Homemade petrol?

[Ext User(KennethGalloway)]

Find OUT HOW to make PETROL FOR YOU CAR with the lowest losses or without
them at all! www.petrol.host.sk

[Ext User(Big uns)]

"KennethGalloway" <petrol@host.sk> wrote in message
news:7f82cde7757eae5b855e9090456e9f0c@localhost.ta lkaboutautos.com...
> Find OUT HOW to make PETROL FOR YOU CAR with the lowest losses or without
> them at all! www.petrol.host.sk

Illegal in australia

[Ext User(Patrick Young)]

Big uns wrote:

> "KennethGalloway" <petrol@host.sk> wrote in message
> news:7f82cde7757eae5b855e9090456e9f0c@localhost.ta lkaboutautos.com...

>>Find OUT HOW to make PETROL FOR YOU CAR with the lowest losses or without
>>them at all! www.petrol.host.sk

> Illegal in australia

If you can buy 200L drums of methanol for $205 and make your own
biodiesel for not a lot over 20c a litre + excise, why wouldn't
you be able to make any road going fuel you like? ... as long as
you pay excise.


--
--------------------------------------------
4x4 Hilux Auto Service Centre,
BP 106 Timbuktu,
Mali (West Africa)
Tel: 292 91 52
Specialising in turbo diesel and R290 aircon
--------------------------------------------

[Ext User(tlai909@visto.com)]

If you don't pay the excise, who's going to know?

[Ext User(Bernd Felsche)]

"KennethGalloway" <petrol@host.sk> writes:

>Find OUT HOW to make PETROL FOR YOU CAR with the lowest losses or
>without them at all! www.petrol.host.sk

Lovely scam.

But quite obviously so. "Britney Spears, ..." in tha page title are
a dead giveaway.

Scammers can be more stupid than the scammed.
--
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign | "Laws do not persuade just because
X against HTML mail | they threaten."
/ \ and postings | Lucius Annaeus Seneca, c. 4BC - 65AD.

[Ext User(athol)]

KennethGalloway <petrol@host.sk> wrote:
> Find OUT HOW to make PETROL FOR YOU CAR with the lowest losses or without
> them at all! www.petrol.host.sk

That's not making petrol you idiot. That's the process for reforming methane
into methanol. The diagram is a little small, and looks like CH4OH where it
should say CH3OH.

The process described does work, as it is the commerical process used to
produce methanol. It is very energy inefficient and costly.

Oh, and you need to remove the LPG, air and CO2 from the feedstock before
feeding it into the process, plus source the acetone to add at 5% so that
the flame burns with colour.

This is _not_ something that should be attempted at home!

--
Athol
<http://cust.idl.com.au/athol> Linux Registered User # 254000
The state of infrastructure in New South Wales is a disgrace.
I'm a Libran Engineer. I don't argue, I discuss.

[Ext User(Mike)]

In article <43f649b6$1@news1.veridas.net>, wogboy@riceboy.blog says...
>
>
>"KennethGalloway" <petrol@host.sk> wrote in message
>news:7f82cde7757eae5b855e9090456e9f0c@localhost.ta lkaboutautos.com...
>> Find OUT HOW to make PETROL FOR YOU CAR with the lowest losses or without
>> them at all! www.petrol.host.sk
>
>Illegal in australia

no, only if you dont pay excise, which at present is pretty low
for biodiesel, besides who is going to know or care if you
supplement your weekly tank with a few litres of alternate
fuel (in a separate tank system etc) for the purpose of carbon
credits or dare I say it R&D into reducing fossil fuel usage ;-)

--
Regards
Mike
VL Commodore, Calais VL Turbo FuseRail that wont warp or melt !
High grade milspec ignition driver electronics now in development
http://niche.iinet.net.au

[Ext User(Mike)]

In article <1140239688.184824@idlweb>, me@privacy.net says...
>
>KennethGalloway <petrol@host.sk> wrote:
>> Find OUT HOW to make PETROL FOR YOU CAR with the lowest losses or without
>> them at all! www.petrol.host.sk
>
>That's not making petrol you idiot. That's the process for reforming methane
>into methanol. The diagram is a little small, and looks like CH4OH where it
>should say CH3OH.
>
>The process described does work, as it is the commerical process used to
>produce methanol. It is very energy inefficient and costly.

