Mxsmanic

[gwengler]

Could everybody PLEASE not contribute to any thread with any posting
from Mxsmanic?!!! His postings are spamming up this group to no end.
Gerd

[Tony]

Regarding MX, the wannabe pain in the lower back.

He's actually, by my measure at least, a sad case. There's obvously
some intelligence there but by his own admission he earns a bit over
$100 a week.

He has endured a one hour gate hold at Logan -- while simulating a
flight!

He carefully programs the flight plan into his computer, probably does
a simulated taxi out, then lets the computer simulator's autopilot fly
most of the flight. That may mean he sits in front of his computer,
feet on simulated rudder controls, with a play stick or a yoke, I'm not
sure which, and watches the simulator fly itself.

I think most of us who are pilots are successful in other aspects of
our lives too. I would guess many of us are managers, and of those, a
number had told smart people who wear their Mensa memberships like a
badge of honor that their services are no longer required because, in
reality, they were too difficult to work with. He is, I think, in that
class.

I do hope he finds a measure of happiness in his chair (does he wear a
shoulder harness?) playing his simulated games, but it's not a life I
would choose for anyone I cared about.

So let him have some fun. One need not make replies made to his posts
except perhaps when his 'logical' assertions are in conflict with safe
flying. He has, we can assume, never touched the toe brakes to stop the
wheels rotating before retracting them, never saw a runway appear 20
degrees off the nose at MDA, or ice growing on the wing, or requested
ATC permission to fly at 7200 feet with minor deviations in the course
so he could play in the canyons in the clouds.

Do you remember what it's like to tell a non-flyer what general
avaition is all about, and some of the experiences you had? Think of
that when you read his posts, and feel sadness rather than anger. He
probably can't help himself.

And, really, take this attitude. "Mx, your comments are no longer
needed here," and respond only if you think he's making unsafe
suggestions. The response is NOT directed at him, but at newer pilots
who might be reading the thread. After all, MX is sometimes 'logical'
even when he's wrong, and we don't want newbies. or ourselves, to be
misled.

Gee, that's almost a rant, isn't it?



On Jan 8, 11:29 am, "gwengler" > wrote:
> Could everybody PLEASE not contribute to any thread with any posting
> from Mxsmanic?!!! His postings are spamming up this group to no end.
> Gerd

[John T]

gwengler wrote:
>
> Could everybody PLEASE not contribute to any thread with any posting
> from Mxsmanic?!!! His postings are spamming up this group to no end.

1. I empathize. This has been an issue almost from the beginning of USENET.

2. Your posting (and my response) only adds to the "spam" you're complaining
about.

3. "Any thread with any posting from XXX" could eliminate a lot of good
information. :) It's best to simply ignore posters you find offensive.

4. I recommend using a traditional newsreader and subscribing to a USENET
provider (some are even free). This option will allow you to filter out
posts based on sender, subject, content, etc. and could lead to a higher
quality USENET experience. Google has done a good thing by archiving almost
all USENET articles, but they are doing all of us a disservice by not
allowing a quality newsreader experience (even a browser-based one).

--
John T
http://sage1solutions.com/TknoFlyer
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com
____________________

[Chris W]

gwengler wrote:
> Could everybody PLEASE not contribute to any thread with any posting
> from Mxsmanic?!!!

If you really think this plea will have any effect, you're delusional.


> His postings are spamming up this group to no end.
> Gerd

While the posts you are referring to are undesirable, I'm not sure
"spam" is the right word for what you are talking about.


--
Chris W
KE5GIX

"Protect your digital freedom and privacy, eliminate DRM,
learn more at http://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm"

Gift Giving Made Easy
Get the gifts you want &
give the gifts they want
One stop wish list for any gift,
from anywhere, for any occasion!
http://thewishzone.com

[gwengler]

Obvioulsy, not everyone is of my opinion:
Gerd


Howdy!

