Gotta keep it from The Children

0tterbot wrote:

"==Daye==" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 09:33:13 +1000, "0tterbot"
wrote:

but from a practical p.o.v. - who on earth would know the number, be able
to
write down the car's numberplate while tooling down the highway, etc.
it's
all a bit hard in practice, innit. it *is* nice to see that it will work
if
pursued, though!

There was a story on "A Current Affair" or "Today Tonight" about
a man who has a notepad attached to his dash. He writes down all
the number plates of people throwing butts out the window. He
then calls and dobs them in.

He probably isn't the only person who does it.

probably not. i hope he also writes down people who run red lights - a habit
which has reached epic proportions in my area.
kylie

Now I think that both of these are bad habits for one to acquire, but
what's to stop someone from, say, writing down all the license numbers
of people he doesn't like and reporting them for littering? Will the
police really take the word of a citizen complaint in something like
this? (or are Ozzies so generally honest that this isn't a problem?)

nate

On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 09:39:39 +1000, "0tterbot" wrote:

if you want to have a dig at someone, put it at the feet of people who
propose dubious laws. it sounds to me like *they* wish to have control out
of all proportion to their entitlement to do so.
kylie

How about if I'd like to take a dig at people who feel they can argue
complicated subjects but somehow can't manage the shift key?

In article , Nan says...

On 23 Jun 2003 20:25:03 -0700, Banty wrote:

In article , "LaTreen says...

x-no-archive: yes

Do you raise as big a fuss when people change diapers in public?

Do you object when people bring their children into public pools
wearing swim diapers (that release fecal matter - a PROVEN
health hazard) into public pools?

Both are an entitlement issue with parents. How many times are
diapers changed in cafes and airplanes?

I WILL smoke outside. When I wait for a bus - I go under the shelter
with everyone else and I DO light up. If people are there with children
I make a point to stand by them. You can take your ill-behaved children
anywhere you want. I WILL smoke where ever I am allowed to by law.
If they don't like it, they can move - that's the entitlement attitude that
applies to me when your children are obnoxious and ill-mannered.

There is an law against smoking in an athletic field near my house and I
will
smoke there until I am fined for it. If I am fined, I will drag the case out
in
court as long as I can to run up the cost and waste the town's money.

I see the litter left behind by breeders from little league and the feces
left
from the dog owners.

These people don't care about the public - why should I?

LaTreen Washington

The Problem Exhibit B.

Banty

No, just another CF troll.

Nan


OK - Problem Smoker's Attitude Exhibit B.
Problem CF Attitude Exhibit A :-)

Banty

In article , Pockets says...

On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 09:39:39 +1000, "0tterbot" wrote:

if you want to have a dig at someone, put it at the feet of people who
propose dubious laws. it sounds to me like *they* wish to have control out
of all proportion to their entitlement to do so.
kylie

How about if I'd like to take a dig at people who feel they can argue
complicated subjects but somehow can't manage the shift key?


Look - a compatriot of yours, or possibly even you, from alt.peeves set up the
original post in this thread as a crosspost to misc.kids. Even if it wasn't you,
I'm sure you've noticed that by now - you being so able to manage complicated
subjects and all, at least by your own report.

"Otterbot" is a well-established personage here in misc.kids, with a
well-established posting style. You're basically an interloper here, riding on
a thread which was cross-posted from your 'group from the get go.

We have no obligation whatsoever to you - no obligation to alter posting style,
to amuse you or to "be original". Let alone to breathe your poison.

Grow up, get over yourself, or see a shrink about your authority/extent of
boundary issues. For one thing, seems to be a compulsive problem - the poster
you slammed for posting style is sympathetic to your point.

Banty

"Banty" wrote:

The Problem Exhibit B.


No, just another CF troll.

Nan


OK - Problem Smoker's Attitude Exhibit B.
Problem CF Attitude Exhibit A :-)

CF?


P. Tierney

On 24 Jun 2003 09:34:36 -0700, Banty wrote:

In article , Pockets says...

On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 09:39:39 +1000, "0tterbot" wrote:

if you want to have a dig at someone, put it at the feet of people who
propose dubious laws. it sounds to me like *they* wish to have control out
of all proportion to their entitlement to do so.
kylie

How about if I'd like to take a dig at people who feel they can argue
complicated subjects but somehow can't manage the shift key?


Look - a compatriot of yours, or possibly even you, from alt.peeves set up the
original post in this thread as a crosspost to misc.kids. Even if it wasn't you,
I'm sure you've noticed that by now - you being so able to manage complicated
subjects and all, at least by your own report.

"Otterbot" is a well-established personage here in misc.kids, with a
well-established posting style. You're basically an interloper here, riding on
a thread which was cross-posted from your 'group from the get go.

We have no obligation whatsoever to you - no obligation to alter posting style,
to amuse you or to "be original". Let alone to breathe your poison.

Grow up, get over yourself, or see a shrink about your authority/extent of
boundary issues. For one thing, seems to be a compulsive problem - the poster
you slammed for posting style is sympathetic to your point.

