Tyler--Lance Run In Post-60 Minutes

On Jun 15, 9:01*pm, " wrote:

The ironic thing is that BL's assholiness is enough turn even a LANCE
hater into a Fanboy.

People that go out of their way to talk **** almost always are getting
the **** served up to them at home and/or work. Flinging it at other
people is their way of divesting themselves of some of the load. You
don't have to be a willing recipient.

R

Fred Flintstein wrote:
I have faith in perl.

But Lafferty is partly implemented in brain****.

On 6/15/2011 10:45 PM, RicodJour wrote:
On Jun 15, 9:01 pm, wrote:

The ironic thing is that BL's assholiness is enough turn even a LANCE
hater into a Fanboy.

People that go out of their way to talk **** almost always are getting
the **** served up to them at home and/or work. Flinging it at other
people is their way of divesting themselves of some of the load. You
don't have to be a willing recipient.

R
If you bother to look at threads I've begun, you will see that,
generally, I only give **** when first given same.

On 6/16/2011 6:10 AM, Simply Fred wrote:
Fred Flintstein wrote:
I have faith in perl.

But Lafferty is partly implemented in brain****.

OH, that's like a dagger to my heart. How will I ever survive?? ROTFLMAO!!!

Fred Flintstein wrote:
I have faith in perl.

Simply Fred wrote:
But Lafferty is partly implemented in brain****.

BL wrote:
OH, that's like a dagger to my heart.

http://search.cpan.org/dist/Lingua-Shakespeare/lib/Lingua/Shakespeare.pod

"RicodJour" wrote in message
...
On Jun 15, 6:57 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
wrote:
"BL" wrote in message
On 6/15/2011 4:48 PM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
"BL" wrote in message
On 6/15/2011 2:37 PM, Fredmaster of Brainerd wrote:
On Wednesday, June 15, 2011 10:46:38 AM UTC-7, BL wrote:
On 6/15/2011 12:51 PM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
wrote in message

Lok in the mirror. Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the fairest
Lance
Fanboy of all? LOL!!

So you can't rise about school-yard name-calling?

Why should I? This is rbr. In your case I guess you're a
Business****Tard selling Treks.

Why should you? Please see my question about
whether you believe that you hold any responsibility
for making rbr what it is today, or if it was
solely the Lance Fanboys' doing.

Mike is also one of the more polite and civilized
regular posters to rbr. I mean, if you call me a
****Tard (tm), that's almost normal, but if you can't
have a conversation with Mike without trotting
out the juvenile name-calling, it says something
about the confidence you have in the logic of
your arguments.

Fredmaster Ben

p.s.
Incidentally, why is ****Tard always in CamelCase
(capitals inside the word)? That's a common
programming convention, so I wonder if it is one
of your internal variables being exposed to the
outside interface.
Mike has been acting more like a Fanboy of late. As to your
question/issue. I have no interest or need to discuss such matters
with morons such as you. Cheers! :-)

And if you'd provide examples or a definition, we could learn what,
exactly, a "Lance Fanboy" is. So far, the only thing I can figure is
that anybody who questions anything about issues with the government's
side of the investigation becomes a "Lance Fanboy." Is it that simple?
If that's the case, then I'd guess that a huge number of people who
believe that Lance doped and should come to terms with that are also
"Lance Fanboys." We'll make it simple for you. Just answer these two
questions-

#1: If someone believes that there are issues with any aspect of the
investigation into Lance's past, issues that would call into question
the ability to make a strong case, is that peson a "Lance Fanboy?" If
yes, then-

#2: If passing the first test, if that same person also believes that
Lance did, in fact, dope, and has to come to terms with that publicly,
is that person still a "Lance Fanboy?" Remembering still that they may
be critical of some aspects of the investigation so far, critical of
things that they feel make it difficult to bring about any sort of
successful criminal prosecution?

Got any fact issues regarding the Armstrong situation that you'd like to
discuss without any personal comments?

You cannot or won't answer the questions?
=======
Does it matter? Why?

You seem to be of the belief that our resident troll will, through the
brute force of your inescapable logic and your tenacity in trying to
achieve a more civil discourse, will change into something other than
a troll.

You would have made a good priest, Mike. You have faith.

R
=======

Or Village Idiot.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

On Jun 16, 8:56*pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
wrote:
"RicodJour" wrote in message

...
On Jun 15, 6:57 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
wrote:







"BL" wrote in message
On 6/15/2011 4:48 PM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
"BL" wrote in message
On 6/15/2011 2:37 PM, Fredmaster of Brainerd wrote:
On Wednesday, June 15, 2011 10:46:38 AM UTC-7, BL wrote:
On 6/15/2011 12:51 PM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
wrote in message

Lok in the mirror. Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the fairest
Lance
Fanboy of all? LOL!!

