"ChrisND @UKRM" <chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote in news:j7fa0lF4k2cU1
@mid.individual.net:

> On 20/02/2022 16:42, wessie wrote:
>>
>> The closest thing on the internet from a social contact aspect has been
>> the Yahoo group that morphed into the UKGSer forum. It has pretty
>> minimal moderation. Through this medium, I have made a few real life
>> friends, fallen out with many, gone on trips, got laid and had a few
>> laughs. Bonwick has settled there.
>>
>> Sadly, the wanker quota on UKGSer is higher than UKRM and I think that
>> is due to the ease of access.
>
> <fx: raises eyebrow> GS?
> Oh, its BMWs, not Suzukis....
> Is this review representative?
> "Search domain reviewcentre.comhttps://www.reviewcentre.com ›
> reviews172239-html
> It appears to be more than just about motorbikes, ukgser seems to be a
> means for the old, infirm, housebound and socially inept to communicate.
> But be prepared to wade through a lot of attempted humor from a regular
> crowd of keyboard recluses spouting in-jokes and trying to chat up the
> one of the few women that frequents the forum. Take it with a pinch of
> salt and you… Read Full Review. If ..."
>
>:-)
>
> Chris

as I said, it is the closest analogue to UKRM in the era of forums and
platforms

wessie <willnotwork@tesco.net> wrote:

> Sadly, the wanker quota on UKGSer is higher than UKRM and I think that
> is due to the ease of access.

There's a witty rejoinder to be made here, but I'm not sure if I am
capable of making it.

On 20/02/2022 15:52, ChrisND @UKRM wrote:
> On 20/02/2022 15:42, Stephen Packer wrote:
>> On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 15:08:50 UTC, Colin Irvine wrote:
>>> On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 13:30:53 +0000, Champ <ne...@champ.org.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 19:38:42 -0000 (UTC), geoffC <m...@home.nl> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 18/02/2022 18:51, petrolcan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/g/uk.rec.motorcycles/c/yF6-jV6TrVs/m/sf7JRCp8Y0IJ
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Very good stuff :-)
>>>>
>>>> That took me right back
>>> And me.
>>
>> I was absent at that time but recognised a lot of the names.
>>
>> Quite shocking that it was 2004.  I mean, where's my fucking life gone?
>>
>> I'm not sure that there's been anything to replace the social
<snip>
d >> sentimental and harking
>> back to better days when we had kb instead of gb.
>
> And as for those that insist on using 'Whatsapp' "because its so much
> safer than facebook messenger" - which they won't go near!
> FFS
>
:-)
Not been bothered by removing WA. Got familly and some friends on to
Signal and Telegram.

For everyone else I resort to good old SMS.

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 20/02/2022 16:42, wessie wrote:
> Stephen Packer <stephen.packer@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:72c6e5dd-655b-45aa-bb32-1c8f1e3826a0n@googlegroups.com:
>
>> On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 15:08:50 UTC, Colin Irvine wrote:
>>> On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 13:30:53 +0000, Champ <ne...@champ.org.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 19:38:42 -0000 (UTC), geoffC <m...@home.nl>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 18/02/2022 18:51, petrolcan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/g/uk.rec.motorcycles/c/yF6-
> jV6TrVs/m/sf7J
>>>>>> RCp8Y0IJ
>>>>
>>>>> Very good stuff :-)
>>>>
>>>> That took me right back
>>> And me.
>>
>> I was absent at that time but recognised a lot of the names.
>>
>> Quite shocking that it was 2004. I mean, where's my fucking life
>> gone?
>>
>> I'm not sure that there's been anything to replace the social
>> 'contact' that was enabled by usenet around the turn of the century.
>> <snip>
>
> Sadly, the wanker quota on UKGSer is higher than UKRM and I think that
Always has been, IMO.

Found most Adv type groups that way, however the Pegaso forum has been
relativley wanker free.

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

YTC#1 <bdp@ytc1-spambin.co.uk> wrote in news:suu1ka$sqd$1@dont-email.me:

>
>
> On 20/02/2022 16:42, wessie wrote:
>> Sadly, the wanker quota on UKGSer is higher than UKRM and I think
>> that
> Always has been, IMO.
>
> Found most Adv type groups that way,
>

Yeah, Bonwick is currently seeking advice about a new conservatory roof and
previously a canopy for his new redneck pick-up.

Colin Irvine <look@colinandpat.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 13:30:53 +0000, Champ <neal@champ.org.uk> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 19:38:42 -0000 (UTC), geoffC <me@home.nl> wrote:
>>
>>>On 18/02/2022 18:51, petrolcan wrote:
>>
>>>>https://groups.google.com/g/uk.rec.motorcycles/c/yF6-jV6TrVs/m/sf7JRCp8Y0IJ
>>
>>>Very good stuff :-)
>>
>>That took me right back
>
> And me.

