On 18/01/2008, at 2:15 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
On Jan 16, 2008 10:25 PM, Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Big and rigid isn't the best for passenger
safety.
Or for getting along with others. Or succeeding in business. Or
government.
Big and rigid is just bad, bad, bad. Well
On 16/01/2008, at 10:19 AM, Jim Sharkey wrote:
Charlie Bell wrote:
Plenty of room Down Under...
Sure, nestled in right next to the various and sundry venomous
arthropods, the sharks, the jellyfish and various other natural
dangers.
Like North America doesn't have its fair share
On 16/01/2008, at 2:20 PM, Doug Pensinger wrote:
John Garcia wrote:
Amending the Constitution is not as easy as Huckabee may wish, (pun
intended) Gracias a Dios. See http://www.usconstitution.net/constam.html
.
If
elected, he won't be able to just wave his hand and have it done.
You
On 17/01/2008, at 2:49 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
SUVs perform poorly in altruistic crash testing, which ranks
vehicles on how
much damage they inflict.
They also fare poorly in almost all other crash testing too,
especially in single vehicle accidents. About the only area where they
do
On 17/01/2008, at 7:27 AM, Dave Land wrote:
On Jan 16, 2008, at 12:52 AM, Charlie Bell wrote:
It's ever more astonishing to me that there has been no impeachment
(let alone a war crimes tribunal...). Then again, these c***s***ers
have insinuated themselves at all levels, and they've
On 17/01/2008, at 7:08 AM, Dave Land wrote:
It's ever more astonishing to me that there has been no impeachment
(let alone a war crimes tribunal...). Then again, these c***s***ers
have insinuated themselves at all levels, and they've probably made
sure they've got a lot of ammo on anyone
On 16/01/2008, at 8:06 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
Um... William, if Huckabee is elected president of my country, would
you
have room for me and my family in yours?
Plenty of room Down Under...
Charlie.
___
On 11/01/2008, at 10:39 AM, Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro wrote:
Jim Sharkey wrote:
I'm sure some of you knew this, what with your big brains and all,
but I found it interesting:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=grass-makes-better-ethanol-than-corn
_Scientific American_ is saying
On 12/01/2008, at 6:10 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
You didn't parse my e-mail address. Do it now.
There's plenty of suitable land for sugarcane here... :-)
Hasn't it got rainforest on it?
Charlie
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
On 03/01/2008, at 5:19 PM, Doug wrote:
I take it that Bank's new Culture novel has been released somewhere
in the
world. I pre-ordered it but it isnt going to be released here until
the
end of February.
Start of Feb in the UK, should have it by the middle of February.
Has anyone
On 30/12/2007, at 3:33 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
On Dec 28, 2007 3:08 PM, Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nick, if you can remember where you read that, there's someone at my
work who might be very grateful.
It was in the New Yorker -- a Malcolm Gladwell article about
profiling
On 28/12/2007, at 9:08 PM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
OTOH, Pitbulls should be called a different species; they are
dogs in the same way that killer whales are whales :-/
That they've been bred for viciousness says more about the people
doing the breeding than the dogs themselves. As for
On 28/12/2007, at 11:00 PM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
I used orcas just because of their (wrong) name, killer whales,
since they are more dolphins than whales.
I didn't mean, what's wrong with the name killer whale. I meant,
what's wrong with killer whales? Why do orcas give whales (or
On 29/12/2007, at 12:04 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Charlie Bell wrote:
I used orcas just because of their (wrong) name, killer whales,
since they are more dolphins than whales.
I didn't mean, what's wrong with the name killer whale.
It's wrong, because they are not whales.
Yes
On 29/12/2007, at 3:02 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
I relaxed a great deal about pits after reading an article citing
statistics
that made it clear that *owners* are far more responsible for their
dogs'
behavior than I had imagined before becoming a dog owner
Nick, if you can remember where
On 29/12/2007, at 9:25 AM, Trent Shipley wrote:
Yes. They threw me off the Orion's Arm discussion list for being a
worm hole
skeptic.
Skeptic or Denialist? *poke* ;-)
Charlie.
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
On 29/12/2007, at 9:46 AM, Doug wrote:
Charlie, thanks for the essay and the links; good stuff.
*takes a bow* My pleasure. It should be obvious it's one of my
favourite topics (well, I did sit through 4 years of it at
university...), and I'm always happy to talk zoology or evolutionary
On 28/12/2007, at 2:52 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
Where the difference is, we provide both sides of the story, Mr.
