http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Facebook hacker - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/178da35874905dfb?hl=en
* learn how to use coupons - 3 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/aeb8e42a23868d01?hl=en
* Use a PC monitor with a Blue Ray player? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/b10e2e7d52880350?hl=en
* I HACK $2500 FROM PAYPAL - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/b3e177086fd3fa4a?hl=en
* Riding a bike in London is risky business - 14 messages, 6 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/e744f8b768901596?hl=en
* Brazil Actresses Sex Videos In All Angles. - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/e7c4b1c160a7d77f?hl=en
* Kabul is not a backward city by Western standards - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/5e057b532bce0fd4?hl=en
* Not hard brown sugar, but white granulized - 3 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/ba32abd9533d725a?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Facebook hacker
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/178da35874905dfb?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 12:06 am
From: The Real Bev
On 07/30/10 21:09, John Savage wrote:
> noel888<harri85274@aol.com> writes:
>>I was duped into joining Facebook by a hacker. It looked completely
>>ligit. Now after losing $100 , the hacker's facebook site is gone. So
>>that confirms to me that i have been hacked. I would like to remove my
>>info and everything from Facebook, but there is no contact on how to
>>do this on their site. Does anyone here know how i can get out if?
>>Thanks
>
> How does one "lose" $100 by joining Facebook? Did you pay $100 to join?
> It's free, so I'm mystified how someone can lose money just by joining.
Send me $100 and I will tell you :-)
--
Cheers, Bev
===============================================
"If God had wanted us to use the metric system,
Jesus would have had 10 apostles."
- Jesse Helms
==============================================================================
TOPIC: learn how to use coupons
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/aeb8e42a23868d01?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 12:11 am
From: The Real Bev
On 07/30/10 17:37, Patricia Martin Steward wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 14:50:31 -0700 (PDT), Steve S
> <sjsindustries@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>If your not using coupons than your paying to much.
>
> So much ignorance, so little time.
Yeah. There used to be coupons for useful things like canned vegetables
and yogurt. Now they seem to be only for overpriced toiletries (I just
bought 4 triple-blade razors for 99 cents at the 99-Cents-Only store;
how can Gillette get away with charging several dollars for just ONE?)
and name brand stuff that even with the coupon doesn't come close to the
price of the equally-good generic.
WORTHLESS!
--
Cheers, Bev
===============================================
"If God had wanted us to use the metric system,
Jesus would have had 10 apostles."
- Jesse Helms
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 2:44 am
From: "Sam"
The Real Bev wrote:
> On 07/30/10 17:37, Patricia Martin Steward wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 14:50:31 -0700 (PDT), Steve S
>> <sjsindustries@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> If your not using coupons than your paying to much.
>>
>> So much ignorance, so little time.
>
> Yeah. There used to be coupons for useful things like canned
> vegetables and yogurt. Now they seem to be only for overpriced
> toiletries (I just bought 4 triple-blade razors for 99 cents at the
> 99-Cents-Only store; how can Gillette get away with charging several
> dollars for just ONE?) and name brand stuff that even with the coupon
> doesn't come close to the price of the equally-good generic.
>
> WORTHLESS!
Only fools bother with razors. You qualify.
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 2:51 am
From: "Simon Brown"
The Real Bev wrote:
> On 07/30/10 17:37, Patricia Martin Steward wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 14:50:31 -0700 (PDT), Steve S
>> <sjsindustries@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> If your not using coupons than your paying to much.
>>
>> So much ignorance, so little time.
>
> Yeah. There used to be coupons for useful things like canned
> vegetables and yogurt. Now they seem to be only for overpriced
> toiletries (I just bought 4 triple-blade razors for 99 cents at the
> 99-Cents-Only store; how can Gillette get away with charging several
> dollars for just ONE?) and name brand stuff that even with the coupon
> doesn't come close to the price of the equally-good generic.
>
> WORTHLESS!
Only fools bother with razors. You qualify.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Use a PC monitor with a Blue Ray player?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/b10e2e7d52880350?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 2:42 am
From: "Rod Speed"
Gordon wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> Gordon wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> Gordon wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>> Gordon wrote
>>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>>> Digital TV is very different to analog TV.
>>>>>>> The RF signal still propagates the same way.
>>>>>> Wrong, you dont get ghosts for starters.
>>>>>> And it works a lot better in weak signal areas too.