In article . com> you
write:
>Could everybody PLEASE not contribute to any thread with any posting
>from Mxsmanic?!!! His postings are spamming up this group to no end.
>Gerd
>
At least his postings pertain to aviation, unlike your post which
simply takes up space. Your post is far more like spam than his.
Thank you for taking up space in my killfile.

yours,
Michael

--
Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
| White Wolf and the Phoenix narrowwares
Bowie, MD, USA | http://whitewolfandphoenix.com
Proud member of the SCA Internet Whitewash Squad

[Steve Foley[_2_]]

"gwengler" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Could everybody PLEASE not contribute to any thread with any posting
> from Mxsmanic?!!! His postings are spamming up this group to no end.
> Gerd
>

Does anyone know of an addin for Outlook Express 6 that will let me select
message text as the bassi of a rule?

Right now, anything *from* mxsmanic is blocked, and I can block anything
with mxmanic in the subject. I'd like to block all of the responses (message
contains 'mxsmanic'), and be free of this loser once and for all.

I realize that I should use a better newsreader, however this is what I'm
used to, and I don't want to change on his account.

[Dudley Henriques]

"Steve Foley" > wrote in message
...
> "gwengler" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> Could everybody PLEASE not contribute to any thread with any posting
>> from Mxsmanic?!!! His postings are spamming up this group to no end.
>> Gerd
>>
>
> Does anyone know of an addin for Outlook Express 6 that will let me select
> message text as the bassi of a rule?
>
> Right now, anything *from* mxsmanic is blocked, and I can block anything
> with mxmanic in the subject. I'd like to block all of the responses
> (message contains 'mxsmanic'), and be free of this loser once and for all.
>
> I realize that I should use a better newsreader, however this is what I'm
> used to, and I don't want to change on his account.

Save yourself the trouble. I use Outlook Express 6.0 myself and have
absolutely no problem whatsoever with avoiding people I don't want to deal
with. I just scroll right on past them and go on to something else. This
works instantly for all situations as the unwanted poster's heading stands
out like a sore thumb and is extremely easy to avoid.
Saves the trouble of setting up kill files. filters, whatnot.
Works like a charm too :-)))))))))
Dudley Henriques

[C J Campbell[_1_]]

On Mon, 8 Jan 2007 12:48:55 -0800, gwengler wrote
(in article om>):

> Obvioulsy, not everyone is of my opinion:
> Gerd

I would be one of them. I find the postings pleading for people to ignore Mx
even more annoying than he is. I particularly object to people who advocate
mistreating him.

If you don't like his posts, don't read them. I don't read them because he is
too argumentative, a characteristic he shares with many of his detractors.

[Steve Foley[_2_]]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
...

> Save yourself the trouble. I use Outlook Express 6.0 myself and have
> absolutely no problem whatsoever with avoiding people I don't want to deal
> with. I just scroll right on past them and go on to something else. This
> works instantly for all situations as the unwanted poster's heading stands
> out like a sore thumb and is extremely easy to avoid.
> Saves the trouble of setting up kill files. filters, whatnot.
> Works like a charm too :-)))))))))
> Dudley Henriques

I don't want to avoid people, only posts replying to mxsmanic, as if they
never existed.

[Dudley Henriques]

"Steve Foley" > wrote in message
...
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> Save yourself the trouble. I use Outlook Express 6.0 myself and have
>> absolutely no problem whatsoever with avoiding people I don't want to
>> deal with. I just scroll right on past them and go on to something else.
>> This works instantly for all situations as the unwanted poster's heading
>> stands out like a sore thumb and is extremely easy to avoid.
>> Saves the trouble of setting up kill files. filters, whatnot.
>> Works like a charm too :-)))))))))
>> Dudley Henriques
>
> I don't want to avoid people, only posts replying to mxsmanic, as if they
> never existed.