Morris said.
That's the thinking that really stinks, in my opinion. Polarizing
issues is
a great way to get attention, gain power and make money. It's no
way to get
to
Hola!
I've reordered Nick's reply slightly, 'cause I want to deal with this
bit first -
On 28/12/2007, at 1:23 PM, Nick Arnett wrote:
I hope nobody here has imagined that I disagree for a moment with the
historical reality of evolution.
Nope! I was just laying it out again, 'cause Henry
On 28/12/2007, at 1:23 PM, Nick Arnett wrote:
Except... that a species often isn't clearly delineated.
Arse, I meant to mention this in my other reply.
http://scienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughts/2007/01/species.php
John Wilkins has a nice piece on species concepts here.
Charlie.
On 15/12/2007, at 1:04 AM, Ray Ludenia wrote:
Can't say I'm a very serious one, but there's two or three metres of
prime shelf space taken up by the annual collections published in
albums by Australia Post alone! It's academic anyway as we can no
longer fit all our books in the library we
7/10 thanks. Got 5 (thought horse), 8 (not a clue), and 9 (oops) wrong.
Ta for that.
C.
On 09/12/2007, at 8:49 AM, jon louis mann wrote:
Passing requires 4 correct answers)
1) How long did the Hundred Years' War last?
2) Which country makes Panama hats?
3) From which animal do we get
On 06/12/2007, at 11:09 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
those systems through a few simple rules is a challenge, but not
beyond our capacity. Interestingly, some of the most successful work
has come out of games and movies - SimCity exhibits some emergence,
and CGI crowd/battle scenes
Oh, I gotta
On 06/12/2007, at 8:45 AM, hkhenson wrote:
At 01:00 PM 12/5/2007, Nick Arnett wrote:
It's great food for thought, but I'd still like to escape the
circularity.
Is it just politically incorrect to consider non-Darwinian
explanations?
One can consider them. But one has to actually show
On 06/12/2007, at 3:05 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
I'm also a committed Christian and there's nothing incompatible
about the
two.
Except insofar as Christianity makes claims about how the world is.
IIRC, you're a Lutheran, and the American Lutheran church is fairly
progressive. But saying
On 06/12/2007, at 2:56 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
I'm talking about the Santa Fe Institution people and those doing
related
work. Kauffman, Waldrop, Holland, Arthur, Lewin, etc.
Right, now I'm a lot closer to understanding what you're alluding to
(but it's the Santa Fe Institute...). I
On 06/12/2007, at 11:17 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
There has been at least one time when I made a commitment to a
church-related activity and our CEO called and wanted to talk
business,
urgently, and I told him that on that particular day -- a Saturday
-- my
priority was the church.
On 06/12/2007, at 8:45 AM, hkhenson wrote:
Furthermore, I think pure Darwinian explanations are generally
wrong. Everything doesn't arise from competition and we have
mathematics
(complexity) that demonstrates that, or at least very strongly
suggests that
Darwinian models are
On 05/12/2007, at 4:56 AM, William T Goodall wrote:
And people who think like that are dangerous to themselves and others.
Hence religion is evil.
I don't agree that religion is evil. It just opens a large door to
evil by fostering unquestioning obedience.
Charlie
On 04/12/2007, at 11:03 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
I'm pointing out that there's a correlation between skepticism about
science
and good science. The country that includes a lot of skeptics about
science
is the same country that excels in science. Therefore, one may leap
to the
On 05/12/2007, at 8:06 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
On Dec 4, 2007 12:47 PM, Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If it's true scepticism, and not denialism. The US is a leader of
science in spite of it's religiosity, not because of it.
It seems far more likely to me that the same freedoms
On 05/12/2007, at 8:19 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
On Dec 4, 2007 12:32 PM, Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't agree that religion is evil. It just opens a large door to
evil by fostering unquestioning obedience.
I think this confuses a belief of certain religions with the general
Since they bear the children, you can blame women for
wars. grin Of course you also have to give them credit for
peace. In this model the low birth rate is the reason Western Europe
has been so peaceful since WW II.
Apart from Ireland and Spain... ;)
Keith Henson
Welcome back Keith.
Evolutionary psychology states that *every* human psychological trait
is either the result of direct selection or a side effect of direct
selection. (With a bit of possibility of something being fixed due to
random genetic drift.)
This is arguing from a conclusion. The conclusion is that
On 05/12/2007, at 3:04 PM, Nick Arnett wrote:
On Dec 4, 2007 7:39 PM, Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll certainly allow that it *may* be true, but
it certainly isn't proved -- our understanding of evolution is far
from
complete.