>>>>> The RF still propagates the same way.
>>>> Still works a hell of a lot better at weak signal levels where
>>>> there is no direct path between the transmitter and receiver.
>>> Yes, digital signals are less suseptable to interfearence.
>>> And multipath reception is a form of self interfearence.
>>> But that has nothing to do with RF propagation.
>> You were the only one rabbitting on about RF propagation.
> Because RF propagation determinies if you can get a signal or not.
You can ALWAYS get a signal in the situation being discussed, fuckwit.
> And how good that signal will be. The OP said that he could not get TV reception.
He didnt even say that, he ACTUALLY said that he needed a tower
to get adequate reception and that is very unlikely with digital TV.
>>>>> It doesn't make any difference that there is digital information
>>>>> modulated onto the carrier. RF is still RF. It behaves the same
>>>>> regardless of what type of information it is carying.
>>>> Wrong with weak signal levels.
>>> Bull! RF is still RF.
> Itiot!
Fuckwit!!!
> I did not.
Everyone can see for themselves that you are lying, as always.
> Re-read the 2nd line. I added emphisis so you can find it.
Pity about your shit you carefully deleted from the quoting and I have restored.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: I HACK $2500 FROM PAYPAL
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/b3e177086fd3fa4a?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 5:58 am
From: paypal money
I HACK $2500 FROM PAYPAL At http://uptadesonly.co.cc
i have hidden the PayPal Form link in an image. in that
website On Top Side Above search box , click on image
and enter your PayPal id And Your name.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Riding a bike in London is risky business
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/e744f8b768901596?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 14 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 6:42 am
From: "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-
Hammock"
On Jul 31, 8:40 am, fur...@mail.croydon.ac.uk wrote:
> On 30 July, 23:37, "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the
> Movement of Tantra-Hammock" <comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > My sources in London (Yahoo News) tell me that such is the nature of
> > riding a bike in London. But things are relative and not black and
> > white, and probably riding a bike in Miami or NYC is far more
> > dangerous.
>
> I can't comment on Miami, I've never been there. I would say that
> London and New York would be pretty similar in terms of risk; I
> wouldn't want to ride a bike in either of them, and there's not much
> that scares me. It's not only the danger, the roads are also dirty
> and fume-filled. If there was a dedicated bike route, not just a
> narrow lane at the side of a normal road, the whole way from home to
> work, then I'd probably buy a bike, and use it. Of course, there's
> still the problem of arriving at work soaking wet in bad weather. As
> it is, I'll keep going by bus.
>
> Of course, different parts of London, or New York, are totally
> different to each other. Overall, I'd say much of London is pretty
> terrible, I hated driving in it during the few years that I had a car,
> but that was almost 28 years ago, and it's certainly got worse since.
London vs. NYC vs. Miami?
Miami bus system is in shambles so getting around by bus is not an
option (unless you are retired). And riding a bike is something you do
short of Euthanasia...
Now, America shares some common dangers not seen in the civilized
world: PEOPLE DRIVE CUSTOMARILY PHONE IN HAND. I don't know about NYC,
but here is the norm. We also have the lion's share of Supersized
Unnecessary Vehicles that add extra aggressiveness and size to the
road (they really ROAR). Road rage is daily life in the city, and I've
been attacked and spit upon for giving a finger to a driver minding my
business.
I guess we are down there with Kabul.
>
>
>
> > London though is launching 6,000 bikes and it may see some peace after
> > the initial mayhem. Is it really that bad? Here they kill you for
> > giving the finger. What it would be like to ride a bike in
> > Afghanistan? Or will it be more deadly to ride an SUV?
>
> > LONDON – Feel like living dangerously?
>
> > Riding a bike in London will soon be more convenient, though it's
> > unlikely to be any less scary. Riders already dodge the city's famed
> > black cabs and double-decker buses — to say nothing of other cyclists.
>
> > A bike rental program launched Friday by London's Mayor Boris Johnson
> > will add an additional 6,000 bikes to the capital's congested streets.
> > Under the initiative, cyclists will be able to rent bikes from 400
> > docking stations around town.
>
> > Johnson called it "a new dawn for the bicycle in the capital" — but
> > veterans of the London cycling scene are bracing for a new era of
> > transit mayhem.
