# SPOILER! Cavendish ties the British stage win record



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

GO MARK GO!!!!!!

Tied with the British stage win record at the TDF!


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

ttug said:


> GO MARK GO!!!!!!
> 
> Tied with the British stage win record at the TDF!



That was a great finish... a very non-boring battle.

Yeah, did you hear that, Gail?


----------



## tri-ac (Aug 4, 2008)

isn't the point of writing "spoiler" in the title so that you can preserve the actual spoiler for the thread itself?

[just giving you a hard time  anything seems game in this forum during the Tour! ]


----------



## JChasse (Sep 16, 2005)

oh for cryin' out loud! W(hy)TF bother putting "SPOILER" there if your'e gonna put the info right after it IN THE THREAD TITLE?!


----------



## majura (Apr 21, 2007)

tri-ac said:


> isn't the point of writing "spoiler" in the title so that you can preserve the actual spoiler for the thread itself?]


This calls for a pic...


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*thats right*



tri-ac said:


> isn't the point of writing "spoiler" in the title so that you can preserve the actual spoiler for the thread itself?
> 
> [just giving you a hard time  anything seems game in this forum during the Tour! ]


Its all about spite, really


----------



## Kevy Metal (Sep 30, 2008)

Please allow me to pile on: Why follow "SPOILER" in the title with the spoiler itself? Not good.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*good point*



Kevy Metal said:


> Please allow me to pile on: Why follow "SPOILER" in the title with the spoiler itself? Not good.


Man oh man, its really all about rage or here is another slick idea:

As the forum actually has a descriptor that states there are spoilers in it, would it not be redundant to even have spoiler in the title, much less announcing, its a spoiler at all?

Better yet, how about just not coming to the forum at all, yell at people not to speak of the TDF at all, and run home with your ears plugged and eyes to the ground.

I know that all radio, TV and internet broadcasts will cease in this honored moment.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*well*



JChasse said:


> oh for cryin' out loud! W(hy)TF bother putting "SPOILER" there if your'e gonna put the info right after it IN THE THREAD TITLE?!


WELL HTFU AND DONT COME IN A FORUM THAT STATES SPOLIERS ARE POSTED!


----------



## Kevy Metal (Sep 30, 2008)

What rage? What yelling at people to not speak of the TdF?

Yes there are spoilers in the forum, but they should not be included in the title of the thread. When I read "spoiler" in the title, I have a choice to find out what it is or simply avoid reading the thread. But when you put the spoiler in the title itself you have defeated the purpose of the courtesy of the spoiler alert. That is all we are saying here.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*I understand*



Kevy Metal said:


> What rage? What yelling at people to not speak of the TdF?
> 
> Yes there are spoilers in the forum, but they should not be included in the title of the thread. When I read "spoiler" in the title, I have a choice to find out what it is or simply avoid reading the thread. But when you put the spoiler in the title itself you have defeated the purpose of the courtesy of the spoiler alert. That is all we are saying here.


oh, ok..........I know what I need to do now


----------



## saird (Aug 19, 2008)

Pro Cycling - Tour de France Discussion (282 Viewing)
*Note: Race results (spoilers) are always allowed in this forum*

S'all good.


----------



## Becky (Jun 15, 2004)

ttug said:


> As the forum actually has a descriptor that states there are spoilers in it, would it not be redundant to even have spoiler in the title, much less announcing, its a spoiler at all?
> 
> Better yet, how about just not coming to the forum at all, yell at people not to speak of the TDF at all, and run home with your ears plugged and eyes to the ground.


Some of us click "new posts" to read the forums, rather than browsing individual sub-forums. Therefore, any spoiler posted in the farkin' thread title is there to see without warning. :idea:


----------



## litespeedchick (Sep 9, 2003)

apparently for people who read really slowly


----------



## JChasse (Sep 16, 2005)

Becky said:


> Some of us click "new posts" to read the forums, rather than browsing individual sub-forums. Therefore, any spoiler posted in the farkin' thread title is there to see without warning. :idea:


precisely. someone needs to spend a night at a Holiday Inn Express. and get some anger management help.