Yours may be - that doesn't mean others don't
On 05/12/2007, at 4:02 PM, Nick Arnett wrote:
Nah-ah. Just a fact. No-one knows everything in a field, and lay-
people often think they have a far better grasp of a technical field
than they do.
Sure. But you don't know what I have or haven't studied about
evolution and
Darwinism, so
On 23/11/2007, at 7:41 AM, Dave Land wrote:
Extra points to Julia for (at least implicitly) knowing that
Craptaculous is the correct word (with all due respect -- that is to
say, not much -- to Nick): Craptaculous, embiggens and Cromulent are
all
Simpsoneologisms.
Cromulent was a
On 20/11/2007, at 9:11 AM, Deborah Harrell wrote:
Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snippage
Consider Phlebus is my favorite Banks, but I enjoyed
all of the culture novels.
I recently finished _Inversion_, which I don't think
is a Culture tale,
Yes it is. :-)
Charlie.
On 19/11/2007, at 3:24 AM, Robert Seeberger wrote:
http://m3.alexweidmann.com/piles/?s=sciencetattoo
Has to be seen to be believed.G
That appears to be shamelessly nicked from Carl Zimmer's blog The
Loom, where he's been running a series on science tats for a while.
Charlie.
On 14/11/2007, at 9:31 PM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Doug wrote:
That's what this war is projected to cost.
Which means that the war will cost $0,000,000,000,000.00 -
the dollar is USA's, you can make any dollars you want, and
China will eagerly trade the dollars for their LSD-bindeezes,
On 14/11/2007, at 10:14 PM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Charlie Bell wrote:
Which means that the war will cost $0,000,000,000,000.00 -
the dollar is USA's, you can make any dollars you want, and
China will eagerly trade the dollars for their LSD-bindeezes,
GHB, not LSD.
Ok, LSD is the TV
On 07/11/2007, at 8:24 PM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
Would jesus wear a Rolex
Would Jesus wear a Rolex
On His television show-ooh-ooh?
You see the face on the tv screen
Coming at you every sunday
See that face on the billboard
That man is me
On the cover of the magazine
Theres no question
On 07/11/2007, at 12:32 PM, Dan M wrote:
Not about invading other countries in the name of the Lord, Allah
or any
athropomorphic deity...
Just to be clear, is it the consensus here that no country should ever
interfere with the internal affairs of another?
Yet again, a Dan Strawman.
On 07/11/2007, at 8:18 PM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
I take it that conservatism has about as much
relation to being truly conservative as
religiosity has to actual religious belief and
how those who believe should live their lives and relate to others?
Yep, that's I'd probably agree with.
On 07/11/2007, at 1:47 AM, Julia Thompson wrote:
On Mon, 5 Nov 2007, Doug wrote:
Ronn! wrote:
So what would most folks think of someone who professed a belief in
God and spent his evenings and weekends drinking and carousing?
Wouldn't that depend on what particular brand of God this
On 05/11/2007, at 3:42 PM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
So what would most folks think of someone who professed a belief in
God and spent his evenings and weekends drinking and carousing?
They'd think he was a pastor in a megachurch...
Charlie.
___
On 06/11/2007, at 4:42 AM, Dave Land wrote:
In answer to Ronn's question: They might well see him for what he is:
a hypocrite. And, if they were willing to do so, they would see the
hypocrisy in their own lives, and recognize the need in him and
themselves to seek forgiveness and repentance.
On 06/11/2007, at 12:51 PM, Dave Land wrote:
I have called myself a Christian, but I despise the disease that
crawls
among us and advertises itself by that name.
As Gandhi said when asked what he thought of Western Civilization: It
would be a good idea... and that's how I see modern
On 06/11/2007, at 4:49 PM, Doug wrote:
Ronn! wrote:
So what would most folks think of someone who professed a belief in
God and spent his evenings and weekends drinking and carousing?
Wouldn't that depend on what particular brand of God this person
believed
in and which particular
On 02/11/2007, at 1:16 PM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
This is the last message I have received from Brin-L . . . including
at least one message I sent to the list which has not shown
up. Apparently Dan broke the list somehow . . . :(
It's just quiet.
Charlie.
On 24/10/2007, at 1:04 PM, David Brin wrote:
Ever wonder what happened to civil defense, in an era
of high techHomelandSecurity? It’s guys like me…
heaven help us!