It's him (or anyone else for that matter) that I'm referring to. Just pass
over him if you don't want to deal with him. What could be simpler? Of
course, if just seeing the name "Mxsmanix" causes some kind of traumatic
syndrome or physical pain to set in that has to be drowned out by a bottle
of Jack Daniels or something, hell, forget the kill file and leave him up
and showing as I've suggested; then invite me over and we'll BOTH get
hammered together and forget the crazy SOB ever existed!!!!! :-))
Dudley Henriques

[Steve Foley[_2_]]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
...

> It's him (or anyone else for that matter) that I'm referring to. Just pass
> over him if you don't want to deal with him. What could be simpler? Of
> course, if just seeing the name "Mxsmanix" causes some kind of traumatic
> syndrome or physical pain to set in

I'd just like to make him go away. It's like driving by an accident. It
takes alot of effort NOT to look. I don't want to expend the effort. I just
want him gone.

> that has to be drowned out by a bottle of Jack Daniels or something,

That 'something' would be John Powers Irish Whiskey

> hell, forget the kill file and leave him up and showing as I've suggested;
> then invite me over and we'll BOTH get hammered together and forget the
> crazy SOB ever existed!!!!! :-))

How about at Oshkosh? I'll bring a couple of bottles.

[Paul Riley]

Hey Dudley,

If you are ever out my way, let me know (contact by e-mail--give me some
advanced notice, I do not check yahoo that often :-))) ). I have a bottle of
Cutty Sark and one of Johnnie Red, stop by anytime. Would love to talk with
you over some "quaint libations". Tell old flying stories (ok, lies<LOL>)
and spend a quiet evening. The wives can compare notes about living with old
farts like us!! We will most likely come out on the short end of the
discussion stick, but after all these years of married life, what else is
new!! :))))))))

Regards,
Paul

Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Steve Foley" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>> Save yourself the trouble. I use Outlook Express 6.0 myself and have
>>> absolutely no problem whatsoever with avoiding people I don't want to
>>> deal with. I just scroll right on past them and go on to something else.
>>> This works instantly for all situations as the unwanted poster's heading
>>> stands out like a sore thumb and is extremely easy to avoid.
>>> Saves the trouble of setting up kill files. filters, whatnot.
>>> Works like a charm too :-)))))))))
>>> Dudley Henriques
>>
>> I don't want to avoid people, only posts replying to mxsmanic, as if they
>> never existed.
>
> It's him (or anyone else for that matter) that I'm referring to. Just pass
> over him if you don't want to deal with him. What could be simpler? Of
> course, if just seeing the name "Mxsmanix" causes some kind of traumatic
> syndrome or physical pain to set in that has to be drowned out by a bottle
> of Jack Daniels or something, hell, forget the kill file and leave him up
> and showing as I've suggested; then invite me over and we'll BOTH get
> hammered together and forget the crazy SOB ever existed!!!!! :-))
> Dudley Henriques
>

[Peter Dohm]

> I don't want to avoid people, only posts replying to mxsmanic, as if they
> never existed.
>
>
Outlook Express does not appear to support a text search withing messages as
part of a message rule.

If you really feel compelled, you can type most of the header into a message
rule as a way to delete any further entries to a thread--since OE won't let
you just copy and past the headers. But that will also discard the good,
bad, and ugly together.

About the most that you can do, that is productive, is to do as Dudley
suggested--and if an entire thread has become insufferable, you can
right-click any header and "mark the conversation as read".

Really the biggest thing you can do is simply to think for most of a minute
about whether any further response is *really* needed--because it does not
take long to glance at a post, or even read it, but composing a reasonable
response is a real time consumer. I did not think much about it until
someone posted a list of the top ten contributors for most of December, and
I saw my name on it. I then did my own research, and I am sure he was
wrong; but it was clear that I was spending *way* too much time--so I have
cut back and will cut back much further--and I will especially refrain from
challenges that demand a rebuttal, since they are guaranteed to double the
time spent.

All of that is a really long winded way of saying that it takes a lot of
time to compose a message, even without finding and correcting all of the
typos, and that if just a few people budget the time they spend, the group
will probably become much more readable.

