Inappropriate product names

I don't think the 'group ginge gestapo' applies to Platypus. I would
not be at all surprised if he remembered the particular thread.

In any case, I often remember threads/posts from the last x years; not
all of them but those I was interested in at the time. If there are
several others with similar memories then the overall 'group memory'
could be pretty extensive.

However I can't be arsed with googling or the whole 'ginge' thing.

Regarding SteveH it seems (to me) that he's getting undue criticism for
ignorance, however he doesn't appear to give much of a **** about it
often adding fuel to the threads.

 

[Snipped Text]

Actually, I'm with you and Steve on this one. It's to the point that I
CBA to even bother posting any funnies anymore.

Why not take it a step further and suggest checking Google before
posting a new article, just in case it's been done before. Or even
before replying in case somebody used a similar answer before. We could
simply use Google, and cut and paste all of the original content!

 

In uk.rec.motorcycles, Andy Hewitt amazed us all with this pearl of
wisdom:

But then that would've definitely been done before ;-)

 

[Snipped Text]

Then just post a link

That wouldn't half save some bandwidth! ;-)

 

What about nicely translated Japanese company slogans?
http://www.tohotenax.com/tenax/en/company/history.php

 

In uk.rec.motorcycles, Andy Hewitt amazed us all with this pearl of
wisdom:

Back when you had to put a telephone reciever into a modem I'd agree but
in today's world of whizzy fast connections I can't see how a KB or two
would make much difference.

 

I think we've had more re-runs of this departure than Bears version
iyswim.

 

[Snipped Text]

e3d2b0c0ff0d511/4607035b051a1b96?lnk=st&q=group%3Auk.rec.motorcycles+ins
ubject%3Aproduct+author%3Aandy+author%3Ahewitt&rnum=1&hl=en#4607035b051a
1b96

Hmm, doesn't really work does it?

Actually in this case your link was larger than my reply!

 

It doesn't take a minute to check on google before posting but the
other thing to do is take your stance and simply not post if you cba
to check. I rarely post links to anything because I cba to look but on
the rare occasion I feel the need to share I try to avoid putting
myself in the firing line.

 

In uk.rec.motorcycles, Andy Bonwick amazed us all with this pearl of
wisdom:

<Unsubscribes>

 

[Snipped Text]

So what's the problem with simply ignoring the repeated one's? Surely
less wasted time and effort than the ridiculous 'Ginge' threads. Perhaps
it might not have occurred to some that not everybody has seen some of
these things?

Do you perhaps *never* watch a repeated programme on TV just because
sometime in your life you have already seen it?

 

Alternatively post and be damned, there's enough shite posted on here
anyway.

 

I'll have to search to find when I last shouted Ginge at someone for
posting a repeat. What pisses me off is the fact that a thread morphs
from someone not giving enough of a toss to make sure they're not
repeating a post into a tedious arguement that could have been
avoided.

I still don't think it was me who started in with the Ginge bit. I
watch repeats, read books more than once, listen to music more than
once but I don't foist it on an unsuspecting public.

 

LOL!

They must've seen my workshop.

 

[Snipped Text]

Or the loonies that want to create a 'Ginge' thread in the first place.
Whatever you do, people will always be posting stuff that's been posted
before. The real trick is to use your own intelligence to decide whether
you actually *need* to respond to it or not.

Indeed, but you still have a choice of whether to add to the thread or
not, or read the article in the first place.

Personally, if I see something I've seen before, I hit the 'close
window' button, and move on.

 

Funnies or whatever... unless it's been posted several times in the same
day, WGAF, eh...

 

Indeed.

But unless it's been posted in the immediate past, why bother commenting?

It just gives off an air along the lines of 'we've got little else to
do...'.

Agreed.

 

You should know... you'll have enough time on your hands to partake in yet
more of it soon, won't you?

 

Not from me you haven't.

 

Probably about 75% of the regular contributors seem to give a **** so
a bit of consideration avoids a flaming.

I certainly don't do a google groups search on every link posted just
on the off chance I'll be able to flame the poster and I can't even
remember moaning about someone offending in this way but I'm firmly of
the belief that anyone who's been around here for a while should have
the common sense to google to make sure they're not going to get
flamed.