PRC as a amplifier in GPS question.

[John-Melb]

On Oct 3, 12:59 pm, keithr <u...@domain.invalid> wrote:

On 2/10/2012 9:29 PM, John-Melb wrote:

On Oct 2, 8:35 pm, keithr <u...@domain.invalid> wrote:

But you are still a cross posting arsehole

This message is brought to you by the fellow who posts irrelevant crap
about antique aircraft on aus.politics.guns

Unlike your efforts, it was not deliberate, and I said as such.

Oh gee, Keefy stuffed up, Keefy's sorry now he's been challenged about
it.

It's OK Keefy, I understand, you got lonely and thought you posting
irrelevant crap on aus.politics.guns would get a bite out of me and at
least you'd have another human being to communicate with.

If I needed to communicate with a human, why would I choose you?

Your dear mate Trevor often claims those who disagree with him are
less than human too,

Sucks to be you, hey.

Really? Of course you'd know.

Put it down to observation.

 

[John-Melb]

On Oct 4, 8:30 pm, keithr <u...@domain.invalid> wrote:

On 3/10/2012 4:42 PM, John-Melb wrote:









On Oct 3, 12:59 pm, keithr <u...@domain.invalid> wrote:
On 2/10/2012 9:29 PM, John-Melb wrote:

On Oct 2, 8:35 pm, keithr <u...@domain.invalid> wrote:

But you are still a cross posting arsehole

This message is brought to you by the fellow who posts irrelevant crap
about antique aircraft on aus.politics.guns

Unlike your efforts, it was not deliberate, and I said as such.

Oh gee, Keefy stuffed up, Keefy's sorry now he's been challenged about
it.

It's OK Keefy, I understand, you got lonely and thought you posting
irrelevant crap on aus.politics.guns would get a bite out of me and at
least you'd have another human being to communicate with.

If I needed to communicate with a human, why would I choose you?

Your dear mate Trevor often claims those who disagree with him are
less than human too,

Dear friend? ROFL

Sucks to be you, hey.

Really? Of course you'd know.

Put it down to observation.

If that is the extent of your powers of observation, you really ought to
get a new trade.

This message has been brought to you by the fool who posts crap about
old planes crashing on aus.politics.guns.

 

[John-Melb]

On Oct 9, 12:38 pm, keithr <u...@domain.invalid> wrote:

This message brought to you by a bitter old man who can't let go of any
supposed insult or disagreement and feels entitled to force his views on
everybody whether involved or not.

The above message has been brought to you by Keefy, who only posts
here to "annoy the crap" out of me

Those who don't have an issue with one side of a debate posting their
opinions and rhetoric somewhere, but get upset and let fly with
childish name-calling and insults when the other side posts response,
are involved.

Freedom of speech is not conditional on you liking what is being
said.

 

[John-Melb]

On Oct 9, 7:43 pm, keithr <u...@domain.invalid> wrote:

Its not what you say that is the problem, its where you choose to say it.

Keefy, are you still wheeling out that old chestnut.

As a wise man once said, "those who forget the past are destined to
repeat it"

You, and others on aus.electronics, had no issue with Trevor Tosspot
using aus.electronics as a forum to launch his anti-gun and anti-
gunowner diatribe. As soon as an alternative viewpoint appeared, the
outrage was loud and clear, you lot were angered that someone would
dare challenged the assertions of your "long standing and highly
respected" poster, and responded with all manner of childish name-
calling and insults.

Your problem is clearly with what I have to say, the forum is
irrelevant.

Give my regards to Dorothy

 

[John-Melb]

On Oct 11, 7:57 pm, keithr <u...@domain.invalid> wrote:

On 10/10/2012 2:54 PM, John-Melb wrote:

On Oct 9, 7:43 pm, keithr <u...@domain.invalid> wrote:

Its not what you say that is the problem, its where you choose to say it.

Keefy, are you still wheeling out that old chestnut.

A practice that I learned from you.

Good to see I'm doing such a good job with your ongoing education.

As a wise man once said, "those who forget the past are destined to
repeat it"

An even wiser man said "He who harbours grudges endlessly will become
bitter and friendless"

Try "Dog bites you ones, dog's fault, dog bites you twice, yours."

