The value of deadlifts

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:51:44 GMT, "JC Der Koenig"
<jcderkoenig RemoveThis @ibm.com> wrote:

>"Charles" <charles RemoveThis @msn.com> wrote in message
>news:ein521tur8jkbiflgii8sqi6dac2vgk8ga@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 19:57:42 -0600, elzinator
>> <callofthewest RemoveThis @nospam.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 20:47:42 GMT, JC Der Koenig wrote:
>>>>"John Hanson" <jhanson RemoveThis @northernlinks.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:eob42198sh2omvpn4hmk3k5nes4cp9a9op@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 15:15:04 GMT, "JC Der Koenig"
>>>>> <jcderkoenig RemoveThis @ibm.com> wrote in misc.fitness.weights:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Hobbes" <khobman RemoveThis @sasktel.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:khobman-2702050836370001@192.168.1.100...
>>>>>>> In article <IDkUd.67758$tl3.42581@attbi_s02>, "Steve McDevitt"
>>>>>>> <jorant RemoveThis @insightbb.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Charles" <charles RemoveThis @msn.com> wrote in message > Why would you want to
>>>>>>>> respond
>>>>>>>> to quite legitimate questions, even if
>>>>>>>> > you do consider them to be somewhat naive, in such a hostile and
>>>>>>>> > sarcastic way?
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > If you don't want to discuss or help, just ignore the OP. Giving
>>>>>>>> > him
>>>>>>>> > smug put-downs is very poor instructional technique and will only
>>>>>>>> > discourage people, or make them want to respond in similar manner,
>>>>>>>> > much like it did me all those years ago!!
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Don't bitch and whine again if you get it back in spades!!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's because half the people here are horrible cunts, and he's just
>>>>>>>> trying
>>>>>>>> to keep up with the rest of the pack. Sad. I'm glad he answered the
>>>>>>>> question, even though he was rude about it. So we should be thankful
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>> least that much.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He is a she. Smart, fit and attractive to boot.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Very old, bad hips, cranky, and a drug abuser to boot.
>>>>>>
>>>>> She's got a nice ass though.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Seems like she's being passed around, so maybe you'll get a shot.
>>>
>>>Dear Troll,
>>>I had two relationships with people who post or posted here. One
>>>before I even appeared on mfw, and with whom I met elsewhere.
>>>Otherwise I do not date or even entertain relationships with anyone I
>>>meet online. I prefer 'real' people.
>>>
>>>So, troll, you know absolutely nothing about me.
>>>
>>>So go bite yourself in the ass and look in the mirror.
>>
>> That one hit the target JC - nice one!! ;o)
>>
>>>
>
>One gets lucky sometimes.

Your success rate is creditably high!! ;o)
 >> Stay informed about: The value of deadlifts 