>
> I've seen these bike rental things when I was up in London last
> weekend, though they were not in use then. How do they cope with the
> fact that a bicycle is supposed to be adjusted to fit each rider; do
> you carry a set of spanners with you to make such adjustments?
There must be a way. The Velib is already in place after all. The
Parisian model is interesting. I think they ride mostly on the road
and people are fine. THERE'S SAFETY IN NUMBERS.
>
> Another Boris gimmick I think; if somebody wants to ride a bike, why
> not buy their own? There are a lot of these rental station things in
> the central area, so you would not need to walk far to find one. they
> look like high-tech bike racks, with what I think are contactless
> smart card readers attached to them. I'm not sure how the scheme
> works, where it's pre-pay and you top up the card, or you're billed
> for the use you make, and whether it's charged by the hour, day, mile
> or what.
Buying your own is always an option, but I guess it sends a signal
that the city is not about cars only. They promised such here in Miami
Beach. I wonder what became of it?
Maybe if I do a Google search?
'While the "City of Lights" is the poster child for what's right and
wrong about bike-sharing, it's only one of scores of programs
springing up all around the world, including here in North America.
Bike share programs are up and running in Washington, D.C.,
Philadelphia (see the short documentary below), and Miami Beach.'
http://evworld.com/currents.cfm?jid=124
Wow, it says they are out there! What have I been missing by being in
the cage! Still around here you see monkeys riding Walmart bikes on
sidewalks. They are true survivors, but it's really more dangerous
than the road.
I'll check into Velib Miami.
== 2 of 14 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 8:14 am
From: "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-
Hammock"
This time is for real, huh?
http://www.decobike.com/index.php
I hope they go together with the place to ride them. I don't ask for
special facilities. I would love people TAKING THE LANE with them and
riding as far as Haulover Beach (the nudist beach to be exact) OVER
THE BRIDGE at Bal Harbour (not on the sidewalk) and over the causeways
to Biscayne Blvd. The 96th st causeway needs to be friendly to
bicycles, not telling people to "walk bicycle" over the bridge, on a
sidewalk where barely a man can walk. That's where the "vigilante"
attacked me for not complying with that stupid rule.
Now we should bring that system to Kabul to pacify them.
NOTE: Luckily I haven't sold my beautiful bikes yet.
== 3 of 14 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 10:15 am
From: Chris
On 30/07/2010 23:39, His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the
Movement of Tantra-Hammock wrote:
> My sources in London (Yahoo News) tell me that such is the nature of
> riding a bike in London. But things are relative and not black and
> white, and probably riding a bike in Miami or NYC is far more
> dangerous.
>
> London though is launching 6,000 bikes and it may see some peace after
> the initial mayhem. Is it really that bad? Here they kill you for
> giving the finger. What it would be like to ride a bike in
> Afghanistan? Or will it be more deadly to ride an SUV?
>
> LONDON – Feel like living dangerously?
>
> Riding a bike in London will soon be more convenient, though it's
> unlikely to be any less scary. Riders already dodge the city's famed
> black cabs and double-decker buses — to say nothing of other cyclists.
>
> A bike rental program launched Friday by London's Mayor Boris Johnson
> will add an additional 6,000 bikes to the capital's congested streets.
> Under the initiative, cyclists will be able to rent bikes from 400
> docking stations around town.
>
> Johnson called it "a new dawn for the bicycle in the capital" — but
> veterans of the London cycling scene are bracing for a new era of
> transit mayhem.
>
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100730/ap_on_re_eu/eu_biking_in_london
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> THE WISE TIBETAN MONKEY SAYS
>
> "The jungle is a very dangerous place to be for the unwise"
>
> http://webspawner.com/users/BIKEFORPEACE
>
> (the revolution starts with the turning of a wheel and the bipedal
> monkey)
In London a lot of cyclists have been run down by trucks turning left,
equivalent to right turn in the US, as a lot tend to undertake, pass the
passenger side of vehicles. The attitude of a lot of cyclists does not
help though as a lot run red lights, ride on pavements and go down one
way streets the wrong way.
--
Chris
== 4 of 14 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 11:11 am
From: Tony Raven
Chris wrote:
>
> In London a lot of cyclists have been run down by trucks turning left,
> equivalent to right turn in the US, as a lot tend to undertake, pass the
> passenger side of vehicles. The attitude of a lot of cyclists does not
> help though as a lot run red lights, ride on pavements and go down one
> way streets the wrong way.