Peter
Just my $0.02

[Dudley Henriques]

Hey...that's good Irish booze you're talking about there!! You know God only
invented whiskey to keep the Irish from ruling the world!!!
Dudley Henriques


"Steve Foley" > wrote in message
...
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> It's him (or anyone else for that matter) that I'm referring to. Just
>> pass over him if you don't want to deal with him. What could be simpler?
>> Of course, if just seeing the name "Mxsmanix" causes some kind of
>> traumatic syndrome or physical pain to set in
>
> I'd just like to make him go away. It's like driving by an accident. It
> takes alot of effort NOT to look. I don't want to expend the effort. I
> just want him gone.
>
>> that has to be drowned out by a bottle of Jack Daniels or something,
>
> That 'something' would be John Powers Irish Whiskey
>
>> hell, forget the kill file and leave him up and showing as I've
>> suggested; then invite me over and we'll BOTH get hammered together and
>> forget the crazy SOB ever existed!!!!! :-))
>
> How about at Oshkosh? I'll bring a couple of bottles.
>
>

[Dudley Henriques]

Sounds like fun PR. God knows my wife has a few "stories" about me she just
LOVES to tell people :-))
Dudley Henriques

"Paul Riley" > wrote in message
et...
> Hey Dudley,
>
> If you are ever out my way, let me know (contact by e-mail--give me some
> advanced notice, I do not check yahoo that often :-))) ). I have a bottle
> of Cutty Sark and one of Johnnie Red, stop by anytime. Would love to talk
> with you over some "quaint libations". Tell old flying stories (ok,
> lies<LOL>) and spend a quiet evening. The wives can compare notes about
> living with old farts like us!! We will most likely come out on the short
> end of the discussion stick, but after all these years of married life,
> what else is new!! :))))))))
>
> Regards,
> Paul
>
> Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Steve Foley" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> Save yourself the trouble. I use Outlook Express 6.0 myself and have
>>>> absolutely no problem whatsoever with avoiding people I don't want to
>>>> deal with. I just scroll right on past them and go on to something
>>>> else. This works instantly for all situations as the unwanted poster's
>>>> heading stands out like a sore thumb and is extremely easy to avoid.
>>>> Saves the trouble of setting up kill files. filters, whatnot.
>>>> Works like a charm too :-)))))))))
>>>> Dudley Henriques
>>>
>>> I don't want to avoid people, only posts replying to mxsmanic, as if
>>> they never existed.
>>
>> It's him (or anyone else for that matter) that I'm referring to. Just
>> pass over him if you don't want to deal with him. What could be simpler?
>> Of course, if just seeing the name "Mxsmanix" causes some kind of
>> traumatic syndrome or physical pain to set in that has to be drowned out
>> by a bottle of Jack Daniels or something, hell, forget the kill file and
>> leave him up and showing as I've suggested; then invite me over and we'll
>> BOTH get hammered together and forget the crazy SOB ever existed!!!!!
>> :-))
>> Dudley Henriques
>>
>
>

[Viperdoc[_4_]]

He is obviously lonely and a social outcast. He posts so frequently he
probably rarely enjoys any face to face interactions with people. He spends
so much time on the computer he probably doesn't have much of a life other
than cyberworld.

Yet, his confrontational and argumentative responses get him the attention
he seeks in his own personal life, all of which is pretty sad.

Unfortunately, most of the people who participate in this NG enjoy flying as
an avocation. It is supposed to be fun and enjoyable, and much of this is
taken away when someone argues simply for the sake of getting attention for
themselves. A brief look at his website makes it obvious that he only refers
to himself, and that all of his focus is inward. He's so self absorbed it's
no wonder he alienates people and doesn't understand why. He simply isn't
capable of looking at himself as the root cause of his own problems.