So you can't rise about school-yard name-calling?

Why should I? This is rbr. In your case I guess you're a
Business****Tard selling Treks.

Why should you? Please see my question about
whether you believe that you hold any responsibility
for making rbr what it is today, or if it was
solely the Lance Fanboys' doing.

Mike is also one of the more polite and civilized
regular posters to rbr. I mean, if you call me a
****Tard (tm), that's almost normal, but if you can't
have a conversation with Mike without trotting
out the juvenile name-calling, it says something
about the confidence you have in the logic of
your arguments.

Fredmaster Ben

p.s.
Incidentally, why is ****Tard always in CamelCase
(capitals inside the word)? That's a common
programming convention, so I wonder if it is one
of your internal variables being exposed to the
outside interface.
Mike has been acting more like a Fanboy of late. As to your
question/issue. I have no interest or need to discuss such matters
with morons such as you. Cheers! :-)

And if you'd provide examples or a definition, we could learn what,
exactly, a "Lance Fanboy" is. So far, the only thing I can figure is
that anybody who questions anything about issues with the government's
side of the investigation becomes a "Lance Fanboy." Is it that simple?
If that's the case, then I'd guess that a huge number of people who
believe that Lance doped and should come to terms with that are also
"Lance Fanboys." We'll make it simple for you. Just answer these two
questions-

#1: If someone believes that there are issues with any aspect of the
investigation into Lance's past, issues that would call into question
the ability to make a strong case, is that peson a "Lance Fanboy?" If
yes, then-

#2: If passing the first test, if that same person also believes that
Lance did, in fact, dope, and has to come to terms with that publicly,
is that person still a "Lance Fanboy?" Remembering still that they may
be critical of some aspects of the investigation so far, critical of
things that they feel make it difficult to bring about any sort of
successful criminal prosecution?

Got any fact issues regarding the Armstrong situation that you'd like to
discuss without any personal comments?

You cannot or won't answer the questions?

=======
Does it matter? *Why?

You seem to be of the belief that our resident troll will, through the
brute force of your inescapable logic and your tenacity in trying to
achieve a more civil discourse, will change into something other than
a troll.

You would have made a good priest, Mike. *You have faith.

R
=======

Or Village Idiot.

Sorry, RBR already has one of those - the position's taken.

R

In article ,
BL wrote:

On 6/15/2011 10:45 PM, RicodJour wrote:
On Jun 15, 9:01 pm, wrote:

The ironic thing is that BL's assholiness is enough turn even a LANCE
hater into a Fanboy.

People that go out of their way to talk **** almost always are getting
the **** served up to them at home and/or work. Flinging it at other
people is their way of divesting themselves of some of the load. You
don't have to be a willing recipient.

If you bother to look at threads I've begun, you will see that,
generally, I only give **** when first given same.

Every message you post is an affront;
and the reasons are on record.

--
Old Fritz

On 6/17/2011 2:29 AM, Frederick the Great wrote:
In articleVMmdnbFfc6ffemTQnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@giganews. com,
wrote:

On 6/15/2011 10:45 PM, RicodJour wrote:
On Jun 15, 9:01 pm, wrote:

The ironic thing is that BL's assholiness is enough turn even a LANCE
hater into a Fanboy.

People that go out of their way to talk **** almost always are getting
the **** served up to them at home and/or work. Flinging it at other
people is their way of divesting themselves of some of the load. You
don't have to be a willing recipient.

If you bother to look at threads I've begun, you will see that,
generally, I only give **** when first given same.

Every message you post is an affront;
and the reasons are on record.

ROTFL!!! You are such a moron, Fred.

In article ,
BL wrote:

On 6/17/2011 2:29 AM, Frederick the Great wrote:
In articleVMmdnbFfc6ffemTQnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@giganews. com,
wrote:

On 6/15/2011 10:45 PM, RicodJour wrote:
On Jun 15, 9:01 pm, wrote:

The ironic thing is that BL's assholiness is enough turn even a LANCE
hater into a Fanboy.

People that go out of their way to talk **** almost always are getting
the **** served up to them at home and/or work. Flinging it at other
people is their way of divesting themselves of some of the load. You
don't have to be a willing recipient.

If you bother to look at threads I've begun, you will see that,
generally, I only give **** when first given same.

Every message you post is an affront;
and the reasons are on record.

ROTFL!!! You are such a moron, Fred.

I finally get drunk enough to read and respond
to your message and you give me recycled oats?

--
Old Fritz