"Hobbes" <khobman800 RemoveThis @REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:khobman800-2802050811550001@localhost...
> In article <iqv3219282bf3mum4u4pnp2m91fd3jbt5j RemoveThis @4ax.com>, Charles
> <charles RemoveThis @msn.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 08:36:36 -0600, khobman RemoveThis @sasktel.net (Hobbes)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <IDkUd.67758$tl3.42581@attbi_s02>, "Steve McDevitt"
>> ><jorant RemoveThis @insightbb.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Charles" <charles RemoveThis @msn.com> wrote in message > Why would you want to
> respond
>> >> to quite legitimate questions, even if
>> >> > you do consider them to be somewhat naive, in such a hostile and
>> >> > sarcastic way?
>> >> >
>> >> > If you don't want to discuss or help, just ignore the OP. Giving him
>> >> > smug put-downs is very poor instructional technique and will only
>> >> > discourage people, or make them want to respond in similar manner,
>> >> > much like it did me all those years ago!!
>> >> >
>> >> > Don't bitch and whine again if you get it back in spades!!
>> >>
>> >> It's because half the people here are horrible cunts, and he's just
>> >> trying
>> >> to keep up with the rest of the pack. Sad. I'm glad he answered the
>> >> question, even though he was rude about it. So we should be thankful
> for at
>> >> least that much.
>> >
>> >He is a she. Smart, fit and attractive to boot.
>> >
>> >The original poster needs to do a search on muscle contractions. Find
>> >out
>> >about 'eccentric'; 'isometric' or 'static'; and 'concentric'. Just
>> >because
>> >there is no apparent muscle movement doesn't mean a msucle isn't
>> >working.
>> >Which was Elzi's point on the fairies.
>> >
>> >As for Charles - I don't see how it helps the original poster by
>> >hijacking
>> >the post with shots at the regulars.
>>
>> This "regular" gets plenty of "shots", which don't appear to be viewed
>> as "hijackings"!! ;o)
>>
>> >To quote the 'insane' Irishman on
>> >Braveheart:
>> >
>> >"Answer the fooking question!"
>>
>> Only because she's always "fooking" doing it, whines when she gets
>> similar responses, and then calls the OP's "trolls"!!
>>
>> If anything it's her doing the "trolling"!!
>>
>> England just lost to Ireland, making it three defeats in a row in the
>> Six-Nation's Championships, and their worst run for 18 years!! ;o(
>
> What's happening? How do you go from being a powerhouse to 3 in a row?

Losing several of the people that made England a powerhouse; Wilkinson plus
half the forwards.

And Jason Robinson being man-marked to pieces in every game, club as well as
country, so he doesn't have a chance to get any form.

2003 RWC final:
J Lewsey, J Robinson, W Greenwood, M Tindall, B Cohen; J Wilkinson, M
Dawson; T Woodman, S Thompson, P Vickery; M Johnson; (capt), B Kay; Richard
Hill, N Back, L Dallaglio.
Replacements: D West, J Leonard, M Corry, L Moody, K Bracken, M Catt, I
Balshaw

2005 vs Ireland:
J Robinson (capt); M Cueto, J Noon, O Barkley, J Lewsey; C Hodgson, H Ellis;
G Rowntree, S Thompson, M Stevens; D Grewcock, B Kay; J Worsley, L Moody, M
Corry.
Replacements: A Titterrell, D Bell, S Borthwick, A Hazell, M Dawson, A
Goode, O Smith.

Peter
 >> Stay informed about: The value of deadlifts 

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 08:11:55 -0600, khobman800 DeleteThis @REMOVEyahoo.com
(Hobbes) wrote:

>In article <iqv3219282bf3mum4u4pnp2m91fd3jbt5j DeleteThis @4ax.com>, Charles
><charles DeleteThis @msn.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 08:36:36 -0600, khobman DeleteThis @sasktel.net (Hobbes)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <IDkUd.67758$tl3.42581@attbi_s02>, "Steve McDevitt"
>> ><jorant DeleteThis @insightbb.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Charles" <charles DeleteThis @msn.com> wrote in message > Why would you want to
>respond
>> >> to quite legitimate questions, even if
>> >> > you do consider them to be somewhat naive, in such a hostile and
>> >> > sarcastic way?
>> >> >
>> >> > If you don't want to discuss or help, just ignore the OP. Giving him
>> >> > smug put-downs is very poor instructional technique and will only
>> >> > discourage people, or make them want to respond in similar manner,
>> >> > much like it did me all those years ago!!
>> >> >
>> >> > Don't bitch and whine again if you get it back in spades!!
>> >>
>> >> It's because half the people here are horrible cunts, and he's just trying
>> >> to keep up with the rest of the pack. Sad. I'm glad he answered the
>> >> question, even though he was rude about it. So we should be thankful
>for at
>> >> least that much.
>> >
>> >He is a she. Smart, fit and attractive to boot.
>> >
>> >The original poster needs to do a search on muscle contractions. Find out
>> >about 'eccentric'; 'isometric' or 'static'; and 'concentric'. Just because
>> >there is no apparent muscle movement doesn't mean a msucle isn't working.
>> >Which was Elzi's point on the fairies.
>> >
>> >As for Charles - I don't see how it helps the original poster by hijacking
>> >the post with shots at the regulars.
>>
>> This "regular" gets plenty of "shots", which don't appear to be viewed
>> as "hijackings"!! ;o)
>>
>> >To quote the 'insane' Irishman on
>> >Braveheart:
>> >
>> >"Answer the fooking question!"
>>
>> Only because she's always "fooking" doing it, whines when she gets
>> similar responses, and then calls the OP's "trolls"!!
>>
>> If anything it's her doing the "trolling"!!
>>
>> England just lost to Ireland, making it three defeats in a row in the
>> Six-Nation's Championships, and their worst run for 18 years!! ;o(
>
>What's happening? How do you go from being a powerhouse to 3 in a row?