[Aluckyguess]

I would ignore you before him.
"gwengler" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Obvioulsy, not everyone is of my opinion:
> Gerd
>
>
> Howdy!
>
> In article . com> you
> write:
>>Could everybody PLEASE not contribute to any thread with any posting
>>from Mxsmanic?!!! His postings are spamming up this group to no end.
>>Gerd
>>
> At least his postings pertain to aviation, unlike your post which
> simply takes up space. Your post is far more like spam than his.
> Thank you for taking up space in my killfile.
>
> yours,
> Michael
>
> --
> Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
> | White Wolf and the Phoenix narrowwares
> Bowie, MD, USA | http://whitewolfandphoenix.com
> Proud member of the SCA Internet Whitewash Squad
>

[Aluckyguess]

You are more likely the outcast get a life.
"Viperdoc" > wrote in message
...
> He is obviously lonely and a social outcast. He posts so frequently he
> probably rarely enjoys any face to face interactions with people. He
> spends so much time on the computer he probably doesn't have much of a
> life other than cyberworld.
>
> Yet, his confrontational and argumentative responses get him the attention
> he seeks in his own personal life, all of which is pretty sad.
>
> Unfortunately, most of the people who participate in this NG enjoy flying
> as an avocation. It is supposed to be fun and enjoyable, and much of this
> is taken away when someone argues simply for the sake of getting attention
> for themselves. A brief look at his website makes it obvious that he only
> refers to himself, and that all of his focus is inward. He's so self
> absorbed it's no wonder he alienates people and doesn't understand why. He
> simply isn't capable of looking at himself as the root cause of his own
> problems.
>

[Michael Rhodes]

On Mon, 08 Jan 2007 14:27:01 -0600, Chris W > wrote:

>gwengler wrote:
>> Could everybody PLEASE not contribute to any thread with any posting
>> from Mxsmanic?!!!
>
>If you really think this plea will have any effect, you're delusional.

Okay, that one set me off.

The irony of applying the word 'delusional' to a critic of the manic!
Oh the critic is the bad guy, rebelling against the right and proper
wants of this news group. He can't think straight, imagining things.
Right...

'Delusional', huh? Looks like a spit couched in hateful cynicism;
would be easily seen, if it weren't for the lack of clear motive. So
what is it? Just plain evil?

>> His postings are spamming up this group to no end.
>> Gerd
>
>While the posts you are referring to are undesirable, I'm not sure
>"spam" is the right word for what you are talking about.

You're so discerning. So what is the right word? "Instruction"?
Little is resolved in his threads. I read those on trimming (w&b) and
leaning, unfortunately. Mind-bending from a bent mind. Futile
non-resolutions ad infinitum. And if he is then so must be his
critics, sadly.

Your use of the word 'undesirable' wrt Mxsmanic (or just his posts),
and putting it between the opposing views forces me to believe you
didn't really mean it. Or undesirable is what you like. Or its what
you and a few others demand us to accept. What is your ulterior
motive? Frustrated aviators? Anarchy? Always a few of those around.
That is not acceptable. Acceptibility must not be universal.

Seemingly, (and if so then cowardly), you defend him from angry words
from those who likley would do him no harm. You defend one who serves
no useful purpose to this world. You defend one who has, and quite
stubbornly (with a certain amount of talent), managed to drag a number
of professionals into his own dark world they are not trained to deal
with.

Some just like to argue, so they have Mxsmanic. Some like to watch
others argue, so they have him & this news group. The rest of us get
little use out of that parasitic relationship, which only serves to
realize the simulator to Mxsmanic, when what he really needs is to get
out and deal with the real world, or be put away by it. It is queer,
psychotic. It isn't difficult to see that the mismated thing should
be avoided, or more.
--
Michael

[Chris W]

Michael Rhodes wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Jan 2007 14:27:01 -0600, Chris W > wrote:
>
>> gwengler wrote:
>>> Could everybody PLEASE not contribute to any thread with any posting
>>> from Mxsmanic?!!!
>> If you really think this plea will have any effect, you're delusional.
>
> Okay, that one set me off.
>
> The irony of applying the word 'delusional' to a critic of the manic!