Speaking of Blasts from the Past, I just had an exchange with Andy
the Pugh on Hackaday, of all places. And he mentioned his FJ1100 in
a comment about a Daft Injury from a piece of metal shrapnel that
embedded itself in his gut.

https://hackaday.com/2022/02/07/as-light-as-plastic-as-strong-as-steel/

[ouch]

--
FJR1300A, GL1000, KLR650A6F, EX250J9A, DR200SE, Vespa Ciao

On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 11:54:08 -0800 (PST), WUN <nigel.eaton@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 5:51:11 PM UTC, petrolcan wrote:
>
>> https://groups.google.com/g/uk.rec.motorcycles/c/yF6-jV6TrVs/m/sf7JRCp8Y0IJ

>That was a pleasant few minutes, wallowing in nostalgia.

+1
--
Champ
neal at champ dot org dot uk

I don't know, but I been told
You never slow down, you never grow old

On 2/20/2022 8:53 AM, ChrisND @UKRM wrote:
> On 20/02/2022 16:42, wessie wrote:
>>
> crowd of keyboard recluses spouting in-jokes and trying to chat up the
> one of the few women that frequents the forum.

Women? There are women on UKRM?

--
The erstwhile Thomas
FJR1300, R1200GS, ST1100 (in memoriam)

Turby <xsurf@xmail.com> wrote in news:suuc6d$jec$1@dont-email.me:

> On 2/20/2022 8:53 AM, ChrisND @UKRM wrote:
>> On 20/02/2022 16:42, wessie wrote:
>>>
>> crowd of keyboard recluses spouting in-jokes and trying to chat up the
>> one of the few women that frequents the forum.
>
> Women? There are women on UKRM?
>
>

No.

Woman.

On 2/20/2022 1:53 PM, wessie wrote:
> Turby <xsurf@xmail.com> wrote in news:suuc6d$jec$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> On 2/20/2022 8:53 AM, ChrisND @UKRM wrote:
>>> On 20/02/2022 16:42, wessie wrote:
>>>>
>>> crowd of keyboard recluses spouting in-jokes and trying to chat up the
>>> one of the few women that frequents the forum.
>>
>> Women? There are women on UKRM?
>>
>>
>
> No.
>
> Woman.

Oh, yes!

--
The erstwhile Thomas
FJR1300, R1200GS, ST1100 (in memoriam)

On 21/02/2022 02:31 YTC#1 penned these words:
> On 20/02/2022 15:52, ChrisND @UKRM wrote:

>>
>> And as for those that insist on using 'Whatsapp' "because its so much
>> safer than facebook messenger" - which they won't go near!
>> FFS
>>
> :-)
> Not been bothered by removing WA. Got familly and some friends on to
> Signal and Telegram.

Much as I'd like to ditch WA there's way too many contacts on it including my banks

> For everyone else I resort to good old SMS.

Blimey, the only thing SMS gets used for is 2FA these days.

--
Ian

"Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of
the last priest"

On 21/02/2022 00:08, Boots wrote:
> On 21/02/2022 02:31 YTC#1 penned these words:
>> On 20/02/2022 15:52, ChrisND @UKRM wrote:
>
>>>
>>> And as for those that insist on using 'Whatsapp' "because its so much
>>> safer than facebook messenger" - which they won't go near!
>>> FFS
>>>
>> :-)
>> Not been bothered by removing WA. Got familly and some friends on to
>> Signal and Telegram.

Telegram is excellent and simple. Signal I know of but do not use but I
gather that is also excellent & simple.

> Much as I'd like to ditch WA there's way too many contacts on it including my banks

Banks? I find that scary. Whatsapp is social media. The clue is in the
name surely? Its not for business (IMHO obvs)

>> For everyone else I resort to good old SMS.
>
> Blimey, the only thing SMS gets used for is 2FA these days.

I always tell people that if they want to contact me urgently (or 'out
of hours') then a phone call or text will get through whereas anything
else may not because I frequently turn off phone data at night to avoid
being disturbed by trivia.

Chris

--
The Deuchars BBB#40 COFF#14
Yamaha XV750SE & Suzuki GS550t
http://www.Deuchars.org.uk

On 20/02/2022 17:41, wessie wrote:
> "ChrisND @UKRM" <chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote in news:j7fa0lF4k2cU1
> @mid.individual.net:
>
>> On 20/02/2022 16:42, wessie wrote:
>>>
>>> The closest thing on the internet from a social contact aspect has been
>>> the Yahoo group that morphed into the UKGSer forum. It has pretty
>>> minimal moderation. Through this medium, I have made a few real life
>>> friends, fallen out with many, gone on trips, got laid and had a few
>>> laughs. Bonwick has settled there.
>>>
>>> Sadly, the wanker quota on UKGSer is higher than UKRM and I think that
>>> is due to the ease of access.
>>
>> <fx: raises eyebrow> GS?
>> Oh, its BMWs, not Suzukis....
>> Is this review representative?
>> "Search domain reviewcentre.comhttps://www.reviewcentre.com ›
>> reviews172239-html
>> It appears to be more than just about motorbikes, ukgser seems to be a
>> means for the old, infirm, housebound and socially inept to communicate.
>> But be prepared to wade through a lot of attempted humor from a regular
>> crowd of keyboard recluses spouting in-jokes and trying to chat up the
>> one of the few women that frequents the forum. Take it with a pinch of
>> salt and you… Read Full Review. If ..."
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> Chris
>
> as I said, it is the closest analogue to UKRM in the era of forums and
> platforms
Yup, I got that :-)

