If I were to promote the benefits of biking, I'd put a lady

On May 3, 2:26 am, Jym Dyer wrote:
=v= In response to a rather nice advert:

http://www.thespincycle.com/files/20...Commercial.pdf

Don Quixote a.k.a. No Lion No Problem a.k.a. Commandante Banana
responded with Internet porn. Way to go, Commandante Dip****.
Not only are you a fearmongering idiot, but you're a pathetic
sexist porn-consumer.
_Jym_

[I removed rec.bicycles.rides because this thread has nothing to
do with the charter of that newsgroup. Honoring a newsgroup's
charter is the most rudimentary courtesy on Usenet, which Don
Quixote apparently lacks the necessary brainpower to grasp.]

If you are afraid of sex or bikes, you shouldn't go to Holland. But
this is NOT porno. This is a sexy lady on a bike. Yummy!

Hey, but even in hypocritical America, Big Business uses sex to
sell...

"In the case of SUV consumers, the auto company marketers start by
implanting the subliminal message you can be tough, independent and
SEXY..."

'To sell a product (like an SUV) ad campaigns repeat a message over
and over again in seductive way that appeals to a target audience, and
like it or not people are not immune to it. Advertising like political
propaganda is the art of getting people to believe a crafted message
and advertisers know what buttons to push, kind of like how the
Taliban brain washed their followers into believing that the United
States is the enemy of Islam or how Nazi propaganda was able to put
Hitler in power. So to some degree consumers of SUVs, followers of the
Taliban and Nazi party, all have something in common and that is they
all were fooled into buying bull****!

In the case of SUV consumers, the auto company marketers start by
implanting the subliminal message you can be tough, independent and
SEXY, if ya buy and drive our brand of SUV. Notice many ads show an
SUV in a wilderness, the H2 ads show it off roading in Iceland (the
viewer is shown beautiful people conquering nature and having fun). In
some National Geographic print ads for Toyota, they show back packers
with their SUVs in the wilderness, with the slogan “oh what a
feeling.” The basic idea of an auto company ad campaign is to
associate driving their SUV with the idea of being SEXY, tough and
independent. The tough and independent image of driving an SUV is
further reinforced by the name of the vehicle (Path Finder, Trail
Blazer, Mountaineer, Escape, Explorer, Expedition, etc.). Constant
exposure to slick ads fools people into thinking they can “walk the
walk” of being independent and tough just by buying the SUV shown in
the idealized dreamland of advertisers. If you do not think SUV
propaganda effects the consumer, then ask your self is it just a
coincidence that SUVs became trendy after SUV advertising rose nearly
nine-fold from $172.5 million in 1990 to $1.5 billion in 2000.'

http://www.phaster.com/road_trips/su...they_suck.html

And when you go to any auto show you find these stunning ladies
selling the stupid SUVs in scanty cloth. SEX SELLS, you know.

So, I don't see why not the Banana Revolution can't use sexy ladies
and bananas to sell biking. Yeah, banana...


"Sexual democracy becomes central even more than religious freedom
when discussing the Dutch vision of democracy."

http://www.bidoun.com/issues/issue_10/05a_all.html

Actually, I propose a "Dutch Package," where issues normal to the
Dutch --gay rights, bike facilities, prostitution and marihuana-- are
discussed in less open societies.

Tom Sherman wrote:

It is refreshing to see a US bicycle dealer promote utility cycling,
showing someone without a foam hat and a load of groceries:
http://www.thespincycle.com/files/2006LoriCommercial.pdf [1]. However,
the "hi... hi" dialog is beyond cheesy.

[1] Link may not work for Linux or Mac users.


Nor for those of us who refuse to use the bloated, invasive,
security-challenged Adobe Reader (as opposed, say, to Foxit).

--
Rob Lindauer - Please change "att" to "sbc" for my real email address

Tom Sherman writes:

Bill Zaumen wrote:
Tom Sherman writes:

Liddite Bill Zaumen wrote:
(Infantile name calling from an idiot.)

Merely an accurate description, no?

Of you - and your behavior truly is infantile.

rest of this idiot's rant snipped

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

writes:

On May 3, 11:06 pm, (Bill Z.) wrote:


When you use terms like "foam hats", your agenda is pretty damn obvious.
...

"Lids", "magical protective properties" ... If you don't want
to give that impression, you should cut out the loaded language.

Or in other words: Tom, stop thy blaspheming! Thou shalt use only
the proper, sacred language when referring to the revered headpiece!

Krygowksi, your sleazy tactics are as transparent and infantile as
Tom Sherman's. Maybe sometime you will actually have something
sensible to say, but I've yet to see a post from you where you
haven't tried to play childish games.

snip



--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

Tom Sherman writes:

Bill Zaumen wrote:
Tom Sherman writes:

http://www.thespincycle.com/files/20...Commercial.pdf

Adobe® Clip Notes® as I posted above?
Oh, just to show what a fool Tom Sherman is, I used a program I have
that prints the HTTP response headers. Here's what you get:
Status: 200 OK
...
Content-Type: application/pdf
...
Content-Length: 2090466
Note the Content-Type header - it claims the file is a PDF file. The
extension ".pdf" is the extension normally used by a PDF file. So,
do you think it is surprising that my browser would try to open it
as a PDF file?
Nothing about some special "Adobe® Clip Notes®" format was given.