----------



## danl1 (Jul 23, 2005)

Becky said:


> Some of us click "new posts" to read the forums, rather than browsing individual sub-forums. Therefore, any spoiler posted in the farkin' thread title is there to see without warning. :idea:


And not for nuthin', but a lot of folks do that and respond, without bothering to read the rest of the thread... also not good. 

I'm a big fan of personal responsibility. If an action yields an undesired outcome, the best choice is usually to change the behavior, rather than screaming at the rain. But that's apparently just me.

But I've long since shown my oddness by not caring a whit about spoilers. For example, on Sunday, I watched the race, then went for a ride. Watched again while I was doing chores. Watched it again while visiting someone over dinner. It turns out that Fedrigo won it each time. I may be going out on a limb here, but I'm willing to bet that if I hadn't seen it the first two times, he still would have won at the dinner hour.

And BTW, Snape Kills Dumbledore. hth.


----------



## bigmig19 (Jun 27, 2008)

Is it really that compli-effing-cated???? Spoiler in title, INFO in the thread.... genius! I like to come to pro cycing while at work sometimes and not worry about some goof spelling out the results of that days stage. Now I know who won you turd. Procycling should be safe place to visit for those who like it but dont want their evening spoiled.


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

*TCS=Town Crier Syndrome*



Becky said:


> Some of us click "new posts" to read the forums, rather than browsing individual sub-forums. Therefore, any spoiler posted in the farkin' thread title is there to see without warning. :idea:


Why should we make the compulsive spoilers go out of their way to not be spoilers? It's a behavorial tick they can't overcome. They simply don't have the self control to NOT scream the result in the thread title. Without the stage result ejaculated in a thread title, we'd never have access to information disclosing who won. Who are we do deny them the glory of being the first human to bring this news to North America?
As a community, it's much easier to ask everybody else to avoid the forum altogether than it is to ask one person to exercise some consideration. 
Seriously though, if you avoid the forum till you have enjoyed the race at your convenience, you don't get burned by someone elses compulsion. And the band of people who watched it live can enjoy reading a screaming thread title proclaiming what they already know.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

JChasse said:


> oh for cryin' out loud! W(hy)TF bother putting "SPOILER" there if your'e gonna put the info right after it IN THE THREAD TITLE?!



"Pro Cycling - Tour de France Discussion" = Spoiler. Avert your eyes.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

Becky said:


> Some of us click "new posts" to read the forums, rather than browsing individual sub-forums. Therefore, any spoiler posted in the farkin' thread title is there to see without warning. :idea:



And yet even though you know this you just keep on doing it.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

bigmig19 said:


> Is it really that compli-effing-cated???? Spoiler in title, INFO in the thread.... genius! I like to come to pro cycing while at work sometimes and not worry about some goof spelling out the results of that days stage. Now I know who won you turd. Procycling should be safe place to visit for those who like it but dont want their evening spoiled.



"Pro Cycling - Tour de France Discussion" = Spoiler. Get over it.


----------



## Maximus_XXIV (Nov 10, 2008)

litespeedchick said:


> apparently for people who read really slowly


The most hilarious thing I have read all week!


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*oh my gosh*



bigmig19 said:


> Is it really that compli-effing-cated???? Spoiler in title, INFO in the thread.... genius! I like to come to pro cycing while at work sometimes and not worry about some goof spelling out the results of that days stage. Now I know who won you turd. Procycling should be safe place to visit for those who like it but dont want their evening spoiled.


OK, lets try this out, for one final time, here we go:

We have a forum where in the descriptor, a warning is clearly posted stating that spoilers will be posted and present. SO.......there you go.

Thus, by the ability of reading and comprehension, one now knows, hey, I bet there are spoilers in this forum. Well well well. As to the less than pleasant nomens assigned to folks who GASP, put the spoiler info in the title. MEA CULPA. Its not at all in the least a violation of the forum guidelines.

HOWEVER, the less than pleasant way of telling a person, gee, I do not want you to post spoiler info, in a forum with spoilers being described as a set of info in same said forum is not the most clever thintg to do. Its not stupid, its just impaired. Its supposed to be fun, and yet another shocker: folks like the sport and as the thread is about the sport, and the thread is a spoiler, and the forum has a spoiler warning, I just do not get what you have an issue with. 

SO, the only solution is the problem is to dig your head out of your rectum, get over it and move on.


----------



## Guest (Jul 16, 2009)

ttug said:


> OK, lets try this out, for one final time, here we go:
> 
> We have a forum where in the descriptor, a warning is clearly posted stating that spoilers will be posted and present. SO.......there you go.
> 
> ...


No,

The solution is for you not to be a selfish jacktard.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*pardon*



Jesse D Smith said:


> Why should we make the compulsive spoilers go out of their way to not be spoilers? It's a behavorial tick they can't overcome. They simply don't have the self control to NOT scream the result in the thread title. Without the stage result ejaculated in a thread title, we'd never have access to information disclosing who won. Who are we do deny them the glory of being the first human to bring this news to North America?
> As a community, it's much easier to ask everybody else to avoid the forum altogether than it is to ask one person to exercise some consideration.
> Seriously though, if you avoid the forum till you have enjoyed the race at your convenience, you don't get burned by someone elses compulsion. And the band of people who watched it live can enjoy reading a screaming thread title proclaiming what they already know.



Speaking of personality ticks, if you have to use the word ejaculated to describe a spoiler.....odds are, thats precidely what you need to do more of...Just sayin......


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*oh, I get it*



toomanybikes said:


> No,
> 
> The solution is for you not to be a selfish jacktard.


No, you see the solution is easier...stop being a jaded POS who drains the fun out of the freaking sport and move on.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*Visual aids*

As we have folks who cant or will not read, here is a visual aid concerning the spoiler aspect of this forum.


----------



## Guest (Jul 16, 2009)

Most people can read that.

Most people are also considerate enough to actually think about, and care about what other people think and don't deliberately try to destroy it for them.

But that's most people.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*excuse me*



toomanybikes said:


> Most people can read that.
> 
> Most people are also considerate enough to actually think about, and care about what other people think and don't deliberately try to destroy it for them.
> 
> But that's most people.



Destroy?

I think thats a tad harsh dont you? Look, if yhou think that this involves a destruction of some sort, or, a life changer is indeed on the horizon, because you are reading a spoiler in a forum where spoilers are allowed, I cant help you out.

Tell you what, I just will drop the word spoiler, how about that?


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

toomanybikes said:


> No,
> 
> The solution is for you not to be a selfish jacktard.



That was a bit much.


----------



## bigmig19 (Jun 27, 2008)

ttug said:


> Destroy?
> 
> I think thats a tad harsh dont you? Look, if yhou think that this involves a destruction of some sort, or, a life changer is indeed on the horizon, because you are reading a spoiler in a forum where spoilers are allowed, I cant help you out.
> 
> Tell you what, I just will drop the word spoiler, how about that?


So you have at least acknowledged you are "impaired", right? I cant really tell from your ramblings though. While spoilers are "allowed", its common decency and sense to just not blurt out the winner in your title when its completely unnecessary! 
Here's the thing, almost everyone gets it but you! Ive been checking in on ProCycling at least every other day for 2 years and rarely does some idiot post the winner as a spoiler *even though *it is technically allowed. This is just a courtesy people use around the Tour (at least). Just not you. Thanks to idiots like you, ill probably have to check out for a month. Not exactly what the moderators were looking for I would think.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

toomanybikes said:


> Most people can read that.
> 
> Most people are also considerate enough to actually think about, and care about what other people think and don't deliberately try to destroy it for them.
> 
> But that's most people.



Good grief... get over it. You picked a battle that you're holding onto like a farking pit bull (Watch out for Fixed) with a bone in it's jaws. You can argue your ridiculous point from now until the Tour is over but your argument nonetheless ridiculous. Pro Cycling - Tour de France Discussion is designated open to spoilers... so either take it up with the mods or Gregg if you must otherwise end of story... get over it!


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

bigmig19 said:


> So you have at least acknowledged you are "impaired", right? I cant really tell from your ramblings though. While spoilers are "allowed", its common decency and sense to just not blurt out the winner in your title when its completely unnecessary!
> Here's the thing, almost everyone gets it but you! Ive been checking in on ProCycling at least every other day for 2 years and rarely does some idiot post the winner as a spoiler *even though *it is technically allowed. This is just a courtesy people use around the Tour (at least). Just not you. Thanks to idiots like you, ill probably have to check out for a month. Not exactly what the moderators were looking for I would think.



You're getting awfully close to the personal line with this. 

Here's a fair question for you. Are you incapable of understanding what* "Pro Cycling - Tour de France Discussion - Note: Race results (spoilers) are always allowed in this forum"* means?

What is "always allowed" is always allowed, there's nothing "technical" about it. 

Keep it up and I just might personally see to it that there's a spoiler posted here within seconds of every stage ends for the rest of the Tour.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*Thank God*



bigmig19 said:


> So you have at least acknowledged you are "impaired", right? I cant really tell from your ramblings though. While spoilers are "allowed", its common decency and sense to just not blurt out the winner in your title when its completely unnecessary!
> Here's the thing, almost everyone gets it but you! Ive been checking in on ProCycling at least every other day for 2 years and rarely does some idiot post the winner as a spoiler *even though *it is technically allowed. This is just a courtesy people use around the Tour (at least). Just not you. Thanks to idiots like you, ill probably have to check out for a month. Not exactly what the moderators were looking for I would think.


So, my feelings are supposed to be hurt because I posted a spoiler where spoilers are allowed AND OF COURSE endure your "consternation" because you cant follow forum rules and guidelines by simply READING that spoilers are *ALWAYS ALLOWED* 

But foolishly, I must be wrong to have read and understood that spoilers are *ALWAYS ALLOWED* except for folks who do not like spoilers. I do not see that in the forum descriptor. Do you YES or NO see this written in this forum descriptor?

I dont, so get over it


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*Oh yeah*



rocco said:


> You're getting awfully close to the personal line with this.
> 
> Here's a fair question for you. Are you incapable of understanding what* "Pro Cycling - Tour de France Discussion - Note: Race results (spoilers) are always allowed in this forum"* means?
> 
> ...


Thats PRECISELY what I will do


----------



## JSR (Feb 27, 2006)

ttug said:


> Thats PRECISELY what I will do


Ohfercryinoutloud, Francis. Lighten it up a bit.

JSR


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

JSR said:


> Ohfercryinoutloud, Francis. Lighten it up a bit.
> 
> JSR



Now THAT is ironic. Gawd love the annual Tour crowd.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*how ironic*



rocco said:


> Now THAT is ironic. Gawd love the annual Tour crowd.


I am told to "lighten up" because, I followed forum content rules and was repeatedly insulted because folks are too lazy to not come to forum where spoilers are allowed to be posted.........................AND these are folks who basically do not even follow the sport except for once a year, AND possibly beuase ONLY Lance is there.

Me? I have brits who are neighbors and they are delighted about Cavendish and we chat daily about british cycling etc etc 

WOW


----------



## Kevy Metal (Sep 30, 2008)

ttug, rocco, and others, I don't see any one disagreeing with you about spoilers being allowed in this forum. At least I am not. It does clearly state in the forum description that there will be spoilers. The point I and others are getting at is to keep the spoiler within the thread and not in the title of the thread. This way people can come to the forum and pick and choose which thread they want to read without revealing any results information they don't want to know. It's just common courtesy and how it is done in every forum I have visited. 

For example you titled this thread: "SPOILER! Cavendish ties the British stage win record". What we are asking of you, and the rest of the Road Bike Review users, so that we can avoid this spoiler and still enjoy scanning through the posts of this forum is to title your thread something more like: "SPOILER: Stage 11 results" or "SPOILER: Green Jersey". A title that is usually simple, not revealing any sort of results but alerting us to the fact there is spoiler info in the thread. Then in the thread you can write whatever you want about Cavendish's exploits and history making efforts in the Tour. If any one enters the thread and has a problem with it they had been warned with the "SPOILER" alert in the title.

Yes there ARE spoilers in the Pro Cycling forum, and they ARE allowed, but one has a responsibility to others to use discretion in how those spoilers are revealed. It's simply an act of courtesy to others. Please don't feel any one is telling you you can't post any spoilers in this forum. We just ask you do so with caution.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*see, thats what I mean*



Kevy Metal said:


> ttug, rocco, and others, I don't see any one disagreeing with you about spoilers being allowed in this forum. At least I am not. It does clearly state in the forum description that there will be spoilers. The point I and others are getting at is to keep the spoiler within the thread and not in the title of the thread. This way people can come to the forum and pick and choose which thread they want to read without revealing any results information they don't want to know. It's just common courtesy and how it is done in every forum I have visited.
> 
> For example you titled this thread: "SPOILER! Cavendish ties the British stage win record". What we are asking of you, and the rest of the Road Bike Review users, so that we can avoid this spoiler and still enjoy scanning through the posts of this forum is to title your thread something more like: "SPOILER: Stage 11 results" or "SPOILER: Green Jersey". A title that is usually simple, not revealing any sort of results but alerting us to the fact there is spoiler info in the thread. Then in the thread you can write whatever you want about Cavendish's exploits and history making efforts in the Tour. If any one enters the thread and has a problem with it they had been warned with the "SPOILER" alert in the title.
> 
> Yes there ARE spoilers in the Pro Cycling forum, and they ARE allowed, but one has a responsibility to others to use discretion in how those spoilers are revealed. It's simply an act of courtesy to others. Please don't feel any one is telling you you can't post any spoilers in this forum. We just ask you do so with caution.


BECAUSE, you get it, BECAUSE, you are polite about it, iwill certainly take heed of thisd well thought request .

I very much appreciate your kindness, I very much appreciate the polite way you have requested it and as such, I will do this.

HOWEVER, if I in this TDF future am again approached in a rude manner, by the TDF migration, about a perfectly allowed post, I will not honor our agreement.

IF you or another person had so nicely requested this, we would not even be typing. Thank you again


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

ttug said:


> BECAUSE, you get it, BECAUSE, you are polite about it, iwill certainly take heed of thisd well thought request .
> 
> I very much appreciate your kindness, I very much appreciate the polite way you have requested it and as such, I will do this.
> 
> ...



I think what Coolhand said is reasonable: http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showpost.php?p=2268696&postcount=1

Perhaps it should be a sticky.


----------



## Kevy Metal (Sep 30, 2008)

BTW, what Cavendish can do on a bicycle is jaw droppingly awsome. Isn't it?


----------



## tarwheel2 (Jul 7, 2005)

The best solution -- if you don't want to see spoilers, stay out of the Pro Racing/TDF forum. That seems pretty simple to me.

Apparently the non-spoiler types want everyone else to discuss yesterday's news (or in some cases news that several days old) just so they can watch it on TV unsullied by the outcome. I repeat, the solution is simple. Just stay away from this forum.


----------



## PJay (May 28, 2004)

*spoiler: cavendish wins tomorrow.*

spoiler: cavendish wins tomorrow.
ok there i have done it.


----------



## Kevy Metal (Sep 30, 2008)

PJay said:


> spoiler: cavendish wins tomorrow.
> ok there i have done it.


Being tomorrow's stage is not well suited for Cav with a cat. 1 and couple of cat. 2 climbs I'm not so sure I agree with you. But we'll see.


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

rocco said:


> I think what Coolhand said is reasonable: http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showpost.php?p=2268696&postcount=1
> 
> Perhaps it should be a sticky.


Please don't use the "R" word.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

Jesse D Smith said:


> Please don't use the "R" word.



Reasonable?


----------



## RkFast (Dec 11, 2004)

rocco said:


> You're getting awfully close to the personal line with this.
> 
> Here's a fair question for you. Are you incapable of understanding what* "Pro Cycling - Tour de France Discussion - Note: Race results (spoilers) are always allowed in this forum"* means?
> 
> ...


Spoilers are "always allowed." 

Im ALSO "always allowed" to cut people off on the Freeway, not take my pulls on my club rides, and take the last piece of chicken out of the buffet pan when I KNOW five other people behind me in line didnt eat. 

Im "allowed" to do a lot of things that might not get me banned from an internet forum or a ticket from a cop, or thorwn out of a party, but doing those things still makes me an inconsiderate buffoon.

Its called "courtesy."