The OP was not a critic, it was a plea. My response was not intended to
to be a critic on to worthiness of the plea, just the effectiveness of
it. Any one posting any message that says something like... "Could
everybody PLEASE not post this that or the other thing?", would have
received a similar response from me. If you think any such plea will
have any effect on posters, you are not just delusional, you are
pathetically delusional.


> Oh the critic is the bad guy, rebelling against the right and proper
> wants of this news group. He can't think straight, imagining things.
> Right...
>
> 'Delusional', huh? Looks like a spit couched in hateful cynicism;
> would be easily seen, if it weren't for the lack of clear motive. So
> what is it? Just plain evil?

Cynicism? More like realism, such pathetic pleas will never be useful.

>
>>> His postings are spamming up this group to no end.
>>> Gerd
>> While the posts you are referring to are undesirable, I'm not sure
>> "spam" is the right word for what you are talking about.
>
> You're so discerning. So what is the right word?

I don't know but if you label every piece of undesirable email-type of
communication spam, you devalue the meaning of the word.




"Instruction"?
> Little is resolved in his threads.

Again my previous post didn't even attempt to address the worthiness of
the posts by the subject of this thread. However I will say that while
his contributions seem to be pretty worthless, I have learned from some
of the other posts in those treads.



> Some just like to argue, so they have Mxsmanic. Some like to watch
> others argue, so they have him & this news group. The rest of us get
> little use out of that parasitic relationship.

Then you only have one logical recourse, ignore any such postings. No
other course of action (short of killing someone or physically
destroying their ability to post) will have any effect and once again if
you think . . . never mind I think I made my point already.


--
Chris W
KE5GIX

"Protect your digital freedom and privacy, eliminate DRM,
learn more at http://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm"

Gift Giving Made Easy
Get the gifts you want &
give the gifts they want
One stop wish list for any gift,
from anywhere, for any occasion!
http://thewishzone.com

[Michael Houghton]

Howdy!

In article >, Aluckyguess > wrote:
>I would ignore you before him.

That's your call. Mox nix to me.

yours,
Michael


--
Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
| White Wolf and the Phoenix narrowwares
Bowie, MD, USA | http://whitewolfandphoenix.com
Proud member of the SCA Internet Whitewash Squad

[Danny Deger]

"gwengler" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Could everybody PLEASE not contribute to any thread with any posting
> from Mxsmanic?!!! His postings are spamming up this group to no end.
> Gerd
>

I like his posts. I think he is very intelligent and has good insight into
how to fly -- most of the time :-)

Danny Deger

[Michael Rhodes]

On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 10:53:29 -0600, Chris W > wrote:

>Michael Rhodes wrote:

>> On Mon, 08 Jan 2007 14:27:01 -0600, Chris W > wrote:
>>

>
>The OP was not a critic, it was a plea. My response was not intended to
>to be a critic on to worthiness of the plea, just the effectiveness of
>it. Any one posting any message that says something like... "Could
>everybody PLEASE not post this that or the other thing?", would have
>received a similar response from me. If you think any such plea will
>have any effect on posters, you are not just delusional, you are
>pathetically delusional.
>

His plea is complaint, and with others it is an irritant. Irritants
are not necessarily without value, or 'delusional'. And your
overstated reply iis also intended an irritant, though in the opposite
direction; against those most would say are quite sane, as of this
moment.

Yours worries me.


>> 'Delusional', huh? Looks like a spit couched in hateful cynicism;
>> would be easily seen, if it weren't for the lack of clear motive. So
>> what is it? Just plain evil?
>
>Cynicism? More like realism, such pathetic pleas will never be useful.

Realistic? Psychosis are real. Pleading with them is likely
pathetic. But removing them is a reasonable goal. It is the one
having most realistic chances of success -- unless 'the law' makes it
'unrealistic'.