This is true, what especially pains me as well is that the gas company
here in Perth (Alinta) wont under any circumstances remove the flow
restriction and pressure regulator before the meter. This means if one
was inspired to use natural gas at any reasonable level for vehicle use,
you'd be faced with woefully inefficient flow - even if using it as
CNG through a suitable compressor, going from the 0.5psi or so of final
pressure to a reasonable 1500 to 2000 psi or so for a tank in a car would
be a huge waste of energy. Ironic when you discover that a Alinta Gas tech
has designed a setup for a Ford wagon that uses Bosch methanol injectors
for CNG through a pressure regulator etc... <sigh>

>Oh, and you need to remove the LPG, air and CO2 from the feedstock before
>feeding it into the process, plus source the acetone to add at 5% so that
>the flame burns with colour.

Not to mention the accumulation of mercaptan which you would want to
release in even small quantities in any urban environment, well unless
you wanted to get rid of the neighbours and cause a panic. I understand
there is a small pressure can of the stuff you can buy in joke shops in
USA for that very purpose... !
>
>This is _not_ something that should be attempted at home!

Agree, unless you are a really enthusiastic engineer with nothing
better to do than rediscover methods of entering low earth orbit.

>
>--
>Athol
><http://cust.idl.com.au/athol> Linux Registered User # 254000
>The state of infrastructure in New South Wales is a disgrace.
>I'm a Libran Engineer. I don't argue, I discuss.

<chuckle> it takes one to know one :o)

PS: Saw the 4 corners article re Sydney tunnel last night !, <geeesh>
I really sympathise with you guys, and would be afraid of major accidents
with LPG taxis crossing those tunnel entry ramps when bypassing etc
I cant believe how bad the setup is and how little emphasis there is
on growing the rail network, did they ever consider some circle route
such as exists in London ?

--
Regards
Mike
* VL Commodore, Calais VL Turbo FuseRail that wont warp or melt !
* High grade milspec ignition driver electronics now in development
http://niche.iinet.net.au

[Ext User(Spear and Magic Helmet)]

Mike wrote:

<snip>

Well that was a lot of typing. However I'm willing to bet that Athol
has plonked you because of your eBay spamming.

[Ext User(Mike)]

In article <1140510067.007792.92290@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.c om>, speed_saves@yahoo.com.au says...
>
>Mike wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>Well that was a lot of typing. However I'm willing to bet that Athol
>has plonked you because of your eBay spamming.

huh ? There are a few people on this group that do a 'lot of typing'
to offer an opinion, curious why you draw attention to my doing that,
yet dont make any comment on the actual content ?

Is making one post about an improved product in 3 to 5 weeks spamming ?

This thread is really about homemade petrol - or rather homemade fuel
I'm curious why you need to shift it away from that to the issue of
spamming and dont make any comment on the actual content of my posting ?

--
Regards
Mike
* VL Commodore, Calais VL Turbo FuseRail that wont warp or melt !
* High grade milspec ignition driver electronics now in development
http://niche.iinet.net.au

[Ext User(Spear and Magic Helmet)]

Mike wrote:

> huh ? There are a few people on this group that do a 'lot of typing'
> to offer an opinion, curious why you draw attention to my doing that,

It's not about how much you typed, I'm simply pointing out that IMHO
it's quite likely Athol can't see what you type without someone quoting
you in a reply (like I'm doing right now)

> yet dont make any comment on the actual content ?

Because I have nothing to add on the topic, I was just pointing
something out to you in case you were waiting for a response from
Athol.

> Is making one post about an improved product in 3 to 5 weeks spamming ?

The point was that posting your eBay ads in here is frowned upon rather
heavily. Especially when it's pointed out to you and all you do in
response is along the lines of "nyah nyah, you can't stop me".

> This thread is really about homemade petrol - or rather homemade fuel
> I'm curious why you need to shift it away from that

I have no *need* to do it. Like I said I'm just pointing something out
to you. I haven't stopped anyone from posting on the topic have I?

> and dont make any comment on the actual content of my posting ?

Because I have nothing to add. If I did, I would.

To use your wording, "I'm curious" as to why you're so hung up on the
fact that I didn't have anything to say on the topic of the thread, and
are seemingly baffled by why I made the comment to you that I did.
Pretty straight forward I would've thought.