>
Not a lot actually. Ten or less a year are hit by trucks which, for 180
million cycle journeys a year means its pretty rare. And easily avoided
by giving the big trucks a bit more room and respect.
It may feel scary riding in parts of London but risky it is not by any
sensible meaning of the word.
--
Tony
" I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong."
Bertrand Russell
== 5 of 14 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 11:39 am
From: "Colin McKenzie"
On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 19:11:20 +0100, Tony Raven <traven@gotadsl.co.uk>
wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>>
>> In London a lot of cyclists have been run down by trucks turning left,
>> equivalent to right turn in the US, as a lot tend to undertake, pass
>> the passenger side of vehicles. The attitude of a lot of cyclists does
>> not help though as a lot run red lights, ride on pavements and go down
>> one way streets the wrong way.
>
> Not a lot actually. Ten or less a year are hit by trucks which, for 180
> million cycle journeys a year means its pretty rare. And easily avoided
> by giving the big trucks a bit more room and respect.
Quite. And as rather fewer than 10 a year, on average, are killed by other
vehicles, you can halve your already minuscule risk of death simply by
being very careful around lorries:
- don't pass (on either side) unless it can't possibly move in the time it
takes to get past.
- if in front, be where the driver can see you, and make eye contact to
make sure he HAS seen you.
- if to the side with priority, ride in a prominent position but be ready
to stop until you know the driver's seen you.
If you want to halve your chance of injury, do the same with other
vehicles, and ride a door's width from parked cars.
Colin McKenzie
> It may feel scary riding in parts of London but risky it is not by any
> sensible meaning of the word.
--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the
population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.
== 6 of 14 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 12:36 pm
From: Jobst Brandt
Chris who? wrote:
> In London a lot of cyclists have been run down by trucks turning
> left, equivalent to right turn in the US, as a lot tend to
> undertake, pass the passenger side of vehicles. The attitude of a
> lot of cyclists does not help though as a lot run red lights, ride
> on pavements and go down one way streets the wrong way.
I spent a few miles riding in central London where two lane streets
were converted to three lanes, tow for cars and one for buses and
taxis and bicycles. This new lane was paved with red asphalt. I and
my brother, who lives there, rode close to the curb on the left and
were passed by huge transit busses with few inches to spare. This was
standard procedure for adult bicyclists, who use these streets for
transportation.
Although we found riding with care safe, I commented to my brother
that many wreck.bike riders would die here, knowing their propensity
to "take the lane", it being their legal right. Don't try it!
Jobst Brandt
== 7 of 14 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 1:02 pm
From: "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-
Hammock"
On Jul 31, 2:11 pm, Tony Raven <tra...@gotadsl.co.uk> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
> > In London a lot of cyclists have been run down by trucks turning left,
> > equivalent to right turn in the US, as a lot tend to undertake, pass the
> > passenger side of vehicles. The attitude of a lot of cyclists does not
> > help though as a lot run red lights, ride on pavements and go down one
> > way streets the wrong way.
>
> Not a lot actually. Ten or less a year are hit by trucks which, for 180
> million cycle journeys a year means its pretty rare. And easily avoided
> by giving the big trucks a bit more room and respect.
>
> It may feel scary riding in parts of London but risky it is not by any
> sensible meaning of the word.
The word I hate the most is STRESSFUL. Rides that become so around
here (90% of them) I avoid and I simply drive a car.
== 8 of 14 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 1:04 pm
From: "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-
Hammock"
On Jul 31, 2:39 pm, "Colin McKenzie" <n...@proof-read.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 19:11:20 +0100, Tony Raven <tra...@gotadsl.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> > Chris wrote:
>
> >> In London a lot of cyclists have been run down by trucks turning left,
> >> equivalent to right turn in the US, as a lot tend to undertake, pass
> >> the passenger side of vehicles. The attitude of a lot of cyclists does
> >> not help though as a lot run red lights, ride on pavements and go down
> >> one way streets the wrong way.
>
> > Not a lot actually. Ten or less a year are hit by trucks which, for 180
> > million cycle journeys a year means its pretty rare. And easily avoided
> > by giving the big trucks a bit more room and respect.
>
> Quite. And as rather fewer than 10 a year, on average, are killed by other
> vehicles, you can halve your already minuscule risk of death simply by
> being very careful around lorries:
> - don't pass (on either side) unless it can't possibly move in the time it
> takes to get past.
