Re: Mountain Bikers Really HATE Hearing the Truth! - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

11-20-2006, 08:38 AM

On Sun, 19 Nov 2006 11:43:07 GMT, "Andy H" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].com>
wrote:

>
>"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].. .
>> Careful! Mountain bikers really HATE hearing the truth....
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>> From: Linda <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
>> Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 07:31:57 -0800
>> Subject: Re: Harvey Manning/Trainers
>>
>> I find it counterproductive that some members here seem to participate
>> in
>> the very "attitude poisoning" you're talking about in regards to the
>> hikers
>> and wilderness preservationists. To me, spewing such nastiness makes
>> me
>> leery of joining any advocacy efforts if those are the attitudes of
>> the primary representatives.
>>
>> On 11/16/06, art bbtc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>>
>>> >>Yeah the guy was gunning for mt bikers but give him the credit he is
>>> due. From everything I've heard and read in the past he IS the reason
>>> why there is a Cougar Mt (and Squak)<<
>>>
>>> Yes, Harvey accomplished a lot in regards to preservation and trails
>>> and I'll give him some credit for that. But, think how much more he
>>> could have accomplished if instead of alienating other user groups
>>> with his selfish and hateful agenda he had sought to work together.
>>>
>>> We (BBTC) spent the 80's trying to stem the loss of trail access; we
>>> spent the 90's trying to stay even and rebuild our image; we've spent
>>> most of this decade struggling to build new trail.
>>>
>>> What if Harvey had acknowledged that this new user group was just as
>>> passionate as he to preserve nature and given us a hand up rather than
>>> demonizing us with his endless vitriolic diatribes?
>>>
>>> How much more could user groups have worked together without his
>>> attitude poisoning the spirit of cooperation? How many more encounters
>>> on the trails would have been pleasant interactions instead of a
>>> scowl? And how many more trails would be enabling the next generation
>>> of mountain bikers to develop a love for our mountains and trees and a
>>> passion to preserve that experience.
>>>
>>> Yes Harvey accomplished a lot, but when a full accounting is made he
>>> comes up way short.
>>>
>>> -Art
>> ===
>> I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
>> humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
>> years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
>>
>> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are
>> fond of!
>>
>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>
>Linda seems to be talking about YOU.
>
>"attitude poisoning" - Check
>"spewing nastiness" - Check
>
>IT IS you she's talking about. Foot, shot I think.

BS. I just tell the truth. That's neither positive nor negative. It
just IS.
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

11-20-2006, 09:50 AM

"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> On Sun, 19 Nov 2006 11:43:07 GMT, "Andy H" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]. ..
>>> Careful! Mountain bikers really HATE hearing the truth....
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Linda <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
>>> Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 07:31:57 -0800
>>> Subject: Re: Harvey Manning/Trainers
>>>
>>> I find it counterproductive that some members here seem to participate
>>> in
>>> the very "attitude poisoning" you're talking about in regards to the
>>> hikers
>>> and wilderness preservationists. To me, spewing such nastiness makes
>>> me
>>> leery of joining any advocacy efforts if those are the attitudes of
>>> the primary representatives.
>>>
>>> On 11/16/06, art bbtc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >>Yeah the guy was gunning for mt bikers but give him the credit he is
>>>> due. From everything I've heard and read in the past he IS the reason
>>>> why there is a Cougar Mt (and Squak)<<
>>>>
>>>> Yes, Harvey accomplished a lot in regards to preservation and trails
>>>> and I'll give him some credit for that. But, think how much more he
>>>> could have accomplished if instead of alienating other user groups
>>>> with his selfish and hateful agenda he had sought to work together.
>>>>
>>>> We (BBTC) spent the 80's trying to stem the loss of trail access; we
>>>> spent the 90's trying to stay even and rebuild our image; we've spent
>>>> most of this decade struggling to build new trail.
>>>>
>>>> What if Harvey had acknowledged that this new user group was just as
>>>> passionate as he to preserve nature and given us a hand up rather than
>>>> demonizing us with his endless vitriolic diatribes?
>>>>
>>>> How much more could user groups have worked together without his
>>>> attitude poisoning the spirit of cooperation? How many more encounters
>>>> on the trails would have been pleasant interactions instead of a
>>>> scowl? And how many more trails would be enabling the next generation
>>>> of mountain bikers to develop a love for our mountains and trees and a
>>>> passion to preserve that experience.
>>>>
>>>> Yes Harvey accomplished a lot, but when a full accounting is made he
>>>> comes up way short.
>>>>
>>>> -Art
>>> ===
>>> I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
>>> humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
>>> years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
>>>
>>> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are
>>> fond of!
>>>
>>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>>
>>Linda seems to be talking about YOU.
>>
>>"attitude poisoning" - Check
>>"spewing nastiness" - Check
>>
>>IT IS you she's talking about. Foot, shot I think.
>
> BS. I just tell the truth. That's neither positive nor negative. It
> just IS.

BS yourself, you wouldn't know the truth if it smacked you in the face,
you're so full of piss and anger it makes me wonder what happened in your
past, where you abused as a child?

You seriously need therapy for that anger projection thing you got going on,
but I feel as you fade into your later years that it's probably too late for
it to do any good.

> ===
> I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
> humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
> years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
>
> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are
> fond of!
>
> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

11-20-2006, 03:27 PM

I've already proven you to be a LIAR, which means that your statement below
is a LIE.

I see you also publish photographs illegally, like those watermarked ones on
your website. Not only do you spread lies and totally inaccurate
information, you break the law in order to do so.

You're a legend in your own mind.

"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> BS. I just tell the truth. That's neither positive nor negative. It
> just IS.

11-21-2006, 08:47 AM

On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 17:50:52 GMT, "Andy H" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].com>
wrote:

>
>"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].. .
>> On Sun, 19 Nov 2006 11:43:07 GMT, "Andy H" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>>>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] ...
>>>> Careful! Mountain bikers really HATE hearing the truth....
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Linda <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
>>>> Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 07:31:57 -0800
>>>> Subject: Re: Harvey Manning/Trainers
>>>>
>>>> I find it counterproductive that some members here seem to participate
>>>> in
>>>> the very "attitude poisoning" you're talking about in regards to the
>>>> hikers
>>>> and wilderness preservationists. To me, spewing such nastiness makes
>>>> me
>>>> leery of joining any advocacy efforts if those are the attitudes of
>>>> the primary representatives.
>>>>
>>>> On 11/16/06, art bbtc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >>Yeah the guy was gunning for mt bikers but give him the credit he is
>>>>> due. From everything I've heard and read in the past he IS the reason
>>>>> why there is a Cougar Mt (and Squak)<<
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, Harvey accomplished a lot in regards to preservation and trails
>>>>> and I'll give him some credit for that. But, think how much more he
>>>>> could have accomplished if instead of alienating other user groups
>>>>> with his selfish and hateful agenda he had sought to work together.
>>>>>
>>>>> We (BBTC) spent the 80's trying to stem the loss of trail access; we
>>>>> spent the 90's trying to stay even and rebuild our image; we've spent
>>>>> most of this decade struggling to build new trail.
>>>>>
>>>>> What if Harvey had acknowledged that this new user group was just as
>>>>> passionate as he to preserve nature and given us a hand up rather than
>>>>> demonizing us with his endless vitriolic diatribes?
>>>>>
>>>>> How much more could user groups have worked together without his
>>>>> attitude poisoning the spirit of cooperation? How many more encounters
>>>>> on the trails would have been pleasant interactions instead of a
>>>>> scowl? And how many more trails would be enabling the next generation
>>>>> of mountain bikers to develop a love for our mountains and trees and a
>>>>> passion to preserve that experience.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes Harvey accomplished a lot, but when a full accounting is made he
>>>>> comes up way short.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Art
>>>> ===
>>>> I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
>>>> humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
>>>> years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
>>>>
>>>> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are
>>>> fond of!
>>>>
>>>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>>>
>>>Linda seems to be talking about YOU.
>>>
>>>"attitude poisoning" - Check
>>>"spewing nastiness" - Check
>>>
>>>IT IS you she's talking about. Foot, shot I think.
>>
>> BS. I just tell the truth. That's neither positive nor negative. It
>> just IS.
>
>BS yourself, you wouldn't know the truth if it smacked you in the face,
>you're so full of piss and anger it makes me wonder what happened in your
>past, where you abused as a child?
>
>You seriously need therapy for that anger projection thing you got going on,
>but I feel as you fade into your later years that it's probably too late for
>it to do any good.

Anger is the only appropriate response to the destruction of the
environment.

>> ===
>> I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
>> humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
>> years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
>>
>> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are
>> fond of!
>>
>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

11-21-2006, 08:49 AM

On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 23:27:35 GMT, "Roberto Baggio"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>I've already proven you to be a LIAR, which means that your statement below
>is a LIE.
>
>I see you also publish photographs illegally, like those watermarked ones on
>your website.

That's a LIE. Look up "fair use" under copyright law. I have a right
to post copyrighted material in order to expose unlawful abuses of the
environment. So does everyone. You just don't want your abuses made
public! TOUGH!

Not only do you spread lies and totally inaccurate
>information, you break the law in order to do so.
>
>You're a legend in your own mind.
>
>
>"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].. .
>> BS. I just tell the truth. That's neither positive nor negative. It
>> just IS.
>
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

11-21-2006, 04:17 PM

"The distinction between "fair use" and infringement may be unclear and not
easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that
may safely be taken without permission.
Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for
obtaining permission.
Copyright protects the particular way an author has expressed himself; it
does not extend to any ideas, systems, or factual information conveyed in
the work.
The safest course is always to get permission from the copyright owner
before using copyrighted material."

Don't skirt these questions:
- did you ask for permission to use the copyrighted material?
- has the owner asked you to remove the material, and have you complied?

By the way, what is depicted is NOT unlawful; your argument for the use of
the copyrighted material is invalid.

"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 23:27:35 GMT, "Roberto Baggio"
> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>
>>I've already proven you to be a LIAR, which means that your statement
>>below
>>is a LIE.
>>
>>I see you also publish photographs illegally, like those watermarked ones
>>on
>>your website.
>
> That's a LIE. Look up "fair use" under copyright law. I have a right
> to post copyrighted material in order to expose unlawful abuses of the
> environment. So does everyone. You just don't want your abuses made
> public! TOUGH!
>
> Not only do you spread lies and totally inaccurate
>>information, you break the law in order to do so.
>>
>>You're a legend in your own mind.
>>
>>
>>"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]. ..
>>> BS. I just tell the truth. That's neither positive nor negative. It
>>> just IS.
>>
> ===
> I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
> humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
> years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
>
> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are
> fond of!
>
> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

11-22-2006, 07:43 AM

"Andy H" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].com> wrote in message news:0Wl8h.23425$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].net...
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All of Mikey's useless drivel snipped...<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> BS yourself, you wouldn't know the truth if it smacked you in the face,
> you're so full of piss and anger it makes me wonder what happened in your
> past, where you abused as a child?

He's not full of anger Andy, he's playing you for a reaction like a kid poking a bug.
He doesn't give a crap for the environment or wildlife or he would be directing his
considerable efforts in a direction where they might actually accomplish something.
Instead he gets his jollys from annoying and namecalling.
As you've seen a reasoned response, logical, annotated, factual is a waste of time.
He's like a child making prank calls when Mommy and Daddy aren't home.
He's only interested in getting a response so he can start calling names.

>
> You seriously need therapy for that anger projection thing you got going on,
> but I feel as you fade into your later years that it's probably too late for
> it to do any good.
>

He loses when his posts get ZERO response and sit alone and ignored between other threads.
That's the only way to defeat a troll. Like Tinkerbelle, when no one believes in him anymore
he will wither and die.

If you must repond to him, please delete his stupid diatribe. It's criminal to consider
how many servers are necessary for Google to preserve his nonsense because people
duplicate his entire post to respond.

11-22-2006, 08:32 AM

On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 00:17:10 GMT, "Roberto Baggio"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>"The distinction between "fair use" and infringement may be unclear and not
>easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that
>may safely be taken without permission.
>Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for
>obtaining permission.
>Copyright protects the particular way an author has expressed himself; it
>does not extend to any ideas, systems, or factual information conveyed in
>the work.
>The safest course is always to get permission from the copyright owner
>before using copyrighted material."
>
>
>Don't skirt these questions:
>- did you ask for permission to use the copyrighted material?

I don't know if it's copyrighted. Fair use gives me the right to use
it.

>- has the owner asked you to remove the material, and have you complied?

I have no idea who the owner is, nor do you.

>By the way, what is depicted is NOT unlawful; your argument for the use of
>the copyrighted material is invalid.
>
>
>"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].. .
>> On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 23:27:35 GMT, "Roberto Baggio"
>> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>
>>>I've already proven you to be a LIAR, which means that your statement
>>>below
>>>is a LIE.
>>>
>>>I see you also publish photographs illegally, like those watermarked ones
>>>on
>>>your website.
>>
>> That's a LIE. Look up "fair use" under copyright law. I have a right
>> to post copyrighted material in order to expose unlawful abuses of the
>> environment. So does everyone. You just don't want your abuses made
>> public! TOUGH!
>>
>> Not only do you spread lies and totally inaccurate
>>>information, you break the law in order to do so.
>>>
>>>You're a legend in your own mind.
>>>
>>>
>>>"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>>>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] ...
>>>> BS. I just tell the truth. That's neither positive nor negative. It
>>>> just IS.
>>>
>> ===
>> I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
>> humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
>> years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
>>
>> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are
>> fond of!
>>
>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

11-22-2006, 11:09 PM

On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 15:43:29 GMT, "JP" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>
>
>
>"Andy H" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].com> wrote in message news:0Wl8h.23425$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].net...
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All of Mikey's useless drivel snipped...<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>> BS yourself, you wouldn't know the truth if it smacked you in the face,
>> you're so full of piss and anger it makes me wonder what happened in your
>> past, where you abused as a child?
>
>He's not full of anger Andy, he's playing you for a reaction like a kid poking a bug.
>He doesn't give a crap for the environment or wildlife or he would be directing his
>considerable efforts in a direction where they might actually accomplish something.
>Instead he gets his jollys from annoying and namecalling.
>As you've seen a reasoned response, logical, annotated, factual is a waste of time.
>He's like a child making prank calls when Mommy and Daddy aren't home.
>He's only interested in getting a response so he can start calling names.
>
>>
>> You seriously need therapy for that anger projection thing you got going on,
>> but I feel as you fade into your later years that it's probably too late for
>> it to do any good.
>>
>
>
>He loses when his posts get ZERO response

BS. I don't care if they get a response or not! Either way, I win,
because you guys can't refute what I say.

and sit alone and ignored between other threads.
>That's the only way to defeat a troll. Like Tinkerbelle, when no one believes in him anymore
>he will wither and die.
>
>If you must repond to him, please delete his stupid diatribe. It's criminal to consider
>how many servers are necessary for Google to preserve his nonsense because people
>duplicate his entire post to respond.
>
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

11-22-2006, 11:49 PM

Once again, you are lying, and more than once. Do you ever quit?

> I don't know if it's copyrighted. Fair use gives me the right to use
> it.

You do not know if is copyrighted? Talk about a blatant lie.

You yourself said look up the "fair use", yet it is obvious that you have
not done so.

It IS copyrighted because that is what the law states. Read the law of your
land. Not the law that you make up in your head, but the law that everyone
else in your country follows.

Where did you get the material? Did you take the photographs? If you
didn't, then you have to consider that using the photos could be infringing
on someone else's rights.

How about the watermarks on the photos. Doesn't that give you even the
slightest clue that the photographs are copyrighted?

> I have no idea who the owner is, nor do you.

Again, another lie. I looked it up, and found it right where you stole the
photographs from:
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Read post #103. This is the opinion of a lawyer (LeeLau).

Read post #105. The person who took one or more of the photos (thebigchin).
He clearly states that he e-mailed you.

Read post #108: thebigchin posts the response you sent to him.

Read post #114: thebigchin states that he has e-mailed the ISP that is
hosting your site.

Looks like you might get a chance to show a judge how well you lie.

"Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news

qu8m2l3d37mfk06fk9f65al3d1ja1gj5b@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 00:17:10 GMT, "Roberto Baggio"
> <baggio94@telus.net> wrote:
>
>>"The distinction between "fair use" and infringement may be unclear and
>>not
>>easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that
>>may safely be taken without permission.
>>Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute
>>for
>>obtaining permission.
>>Copyright protects the particular way an author has expressed himself; it
>>does not extend to any ideas, systems, or factual information conveyed in
>>the work.
>>The safest course is always to get permission from the copyright owner
>>before using copyrighted material."
>>
>>
>>Don't skirt these questions:
>>- did you ask for permission to use the copyrighted material?
>
> I don't know if it's copyrighted. Fair use gives me the right to use
> it.
>
>>- has the owner asked you to remove the material, and have you complied?
>
> I have no idea who the owner is, nor do you.
>
>>By the way, what is depicted is NOT unlawful; your argument for the use of
>>the copyrighted material is invalid.
>>
>>
>>"Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message
>>news:ndb6m2d6m7e7j73f726u3mhcu49adrncus@4ax.com. ..
>>> On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 23:27:35 GMT, "Roberto Baggio"
>>> <baggio94@telus.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I've already proven you to be a LIAR, which means that your statement
>>>>below
>>>>is a LIE.
>>>>
>>>>I see you also publish photographs illegally, like those watermarked
>>>>ones
>>>>on
>>>>your website.
>>>
>>> That's a LIE. Look up "fair use" under copyright law. I have a right
>>> to post copyrighted material in order to expose unlawful abuses of the
>>> environment. So does everyone. You just don't want your abuses made
>>> public! TOUGH!
>>>
>>> Not only do you spread lies and totally inaccurate
>>>>information, you break the law in order to do so.
>>>>
>>>>You're a legend in your own mind.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:jem3m2dfg200a1mgdabtfkkh3tkkmkui08@4ax.co m...
>>>>> BS. I just tell the truth. That's neither positive nor negative. It
>>>>> just IS.
>>>>
>>> ===
>>> I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
>>> humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
>>> years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
>>>
>>> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are
>>> fond of!
>>>
>>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>>
> ===
> I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
> humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
> years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
>
> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are
> fond of!
>
> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]