Maybe once this dies down and people have a chance to take stock,
people in bushfire zones in the US will take a look at the
On 25/10/2007, at 2:38 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Years ago, I watched a Botsuana movie The Gods Must Be Crazy,
where the bushman hero used an interesting technique to fight an
out-of-control fire: he used fire to start a controlled fire,
creating a barrier of ashes, so that the
On 24/10/2007, at 12:46 AM, Klaus Stock wrote:
...and when you're accelerating hard, both the engine and the motor
are working together.
Right. People buy a hybrid Lexus to brag about their green
attitude and
yet happily kick the pedal to the metal to get most of the 400+
horsepowers
On 23/10/2007, at 3:57 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
I was surprised to see that it's only 67 hp... I drove my mother's
Prius a
while ago and it seemed zippier than that. Lots of torque, I guess.
...and when you're accelerating hard, both the engine and the motor
are working together.
On 15/10/2007, at 11:02 AM, Gary Nunn wrote:
Highlander 2?
There is no such thing.
Julia
au contraire..
From the IMDB:
Did you post some text after from the IMDB? It mysteriously vanished.
Charlie
___
On 12/10/2007, at 10:57 AM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
which could also stand for High Profile
Vehicle, i.e., the ones which are subject to
being blown off the road or over on their sides when it gets
windy . . .
What's the difference? That's happened to me once this year (found
out when
On 12/10/2007, at 1:48 PM, Kevin B. O'Brien wrote:
I have been reading this list for months, and I don't know what
this is
about. I suppose some kind of in-joke, but would someone explain it to
me?
Ship names. Kobayashi Maru, for example. So as apropos or amusing
postscripts, Maru ship
On 13/10/2007, at 1:36 AM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
At 09:33 AM Friday 10/12/2007, Charlie Bell wrote:
On 12/10/2007, at 10:57 AM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
which could also stand for High Profile
Vehicle, i.e., the ones which are subject to
being blown off the road or over on their sides
On 13/10/2007, at 11:59 AM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
I was being ironic.
Me, too! Don't stop now!
LOL Fair enough. Bit of a sense of humour failure last night - lost
my pannier with wallet, housekeys, work pass, work blackberry, mobile
phone... fortunately it was handed in to the cops
On 11/10/2007, at 1:45 AM, Horn, John wrote:
Charlie Bell wrote
Sanctimonious? How much of a snarl-up is asking for trouble?
Oooo... There's that nerve again. At least it wasn't *me* this time!
It's going to get very tiresome if every time I disagree with
something strongly, you claim
On 11/10/2007, at 2:28 AM, Dan Minettte wrote:
What you're saying is that the weak should give up their rights to
the strong.
Actually, while asking for trouble is a poor choice of words, I
don't
think that he's advocating that the weak should give up rights to the
strong. I don't
On 12/10/2007, at 12:40 AM, Horn, John wrote:
It's going to get very tiresome if every time I disagree with
something strongly, you claim it's a hit nerve...
Looks like I hit ano...urk!!
Oh wait...
Nevermind.
;-) Sorry, couldn't resist.
Funny man...
:-p
Charlie
On 10/10/2007, at 7:23 AM, jon louis mann wrote:
i think riders should do as least as much as drivers to accommodate
each other, if for no other reason than they are more vulnerable.
there is a too much hostility and frustration on the road to risk
generating more. those sanctimonious
On 10/10/2007, at 2:22 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What is woo?
Woo woo. Magical thinking. Evidence free medicine for example.
Charlie.
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
On 09/10/2007, at 3:52 AM, Dan Minettte wrote:
I have a question about your trip around Australia. Did you only
travel on
low traffic roads, or multi-lane roads, or roads with wide
shoulders that
can easily accommodate a bike?
Most roads in Australia are what you'd call low traffic,
On 09/10/2007, at 12:26 PM, jon louis mann wrote:
Type O was the original paleolithic blood type.
Type A showed up after agriculture changed our diet from
hunter/gatherer.
Ah, the Blood Type Diet, which is almost certainly pure woo:
Allele O phylogenetic analysis suggests that the most
On 09/10/2007, at 11:52 PM, Dan Minettte wrote:
I agree with that statement, I've just been irritated by the
exception who
insist that, since bikes were better for the environment, rude
actions like
snarling traffic are justified. One of the reasons I asked is that
I wanted
to see
On 05/10/2007, at 8:17 AM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
At 03:55 PM Thursday 10/4/2007, jon louis mann wrote:
The biggest problem with car driver in car-based cities is
the general ignorance of rules applying to bicycles.