We've now lost 8 from 11 so it is worse than it appears.

Unfortunately, since the heady events of Sydney on 22nd November 2003,
the England squad has been decimated by retirements and an inordinate
number of injuries.

It's no good us whining as it does no good, and the rest of the world
are enjoying England's discomfort. We just have to re-group and do it
all again!!

>
>Dayum.
>
>On a positive note, my coach and one of my best friends is being inducted
>into the Provincial hall of fame this weekend. Woot!

It's good to hear of someone getting recognition for all his selfless
input. Congratulations to him and enjoy the ceremony!! ;o)
 >> Stay informed about: The value of deadlifts 

"elzinator" wrote
>
> Charles wrote:
>
>> I don't "question" their deeper knowledge of certain aspects of
>> 'on-topic' matters, but do deeply resent their high-handed attitudes
>> sometimes, and their rudeness!!
>
> Big pot-kettle-black.
>

But an aristocratic snob troll is better somehow??

I have learned a lot of things through adverse circumstances. At no point
did I ever throw public temper tantrums that somebody did not play nice.

It is like those folks who go into a total shutdown state everytime they
hear a "dirty" word. We are supposed to change our behavior based on their
phobias and extreme fear response.

I prefer to get my info from knowledgable people. My thirst (lust?) for
knowledge transcends every little social nuance or rule that exists
throughout time and space. Because my desire to learn is AUTHENTIC!!

Not like some whiny. wimpy brit trolls.

Lee Michaels
 >> Stay informed about: The value of deadlifts 

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 09:49:39 -0500, nono.TakeThisOut@way.com (Preacher) wrote:

>Roger Zoul <rogerzoul2.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If you cared about getting information from knowledgable people and you
>> didn't want to waste their time, you'd google before asking. It's the
>> considerate thing to do.
>>
>> So if you don't wish to be considerate of others, why do you expect the
>> same?
>
>How is someone asking a question in a public forum inconsiderate? If you
>don't want to answer - if it seems like a waste of your time - don't
>answer. You could probably avoid most of the dumb questions just by
>avoiding subjects that sound dumb and posters that you don't know.

I think Roger has put his neck on the block on this one, and despite
being wrong is stubborn enough to leave it there, despite the
likelihood of the axe descending!!
 >> Stay informed about: The value of deadlifts 

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 07:16:12 -0800, "Larry Hodges"
<2larry2 DeleteThis @2maximizesoftware2.com> wrote:

>Charles wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 23:21:41 -0800, "Larry Hodges"
>> <2larry2 DeleteThis @2maximizesoftware2.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Preacher wrote:
>>>> Roger Zoul <rogerzoul2 DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> David <forgotwhy DeleteThis @yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> The people that respond in that tone and manner are basically
>>>>>> showing off to their friends. If it were just you asking the
>>>>>> question with no gallery to perform for, the reply would be honest
>>>>>> and helpful. People here have a narrow range of knowledge and
>>>>>> love to be arrogant when they get an opportunity. This was a
>>>>>> genuine question and deserves a genuine reply.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's only been asked a zillion times. Google has plenty of
>>>>> "replies".
>>>>
>>>> Well, then maybe we don't even need a newsgroup. You can just google
>>>> whatever information you need on lifting, training, nutrition, etc.
>>>> It's all on the web somewhere.
>>>>
>>>> I don't understand the offense people take at questions that have
>>>> been asked before. If you don't want to answer, you don't have to.
>>>> And if you don't want to read it, you probably can judge from the
>>>> subject that you don't want to.
>>>
>>> Good point. Many...most...people don't know how to use Google.
>>> They find this place and ask their question. I see no reason to
>>> mock them. Maybe give them a url to Google groups or something
>>> useful, but not mock them.
>>
>> Not too difficult to grasp is it Larry, so why is it we have a
>> 'culture' here where some think it's fun to mock people seeking
>> advice?
>>
>> Did you have a good weekend - if you know what I mean, nudge nudge
>> wink wink, say no more, know what I mean Squire!! ;o)
>>
>> Ugh! It's Monday!! ;o(
>
>Had a great weekend John.

Good for you, I had another abstemious one but very busy and very
pleasant.

I'm fortunate that I still have the capacity to enjoy myself, in the
absence of my own hedonistic personal consumption of booze and food,
and really enjoy helping those around me to enjoy themselves.

I manage to accrue quite a few nominated driver credits!! ;o)

>Had my two boys as usual.

That is always time well spent.

> No leg tossing
>however. That's scheduled for Thursday.

And that is all to look forward to!! ;o)
 >> Stay informed about: The value of deadlifts 

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:24:22 -0500, "Lee Michaels"
<leemichaels*nadaspam*@comcast.net> wrote:

>
>"Preacher" <nono DeleteThis @way.com> wrote in message
>news:1gsot1d.3ja6oo8d3mr3N%nono@way.com...
>> Roger Zoul <rogerzoul2 DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> If you cared about getting information from knowledgable people and you
>>> didn't want to waste their time, you'd google before asking. It's the
>>> considerate thing to do.
>>>
>>> So if you don't wish to be considerate of others, why do you expect the
>>> same?
>>
>> How is someone asking a question in a public forum inconsiderate? If you
>> don't want to answer - if it seems like a waste of your time - don't
>> answer. You could probably avoid most of the dumb questions just by
>> avoiding subjects that sound dumb and posters that you don't know.
>>
>>
>
>That sounds like you!!
>
>Perhaps you should post a disclaimer with all your posts to ignore you.

It really is time your interminable whining and "trolling" ceased Lee;
you sound like a worn out 78 you silly old bastard!!
 >> Stay informed about: The value of deadlifts 

Roger Zoul wrote:
> Charles <charles DeleteThis @msn.com> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 04:57:56 GMT, Adam Fahy <mailme DeleteThis @myobligatory.com>
>>wrote:

>>>What's your point? This is a discussion group,

>>>not your personal help desk.
>>
>>That's not what he assumed!!
>
> Sure he did. He could have googled first and then asked follow on questions
> here.

It was a silly, FAQ-like question (from the OP)--if it was even a
serious question in the first place. You don't want your nose tweaked
by people with years of experience and expertise, then read a freakin'
FAQ or at least try to ask an informed or meaningful question. Oh no!
A sarcastic comment from Elzi! Whatever.


-Adam
 >> Stay informed about: The value of deadlifts 

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 15:59:22 GMT, Adam Fahy <mailme.RemoveThis@myobligatory.com>
wrote:

>Roger Zoul wrote:
>> Charles <charles.RemoveThis@msn.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 04:57:56 GMT, Adam Fahy <mailme.RemoveThis@myobligatory.com>
>>>wrote:
>
>>>>What's your point? This is a discussion group,
>
>>>>not your personal help desk.
>>>
>>>That's not what he assumed!!
>>
>> Sure he did. He could have googled first and then asked follow on questions
>> here.
>
>It was a silly, FAQ-like question (from the OP)--if it was even a
>serious question in the first place.