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*thats it*



RkFast said:


> Spoilers are "always allowed."
> 
> Im ALSO "always allowed" to cut people off on the Freeway, not take my pulls on my club rides, and take the last piece of chicken out of the buffet pan when I KNOW five other people behind me in line didnt eat.
> 
> ...


Look, you have PM'd me twice, both PMs were about how tough you are and how I need to go *&% myself.

I hate stalkers, they are cowards. Get a life and move on. I have already reported you to the mod. Leave me alone, and this is my nice request. The ONLY ONE you will get. OK?


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*thats enough*



RkFast said:


> Spoilers are "always allowed."
> 
> Im ALSO "always allowed" to cut people off on the Freeway, not take my pulls on my club rides, and take the last piece of chicken out of the buffet pan when I KNOW five other people behind me in line didnt eat.
> 
> ...



I was politely asked by a forum member to not do so, I have foloowed the polite request. As you were rude, and have PMd me twice and have now stalked me, lets just say, thats not polite.


----------



## fontarin (Mar 28, 2009)

Yes, spoilers are allowed in the forum. However, when you put them in the topic, I can see them without ever going into the Pro Cycling section, either by means of the "Latest Posts" options on the main page (which doesn't state anything about possibly having spoilers in it), or by scrolling through the main forum view and seeing the thread title there.

It isn't a big deal for me, as I generally try to avoid the site until after I've watched the race anyway, but I wanted to point out that you can see the posts where there's nothing about spoilers being allowed.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*ok, lets be clear*



fontarin said:


> Yes, spoilers are allowed in the forum. However, when you put them in the topic, I can see them without ever going into the Pro Cycling section, either by means of the "Latest Posts" options on the main page (which doesn't state anything about possibly having spoilers in it), or by scrolling through the main forum view and seeing the thread title there.
> 
> It isn't a big deal for me, as I generally try to avoid the site until after I've watched the race anyway, but I wanted to point out that you can see the posts where there's nothing about spoilers being allowed.


I agreed as a matter of politemess of courtesy from a request to stop discussing the topic.

SO, to be clear leave the the f*&k alone on this topic. Enough is enough.

The forum descriptor states spoilers are allowed.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

RkFast said:


> Spoilers are "always allowed."
> 
> Im ALSO "always allowed" to cut people off on the Freeway, not take my pulls on my club rides, and take the last piece of chicken out of the buffet pan when I KNOW five other people behind me in line didnt eat.
> 
> ...



Your examples are ridiculous. I think this has been done to death... In fact I think it's been resolved... Go read what the mo, Coolhand had to say about it... it was quite reasonable. However, if you want to keep going down this path then have at it but don't be surprised if you don't like what you get in return.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

ttug said:


> I was politely asked by a forum member to not do so, I have foloowed the polite request. As you were rude, and have PMd me twice and have now stalked me, lets just say, thats not polite.



Apparently he or she is a little slow on the uptake. I guess that might be why it says "Not Fast. Not even close." under the name.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*I guess so*



rocco said:


> Apparently he or she is a little slow on the uptake. I guess that might be why it says "Not Fast. Not even close." under the name.


I can see a thread reply, but 2 PM's and then following in the thread.

I have already told the mod, but this is freaking weird man. I bet he has looked at my profile and wants to try and SPAM me as well. The TDF brings out the freaks for sure.


----------



## RkFast (Dec 11, 2004)

> However, if you want to keep going down this path then have at it but don't be surprised if you don't like what you get in return.


Oooooooohhhh.......threats..........Im so scared.


----------



## Guest (Jul 17, 2009)

RkFast said:


> Oooooooohhhh.......threats..........Im so scared.


Anybody else reminded of high school bullies by all this??

Pathetic.


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

*Moderators note.*



rocco said:


> Your examples are ridiculous. I think this has been done to death... In fact I think it's been resolved... Go read what the mo, Coolhand had to say about it... it was quite reasonable. However, if you want to keep going down this path then have at it but don't be surprised if you don't like what you get in return.


Indeed. RkFast enjoy your posting vacation.


----------



## foofighter (Dec 19, 2008)

what's this i hear that cav was disqualified on today's sprint


----------