You, and others on aus.electronics, had no issue with Trevor Tosspot
using aus.electronics as a forum to launch his anti-gun and anti-
gunowner diatribe. As soon as an alternative viewpoint appeared, the
outrage was loud and clear, you lot were angered that someone would
dare challenged the assertions of your "long standing and highly
respected" poster, and responded with all manner of childish name-
calling and insults.

Like I said about harbouring grudges, you can't let go can you? You also
seem to have problems with the concept that others can hold views that
contrast with your own, and they are just as valid as yours.

You're claiming I have trouble with differing views, what a joke.
Let's remember, Trevor Tosspot used aus.electronics to launch his
tirades not once, but repeatedly, and you lot said nothing, as soon as
alternative viewpoint started appearing, you lot went feral.

Your problem is clearly with what I have to say, the forum is
irrelevant.

Nope, I have no argument about most of your views about firearms
ownership when you make them in the appropriate forums.

But you're not prepared to hold an anti-gun zealot like Trevor Tosspot
to the same requirement (to post only on appropriate forums), bit
hypocritical isn't it?

Give my regards to Dorothy

Your friend not mine.

You introduced her into the conversation.

 

[John-Melb]

On Oct 26, 9:44 pm, keithr <u...@domain.invalid> wrote:

hello john, you don't seem to have the intellect to understand that I
care not what wilson does or has done to him. Feel free to quote any
case where I have defended him.

http://t.qkme.me/3q6y9m.jpg

You really want me to go over this again? Fair enough, Trevor Tosspot
used aus.electronics to launch his anti-gun and anti-gun owner
diatribes not once, but repeatedly, you lot said nothing.

As soon as opinion/viewpoint alternative to that held by your "long
standing and highly respected" poster appeared, you lot went feral.
Childish name calling, insults, the full gamut of abuse was levelled
against one who dared challenge what your "long standing and highly
respected" poster had to say.

You don't see what was said at that time as "defence" of Trevor
Tosspot and his position? Stiff shit, I do.

Give my regards to Dorothy.

 

[John-Melb]

On Oct 27, 9:27 am, keithr <u...@domain.invalid> wrote:

On 27/10/2012 6:47 AM, John-Melb wrote:

On Oct 26, 9:44 pm, keithr <u...@domain.invalid> wrote:

hello john, you don't seem to have the intellect to understand that I
care not what wilson does or has done to him. Feel free to quote any
case where I have defended him.

http://t.qkme.me/3q6y9m.jpg

You really want me to go over this again? Fair enough, Trevor Tosspot
used aus.electronics to launch his anti-gun and anti-gun owner
diatribes not once, but repeatedly, you lot said nothing.

Like most people, I ignore what he has to say on the subject, but his
opinion is as valid as yours, and expressing it on an obscure geek
Usenet group is not going to change anything anywhere. It certainly
isn't worth the amount of emotional energy that you have devoted to it.

No reasonable person doubts anyone's entitlement to voice their
opinion, isn't it a shame when so many on aus.electronics don't
recognise the same when the person voicing the opinion happens to be a
gun owner? Trevor Tosspot, not once, but repeatedly posted his anti-
gun diatribe on aus.electronics, you people said nothing. As soon as
alternative viewpoint appeared, you lot (notice the plural) went feral
with insults and childish name-calling. Notice the difference, because
I certainly do.

Freedom of speech is always worth it.

Like the cartoon referred to above, who cares? Nobody of any importance
is listening to him, or, for that matter, to your emotional outbursts in
response.

As soon as opinion/viewpoint alternative to that held by your "long
standing and highly respected" poster appeared, you lot went feral.
Childish name calling, insults, the full gamut of abuse was levelled
against one who dared challenge what your "long standing and highly
respected" poster had to say.

Just show one post where I have referred to wilson as "long
 > standing and highly respected". Bet you can't

That description of Trevor Tosspot came from one of the other idiots
on aus.electronics who also didn't have a problem with Tosspot's
diatribes being posted there, but got so upset and vocal at
alternative viewpoint. You anti's seem quite prepared to use "guilt by
association" as a tool to attack others, but get very upset when the
same tactic is used back at you, why is that?