Two abreast is legal just about everywhere, and a bicycle is
*entitled*
On 06/10/2007, at 12:06 AM, Horn, John wrote:
Charlie Bell wrote
Like everyone else? A majority of people in motor vehicles speed.
Cyclists who do flaunt road rules, flaunt different road
rules to car drivers, but they're still a minority of cyclists.
Hit a nerve, did I? Didn't mean
On 06/10/2007, at 5:11 AM, Dave Land wrote:
On Oct 4, 2007, at 1:40 AM, Charlie Bell wrote:
On 04/10/2007, at 11:13 AM, jon louis mann wrote:
pedestrians are not much better. i would think anyone ambulating
by feet or bike would take more care because they are far more
vulnerable. i
On 06/10/2007, at 1:13 PM, Gary Nunn wrote:
No spoilers
Is anyone watching the Bionic Woman? I was pleasantly surprised
by it.
Yes. Started last Thursday here in Ozland. Has promise.
Of course Katee Sackhoff, from Battlestar Galactica, plays a
renegade bionic
badass of
On 04/10/2007, at 11:13 AM, jon louis mann wrote:
i ride a bike and drive so i can see both sides. i am of the
opinion that both groups exhibit extremely hostile and discourteous
behavior, at least in los angeles.
Some do. The biggest problem with car driver in car-based cities is
On 03/10/2007, at 11:07 AM, Dan Minettte wrote:
u
Yep. I'm still wondering what bits of London are 20 mins apart by car
and hours apart by public transport (apart from at 3am, at which time
most of London is 20 mins by car and unreachable at all by public
transport...).
I thought it would
On 03/10/2007, at 10:23 PM, Jim Sharkey wrote:
Apparently, they're too quiet:
http://money.excite.com/jsp/nw/nwdt_rt_top.jsp?news_id=ap-d8s1n79o0;
The National Federation for the Blind is complaining that when the
cars are running on solely electricity, blind people cannot hear them
and
On 04/10/2007, at 12:04 AM, Julia Thompson wrote:
Most of the cyclists I know are responsible and will use their
bells if
they're approaching an intersection with pedestrians waiting to cross.
Banning bicycles is not the answer, penalizing irresponsible
behavior by
cyclists is.
Yes.
On 04/10/2007, at 12:23 AM, Horn, John wrote:
Julia Thompson wrote
(Most cyclists tend to be
significantly more safety-conscious than many drivers, I've noticed.)
Would that be the ones who ride straight through red lights and stop
signs without stopping? That's a particular pet peeve of
On 30/09/2007, at 8:50 PM, Gary Nunn wrote:
Holy Cow!!
I make a post and step away for a few weeks and find this topic ran
rampant
- and I missed it!
Yep. I'm still wondering what bits of London are 20 mins apart by car
and hours apart by public transport (apart from at 3am, at
On 01/10/2007, at 5:11 PM, Ray Ludenia wrote:
A few sent by my brother-in-law from Africa.
http://raylud.googlepages.com/africa
...and even here in lovely Victoria there is some spectacularly
stupid signage
http://www.whittlesealeader.com.au/article/
2007/04/24/13551_wpv_news.html
On 25/09/2007, at 10:27 PM, Russell Chapman wrote:
Ray Ludenia wrote:
Maybe in your neck of the woods, Rob. In Melbourne and most of the
state of Victoria (and much of the rest of Australia), watering lawns
is a big no-no.
Of course, a significant region of Victoria (not that far from
On 26/09/2007, at 2:09 AM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
For much of the past several months we've been in a so-called
exceptional drought (apparently that's the level above such things
as severe drought and extreme drought: whenever I heard that
term on the news I kept expecting someone to
On 21/09/2007, at 6:31 PM, Martin Lewis wrote:
I don't get the exact meaning but presumed you were suggesting
something about my mental state. In other words you were attacking my
character rather than the argument. Is this not a perfect example of
an ad hominem?
No, because he wasn't
On 22/09/2007, at 4:08 AM, Julia Thompson wrote:
On Fri, 21 Sep 2007, Horn, John wrote:
Martin Lewis wrote
I was using it in reference to this line:
Oh, for Krum's sake, Martin. Take a pill.