> - if in front, be where the driver can see you, and make eye contact to
> make sure he HAS seen you.
> - if to the side with priority, ride in a prominent position but be ready
> to stop until you know the driver's seen you.
>
> If you want to halve your chance of injury, do the same with other
> vehicles, and ride a door's width from parked cars.
My proposal to MANDATE VISIBLE CLOTHING/VEST/LYCRA would help quite a
bit. No clothing, no rights.
== 9 of 14 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 1:09 pm
From: Tony Raven
Jobst Brandt wrote:
>
> I spent a few miles riding in central London where two lane streets
> were converted to three lanes, tow for cars and one for buses and
> taxis and bicycles. This new lane was paved with red asphalt. I and
> my brother, who lives there, rode close to the curb on the left and
> were passed by huge transit busses with few inches to spare. This was
> standard procedure for adult bicyclists, who use these streets for
> transportation.
>
> Although we found riding with care safe, I commented to my brother
> that many wreck.bike riders would die here, knowing their propensity
> to "take the lane", it being their legal right. Don't try it!
>
Your trouble was not taking the lane. I ride in London all the time and
your riding style will always create problems of buses and taxis trying
to squeeze past whereas I have very few because they have to overtake
me. Its a pity you saw fit to comment on how to do it with so little
experience.
--
Tony
" I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong."
Bertrand Russell
== 10 of 14 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 1:12 pm
From: Tony Raven
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of
Tantra-Hammock wrote:
>
>>
>> If you want to halve your chance of injury, do the same with other
>> vehicles, and ride a door's width from parked cars.
>
> My proposal to MANDATE VISIBLE CLOTHING/VEST/LYCRA would help quite a
> bit. No clothing, no rights.
I bet you'd get noticed even more without clothing and you can bet most
motorists would give you a much wider berth ;-)
--
Tony
" I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong."
Bertrand Russell
== 11 of 14 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 1:28 pm
From: "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-
Hammock"
On Jul 31, 4:12 pm, Tony Raven <tra...@gotadsl.co.uk> wrote:
> His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of
>
> Tantra-Hammock wrote:
>
> >> If you want to halve your chance of injury, do the same with other
> >> vehicles, and ride a door's width from parked cars.
>
> > My proposal to MANDATE VISIBLE CLOTHING/VEST/LYCRA would help quite a
> > bit. No clothing, no rights.
>
> I bet you'd get noticed even more without clothing and you can bet most
> motorists would give you a much wider berth ;-)
No wonder some cyclists propose riding naked. A young lady would
surely get the most attention.
== 12 of 14 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 1:49 pm
From: "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-
Hammock"
On Jul 31, 4:12 pm, Tony Raven <tra...@gotadsl.co.uk> wrote:
> His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of
>
> Tantra-Hammock wrote:
>
> >> If you want to halve your chance of injury, do the same with other
> >> vehicles, and ride a door's width from parked cars.
>
> > My proposal to MANDATE VISIBLE CLOTHING/VEST/LYCRA would help quite a
> > bit. No clothing, no rights.
>
> I bet you'd get noticed even more without clothing and you can bet most
> motorists would give you a much wider berth ;-)
Only a problem if done alone...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYFkos8DDlY
== 13 of 14 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 2:26 pm
From: "Colin McKenzie"
On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 21:04:27 +0100, His Highness the TibetanMonkey,
Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock <nolionnoproblem@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> My proposal to MANDATE VISIBLE CLOTHING/VEST/LYCRA would help quite a
> bit. No clothing, no rights.
No-one has ever proved that hi-viz clothing makes you safer. You may be
visible from further away, but by definition the driver who hits you is
rather close.
The main thing is to be where they're looking, and not to assume you've
been seen until there's evidence that you have.
Colin McKenzie
--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the
population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.
== 14 of 14 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 2:33 pm
From: "Colin McKenzie"
On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 21:09:52 +0100, Tony Raven <traven@gotadsl.co.uk>
wrote:
> Jobst Brandt wrote:
>> I spent a few miles riding in central London where two lane streets
>> were converted to three lanes, tow for cars and one for buses and
>> taxis and bicycles. This new lane was paved with red asphalt. I and
>> my brother, who lives there, rode close to the curb on the left and
>> were passed by huge transit busses with few inches to spare. This was
>> standard procedure for adult bicyclists, who use these streets for
>> transportation.