He is pleading for 'the law', (whatever that might be), to remove the
disturbance. You consider that delusional and pathetic. So, what?
You defend the disturbance in apparent hate of 'the law'. That is
pathetic.
>
>>
>>>> His postings are spamming up this group to no end.
>>>> Gerd
>>> While the posts you are referring to are undesirable, I'm not sure
>>> "spam" is the right word for what you are talking about.
>>
>> You're so discerning. So what is the right word?
>
>I don't know but if you label every piece of undesirable email-type of
>communication spam, you devalue the meaning of the word.

That is a strange statement, almost a twisted defense of spam.

>"Instruction"?
>> Little is resolved in his threads.
>
>Again my previous post didn't even attempt to address the worthiness of
>the posts by the subject of this thread. However I will say that while
>his contributions seem to be pretty worthless, I have learned from some
>of the other posts in those treads.

His threads exercise the mind, forcing it to run in circles,
eventually wearing paths too easily found again. I prefer my paths
more disciplined. The concepts gained are more appreciated, a method
of learning becomes a sought-after discipline. It affects my view of
the world, and my neighbors.

Msxmanic's preoccupation with a 'default' trim setting found nothing.
Nothing was expected. After study, my conclusion is that he actually
knew that all along, but enjoyed the game with those he knows have
almost no choice but to attempt to teach. If he didn't know it, then
the demon that posseses him does. The value added by instruction,
(the 'food' as one poster called it), becomes bait into a trap.

Generally, the group's attempt is to overwhelm the thread with a valid
perspective. But Msxmanic is very persistent, refusing to let go of
the 'spolight'.
>
>
>> Some just like to argue, so they have Mxsmanic. Some like to watch
>> others argue, so they have him & this news group. The rest of us get
>> little use out of that parasitic relationship.
>
>Then you only have one logical recourse, ignore any such postings. No
>other course of action (short of killing someone or physically
>destroying their ability to post) will have any effect and once again if
>you think . . . never mind I think I made my point already.

By expressing my thoughts as if it were your excretion?
--
Michael

[Montblack]

("Aluckyguess" wrote)
> You are more likely the outcast get a life.


Yes Viperdoc, you outcast you. Get a life! :-)

Still laughing at that one!


Montblack

[Chris W]

I guess I'm not being clear. I am not saying the request in the OP is,
or is not worthy. In fact, I'm explicitly avoiding that.

Let me put it this way. Suppose you were with a group of people all
doing something you wanted to do, and then some one you don't even know
walks up and says, "hey stop doing that". Are you going to stop doing
something you want to just because someone you don't even know asks you
to. I know most people wouldn't.

In other words no one in this or any other news group is going to stop
doing something just because some asks them to. If there are posts you
don't like, them simply don't read them. There is nothing you can do to
stop them. If you think you can . . .

--
Chris W
KE5GIX

"Protect your digital freedom and privacy, eliminate DRM,
learn more at http://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm"

Gift Giving Made Easy
Get the gifts you want &
give the gifts they want
One stop wish list for any gift,
from anywhere, for any occasion!
http://thewishzone.com

[gwengler]

Chris W wrote:
> I guess I'm not being clear. I am not saying the request in the OP is,
> or is not worthy. In fact, I'm explicitly avoiding that.
>
> Let me put it this way. Suppose you were with a group of people all
> doing something you wanted to do, and then some one you don't even know
> walks up and says, "hey stop doing that". Are you going to stop doing
> something you want to just because someone you don't even know asks you
> to. I know most people wouldn't.
>
> In other words no one in this or any other news group is going to stop
> doing something just because some asks them to. If there are posts you
> don't like, them simply don't read them. There is nothing you can do to
> stop them. If you think you can . . .
>
> --
> Chris W
> KE5GIX

Yes, but... If all or most people in the newsgroup would never reply
to any thread that contains MXSMANIAC, then he would perhaps go away.
I know this is not going to work, just a hope. And, yes, you called me
delusional before, but that's only because you're jealous that you
don't hear the little voices...
Gerd

[Tony]

The issue -- I was going to say 'problem' but if it is, it's of our own
making --- with MX is it's like watching a car crash. You know what's
going to happen, you're just not sure when or where, but somewhere in
many of his threads will be a well written but really misinformed
remark or statement.