I don't get the exact meaning but presumed you were
suggesting something about my mental
On 20/09/2007, at 12:17 PM, jon louis mann wrote:
depends on if it is done in a condescending manner... pointing
out rules be a benefit to other newbies. other things have been
pointed out to me in e-mail that would have embarrassed me if
posted to the list, when it served no
On 21/09/2007, at 6:52 AM, Dave Land wrote:
Ad-hominem used incorrectly, leading to correction.
Perhaps we would all do well to stick with English?
It *is* English. It may be a Latin-rooted description, but many
technical words are. Would you say that using scientific or legal
On 21/09/2007, at 7:40 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
English is, after all, the lingua franca of the Internet.
And, ipso facto, the sina qua non for this group.
Semper fidelus,
Nick
Damn you! LOL
Charlie
Sultana Bran On My Keyboard Maru
___
On 21/09/2007, at 7:49 AM, Dave Land wrote:
Heck no. I appreciate the fact that people on this list want things
said
well, and words used correctly.
Yep. Language is one of the defining characters of our species, and
it's good to use it well. Better than my friend Allison's lorikeet
On 18/09/2007, at 1:47 AM, Dan Minettte wrote:
Calculations show that a car-free inner London scenario equates to
a 49%
reduction in emissions7. Because most London car trips are within
outer
London, changes in inner London boroughs alone were not found to be
sufficient to meet the
On 20/09/2007, at 3:58 AM, Dave Land wrote:
I'm not sure what this means. I thought you wanted to discuss the
ettiquette of online communication? Why do you have to repeatedly
resort to these ad hominems?
I sincerely apologize for this and other ad-hominem attacks that I
have resorted
On 17/09/2007, at 1:06 PM, Dan Minettte wrote:
Well, technically, the proposal doesn't force people to walk.
There could
be mass transit on each and every street, I suppose. It's just
that any
realistic implementation of the proposal would force people who are
not
capable of
Never, ever post a private message to a mailing list.
It is an unconscionable breach of netiquette.
Oddly enough, I think that replying to an onlist post offlist is
pretty poor netiquette. If you wish to berate someone for their
behaviour onlist, do it onlist or not at all. It's called
On 18/09/2007, at 12:34 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Julia Thompson wrote:
Question: How much does a good bike (good for riding around London)
cost?
(Wondering how good a selling point this is; if it pays for itself
in 2 years, that's a good deal, IMO.)
I don't think this is the correct
On 18/09/2007, at 1:47 AM, Dan Minettte wrote:
Finally, are you arguing that those people who do drive in greater
London
are just a bunch of idiots who could do much better if only they
used public
transportation instead?
I'll answer the rest later as I'm just heading off to work, but
On 18/09/2007, at 12:27 AM, Julia Thompson wrote:
Question: How much does a good bike (good for riding around
London) cost? (Wondering how good a selling point this is; if it
pays for itself in 2 years, that's a good deal, IMO.)
Answer one - as much as you want to spend. OK, I'm
On 18/09/2007, at 12:19 AM, PAT MATHEWS wrote:
I tried to re-acquire a bicycle and ride it and found I was no
longer secure
in my balance.
You are the perfect candidate to discover the joys of triking. I have
read story after story by people who rediscovered the joys of cycling
On 16/09/2007, at 6:21 AM, Dan Minette wrote:
Now, Charlie Rob and I do not live in London, so our experiences do
not directly translate.
No, but I did grow up in London, and used a bike pretty much
exclusively there too. And it was likewise far quicker by bike there
too, because I
On 15/09/2007, at 6:01 AM, Andrew Crystall wrote:
What's mysterious about it? People take extra time to get into work,
this costs.
Time to work for me:
Car: 40 mins
Train: 40 mins
Tram: 45 mins
Bicycle: 25 mins.
Charlie
___
On 28/08/2007, at 12:47 PM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
Best view in the U.S. the further west you are. Details here:
http://www.skyandtelescope.com/observing/highlights/9282371.html
Or right now in Oz. Red moon!
Charlie
My 5th Lunar Eclipse Maru
On 28/08/2007, at 8:40 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Were you trying to say something, but were caught by the beauty of
the eclipse? :-)
Charlie
In Melbourne Maru
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Urm...
You're losing content somewhere in these posts.
Charlie.
On 28/08/2007, at 8:48 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
___
On 28/08/2007, at 10:49 PM, Jim Sharkey wrote:
Charlie Bell wrote:
You're losing content somewhere in these posts.
Silly rabbit. Content-free posts are what we're best at around here.
Sorry, I should have been more precise. Text-free posts is what I meant.
Is it just me not seeing any
401 - 500 of 1013 matches
Mail list logo
