What do you like most about the troll?

They really are a lovely bunch, these anti cycling trolls.

One of them can't decide what sex he is, fills his washer bottle with
urine to stray cyclists with, and believes that cyclists who wear toe
clips should also use stabilisers lol

Another of them thinks that his belief that certain parts of the Highway
Code are wrong overrides the law.

Yet another believes that he spends his time on the motorways dodging
coaches doing over 70 mph when they are actually limited to 62 mph. He
also detests the poor because they can't afford a Land Rover Discovery.

And last, but by no means least, we now have one who believes in culling
the old and the infirm to save the NHS money.

What delightful people!
--

Judith

"Andrew" wrote in message
...

They really are a lovely bunch, these anti cycling trolls.


They are, and even more amusingly, they're all still here posting what they
want, when they want. Despite the thousands of hours, the expense and the
butthurt that went into the inevitably doomed and varied "take the group
back" strategies.

I really can't recall any other self-appointed Usenet "trollbuster" have so
little impact on anything, other than encourage previously-retired
anti-cyclists *back* to the group whilst earning the utter derision of those
he claims to be defending.

On 26/02/2014 11:17, Mentalguy2k8 wrote:

"Andrew" wrote in message
...

They really are a lovely bunch, these anti cycling trolls.


They are, and even more amusingly, they're all still here posting what
they want, when they want. Despite the thousands of hours, the expense
and the butthurt that went into the inevitably doomed and varied "take
the group back" strategies.

I really can't recall any other self-appointed Usenet "trollbuster" have
so little impact on anything, other than encourage previously-retired
anti-cyclists *back* to the group whilst earning the utter derision of
those he claims to be defending.

Do stop talking rubbish, dear boy. The idea of taking the group back was
a non-starter because other people continued to communicate with the
scum. As I have pointed out in another post, the impact that I have had
upon Jimdith and the rest of you has been enormous, and I shall continue
in the same way.

As for encouraging people back, who? Oh, you mean one person, Dave, who
I just ignore because he isn't even intelligent enough to insult someone.

Can you point this derision out for me, btw? I would like to read it.
Oh, right, it doesn't exist, huh? I thought not.

--

Judith

"Andrew" wrote in message
...

The idea of taking the group back was a non-starter

Just a shame it took you two months, dozens of news accounts, hundreds of
man-hours and a lot of self-pity to realise it.

On 26/02/2014 11:29, Mentalguy2k8 wrote:

"Andrew" wrote in message
...

The idea of taking the group back was a non-starter

Just a shame it took you two months, dozens of news accounts, hundreds
of man-hours and a lot of self-pity to realise it.

No mate, I knew that within a couple of days.

Anyway, when are you going to abandon your search for coaches that do 70
mph and show me this derision?

--

Judith

"Andrew" wrote in message news
On 26/02/2014 11:29, Mentalguy2k8 wrote:

"Andrew" wrote in message
...

The idea of taking the group back was a non-starter

Just a shame it took you two months, dozens of news accounts, hundreds
of man-hours and a lot of self-pity to realise it.

No mate, I knew that within a couple of days.

I know, but you just couldn't let it go. And still can't.

On 26/02/2014 11:38, Mentalguy2k8 wrote:

"Andrew" wrote in message news
On 26/02/2014 11:29, Mentalguy2k8 wrote:

"Andrew" wrote in message
...

The idea of taking the group back was a non-starter

Just a shame it took you two months, dozens of news accounts, hundreds
of man-hours and a lot of self-pity to realise it.

No mate, I knew that within a couple of days.

I know, but you just couldn't let it go. And still can't.

When are you going to give up your search for 70 mph lorries and show me
the derision?

--

Judith

On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 11:17:07 -0000, "Mentalguy2k8"
wrote:


"Andrew" wrote in message
...

They really are a lovely bunch, these anti cycling trolls.


They are, and even more amusingly, they're all still here posting what they
want, when they want. Despite the thousands of hours, the expense and the
butthurt that went into the inevitably doomed and varied "take the group
back" strategies.

I really can't recall any other self-appointed Usenet "trollbuster" have so
little impact on anything, other than encourage previously-retired
anti-cyclists *back* to the group whilst earning the utter derision of those
he claims to be defending.


I would award Simon Mason: Silver , and Glugg: Bronze for their "troll-busting
techniques" and results.

On 26/02/2014 11:26, Andrew wrote:


As for encouraging people back, who? Oh, you mean one person, Dave, who
I just ignore because he isn't even intelligent enough to insult someone.


Is that why you resorted to the last refuge of the intellectually
retarded? The kill file?

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."