There are enough readers to at least offer information that's more
correct, and that may help the ignorant bystander.

But man, watching him twitch at the end of the of the rope he tied
around his own neck is almost a compelling sight.

Think of it, really. He often posts in the middle of his night, maybe
strapped and harnessed into his simulator chair, bored because his
simulated airplane is flying in the enroute structure on a simulated
auto pilot, and he's composing messages to the various news groups.

Watching what happens,and occasionly pulling on his rip cord is part of
the fun -- don't take it seriously. We have real lives, do real things,
fly real airplanes. We know, both in our minds and our hearts, what he
has never experienced. Even more telling, he often dismisses our
experience as unimportant.

He's never been there, never done that, and doesn't have the tee shirt,
either.







On Jan 10, 2:34 pm, "gwengler" > wrote:
> Chris W wrote:
> > I guess I'm not being clear. I am not saying the request in the OP is,
> > or is not worthy. In fact, I'm explicitly avoiding that.
>
> > Let me put it this way. Suppose you were with a group of people all
> > doing something you wanted to do, and then some one you don't even know
> > walks up and says, "hey stop doing that". Are you going to stop doing
> > something you want to just because someone you don't even know asks you
> > to. I know most people wouldn't.
>
> > In other words no one in this or any other news group is going to stop
> > doing something just because some asks them to. If there are posts you
> > don't like, them simply don't read them. There is nothing you can do to
> > stop them. If you think you can . . .
>
> > --
> > Chris W
> > KE5GIXYes, but... If all or most people in the newsgroup would never reply
> to any thread that contains MXSMANIAC, then he would perhaps go away.
> I know this is not going to work, just a hope. And, yes, you called me
> delusional before, but that's only because you're jealous that you
> don't hear the little voices...
> Gerd- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -

[JD]

On Jan 8, 10:29 am, "gwengler" > wrote:
> Could everybody PLEASE not contribute to any thread with any posting
> from Mxsmanic?!!! His postings are spamming up this group to no end.
> Gerd

Gotta admit, MX has generated more newsgroup traffic of anyone other
than Sam Spade.

The signal to noise ratio is rather high for responses to his posts.

Let the finest social-misfit of these groups throw the first stone.

But to suggest we put a muzzle on some poster? That's just utter BS and
contrary to purpose of a public forum.
You don't want to read and respond to his threads, fine, you have my
permission to ignore him. But suggesting
that I ignore ANY poster, well, I got two words for you and it ain't
Merry Christmas.

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Viperdoc" > wrote

> He is obviously lonely and a social outcast. He posts so frequently he
> probably rarely enjoys any face to face interactions with people. He
> spends so much time on the computer he probably doesn't have much of a
> life other than cyberworld.

Probably the best thing that could happen to him, would be for his computer
to break, and he be so broke that he would have to go without it for a
couple of months.

He might even make some friends, and have a life.

Naaah.
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans[_2_]]

"JD" > wrote

> You don't want to read and respond to his threads, fine, you have my
> permission to ignore him. But suggesting
> that I ignore ANY poster, well, I got two words for you and it ain't
> Merry Christmas.


And I got two words for you.

Kill File.

Merry Christmas.
--
Jim in NC

[Kev]

Morgans wrote:
> "JD" > wrote
> > You don't want to read and respond to his threads, fine, you have my
> > permission to ignore him. But suggesting
> > that I ignore ANY poster, well, I got two words for you and it ain't
> > Merry Christmas.
>
> And I got two words for you.
> Kill File.
> Merry Christmas.

ROTFL !! At this rate, it won't be long before Jim has virtually
everyone here in his "you didn't do what I wanted" kill file ! And
all damned proud of it, too.

Happy New Year!
Kev