Yo Zaumen,

My browser also opens the link as a PDF.

When I go to the link, it says "Adobe® Clip Notes®" right above the
black box displayed on the page.

There is an RFC describing the PDF format. Adobe is going around
modifying it for business reasons, and those changes are not in
the standard. Is it any surprise that something doesn't work
when you aren't using Adobe products?


Furthermore, the dialog box that appears says, "This PDF uses Adobe
Clip Notes technology to allow you to review a movie and to add
comments...."

..... nope - no such dialog box appears - not with my PDF viewer.
You showed your ignorance on that one - assuming your system behaves
like everyone else's.

Then player controls and a box to allow review comments appears below
the "black box" that allows one to play the video clip.

.... same thing ... new adobe product that "extends" a standard but
doesn't tell you.

To bad computer expert Zaumen can not get his computer to work with
the web page, so he would not look like a fool for calling me a fool,

No, you are are the fool. I simply don't bother with Adobe's viewer
for a variety of reasons, including package management. Read up on
it if you are not familiar with the concept.

Sherman, you really are an idiot.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

Bill Zaumen wrote:
Tom Sherman writes:

Bill Zaumen wrote:
Tom Sherman writes:

Liddite Bill Zaumen wrote:
(Infantile name calling from an idiot.)

Merely an accurate description, no?

Of you - and your behavior truly is infantile.

rest of this idiot's rant snipped

Anger management issues?

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Bill Zaumen wrote:
Tom Sherman writes:

Bill Zaumen wrote:
Tom Sherman writes:

http://www.thespincycle.com/files/20...Commercial.pdf
Adobe® Clip Notes® as I posted above?
Oh, just to show what a fool Tom Sherman is, I used a program I have
that prints the HTTP response headers. Here's what you get:
Status: 200 OK
...
Content-Type: application/pdf
...
Content-Length: 2090466
Note the Content-Type header - it claims the file is a PDF file. The
extension ".pdf" is the extension normally used by a PDF file. So,
do you think it is surprising that my browser would try to open it
as a PDF file?
Nothing about some special "Adobe® Clip Notes®" format was given.

Yo Zaumen,

My browser also opens the link as a PDF.

When I go to the link, it says "Adobe® Clip Notes®" right above the
black box displayed on the page.

There is an RFC describing the PDF format. Adobe is going around
modifying it for business reasons, and those changes are not in
the standard. Is it any surprise that something doesn't work
when you aren't using Adobe products?

You are the expert, no? I made no previous comment on the surprising
nature or lack thereof.

Furthermore, the dialog box that appears says, "This PDF uses Adobe
Clip Notes technology to allow you to review a movie and to add
comments...."

.... nope - no such dialog box appears - not with my PDF viewer.

Well it does on mine (actually in the PDF window Firefox opens).

You showed your ignorance on that one - assuming your system behaves
like everyone else's.

I have not examined other people systems.

How the hell can it be ignorant to report exactly what one sees?
Zaumen's lack of logic here is truly bizarre.

Then player controls and a box to allow review comments appears below
the "black box" that allows one to play the video clip.

... same thing ... new adobe product that "extends" a standard but
doesn't tell you.

So? Again for slow on the uptake, I am reporting on what happens on MY
system. Duh!

Adobe tells us the Clip Notes is being used by the logo and dialog box
appearing on the screen. Duh!

To bad computer expert Zaumen can not get his computer to work with
the web page, so he would not look like a fool for calling me a fool,

No, you are are the fool. I simply don't bother with Adobe's viewer
for a variety of reasons, including package management. Read up on
it if you are not familiar with the concept.

No Zaumen, you are a fool for claiming I was a fool for saying Adobe®
Clip Notes® was involved, when the evidence of such is easily obtained
by anyone who system has Adobe's viewer installed.

You can not make an event that actually occurred go away just because
you think it should not have happened. Duh!

Sherman, you really are an idiot.

Accurately reporting what appears on a computer monitor is a sign of
idiocy, just because it disagrees with The Great Bill Zaumen's
assumptions? WOW!

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Sincerely, guys, I think you are riding the wrong saddles that leave
you, you know with ED (impotence).

In this other forum, look what they say to the question,

"Are you in favor of using sex to sell biking?"

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=414469

Yep, 85% of them think is good.

The good news is that if you change the seat, it should be all right.
Look for the ones with the groove.

Bill Z. :
There is an RFC describing the PDF format. Adobe is going around
modifying it for business reasons, and those changes are not in
the standard. Is it any surprise that something doesn't work
when you aren't using Adobe products?

Can you cite the RFC number? The nearest I can find is RFC
3778, which is by no means a full description of the format;
rather it offers a few notes on usage and a pointer to the
separately-published (by Adobe, not by the IETF) PDF Reference
Manuals.

If the full specification has also been published by the IETF
I'd be interested to know where.

Norman Wilson
Toronto ON
--
To reply directly, expel `.edu'.

Tom Sherman writes:

Bill Zaumen wrote:
Tom Sherman writes:

Bill Zaumen wrote:
Tom Sherman writes:

Liddite Bill Zaumen wrote:
(Infantile name calling from an idiot.)

Merely an accurate description, no?
Of you - and your behavior truly is infantile.
rest of this idiot's rant snipped

Anger management issues?

No, time-management issues. If you want your posts to not
be treated as utter garbage, I suggest you not start them
with infantile name calling.


--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB