> > > > I really don't know why you bother posting to newsgroups.
> > >
> > > How is this post helpful in any way, Peter?
> >
> > LOL!! Pot, kettle, black.
>
> I guess you don't really know what this means. My original post was
> at least a step in the right direction. Yours is just taking a ****.

Maybe they both were. I mean, if you're going to make the effort to post,
why not consider the fact that the OP might be fairly new to the internet,
and might not be all that familiar with search engines (yes, I know they're
not exactly rocket science, but different people have different levels of
knowledge and experience). Why not actually give a useful answer, such as
"They're both German manufacturers, competing in the so-called 'luxury' end
of the car market, but aside from the German connection, have little in
common", and then mention that answers to straightforward questions like
this can often more easily be found on search engines, rather than just
wasting your own time telling him to look on a search engine, when you could
have spent the same amount of time actually giving him an answer to his
question.

> > > I know you have a hard-on
> > > for me, and are just itching to get into another pissing match.
> >
> > Yeah, whatever.
>
> I notice you couldn't help yourself in responding, though. Poor
> self-control?

Yep. Abominable.

Peter

 

Yep, Spidey, you're right. I owned both a 914 and a 924 when they were new
back in the 70's. The 914 was a blast to drive; most fun car I have owned. I
had the heads milled and the FI turned up a bit, and the tach would
literally race to the redline. The targa top made cruising even in winter a
lot of fun. Felt like driving a can-am car! It was so close to the ground,
and the hood was short & low.

The 924 I modified with an aftermarket BAE turbo, and 911 turbo fuel pump,
and fuel enrichment device. Never got it quite right, but it was dyno'ed at
155 HP. You should have seen the looks on 240Z drivers when I blew them
away! It was stealth, also. Only a "turbo" badge on the rear...

Those were the days...


--
Stephen Clark
89 Audi 100
Houston, Texas USA

See my Audi in the Registry at www.audiworld.com!


"Spider" <beelzebubba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:73da2590.0310020810.225f81f1@posting.google.c om...
> Mike Smith <mike_UNDERSCORE_smith@acm.DOT.org> wrote in message
news:<vnmr46e29mmk16@news.supernews.com>...
> > Spider wrote:
> > >
> > > Now, maybe a good flamewar over the 9X4 series of Porsches...
> >
> > What was wrong with the 964? ;-P
>
> LOL.
>
> I once had the opportunity to drive a turbo 944 at a club event. That
> car was damned fast, and nice to drive. I'm not sure what the cost of
> continuing ownership would have been, but it sure was a nice car.
> Because of their "red-headed stepchild" sort of status, I guess you
> can usually pick up the 9X4 series of cars for reasonable money.
> Keeping them on the road might be another thing - I'm fairly sure the
> insurance companies only need to see the brand...
>
> Spider

 

"AstraVanMan" <Peter@SwerveWeb.com> wrote in message news:<gYZeb.5198$QH3.3644@newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net>...
> > > > > I really don't know why you bother posting to newsgroups.
> > > >
> > > > How is this post helpful in any way, Peter?
> > >
> > > LOL!! Pot, kettle, black.
> >
> > I guess you don't really know what this means. My original post was
> > at least a step in the right direction. Yours is just taking a ****.
>
> Maybe they both were.

No, just yours.

> I mean, if you're going to make the effort to post,
> why not consider the fact that the OP might be fairly new to the internet,
> and might not be all that familiar with search engines (yes, I know they're
> not exactly rocket science, but different people have different levels of
> knowledge and experience).

No time like the present to learn - that's my motto. I figure if
someone can find USENET, surely they know how to use a browser.

> Why not actually give a useful answer

My answer was useful, and indeed can be used for other questions.
Your ****-take aside, try and expand your mind as to what might
constitute "helpful."


> rather than just
> wasting your own time telling him to look on a search engine

Why are you concerned about my time?

> when you could
> have spent the same amount of time actually giving him an answer to his
> question.

That really wouldn't help him with the next question, though, would
it? I realize that you would rather have everyone spoon-fed, but I
think that is the exact opposite of the spirit of USENET. If people
learn how to find their own answers, then they can in turn help others
find their own answers, or relate their experiences.

Everybody wins.

Now the question remains as to what exactly your postings are doing to
help anyone, other than just humping my leg because of your hard-on
for me in particular?

Spider

 

> What is the relationship between audi and bmw?

Nothing really, besides the fact that they're both German car manufacturers.
Audi is part of Volkswagen-Audi Group, commonly known as VAG, and also
includes Seat and Skoda. They share a lot of engines and mechanical
designs.

BMW is a completely separate company. Both BMW and Audi compete in the
"luxury" sector of the market. Probably the wrong choice of words, but they
are considered to be amongst the higher quality brands, also along with
Mercedes, and maybe Jaguar as well, possibly others. These days though, due
to the market dictating it, they've both started producing much cheaper and
smaller cars, when they traditionally only used to knock out nice saloon
cars. Examples are the BMW MINI, the Audi A3, 3 Series Compact and the Audi
A2.

> told you.

Heh!

Well there's my token useful post anyway, for those that doubted my ability
to make one.

Peter

 

> > I mean, if you're going to make the effort to post,
> > why not consider the fact that the OP might be fairly new to the
internet,
> > and might not be all that familiar with search engines (yes, I know
they're
> > not exactly rocket science, but different people have different levels
of
> > knowledge and experience).
>
> No time like the present to learn - that's my motto. I figure if
> someone can find USENET, surely they know how to use a browser.

You don't know this for sure.

> > Why not actually give a useful answer
>
> My answer was useful, and indeed can be used for other questions.
> Your ****-take aside, try and expand your mind as to what might
> constitute "helpful."

I'll give it a go - anyone got any mind-expanding drugs to assist me in my
research?

> > rather than just
> > wasting your own time telling him to look on a search engine
>
> Why are you concerned about my time?

Because I'm a very caring person generally. Ask anyone.

> > when you could
> > have spent the same amount of time actually giving him an answer to his
> > question.
>
> That really wouldn't help him with the next question, though, would
> it? I realize that you would rather have everyone spoon-fed, but I
> think that is the exact opposite of the spirit of USENET.

Oddly enough, I do agree with this to an extent. But if every time a fairly
commonly asked question came up, and someone then replied with "just look on
google for God's sake, and stop wasting everyone's time", or words to
similar effect or in a similar tone, then that itself would be the exact
opposite of the spirit of usenet. It would discourage people from using
newsgroups if they thought that they were just going to be called a lazy
useless c*** every time they asked a question that happened to have been
asked before.

> If people
> learn how to find their own answers, then they can in turn help others
> find their own answers, or relate their experiences.
>
> Everybody wins.

Bloody hell, am I actually starting to agree with you? Maybe to an extent,
but everyone's got to start somewhere.

> Now the question remains as to what exactly your postings are doing to
> help anyone, other than just humping my leg because of your hard-on
> for me in particular?

Hard-on for you? Please, give me some credit.

As to what exactly my postings are doing to help anyone, well I've done a
token useful post to this thread, so there

Peter

 

"AstraVanMan" <Peter@SwerveWeb.com> wrote in message news:<gzvfb.5416$RU4.53728@newsfep4-glfd.server.ntli.net>...
> > > I mean, if you're going to make the effort to post,
> > > why not consider the fact that the OP might be fairly new to the
> internet,
> > > and might not be all that familiar with search engines (yes, I know
> they're
> > > not exactly rocket science, but different people have different levels
> of
> > > knowledge and experience).
> >
> > No time like the present to learn - that's my motto. I figure if
> > someone can find USENET, surely they know how to use a browser.
>
> You don't know this for sure.

Tell me - how might it be possible that someone would know how to use
a news client without having knowledge of a browser? I can actually
think of one way, but it would be really an incredible stroke of luck.

So, no, I do not know "for sure." But I would suggest, on balance of
probabilities, that someone who surfs USENET knows how to use a
browser.

> > > Why not actually give a useful answer
> >
> > My answer was useful, and indeed can be used for other questions.
> > Your ****-take aside, try and expand your mind as to what might
> > constitute "helpful."
>
> I'll give it a go - anyone got any mind-expanding drugs to assist me in my
> research?

Isn't your mind up to the task?

> > > rather than just
> > > wasting your own time telling him to look on a search engine
> >
> > Why are you concerned about my time?
>
> Because I'm a very caring person generally. Ask anyone.

Well, then, you should care about the folks who laboriously type in
the same answer for the same question that was asked a month ago, or
two, or three, etc. Isn't their time worth something - since you are
concerned, after all?

No, I think the answer is that you wish to modify my behavior. Since
you can't, I suggest you stop trying.

> > > when you could
> > > have spent the same amount of time actually giving him an answer to his
> > > question.
> >
> > That really wouldn't help him with the next question, though, would
> > it? I realize that you would rather have everyone spoon-fed, but I
> > think that is the exact opposite of the spirit of USENET.
>
> Oddly enough, I do agree with this to an extent.

The end is nigh.

> But if every time a fairly
> commonly asked question came up, and someone then replied with "just look on
> google for God's sake, and stop wasting everyone's time", or words to
> similar effect or in a similar tone, then that itself would be the exact
> opposite of the spirit of usenet.

If one wishes to find offense, it will be found, no matter the intent.
It comes down to a matter of style - and if you don't like my posting
style, that's really too bad - I'm not going to change my style for
you or anyone else. The only thing you can do is to change you *you
respond* to my style. That, at least, is within your control.

> It would discourage people from using
> newsgroups if they thought that they were just going to be called a lazy
> useless c*** every time they asked a question that happened to have been
> asked before.

Well, I don't recall ever calling anyone that on the first go, but if
you search enough, you may find such a comment from me. I doubt it.

Normally, I just tell folks that "this has been discussed numerous
times - goto [URL] and enter search parameters.

> > If people
> > learn how to find their own answers, then they can in turn help others
> > find their own answers, or relate their experiences.
> >
> > Everybody wins.
>
> Bloody hell, am I actually starting to agree with you? Maybe to an extent,
> but everyone's got to start somewhere.

I agree completely - and the place to start is not by posting in
USENET. Surf around a few minutes. You might find EXACTLY what you
need on the first search page. Or not.

> > Now the question remains as to what exactly your postings are doing to
> > help anyone, other than just humping my leg because of your hard-on
> > for me in particular?
>
> Hard-on for you? Please, give me some credit.

Why? You seem to get off on humping my leg in every post, even though
you merely disagree with my style - something that you have no power
to change. Work on yourself first, then lead by example.

> As to what exactly my postings are doing to help anyone, well I've done a
> token useful post to this thread, so there

Yes, you have. But all this leg-humping you are doing to me is merely
noise, and has no Audi value. Since you are complaining about the
lack of value in my posts, this stance of yours is *at best*
hypocritical.

I will state it again: there is nothing you can do to change my
posting style. Nothing. So why bother trying? Really - it's a
question that begs for an answer.

Spider

 

> > > > rather than just
> > > > wasting your own time telling him to look on a search engine
> > >
> > > Why are you concerned about my time?
> >
> > Because I'm a very caring person generally. Ask anyone.
>
> Well, then, you should care about the folks who laboriously type in
> the same answer for the same question that was asked a month ago, or
> two, or three, etc. Isn't their time worth something - since you are
> concerned, after all?
>
> No, I think the answer is that you wish to modify my behavior. Since
> you can't, I suggest you stop trying.

Maybe. Maybe I was the only person that viewed your post that noticed the
sarcasm and bitterness in the way your phrased the post. I think I should
perhaps give up on trying to modify your behaviour, as it really does seem
to be a lost cause.

> > > > when you could
> > > > have spent the same amount of time actually giving him an answer to
his
> > > > question.
> > >
> > > That really wouldn't help him with the next question, though, would
> > > it? I realize that you would rather have everyone spoon-fed, but I
> > > think that is the exact opposite of the spirit of USENET.
> >
> > Oddly enough, I do agree with this to an extent.
>
> The end is nigh.

Well whoopee-doo.

> > But if every time a fairly
> > commonly asked question came up, and someone then replied with "just
look on
> > google for God's sake, and stop wasting everyone's time", or words to
> > similar effect or in a similar tone, then that itself would be the exact
> > opposite of the spirit of usenet.
>
> If one wishes to find offense, it will be found, no matter the intent.
> It comes down to a matter of style - and if you don't like my posting
> style, that's really too bad - I'm not going to change my style for
> you or anyone else. The only thing you can do is to change you *you
> respond* to my style. That, at least, is within your control.

Awfully sorry, but grammatically, that penultimate sentence was garbage.
Maybe I read it wrong, but did you mean:

"The only thing you can do is to change the way *you respond* to my style"

?

If you did, then I can understand what you've written.

> > It would discourage people from using
> > newsgroups if they thought that they were just going to be called a lazy
> > useless c*** every time they asked a question that happened to have been
> > asked before.
>
> Well, I don't recall ever calling anyone that on the first go, but if
> you search enough, you may find such a comment from me. I doubt it.

My mistake, I forgot to put "or words that could be construed to have that
effect".

> Normally, I just tell folks that "this has been discussed numerous
> times - goto [URL] and enter search parameters.

> > > Now the question remains as to what exactly your postings are doing to
> > > help anyone, other than just humping my leg because of your hard-on
> > > for me in particular?
> >
> > Hard-on for you? Please, give me some credit.
>
> Why? You seem to get off on humping my leg in every post, even though
> you merely disagree with my style - something that you have no power
> to change. Work on yourself first, then lead by example.

I refer you to my next comment below.

> > As to what exactly my postings are doing to help anyone, well I've done
a
> > token useful post to this thread, so there
>
> Yes, you have. But all this leg-humping you are doing to me is merely
> noise, and has no Audi value. Since you are complaining about the
> lack of value in my posts, this stance of yours is *at best*
> hypocritical.

You go on about all this "leg-humping" I do of every post of yours - let me
remind you that it was you that actually jumped on one of my very first
posts to the newsgroup, with nothing but insults and criticism. So, in the
words of a 5-year-old schoolkid, you started it.

> I will state it again: there is nothing you can do to change my
> posting style. Nothing. So why bother trying? Really - it's a
> question that begs for an answer.

You're completely right. It is a lost cause.

Peter

 

"AstraVanMan" <Peter@SwerveWeb.com> wrote in message news:<boQfb.5971$RU4.57674@newsfep4-glfd.server.ntli.net>...
> > > > > rather than just
> > > > > wasting your own time telling him to look on a search engine
> > > >
> > > > Why are you concerned about my time?
> > >
> > > Because I'm a very caring person generally. Ask anyone.
> >
> > Well, then, you should care about the folks who laboriously type in
> > the same answer for the same question that was asked a month ago, or
> > two, or three, etc. Isn't their time worth something - since you are
> > concerned, after all?
> >
> > No, I think the answer is that you wish to modify my behavior. Since
> > you can't, I suggest you stop trying.
>
> Maybe. Maybe I was the only person that viewed your post that noticed the
> sarcasm and bitterness in the way your phrased the post. I think I should
> perhaps give up on trying to modify your behaviour, as it really does seem
> to be a lost cause.

Like I have said before - it is not my responsibility to protect your
thin skin. You have multiple options open to you to avoid my
postings.

> >
> > The end is nigh.
>
> Well whoopee-doo.

LOL. You complain about sarcasm and bitterness. Hypocrite.

> > > But if every time a fairly
> > > commonly asked question came up, and someone then replied with "just
> look on
> > > google for God's sake, and stop wasting everyone's time", or words to
> > > similar effect or in a similar tone, then that itself would be the exact
> > > opposite of the spirit of usenet.
> >
> > If one wishes to find offense, it will be found, no matter the intent.
> > It comes down to a matter of style - and if you don't like my posting
> > style, that's really too bad - I'm not going to change my style for
> > you or anyone else. The only thing you can do is to change you *you
> > respond* to my style. That, at least, is within your control.
>
> Awfully sorry, but grammatically, that penultimate sentence was garbage.
> Maybe I read it wrong, but did you mean:

No, it was editted poorly. The second "you" of that sentence should
have been replaced with "how". Since you obviously got the gist of
it, you're just taking another ****.

> > > It would discourage people from using
> > > newsgroups if they thought that they were just going to be called a lazy
> > > useless c*** every time they asked a question that happened to have been
> > > asked before.
> >
> > Well, I don't recall ever calling anyone that on the first go, but if
> > you search enough, you may find such a comment from me. I doubt it.
>
> My mistake, I forgot to put "or words that could be construed to have that
> effect".

I do not control what others will infer from my posts. Since that is
not within my control, I don't accept responsibility for it.

> > > Hard-on for you? Please, give me some credit.
> >
> > Why? You seem to get off on humping my leg in every post, even though
> > you merely disagree with my style - something that you have no power
> > to change. Work on yourself first, then lead by example.