>> Although we found riding with care safe, I commented to my brother
>> that many wreck.bike riders would die here, knowing their propensity
>> to "take the lane", it being their legal right. Don't try it!
>>
> Your trouble was not taking the lane. I ride in London all the time and
> your riding style will always create problems of buses and taxis trying
> to squeeze past whereas I have very few because they have to overtake
> me. Its a pity you saw fit to comment on how to do it with so little
> experience.
Absolutely. I would add that too many cyclists equate delaying drivers
with endangering themselves. Actually the main point is to be seen and
taken account of, which means taking the lane if it's too narrow to pass
safely.
Being hooted is great. You know the driver's seen you, and you know that
when you let him pass, he'll pass quickly and not dither.
I am still amazed how many cyclists hug the left of a narrow lane and
never look back, and are overtaken with barely a foot of clearance as a
result. That very rarely happens to me. If it did, my hand would be in
agony from all the cars I'd have thumped.
Colin McKenzie
--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the
population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Brazil Actresses Sex Videos In All Angles.
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/e7c4b1c160a7d77f?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 7:47 am
From: Hot sex
Brazil Actresses Sex Videos In All Angles At http://100bestvideos.co.cc
Due to high sex content, i have hidden the videos in an image. in
that
website on Top Side search box Above click on image and watch
videos in all angles.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Kabul is not a backward city by Western standards
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/5e057b532bce0fd4?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 10:45 am
From: "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-
Hammock"
Which means that cars outnumber bicycles by 1,000 to 1. Funny, that
city is still in the middle of a very poor country, and they could be
make better use of bicycles than cars.
India and China are nearby and they use the bicycle extensively.
Though they also want to leave it behind for the outcasts and want to
embrace CAPITALISM with full power, ie. SUVs and all.
In this clip of Kabul, you don't see the homeless, a staple of Western
capitals, but you do see a few bikes, riding against traffic, whatever
it takes to survive in chaos...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZyHX3KqSl0&feature=related
----------------------------------------------
WHEN THE REVOLUTION IS THE SOLUTION
http://webspawner.com/users/BANANAREVOLUTION
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Not hard brown sugar, but white granulized
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/ba32abd9533d725a?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 12:45 pm
From: noel888
I purchased this 5 lb granulized sugar about 2 or 3 weeks ago..sale
price. It was normal then. Yesterday i had to use it for the first
time and i took it out of the pantry and it was hard as a rock. Now i
heard something about microwaves and brown sugar...does it apply to
white sugar as well? I really don't see the difference. But this is a
5 pound bag...hate to put it in the micro like that...it would
probably burst and not knowing what readings one should set it at also.
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 3:05 pm
From: imascot
noel888 <harri85274@aol.com> wrote in news:36eb098c-3f85-4f38-a3fa-
051c6655a9ad@g35g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:
> I purchased this 5 lb granulized sugar about 2 or 3 weeks ago..sale
> price. It was normal then. Yesterday i had to use it for the first
> time and i took it out of the pantry and it was hard as a rock. Now i
> heard something about microwaves and brown sugar...does it apply to
> white sugar as well? I really don't see the difference. But this is a
> 5 pound bag...hate to put it in the micro like that...it would
> probably burst and not knowing what readings one should set it at also.
>
Google is your friend:
http://whatscookingamerica.net/Q-A/BrownSugar.htm
.
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 31 2010 3:16 pm
From: noel888
On Jul 31, 6:05 pm, imascot <im...@mycomputer.now> wrote:
> noel888 <harri85...@aol.com> wrote in news:36eb098c-3f85-4f38-a3fa-
> 051c6655a...@g35g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:
>
> > I purchased this 5 lb granulized sugar about 2 or 3 weeks ago..sale
> > price. It was normal then. Yesterday i had to use it for the first
> > time and i took it out of the pantry and it was hard as a rock. Now i
> > heard something about microwaves and brown sugar...does it apply to
> > white sugar as well? I really don't see the difference. But this is a
> > 5 pound bag...hate to put it in the micro like that...it would
> > probably burst and not knowing what readings one should set it at also.
>
> Google is your friend:http://whatscookingamerica.net/Q-A/BrownSugar.htm
>
> .
google denied me LOL
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "misc.consumers.frugal-living"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to misc.consumers.frugal-living+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