Nicholas Steel's initial queries were:

"Just what muscle groups do deadlifts develop and how?

I can understand how leg development occurs since you start at a bent
leg position and straighten up.

But what about the arms and upper body? You don't actually move
anything. Your upper body and arms remain static.

Difficult to imagine how muscle development is possible."

That all sounds perfectly reasonable to me, what do you find so
objectionable Adam?!!

>You don't want your nose tweaked
>by people with years of experience and expertise, then read a freakin'
>FAQ or at least try to ask an informed or meaningful question.

How can you ask a an informed or meaningful question if you know
little or nothing about the subject. That was the object of the
enquiry, to seek answers to puzzling problems!!

>Oh no! A sarcastic comment from Elzi! Whatever.

If Elzi feels motivated to respond other than in a positive way, than
she must expect a response in similar vein. That surely is not too
difficult to grasp is it Adam?

Here's a little test for all of you. What search criteria should
Nicholas have used in Google to produce the information he wanted.

I've tried quite a few and it's not as simple as those 'know-alls'
would have us believe!!
 >> Stay informed about: The value of deadlifts 

"Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:38gh2uF5krvtvU1@individual.net...
> Charles <charles.RemoveThis@msn.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 04:57:56 GMT, Adam Fahy <mailme.RemoveThis@myobligatory.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>Preacher wrote:
> >>> Roger Zoul <rogerzoul2.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>>It's only been asked a zillion times. Google has plenty of
> >>>>"replies".
> >>
> >>> Well, then maybe we don't even need a newsgroup. You can just google
> >>> whatever information you need on lifting, training, nutrition, etc.
> >>> It's all on the web somewhere.
> >>
> >>What's your point? This is a discussion group,
> >
> > Er... that's what he assumed!!
> >
> >>not your personal help desk.
> >
> > That's not what he assumed!!
>
> Sure he did. He could have googled first and then asked follow on
questions
> here.
>
There is an imbecile who posts here - Lee Michaels - he owns the "rules" for
mfw - a puerile effort which he obviously authored. Maybe get him to enter
that in his 'charter'? i.e. the valuable time of regulars should not be
taken advantage of so all issues should be fully researched before any
questions asked?
 >> Stay informed about: The value of deadlifts 

