A nice safe cycle path in the park

On Sun, 29 Dec 2019 13:07:59 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 12/29/2019 11:17 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Saturday, 28 December 2019 20:19:49 UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
What ever could go wrong?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...onal-park.html


Yet another site that wants me to disable my adblocker in order to view the content. No thanks. I have an adblocker for very good reasons and am not disabling it.


Suit yourself; I have no axe to grind. I link to various
items with bicycle mention, some newsy, some tragic, some
pathetic, some humorous (intentionally or not). Often, after
a radio mention, I'll seek a web link.

Try
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmTHk3sxSUA
or
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxsO...k&spfreload=10
--
cheers,

John B.

On Sun, 29 Dec 2019 15:30:26 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 11:33:40 PM UTC+1, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Sunday, 29 December 2019 12:59:20 UTC-5, wrote:
On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 6:17:02 PM UTC+1, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Saturday, 28 December 2019 20:19:49 UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
What ever could go wrong?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...onal-park.html

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Yet another site that wants me to disable my adblocker in order to view the content. No thanks. I have an adblocker for very good reasons and am not disabling it.

Cheers

You don'y have to mention this every time. Why is an ad blocker so important for you?

Lou

I use an ad blocker so I don't get inundated with junk. I'd like to read some of the articles that links are provided for but not if it means I'll be swamped with junk ads. YMMV

Cheers

People expect the services on the internet to be free. They are not. You pay with your privacy, have to accept adds or pay for the services of course. A free browser with an add blocker that is a dead end. People complaining about their privacy and still using Facebook, Whatsapp, instagram or whatever social media junk are at first naive but at this moment of time plain stupid.

Lou

I've often wondered about this, what seems to be a modern, desire for
privacy. Back in the day, everyone I knew in business had "cards" with
their name, company position and phone numbers, most companies had an
entry in the "yellow pages" with their address, governments, both
local and federal, have always kept track of their residents, private
agencies publish lists of their adherents - my home town High School
Alumni Society publishes graduates back into the 1910's, collages
publish list of graduates. People have always been very visible.

For those that believe that they are invisible just try typing your
name into a search engine such as google and see what happens.
(I just searched for "l holtman" and got 2,490,000 hits :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

On Sunday, 29 December 2019 18:30:28 UTC-5, wrote:
On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 11:33:40 PM UTC+1, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Sunday, 29 December 2019 12:59:20 UTC-5, wrote:
On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 6:17:02 PM UTC+1, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Saturday, 28 December 2019 20:19:49 UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
What ever could go wrong?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...onal-park.html

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Yet another site that wants me to disable my adblocker in order to view the content. No thanks. I have an adblocker for very good reasons and am not disabling it.

Cheers

You don'y have to mention this every time. Why is an ad blocker so important for you?

Lou

I use an ad blocker so I don't get inundated with junk. I'd like to read some of the articles that links are provided for but not if it means I'll be swamped with junk ads. YMMV

Cheers

People expect the services on the internet to be free. They are not. You pay with your privacy, have to accept adds or pay for the services of course. A free browser with an add blocker that is a dead end. People complaining about their privacy and still using Facebook, Whatsapp, instagram or whatever social media junk are at first naive but at this moment of time plain stupid.

Lou

I use this group and one other bicycling forum. I do not use those other social networking sites.

Cheers

wrote:
On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 6:17:02 PM UTC+1, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Saturday, 28 December 2019 20:19:49 UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/....

Yet another site that wants me to disable my adblocker in order to view the

You don'y have to mention this every time. Why is an ad blocker so important for you?

Maybe if people would post actual content on usenet instead of just
a "click-bait" URL then we could just read the stuff here...
Of course that's too much to expect here where too many people post
whatever is on their mind without being relevant to this usenet group.

PS: use w3m to read that stuff then you don't have a problem
with ads, graphics, "multi-media", etc.

--
Note: please read the netiquette before posting. I will almost never
reply to top-postings which include a full copy of the previous
article(s) at the end because it's annoying, shows that the poster
is too lazy to trim his article, and it's wasting the time of all readers.

On Monday, December 30, 2019 at 5:57:29 AM UTC, Claus Aßmann wrote:
wrote:
On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 6:17:02 PM UTC+1, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Saturday, 28 December 2019 20:19:49 UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/....

Yet another site that wants me to disable my adblocker in order to view the

You don'y have to mention this every time. Why is an ad blocker so important for you?

Maybe if people would post actual content on usenet instead of just
a "click-bait" URL then we could just read the stuff here...
Of course that's too much to expect here where too many people post
whatever is on their mind without being relevant to this usenet group.

PS: use w3m to read that stuff then you don't have a problem
with ads, graphics, "multi-media", etc.

--

People are welcome to post links to my material, but if you copy it and post it here, I will humiliate you in public, I may sue for theft, or I may come around to express my displeasure in person, none of which you will like. Other copyright owners may be more polite but the outcome will be the same.. You don't know what you're talking about, Claus Aßmann, and as is common with the ignoramus-class on the net, the more ignorant, the more insistent they become:

Note: please read the netiquette before posting. I will almost never
reply to top-postings which include a full copy of the previous
article(s) at the end because it's annoying, shows that the poster
is too lazy to trim his article, and it's wasting the time of all readers..