|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Danger: URCM Moderators at work
Someone (a newcomer) tried to make a new post to URCM:
================================================== =============== Subject: Bicycle Helmet Research Foundation Someone directed me to www.cyclehelmets.org. It seems to be the website specifically for this organisation. What seems to be missing is that I can't find any pictures of their research headquarters, their extensive engineering test laboratories, or test tracks. There is no detail of their team of research scientists or their technical experts. Some list of their own research projects, research project funding, funding bodies and interim or final reports on their own research would also be useful. Does anyone here know about this and help with information to help assess their real contribution to research? Thanks Tumshie ================================================== =============== (You need to know that cyclehelmets.org is the bible - how dare someone question it) So the post was rejected as unconstructive with the reason: Please see the existing extensive thread on helmets. If you have something useful to contribute please do so there, in response to an existing article mentioning cyclehelmets.org. We don't want to start a new thread on this well-worn ground. (Perhaps there is a limit on the number of threads that chiark can handle at any one time :-) Most odd - it seems quite a reasonable post - and sensible to start a new thread. (I loved the "If you have something useful to contribute" by the moderator) Perhaps they hoped he would go away - but he didn't - he made the post again in an existing thread - starting the post with "Sorry if this seems a bit off-topic, but the moderators asked me to re-submit my query under the existing helmet thread:-" So he asks his question - and what does he get : Immediately savaged by one of the moderators (Clinch): Oh dear. Fail straight away, you can't read very well, it seems. I've not come across any organisation called the "British Helmet Research Foundation". ITYM "Bicycle Helmet Research Foundation". followed by: Fail #2, not doing very well, are you? It's a straight link from the front page but since you're having a bad day here we go... For goodness sake: when will people realise that newcomers who ask awkward questions are not welcome in URCM. And if you speak out on one of the moderators favourite subjects - well god help you. The moderators really do not help themselves. (I guess this is where I ask: have you ever, ever seen a moderator in uk.legal.moderated or uk.religion.christian make such comments?) Is Clinch really treating that newcomer "equally and fairly"? |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Danger: URCM Moderators at work
On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 10:45:40 AM UTC+1, Judith wrote:
Someone (a newcomer) tried to make a new post to URCM: Was it you posting under a fake ID again? How many fake IDs have you used now? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Danger: URCM Moderators at work
PhilO wrote:
On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 10:45:40 AM UTC+1, Judith wrote: Someone (a newcomer) tried to make a new post to URCM: Was it you posting under a fake ID again? How many fake IDs have you used now? You really are STUPID. Which part of "a newcomer" did you not understand. You are clearly suffering from paranoid delusions again, please ask nurse to give you your medication. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Danger: URCM Moderators at work
On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 2:27:42 PM UTC+1, (unknown) wrote:
PhilO wrote: On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 10:45:40 AM UTC+1, Judith wrote: Someone (a newcomer) tried to make a new post to URCM: You really are STUPID. Which part of "a newcomer" did you not understand. You are clearly suffering from paranoid delusions again, please ask nurse to give you your medication. Judith cannot always be relied on to tell the truth. Are you Judith? - you seem about as polite and she adds my email address too. How many fake IDs now Judith? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Danger: URCM Moderators at work
On Wed, 3 Oct 2012 06:35:35 -0700 (PDT), PhilO wrote:
On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 2:27:42 PM UTC+1, (unknown) wrote: PhilO wrote: On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 10:45:40 AM UTC+1, Judith wrote: Someone (a newcomer) tried to make a new post to URCM: You really are STUPID. Which part of "a newcomer" did you not understand. You are clearly suffering from paranoid delusions again, please ask nurse to give you your medication. Judith cannot always be relied on to tell the truth. Still waiting for your claims and your evidence - or are you trying to make people believe that you are just an accusative ****? Excellent value as always though. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Danger: URCM Moderators at work
On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 9:45:40 AM UTC, Judith wrote:
Someone (a newcomer) tried to make a new post to URCM: ================================================== =============== Subject: Bicycle Helmet Research Foundation Someone directed me to www.cyclehelmets.org. It seems to be the website specifically for this organisation. What seems to be missing is that I can't find any pictures of their research headquarters, their extensive engineering test laboratories, or test tracks. There is no detail of their team of research scientists or their technical experts. Some list of their own research projects, research project funding, funding bodies and interim or final reports on their own research would also be useful. Does anyone here know about this and help with information to help assess their real contribution to research? Thanks Tumshie ================================================== =============== (You need to know that cyclehelmets.org is the bible - how dare someone question it) So the post was rejected as unconstructive with the reason: Please see the existing extensive thread on helmets. If you have something useful to contribute please do so there, in response to an existing article mentioning cyclehelmets.org. We don't want to start a new thread on this well-worn ground. (Perhaps there is a limit on the number of threads that chiark can handle at any one time :-) Most odd - it seems quite a reasonable post - and sensible to start a new thread. (I loved the "If you have something useful to contribute" by the moderator) Perhaps they hoped he would go away - but he didn't - he made the post again in an existing thread - starting the post with "Sorry if this seems a bit off-topic, but the moderators asked me to re-submit my query under the existing helmet thread:-" So he asks his question - and what does he get : Immediately savaged by one of the moderators (Clinch): Oh dear. Fail straight away, you can't read very well, it seems. I've not come across any organisation called the "British Helmet Research Foundation". ITYM "Bicycle Helmet Research Foundation". followed by: Fail #2, not doing very well, are you? It's a straight link from the front page but since you're having a bad day here we go... For goodness sake: when will people realise that newcomers who ask awkward questions are not welcome in URCM. And if you speak out on one of the moderators favourite subjects - well god help you. The moderators really do not help themselves. (I guess this is where I ask: have you ever, ever seen a moderator in uk.legal.moderated or uk.religion.christian make such comments?) Is Clinch really treating that newcomer "equally and fairly"? Hallo TumshieJudith. You are a multiple identity hagfish know-nothing troll ****wit. You do not deserve to be treated either equally or fairly. You do deserve to be treated medically and psychologically. I notice you do not deny the allegation and therefore are guilty as charged. Your punishment is to be you for life. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Danger: URCM Moderators at work
PhilO wrote:
You really are STUPID. Which part of "a newcomer" did you not understand. You are clearly suffering from paranoid delusions again, please ask nurse to give you your medication. Judith cannot always be relied on to tell the truth. Are you Judith? - you seem about as polite and she adds my email address too. How many fake IDs now Judith? What an asshole. Try doing some research before you start casting nasturtiums. Do I _really_ have to remind you that you accused me of being "Judith" in unn only last week ?. CLUE :- There are 2 entities called "Judith". One is real and the other is a bogeyman who exists only in your delusions. If you stopped baiting both urc would be a much nicer place. FOAD. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Danger: URCM Moderators at work
On Wed, 3 Oct 2012 07:57:06 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
snip Hallo TumshieJudith. You are a multiple identity hagfish know-nothing troll ****wit. You do not deserve to be treated either equally or fairly. You do deserve to be treated medically and psychologically. I notice you do not deny the allegation and therefore are guilty as charged. Your punishment is to be you for life. Still a keen dogging watcher are you? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Danger: URCM Moderators at work
Am Mittwoch, 3. Oktober 2012 22:42:40 UTC schrieb (unbekannt):
On Wed, 3 Oct 2012 07:57:06 -0700 (PDT), wrote: snip Hallo TumshieJudith. You are a multiple identity hagfish know-nothing troll ****wit. You do not deserve to be treated either equally or fairly. You do deserve to be treated medically and psychologically. I notice you do not deny the allegation and therefore are guilty as charged. Your punishment is to be you for life. Still a keen dogging watcher are you? Our punishment is that JudithBennTumshieCliveGeorge remains an inadequate unemployed retarded hagfish ****wit for the rest of his life. Judith is guilty as charged: he fails to deal with the allegations. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Danger: URCM Moderators at work
On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 3:08:39 PM UTC+1, Judith wrote:
Judith cannot always be relied on to tell the truth. Still waiting for your claims and your evidence - or are you trying to make people believe that you are just an accusative ****? OK - give us an honest answer - how many different IDs have you used to post here? When you pretended not to be yourself, were you telling the truth? |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Another dubious rejection from urcm moderators | John Benn | UK | 20 | August 15th 12 07:03 PM |
[email protected] | jms | UK | 26 | July 19th 09 07:40 PM |
[email protected] | jms | UK | 0 | July 10th 09 03:35 PM |
[email protected] | jms | UK | 2 | July 8th 09 04:11 PM |
[email protected] | jms | UK | 0 | July 7th 09 12:10 PM |