Make sure you let that White Charger cool off before you put him up in
the barn. Doesn't it get hot under all of that armor?

Pockets of Resistance wrote:

On 24 Jun 2003 09:34:36 -0700, Banty wrote:

In article , Pockets says...

On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 09:39:39 +1000, "0tterbot" wrote:

if you want to have a dig at someone, put it at the feet of people who
propose dubious laws. it sounds to me like *they* wish to have control out
of all proportion to their entitlement to do so.
kylie

How about if I'd like to take a dig at people who feel they can argue
complicated subjects but somehow can't manage the shift key?


Look - a compatriot of yours, or possibly even you, from alt.peeves set up the
original post in this thread as a crosspost to misc.kids. Even if it wasn't you,
I'm sure you've noticed that by now - you being so able to manage complicated
subjects and all, at least by your own report.

"Otterbot" is a well-established personage here in misc.kids, with a
well-established posting style. You're basically an interloper here, riding on
a thread which was cross-posted from your 'group from the get go.

We have no obligation whatsoever to you - no obligation to alter posting style,
to amuse you or to "be original". Let alone to breathe your poison.

Grow up, get over yourself, or see a shrink about your authority/extent of
boundary issues. For one thing, seems to be a compulsive problem - the poster
you slammed for posting style is sympathetic to your point.

Make sure you let that White Charger cool off before you put him up in
the barn. Doesn't it get hot under all of that armor?

It's a 426, to be sure, but runs a bit cooler with the 4-speed and the
air works.

oh... never mind.

nate

"Pockets of Resistance" wrote in message
...

Grow up, get over yourself, or see a shrink about your authority/extent
of
boundary issues. For one thing, seems to be a compulsive problem - the
poster
you slammed for posting style is sympathetic to your point.

Make sure you let that White Charger cool off before you put him up in
the barn. Doesn't it get hot under all of that armor?

mm, i'd spell that "armour" but since your valid, sage & timely point about
my capitalisation, i have seen the light about other people's posting
choices (who are these people anyway, i say?!) & henceforth shall defer to
you on all matters. plus, i'm pretty sure that americans are allowed to
spell it that way. just as i'm allowed to post without capitals if i want
to.

and anyway, if you were a regular *here*, you'd be well appraised of the
fact that my family & i live in penury & cannot afford capital letters. we
go without food sometimes in order to be able to afford punctuation marks. i
had to sell my baby on the internet to buy some exclamation marks one time
when i was having an argument with a cranky cross-poster from alt.peeves. i
have to go away & cry now; you are SO INSENSITIVE.
kylie

0tterbot wrote:

"Nathan Nagel" wrote in message
...

probably not. i hope he also writes down people who run red lights - a
habit
which has reached epic proportions in my area.
kylie

Now I think that both of these are bad habits for one to acquire, but
what's to stop someone from, say, writing down all the license numbers
of people he doesn't like and reporting them for littering?

well that's a very good question & i'm glad you asked. i don't know the
answer though :-)

Will the
police really take the word of a citizen complaint in something like
this? (or are Ozzies so generally honest that this isn't a problem?)

my best guess is that it would work the same way as if you are caught by a
speed or red-light camera or if you neglect to vote - you'd be issued with a
notice to pay a fine & then have the option of either paying the fine
without discussion, or explaining yourself, or disputing the event in court.
most people who really are guilty aren't going to go to court - they'd pay
the fine instead, so despite the fact that the assumption is that you are
guilty i'm sure you have the option of taking it to court instead *or*
making a statutory declaration that some other person did it in your car (if
that's what happened), in which case i suppose it's transferred to them
instead, after a suitable amount of grinding of bureaucratic machinery.
kylie

You have speed and red light cameras there? Sheesh, I thought it was
only in DC where we'd sunk so low. Hopefully yours don't work on a
commission basis (don't get me started. Seriously. This has been
discussed in another newsgroup which I frequent beyond the point of
nausea to nearly shoving sharp desktop implements through my nostrils
and eardrums in an attempt to avoid inadvertantly reading another post
on the subject. And yet some people still don't see the blatant
corruption...)

nate

0tterbot wrote:

"Nathan Nagel" wrote in message
...


0tterbot wrote:

i
had to sell my baby on the internet to buy some exclamation marks one
time
when i was having an argument with a cranky cross-poster from
alt.peeves. i
have to go away & cry now; you are SO INSENSITIVE.
kylie

*ahem*

I'd like to point out for the record that I did *not* cross-post this
thread, it came pre-crossposted for my convenience.

oh nathan, i wasn't talking about *you*.
in fact, i was making it up completely!!!!!!!!!!!!! --- whoops, there goes
a week of lunches
so stop stomping all over my joke.


I'll buy ya dinner next time you're in DC-land then.

So how's archy, anyway?

who?


Now we're even apparently.

http://www.donmarquis.com/archy/index.html

Somehow it's less funny with an explanation (I *knew* I should have gone
with an e.e.cummings reference.)

nate

(still smarting about the "cranky" comment...)

i love cranky people. i am one. :-)
kylie

I'm just practicing to be a curmudgeon someday.

nate