You don't see what was said at that time as "defence" of Trevor
Tosspot and his position? Stiff shit, I do.

Maybe somebody said that, but not me. I have never defended wilson only
attacked you for being an arsehole.

So, you've attacked me for posting pro-gun opinion on aus.electronics,
but never attacked Trevor Tosspot for posting anti-gun opinion on the
same forum, is that right? If you and those other anti-gun idiots on
aus.electronics believe me to be an arsehole, I'm obviously doing
something right

Give my regards to Dorothy.

Your friend not mine.

I seem to recall you introduced her into our discussion

You could note that the only posts being made to aus.electronics at
present are your cross-posts and those from "|-|erc" that puts you in
fine company.

Keefy, do you remember what you once said to me about the use of
sarcasm?

Thank you for the compliment, yes, I am in very fine company indeed

 

[John-Melb]

On Oct 27, 4:19 pm, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:

Naah, we already know what a bunch of pyschos you gun owers are.

More anti-gun owner stereotyping from our friends at aus.electronics

 

[dechucka]

"John-Melb" <mcnamara_john@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:94de0843-c756-4111-9985-62c65a837e68@o5g2000pbd.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 27, 4:19 pm, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:

Naah, we already know what a bunch of pyschos you gun owers are.

More anti-gun owner stereotyping from our friends at aus.electronics


=============================

also posted on aus.politics.gun

 

[John-Melb]

On Oct 29, 10:16 am, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:

Lol, who needs to stereotype. You waltz right up on queue with neon
flashing lights. You are definitely not doing gun owners any favour.
OTOH, that is probably your objective little weenie greenie.

Remind me again how you didn't have a problem with Trevor Tosspot
repeatedly posting his anti-gun and anti-gunowner rhetoric on
aus.electronics, but get so upset at alternative viewpoint appearing.

 

[John-Melb]

On Oct 29, 12:31 pm, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:

On 29/10/12 10:19, John-Melb wrote:

On Oct 29, 10:16 am, terryc<newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au>  wrote:

Simple m0ron. He isn't a deliberate cross posting twat like you.

Even when he's posting his anti-gun and anti-gun owner diatribes on
aus.electronics?

We
ignore him.

No you don't, he's your "long standing and highly respected" poster, I
know, someone on aus.electronics said so

When you post your extreme alternative view, it just pisses
people off in non-relevant usenet groups.

As I said, pro-gun opinion posted on aus.electronics "just pisses
people off", anti-gun opinion, even when the claims posted have
previously found to be untrue, is just fine.

 

[John-Melb]

On Oct 29, 12:31 pm, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:

Simple m0ron. He isn't a deliberate cross posting twat like you. We
ignore him. When you post your extreme alternative view, it just pisses
people off in non-relevant usenet groups.

Terry, just wondering, when another aus.electronics stalwart, Keefy,
admitted that he only posts on aus.politics.guns to "annoy the crap
out of" me, and posted some garbage about plane crashes on
aus.politics.guns, were you fine with that?

 

[dechucka]

"John-Melb" <mcnamara_john@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:868677d8-416d-4e75-a54b-b0abdf05d0e2@jj5g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 29, 12:31 pm, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:

Simple m0ron. He isn't a deliberate cross posting twat like you. We
ignore him. When you post your extreme alternative view, it just pisses
people off in non-relevant usenet groups.

Terry, just wondering, when another aus.electronics stalwart, Keefy,
admitted that he only posts on aus.politics.guns to "annoy the crap
out of" me, and posted some garbage about plane crashes on
aus.politics.guns, were you fine with that?

======================================

you forgot that when asked why he said "Coz I fucked up, unlike some, I do
not deliberately post off topic messages." but you keep going on and on
about it

 

[John-Melb]

On Oct 29, 3:48 pm, "dechucka" <dechuc...@hotmail.com> wrote:

=====================================
you forgot that when asked why he said "Coz I fucked up, unlike some, I do
not deliberately post off topic messages." but you keep going on and on
about it

Considering the history of our discussions, a "mistake" is too
convenient, to convenient by far

 

[dechucka]

"John-Melb" <mcnamara_john@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40251d5c-993f-4e8c-a822-12001723ed50@mq1g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 29, 3:48 pm, "dechucka" <dechuc...@hotmail.com> wrote:

======================================

you forgot that when asked why he said "Coz I fucked up, unlike some, I do
not deliberately post off topic messages." but you keep going on and on
about it

Considering the history of our discussions, a "mistake" is too
convenient, to convenient by far

============================

fine

 

[John-Melb]

On Oct 29, 8:05 pm, "Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote:

"terryc" <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote in message

news:k6fqt0$h9a$1@dont-email.me...