"Larry Hodges" <2larry2.DeleteThis@2maximizesoftware2.com> wrote in message
news:b4adneY0PcZ8qb7fRVn-og@comcast.com...
> Roger Zoul wrote:
> > Preacher <nono.DeleteThis@way.com> wrote:
> >> elzinator <callofthewest.DeleteThis@nospam.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>>> I don't understand the offense people take at questions that have
> >>>> been asked before.
> >>>
> >>> Because it gets old, real old. Especially when the information
> >>> exists ad nauseum.
> >>> Reread his post and think about the question.
> >>
> >> I just reread it. His question doesn't bother me - maybe because I'm
> >> something of a newbie myself. I can imagine that if I were as
> >> knowledgeable as you and had heard the question a million times, it
> >> might be tiresome.
> >>
> >>>> If you don't want to answer, you don't have to. And if you
> >>>> don't want to read it, you probably can judge from the subject that
> >>>> you don't want to.
> >>>
> >>> Yup, I should have just deleted it and not posted a reply, but the
> >>> prevalence in lack of thinking and stupidity irritates me lately.
> >>> Especially when I have to work on a sunny Sunday and haven't had my
> >>> coffee yet.
> >>>
> >>> But then I can be a real bitch sometimes and that's how I am
> >>> sometimes. If y'all can't handle it, you can killfile me or not read
> >>> my posts. Matters not to me.
> >>>
> >>> As if I'm the only one in this group that is abrasive? Oh
> >>> please.......
> >>>
> >>> Continue to ream me out as you wish.
> >>
> >> Didn't mean to ream you out or to single you out as particularly
> >> abrasive. For that, I apologize. I want to be treated with respect,
> >> and
> >> I certainly want to extend the same courtesy to you.
> >>
> >> Ironically, I think I am impatient with the kind of impatience that
> >> is sometimes shown in the group towards the beginning lifter. I
> >> EXPECT most questions to be relatively basic to those who are more
> >> expert; newbies are full of questions, sometimes dumb, naive ones
> >> that aren't well thought out. We come to the group hoping to find
> >> someone who is knowledgeable and helpful.
> >>
> >> Of course we could google the answer or read a bunch of books. The
> >> knowledge is always available to someone who is determined enough and
> >> has some sense of where to look. But sometimes, you just have a
> >> question, and you figure someone else might know the answer, so you
> >> ask. Doesn't seem like that should be an offensive thing to do in a
> >> usenet newsgroup.
> >>
> >> I wouldn't want to killfile you. You are a knowledgeable and
> >> wellrespected source of information - when you care to be
> >> informative. But I'll admit that I can do without the "google is
> >> your friend - we are not" attitude that is so commonly celebrated in
> >> the group.
> >
> > If you cared about getting information from knowledgable people and
> > you didn't want to waste their time, you'd google before asking.
> > It's the considerate thing to do.
> >
> > So if you don't wish to be considerate of others, why do you expect
> > the same?
>
> Before I came here, I didn't know Google would search Usenet. Had no
idea.
> And as a database programmer and broadband user since DSL first was
> available here in the late '90s, I'm not particularly ignorant in the area
> of computers. But...I didn't know that.
>
> So why not just inform them that they can Google groups? Or just answer
the
> question? Or just ignore the question?
>
> I like Elzi. I'm not picking on her or siding against her. In fact, I've
> done this from time to time myself because I take on the mfw persona. But
> what Preacher is saying is a valid point. And...I agree with him. Unless
> of course it's a Bowflex post...then all bets are off!
> --
> -Larry
>
I like Elzi too - she does great posts plus she has an incredible ass (her
horse looks pretty good too!) - my only complaint is that she should show us
her tits (this is family and we should know each other more intimately)
 >> Stay informed about: The value of deadlifts 

"Charles" <charles.TakeThisOut@msn.com> wrote in message
news:a6e621hgbv3khj6gg2t79q4ne4jj9aeook@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:24:22 -0500, "Lee Michaels"
> <leemichaels*nadaspam*@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Preacher" <nono.TakeThisOut@way.com> wrote in message
> >news:1gsot1d.3ja6oo8d3mr3N%nono@way.com...
> >> Roger Zoul <rogerzoul2.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> If you cared about getting information from knowledgable people and
you
> >>> didn't want to waste their time, you'd google before asking. It's
the
> >>> considerate thing to do.
> >>>
> >>> So if you don't wish to be considerate of others, why do you expect
the
> >>> same?
> >>
> >> How is someone asking a question in a public forum inconsiderate? If
you
> >> don't want to answer - if it seems like a waste of your time - don't
> >> answer. You could probably avoid most of the dumb questions just by
> >> avoiding subjects that sound dumb and posters that you don't know.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >That sounds like you!!
> >
> >Perhaps you should post a disclaimer with all your posts to ignore you.
>
> It really is time your interminable whining and "trolling" ceased Lee;
> you sound like a worn out 78 you silly old bastard!!

He should get back to his lathe. I;m sure there were a couple of burrs on
the last job that need to be linished.
 >> Stay informed about: The value of deadlifts 

Charles wrote:

> Now you're just being silly Roger, anymore of it and I may have to
> consider "killfiling" you!! ;o)

Roger that!

--
Jock
 >> Stay informed about: The value of deadlifts