[snip]

> > Yes, you have. But all this leg-humping you are doing to me is merely
> > noise, and has no Audi value. Since you are complaining about the
> > lack of value in my posts, this stance of yours is *at best*
> > hypocritical.
>
> You go on about all this "leg-humping" I do of every post of yours - let me
> remind you that it was you that actually jumped on one of my very first
> posts to the newsgroup, with nothing but insults and criticism. So, in the
> words of a 5-year-old schoolkid, you started it.

And so, since you enjoyed it so much, you've decided to embark upon
some useless errand. Or, because you know I'm actually right, you are
trying to flame me to "even the score." Whatever the reason, I have
to ask: Has it produced any fruit?

In any case, my first response to you gave you exactly what you
deserved for being such a ****. While you might see this as irony,
and I might agree, I think that you got off easy for passing off crap
information in that thread.

> > I will state it again: there is nothing you can do to change my
> > posting style. Nothing. So why bother trying? Really - it's a
> > question that begs for an answer.
>
> You're completely right. It is a lost cause.

Then I can count on you to exercise some self-control in your postings
from now on? That certainly would be a step ahead for you.

Spider

 

> > > The end is nigh.
> >
> > Well whoopee-doo.
>
> LOL. You complain about sarcasm and bitterness. Hypocrite.

You're finally getting the irony of most of my posts. Give yourself a pat
on the back.

> > Awfully sorry, but grammatically, that penultimate sentence was garbage.
> > Maybe I read it wrong, but did you mean:
>
> No, it was editted poorly. The second "you" of that sentence should
> have been replaced with "how". Since you obviously got the gist of
> it, you're just taking another ****.

Edited poorly? I normally type my sentences word by wordl, don't know what
methods you employ.

> In any case, my first response to you gave you exactly what you
> deserved for being such a ****.

In your opinion, and, it would seem, your opinion only.

> > > I will state it again: there is nothing you can do to change my
> > > posting style. Nothing. So why bother trying? Really - it's a
> > > question that begs for an answer.
> >
> > You're completely right. It is a lost cause.
>
> Then I can count on you to exercise some self-control in your postings
> from now on? That certainly would be a step ahead for you.

Whoah, facile tigre! Self-control? Me? Nah, don't think so.

Peter

 

"AstraVanMan" <Peter@SwerveWeb.com> wrote in message news:<mvigb.8175$QH3.4206@newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net>...
> > > > The end is nigh.
> > >
> > > Well whoopee-doo.
> >
> > LOL. You complain about sarcasm and bitterness. Hypocrite.
>
> You're finally getting the irony of most of my posts.

I'm not for one second buying the notion that it's *intentional.*

> > > Awfully sorry, but grammatically, that penultimate sentence was garbage.
> > > Maybe I read it wrong, but did you mean:
> >
> > No, it was editted poorly. The second "you" of that sentence should
> > have been replaced with "how". Since you obviously got the gist of
> > it, you're just taking another ****.
>
> Edited poorly? I normally type my sentences word by wordl

Err, what was that, again?

LOL.

I sometimes go back and change the sentence around, for whatever
reason. In this case, I started from the wrong place (I think - I
can't remember how I worded it originally.) Yes - poor editting.

>
> > In any case, my first response to you gave you exactly what you
> > deserved for being such a ****.
>
> In your opinion, and, it would seem, your opinion only.

Uhh, no. Reposting someone's e-mail message is considered quite poor
manners. Hey, don't take my word for it - have a look for yourself.

> > > > I will state it again: there is nothing you can do to change my
> > > > posting style. Nothing. So why bother trying? Really - it's a
> > > > question that begs for an answer.
> > >
> > > You're completely right. It is a lost cause.
> >
> > Then I can count on you to exercise some self-control in your postings
> > from now on? That certainly would be a step ahead for you.
>
> Self-control? Me? Nah, don't think so.

Then what's the point, really? You only make yourself look like a
buffoon. I know that's not your goal, but since I don't care much how
anyone views my postings or my style, you are certainly not damaging
me at all! Sort of like shooting yourself in the foot and then
bragging about what a good shot you are.

Are you going to talk about Audis, or are you going to continue
moaning about something over which you have no control?

Spider