On 27/10/12 06:47, John-Melb wrote:
On Oct 26, 9:44 pm, keithr<u...@domain.invalid>  wrote:

hello john, you don't seem to have the intellect to understand that I
care not what wilson does or has done to him. Feel free to quote any
case where I have defended him.

http://t.qkme.me/3q6y9m.jpg

You really want me to go over this again?

Naah, we already know what a bunch of pyschos you gun owers are.

That's the same as saying "all niggers eat fried chicken".

You're surprised at such stereotyping from our "anti" friends?

--
"There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not
want merely because you think it would be good for him".

Robert A. Heinlein.

 

[John-Melb]

On Oct 29, 11:27 pm, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:

On 29/10/12 13:29, John-Melb wrote:

On Oct 29, 12:31 pm, terryc<newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au>  wrote:
On 29/10/12 10:19, John-Melb wrote:

On Oct 29, 10:16 am, terryc<newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au>    wrote:

Simple m0ron. He isn't a deliberate cross posting twat like you.

Even when he's posting his anti-gun and anti-gun owner diatribes on
aus.electronics?

We
ignore him.

No you don't, he's your "long standing and highly respected" poster, I
know, someone on aus.electronics said so

Yep, every group has a twat. I guess you are the one for this group.

So, you cannot argue what I've said, but must instead rely on childish
name-calling, how so very typical of someone from aus.electronics.

IT's OK, you can now wander back to aus.electronics and join Trevor
Tosspot and Keefy in sooking about nasty rednecks.

 

[John-Melb]

On Oct 30, 11:12 am, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:

On 30/10/12 09:14, ozarkhe...@yahoo.com wrote:

On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 01:24:41 +1100, terryc
newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au>  wrote:

On 29/10/12 14:12, ozarkhe...@yahoo.com wrote:

. Aus laws restrict the availability of guns to those
who need them

Does a 100 pound woman need a gun to defend herself from a 250 pound
attacker?

no.

Why not?

Sad, sad, how very sad that all you can think of is phallic replacement
symbols. Try exercising your brain and working it out.

Isn't it interesting that the first person who has mentioned phallic
symbols during this discussion is one of the anti's from
aus.electronics

 

[John-Melb]

On Oct 30, 11:10 am, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:

On 29/10/12 14:12, ozarkhe...@yahoo.com wrote:

Back to my original comments. I lived in an area where, by what
appears to be your standards, the gun laws were "lax". Again, gun
crime very low and murders nil

So it appears access to guns isn't the problem.

Lies, damm lies and statistics.
I'm sure we could all find areas both for and counter.

And we're quite sure you'd only be interested in the statistics put
forward by the anti's

 

[John-Melb]

On Oct 30, 1:29 pm, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:

Who you? You might like to do a count of posts you've made to
aus.electronics that generate anti-gun feeling despite what you think
you are doing.

Your recollection of the circumstances which first brought me to
aus.electronics appears somewhat faulty.

Trevor Tosspot, not once, but repeatedly, posted his anti-gun and anti-
gun owner rhetoric on aus.electronics, not once was he challenged, not
once was he told his postings were off topic.

As soon (from the very first post) as I responded, I was shit-canned.

Trevor Tosspot is aus.electronics "long standing and highly respected"
poster, anybody who choose to post alternative viewpoint was simply a
troll.

Those who post on aus.electronics clearly believe that an anti-gun
zealot has the right to post their diatribes wherever they wish, but
are not prepared to extend the same right to gun owners. I have some
news for them, my freedom of speech is not dependant on them liking
what I've got to say.

Nothing I post on aus.electronics is going to change the attitudes of
those there to gun ownership or gun owners, not for better, not for
worse. Those attitudes were well and truly made up well before I first
posted there.