If you were in the street and needed directions, you walked up to some
guy from behind (so he hasn't seen you) and started with "Excuse me
mate, I was wondering if..." then some other guy comes up to you and
says "He's deaf - he can't hear you." Would you be curious as to why he
told you that?

[Ext User(Mike)]

In article <1140589048.612023.35870@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.c om>, speed_saves@yahoo.com.au says...
>
>Mike wrote:
>
>> huh ? There are a few people on this group that do a 'lot of typing'
>> to offer an opinion, curious why you draw attention to my doing that,
>
>It's not about how much you typed, I'm simply pointing out that IMHO
>it's quite likely Athol can't see what you type without someone quoting
>you in a reply (like I'm doing right now)

I dont see why the other poster wouldnt see my post, and why didnt
you say that directly instead of making reference to how much I typed ?


>> yet dont make any comment on the actual content ?
>
>Because I have nothing to add on the topic, I was just pointing
>something out to you in case you were waiting for a response from
>Athol.

It makes no sense to me to suggest why the other poster wouldnt
see my post - I dont see why, I can read my post so can other people,
whats the issue ?

And because there doesnt seem to be any issue for me to read posts,
I'm guessing others are not likely to have some problem hence why
would you suggest there is a problem etc. Therefore I'm asking you
to explain...

>> Is making one post about an improved product in 3 to 5 weeks spamming ?
>
>The point was that posting your eBay ads in here is frowned upon rather
>heavily. Especially when it's pointed out to you and all you do in
>response is along the lines of "nyah nyah, you can't stop me".

I *never* said you cant stop me, if you try hard enough anything is
possible - up to a point.

All I implied is that its pointless complaining to ebay, understand ?

And sure there are a small vocal minority that frown upon an ad
of a motorvehicle part on ebay being referenced here on aus.cars
which seems irrational to have that emotion, if they are not
interested why dont they just ignore it - it will go away. Instead
they draw attention to it and Voila - the thread continues <chuckle>

>> This thread is really about homemade petrol - or rather homemade fuel
>> I'm curious why you need to shift it away from that
>
>I have no *need* to do it. Like I said I'm just pointing something out
>to you. I haven't stopped anyone from posting on the topic have I?

I *never* suggested you stopped anyone. The content of your post
suggested something vague about how much I typed and bringing up the
issue of spamming - pretty pointless things to say really. You would
have noticed I stayed on the topic and I was looking forward to
some further technical comment on the topic of making your own fuel.


>> and dont make any comment on the actual content of my posting ?
>
>Because I have nothing to add. If I did, I would.
>
>To use your wording, "I'm curious" as to why you're so hung up on the
>fact that I didn't have anything to say on the topic of the thread, and
>are seemingly baffled by why I made the comment to you that I did.
>Pretty straight forward I would've thought.
>
>If you were in the street and needed directions, you walked up to some
>guy from behind (so he hasn't seen you) and started with "Excuse me
>mate, I was wondering if..." then some other guy comes up to you and
>says "He's deaf - he can't hear you." Would you be curious as to why he
>told you that?

I still dont see why the other poster wouldnt be able to read the post,
care to explain that - afterall - I can read it and you can why
would 'athol' not be able to ?

Are you assuming he would only *want* to read it if someone else
makes reference to it, is that a valid assumption of anyone if it
comes to that - are you doing me a favour in that respect ?

That seems to be your central point, so making obtuse comments about
how much I type has little informational value to get to the point
about how someome cant (or is it wont) see the post <doh>



--
Regards
Mike
* VL Commodore, Calais VL Turbo FuseRail that wont warp or melt !
* High grade milspec ignition driver electronics now in development
http://niche.iinet.net.au

[Ext User(Spear and Magic Helmet)]

Mike wrote:

> I dont see why the other poster wouldnt see my post, and why didnt
> you say that directly instead of making reference to how much I typed ?

I did say it directly. The comment about how much you typed was
separate. Anyway, that doesn't matter because it's now obvious that you
don't know what the term "plonked" means.

If someone has "plonked" you, it means they have put you in what is
called a "killfile" or an "ignore list". Their newsreader will not show
them any posts made from your email address. Killfiles can get more
sophisticated than that, but that's generally the deal.

I believe the above paragraph addresses a large portion of the rest of
your post.

> I *never* said you cant stop me, if you try hard enough anything is
> possible - up to a point.

I know you didn't. I was talking about the general attitude of your
responses with regard to the complaints. The right thing to do would be
to acknowledge that what you have done is against the culture of the
group. But you didn't do that, right? Your attitude was completely not
along those lines, wouldn't you agree?

> All I implied is that its pointless complaining to ebay, understand ?

Possibly. I don't know. I wasn't talking about that. I was talking
about your attitude.

> And sure there are a small vocal minority that frown upon an ad
> of a motorvehicle part on ebay being referenced here on aus.cars

Minority? Have you heard anyone say otherwise other than Mr Saab C900?

> the thread continues <chuckle>

That's part of the attitude I'm talking about.

> You would have noticed I stayed on the topic and I was looking forward to
> some further technical comment on the topic of making your own fuel.

And since I had a fair idea that Athol (someone who is very likely to
be able to continue the discussion *on topic* and certainly technical)
would not see your post, I thought I'd let you know about it.

[Ext User(Mike)]

In article <1140597535.424097.286020@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups. com>, speed_saves@yahoo.com.au says...
>
>Mike wrote:
>
>> I dont see why the other poster wouldnt see my post, and why didnt
>> you say that directly instead of making reference to how much I typed ?
>
>I did say it directly. The comment about how much you typed was
>separate. Anyway, that doesn't matter because it's now obvious that you
>don't know what the term "plonked" means.

huh ? Making reference to how much I typed isnt saying it directly
and the term "plonked" can mean anything, in the context of newsgroups
it used to mean the poster was plonked into an alert script when
unix systems handled news before PCs were the go, Yes I remember
those days, I've been messing with the net since 1978 when you could
set local hosts on a KL-10 system, those were the days :)

>If someone has "plonked" you, it means they have put you in what is
>called a "killfile" or an "ignore list". Their newsreader will not show
>them any posts made from your email address. Killfiles can get more
>sophisticated than that, but that's generally the deal.

Well fine, you assume it concerns me, I made a general comment,
if I wanted to send a message to the other poster I wouldnt have
put it on the newsgroup. This is an open public forum for the
years and years I've been on it, I've noticed its far more
productive to keep things on the open forum unless the poster
invites a personal response. They didnt invite one, so I didnt
proceed and kept it public, thats the etiquette I'm generally on.

>I believe the above paragraph addresses a large portion of the rest of
>your post.

Sure then lets leave it at that, well <cough> I might make passing
reference to the other things you have written...

>> I *never* said you cant stop me, if you try hard enough anything is
>> possible - up to a point.
>
>I know you didn't. I was talking about the general attitude of your
>responses with regard to the complaints. The right thing to do would be
>to acknowledge that what you have done is against the culture of the
>group. But you didn't do that, right? Your attitude was completely not
>along those lines, wouldn't you agree?

Ah well thats where we differ. In my oh so long term opinion, its
not against the culture of the group to post something commercial
about a cars electrical problem and a solution once in 3 to 5 weeks
since this is a news group about cars.

It would be understandable if I'd posted a viagra for sale, but then
maybe I should, seems some respondents talking about ebay are subject
to a level of impotence they really need to raise to a higher level ;)

And should I be concerned that one poster initiates a complaint
against ebay and be concerned that one other poster follows so
readily <doh> no. I am not that much of a wuss :)

>> All I implied is that its pointless complaining to ebay, understand ?
>
>Possibly. I don't know. I wasn't talking about that. I was talking
>about your attitude.

It didnt sound like it, until now, ie. Now you are referring to my
attitude, which is - that I'm not easily perturbed or distracted
from my focus. In your previous post you made no reference I can
see to my attitude and offered a half baked analogy, sorry mate,
I'm telling it like it is, ducking and weaving isnt productive.

>> And sure there are a small vocal minority that frown upon an ad
>> of a motorvehicle part on ebay being referenced here on aus.cars
>
>Minority? Have you heard anyone say otherwise other than Mr Saab C900?

Try and understand this is not a democracy, the posters here dont have
to vote either way, most are just happy to watch and get some
semblence of entertainment from people arguing. If people were really
upset there would be far more posts on the subject, there aint.

>> the thread continues <chuckle>
>
>That's part of the attitude I'm talking about.

Where in your previous post did you ever talk about my laughter
or chuckles ?

>> You would have noticed I stayed on the topic and I was looking forward to
>> some further technical comment on the topic of making your own fuel.
>
>And since I had a fair idea that Athol (someone who is very likely to
>be able to continue the discussion *on topic* and certainly technical)
>would not see your post, I thought I'd let you know about it.

Well I can appreciate that, now that you've pointed out what you were
defining as "plonked", thats fine but as the saying goes, "Each good
deed gets punished" or is it "Road to hell is paved with good intentions"
or some such. The lesson here is, its probably best not to add to a post
unless something is actually helpful to the topic, and if you were
really concerned my post did or didnt reach the other poster then you
could well have quoted it, you didnt, so it didnt help - it just
resulted in a difference of opinion...

tah tah


--
Regards
Mike
* VL Commodore, Calais VL Turbo FuseRail that wont warp or melt !
* High grade milspec ignition driver electronics now in development
http://niche.iinet.net.au

[Ext User(Spear and Magic Helmet)]

Mike wrote:

> huh ? Making reference to how much I typed isnt saying it directly

Okay, in plain basic English, I was initally going to simply tell you
that Athol probably wasn't going to see your post. I added the comment
about how much you typed merely to point out that it was a lot of
effort wasted - since you did reply to Athol and not directly to the
original poster.

> and the term "plonked" can mean anything,

Sure. Which is why I clarified. I just assumed since you were posting
in aus.cars you would know what it meant in aus.cars context. But
obviously not. (I've also seen it used in many other newsgroups in
exactly the same way)

> it used to mean the poster was plonked into an alert script when
> unix systems handled news before PCs were the go, Yes I remember
> those days, I've been messing with the net since 1978 when you could
> set local hosts on a KL-10 system, those were the days :)

Fine. You date back further than me. But surely you must get with the
times? The catholic church used to call an unmarried man a "gay
bachelor", but they changed that given the terminology of the times.
Hast thou been living under a "net" rock?

> Well fine, you assume it concerns me

Yes I did. So sorry if it doesn't.

> I made a general comment, if I wanted to send a message
> to the other poster I wouldnt have put it on the newsgroup.

But you did. You replied to him. Since you're living in the
internet-70s, do you realise that there is such a thing as tree
structure? Your post appeared directly under Athol's and as such it is
assumed you are replying to him. That is the way us wild post-70s
people see things.

> This is an open public forum for the
> years and years I've been on it, I've noticed its far more
> productive to keep things on the open forum unless the poster
> invites a personal response. They didnt invite one, so I didnt
> proceed and kept it public, thats the etiquette I'm generally on.

I fail to see where we disagree here. You kept it public, yes, but you
also replied to Athol according to this new-fangled tree structure.

> >I believe the above paragraph addresses a large portion of the rest of
> >your post.
>
> Sure then lets leave it at that, well <cough> I might make passing
> reference to the other things you have written...

Note I said "large portion". Nowhere did I insinuate that my brief
paragraph was going to address your whole post.

> Ah well thats where we differ. In my oh so long term opinion,

You're not the only one who's older than a teenager here.

> its not against the culture of the group to post something commercial
> about a cars electrical problem and a solution

Again, I'm just talking about posting eBay links. Why are you unable to
grasp this?

So I'll say it in a completely separate paragraph - It is against the
culture of the group to post your eBay ads.

> once in 3 to 5 weeks since this is a news group about cars.

The frequency is not the problem.

> And should I be concerned that one poster

The fact that you say it's "one poster" is evidence that you are not a
regular to aus.cars. It happens every time someone posts an eBay link.

> Now you are referring to my attitude

I snipped your feeble attempt to twist what I said. Your attitude is
what it's all about. You were told that posting eBay links is not the
aus.cars way, and you didn't politely back down, you tried to defend
your position. And since it's now clear you're not an aus.cars regular,
I fail to see where your argument has base.

> Try and understand this is not a democracy,

Of course it's not. It's usenet. But going against the grain of any
newsgroup is hardly productive, now is it? Why don't you try and post
some binaries to a non-binary newsgroup while you're at it.

> most are just happy to watch and get some semblence of
> entertainment from people arguing. If people were really
> upset there would be far more posts on the subject, there aint.

Says he who is obviously not a regular to this newsgroup (Ref: you had
NFI that eBay ads are invariably frowned upon)

> Where in your previous post did you ever talk about my laughter
> or chuckles ?

Does it matter? I'm talking about your attitude. Everything about you
ties into that.

> >> You would have noticed I stayed on the topic and I was looking forward to
> >> some further technical comment on the topic of making your own fuel.
> >
> >And since I had a fair idea that Athol (someone who is very likely to
> >be able to continue the discussion *on topic* and certainly technical)
> >would not see your post, I thought I'd let you know about it.
>
> Well I can appreciate that, now that you've pointed out what you were
> defining as "plonked"

Which seems to be a large part of why there's a bee in your bonnet.

> its probably best not to add to a post unless something is actually
> helpful to the topic

Or helpful to the poster? What about that?

> and if you were really concerned my post did or didnt reach
> the other poster then you could well have quoted it, you didnt,
> so it didnt help

If Athol does indeed have you "plonked", then it certainly helped him.

[Ext User(Mike)]

Spear,

What are you waffling about here, lets get some things clear:-

1. It is of no import to me or most lurkers whether I am regular or not.
2. Its only (apparantly) frowned upon by a small number of people that
I posted an ebay link, nothing is particularly wrong with ebay (afaik).
3. I am commenting on someones post that doesnt mean I am replying to them
directly, it is for the general public <doh> its a public forum <doh> and
can invite any one elese if they want to to add further comment and that
doesnt necessarily mean its destined for me alone, its a public forum.
4. Having my email in someone's killfile doesnt bother me as its for the
public distribution <doh> otherwise I would have emailled them.
5. This 'tree structure' issue is irrelevant, see 3 above.
6. My attitude is that an irregular post in a 3 to 5 week period that
is commercial is not spam whether it includes an ebay link or not bad
luck for some that add noise that its frowned upon, I am happy to see it.
7. I lurk on this forum about once or twice a week to see whats for sale
and <doh> whats listed for sale or auction that I might have missed on
a repeated ebay automated search. And if such paradigm occurs to me
then there is reasonable probability it occurs to others, hence my post.
8. Suggestion of my living in internet 70's is ludicrous, these newsgroups
didnt exist back then but guess what "tree structures" did <doh>.

The rest of your post seems to invite diverse open ended and therefore
endless arguments - all stemming from the issue of advising me Athol
wouldnt read my post.

Well try and get this straight:- "I operate from the basis this is a
public forum and offer comment for the public", if it was for individual
reply then I would reply directly, as I havent, then you've wasted your
noble samaritan ideal and this is better spent by people who can have
practical impost on people who really need it etc I commend you for
taking the trouble but you have saturated the point, I am no longer
interested in what you offer on this topic.

bye bye

Mike




In article <1140609648.168111.245020@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups. com>, speed_saves@yahoo.com.au says...
>
>Mike wrote:
>
>> huh ? Making reference to how much I typed isnt saying it directly
>
>Okay, in plain basic English, I was initally going to simply tell you
>that Athol probably wasn't going to see your post. I added the comment
>about how much you typed merely to point out that it was a lot of
>effort wasted - since you did reply to Athol and not directly to the
>original poster.
>
>> and the term "plonked" can mean anything,
>
>Sure. Which is why I clarified. I just assumed since you were posting
>in aus.cars you would know what it meant in aus.cars context. But
>obviously not. (I've also seen it used in many other newsgroups in
>exactly the same way)
>
>> it used to mean the poster was plonked into an alert script when
>> unix systems handled news before PCs were the go, Yes I remember
>> those days, I've been messing with the net since 1978 when you could
>> set local hosts on a KL-10 system, those were the days :)
>
>Fine. You date back further than me. But surely you must get with the
>times? The catholic church used to call an unmarried man a "gay
>bachelor", but they changed that given the terminology of the times.
>Hast thou been living under a "net" rock?
>
>> Well fine, you assume it concerns me
>
>Yes I did. So sorry if it doesn't.
>
>> I made a general comment, if I wanted to send a message
>> to the other poster I wouldnt have put it on the newsgroup.
>
>But you did. You replied to him. Since you're living in the
>internet-70s, do you realise that there is such a thing as tree
>structure? Your post appeared directly under Athol's and as such it is
>assumed you are replying to him. That is the way us wild post-70s
>people see things.
>
>> This is an open public forum for the
>> years and years I've been on it, I've noticed its far more
>> productive to keep things on the open forum unless the poster
>> invites a personal response. They didnt invite one, so I didnt
>> proceed and kept it public, thats the etiquette I'm generally on.
>
>I fail to see where we disagree here. You kept it public, yes, but you
>also replied to Athol according to this new-fangled tree structure.
>
>> >I believe the above paragraph addresses a large portion of the rest of
>> >your post.
>>
>> Sure then lets leave it at that, well <cough> I might make passing
>> reference to the other things you have written...
>
>Note I said "large portion". Nowhere did I insinuate that my brief
>paragraph was going to address your whole post.
>
>> Ah well thats where we differ. In my oh so long term opinion,
>
>You're not the only one who's older than a teenager here.
>
>> its not against the culture of the group to post something commercial
>> about a cars electrical problem and a solution
>
>Again, I'm just talking about posting eBay links. Why are you unable to
>grasp this?
>
>So I'll say it in a completely separate paragraph - It is against the
>culture of the group to post your eBay ads.
>
>> once in 3 to 5 weeks since this is a news group about cars.
>
>The frequency is not the problem.
>
>> And should I be concerned that one poster
>
>The fact that you say it's "one poster" is evidence that you are not a
>regular to aus.cars. It happens every time someone posts an eBay link.
>
>> Now you are referring to my attitude
>
>I snipped your feeble attempt to twist what I said. Your attitude is
>what it's all about. You were told that posting eBay links is not the
>aus.cars way, and you didn't politely back down, you tried to defend
>your position. And since it's now clear you're not an aus.cars regular,
>I fail to see where your argument has base.
>
>> Try and understand this is not a democracy,
>
>Of course it's not. It's usenet. But going against the grain of any
>newsgroup is hardly productive, now is it? Why don't you try and post
>some binaries to a non-binary newsgroup while you're at it.
>
>> most are just happy to watch and get some semblence of
>> entertainment from people arguing. If people were really
>> upset there would be far more posts on the subject, there aint.
>
>Says he who is obviously not a regular to this newsgroup (Ref: you had
>NFI that eBay ads are invariably frowned upon)
>
>> Where in your previous post did you ever talk about my laughter
>> or chuckles ?
>
>Does it matter? I'm talking about your attitude. Everything about you
>ties into that.
>
>> >> You would have noticed I stayed on the topic and I was looking forward to
>> >> some further technical comment on the topic of making your own fuel.
>> >
>> >And since I had a fair idea that Athol (someone who is very likely to
>> >be able to continue the discussion *on topic* and certainly technical)
>> >would not see your post, I thought I'd let you know about it.
>>
>> Well I can appreciate that, now that you've pointed out what you were
>> defining as "plonked"
>
>Which seems to be a large part of why there's a bee in your bonnet.
>
>> its probably best not to add to a post unless something is actually
>> helpful to the topic
>
>Or helpful to the poster? What about that?
>
>> and if you were really concerned my post did or didnt reach
>> the other poster then you could well have quoted it, you didnt,
>> so it didnt help
>
>If Athol does indeed have you "plonked", then it certainly helped him.
>

--
Regards
Mike
* VL Commodore, Calais VL Turbo FuseRail that wont warp or melt !
* High grade milspec ignition driver electronics now in development
http://niche.iinet.net.au

[Ext User(athol)]

Spear and Magic Helmet <speed_saves@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

[snip, snip, snippety fecking snip!]

> If Athol does indeed have you "plonked", then it certainly helped him.

The question is why you haven't plonked him and given up on trying to
explain to the recalcitrant why his behaviour is getting him plonked by
the people that could sustain a valid technical discussion...

--
Athol
<http://cust.idl.com.au/athol> Linux Registered User # 254000
The state of infrastructure in New South Wales is a disgrace.
I'm a Libran Engineer. I don't argue, I discuss.

[Ext User(Mike)]

In article <1140658641.751971@idlweb>, me@privacy.net says...
>
>Spear and Magic Helmet <speed_saves@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
>[snip, snip, snippety fecking snip!]
>
>> If Athol does indeed have you "plonked", then it certainly helped him.
>
>The question is why you haven't plonked him and given up on trying to
>explain to the recalcitrant why his behaviour is getting him plonked by
>the people that could sustain a valid technical discussion...

Now thats one of many points you have pinned down :)

<chuckle>

--
Regards
Mike
* VL Commodore, Calais VL Turbo FuseRail that wont warp or melt !
* High grade milspec ignition driver electronics now in development
http://niche.iinet.net.au