--
The Deuchars BBB#40 COFF#14
Yamaha XV750SE & Suzuki GS550t
http://www.Deuchars.org.uk

On 21/02/2022 00:08, Boots wrote:
> On 21/02/2022 02:31 YTC#1 penned these words:
>> On 20/02/2022 15:52, ChrisND @UKRM wrote:
>
>>>
>>> And as for those that insist on using 'Whatsapp' "because its so much
>>> safer than facebook messenger" - which they won't go near!
>>> FFS
>>>
>> :-)
>> Not been bothered by removing WA. Got familly and some friends on to
>> Signal and Telegram.
>
> Much as I'd like to ditch WA there's way too many contacts on it including my banks
You know there are other ways of contacting banks, don't you?

>
>> For everyone else I resort to good old SMS.
>
> Blimey, the only thing SMS gets used for is 2FA these days.
>
>
It is their choice for not adding "just another" app.
>

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 21/02/2022 10:05, ChrisND @UKRM wrote:
> On 21/02/2022 00:08, Boots wrote:
>> On 21/02/2022 02:31 YTC#1 penned these words:
>>> On 20/02/2022 15:52, ChrisND @UKRM wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> And as for those that insist on using 'Whatsapp' "because its so much
>>>> safer than facebook messenger" - which they won't go near!
>>>> FFS
>>>>
>>> :-)
>>> Not been bothered by removing WA. Got familly and some friends on to
>>> Signal and Telegram.
>
> Telegram is excellent and simple.  Signal I know of but do not use but I
> gather that is also excellent & simple.

Signal is, I am assured, more secure/private.
Telegram IIRC does not implement end-to-end encrytion correctly.

But if it is good enough for ISIS is it good enough for me.

>
>> Much as I'd like to ditch WA there's way too many contacts on it
>> including my banks
>
> Banks?  I find that scary. Whatsapp is social media. The clue is in the
> name surely?  Its not for business (IMHO obvs)

Yeah, worried me as well. But he is in furrin places and they probably
care less.

>
>>> For everyone else I resort to good old SMS.
>>
>> Blimey, the only thing SMS gets used for is 2FA these days.
>
> I always tell people that if they want to contact me urgently (or 'out
> of hours') then a phone call or text will get through whereas anything
> else may not because I frequently turn off phone data at night to avoid
> being disturbed by trivia.

Due to shite mobile signal in house, messanging services are usually
better. However new phone has wireless calling enabled, so I presume
that works for SMS.

As to nghttime use, I just put on "do not disturb" with selected
(family) overrides.

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 20/02/2022 19:01, wessie wrote:
> YTC#1 <bdp@ytc1-spambin.co.uk> wrote in news:suu1ka$sqd$1@dont-email.me:
>
>>
>>
>> On 20/02/2022 16:42, wessie wrote:
>>> Sadly, the wanker quota on UKGSer is higher than UKRM and I think
>>> that
>> Always has been, IMO.
>>
>> Found most Adv type groups that way,
>>
>
> Yeah, Bonwick is currently seeking advice about a new conservatory roof and
> previously a canopy for his new redneck pick-up.

I'm trying to get to grip with Bonwick asking for advice, and not giving it.

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

"ChrisND @UKRM" <chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote in
news:j7h6fdFfgtvU1@mid.individual.net:

> On 21/02/2022 00:08, Boots wrote:
>>
>> Much as I'd like to ditch WA there's way too many contacts on it
>> including my banks
>
> Banks? I find that scary. Whatsapp is social media. The clue is in
> the name surely? Its not for business (IMHO obvs)
>

we use Whatsapp at work

my work Android phone only has apps installed that are approved for use in
local government. I work in Children's Services and I can use Whatsapp to
communicate with colleagues, parents and children. During the various
lockdowns it was a critical tool for keeping in touch with vulnerable
people where face to face was not possible.

YTC#1 <bdp@ytc1-spambin.co.uk> wrote in news:suvps2$nuc$2@dont-email.me:

>
>
> On 20/02/2022 19:01, wessie wrote:
>> YTC#1 <bdp@ytc1-spambin.co.uk> wrote in
>> news:suu1ka$sqd$1@dont-email.me:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 20/02/2022 16:42, wessie wrote:
>>>> Sadly, the wanker quota on UKGSer is higher than UKRM and I think
>>>> that
>>> Always has been, IMO.
>>>
>>> Found most Adv type groups that way,
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, Bonwick is currently seeking advice about a new conservatory
>> roof and previously a canopy for his new redneck pick-up.
>
> I'm trying to get to grip with Bonwick asking for advice, and not
> giving it.
>

he's morphed into a pipe & slippers, grandfather type with a BMW R-GS
motorcycle, a motorhome, a pick-up, a puppy and a suburban house in a
Lancashire commuter town. He's not unique amongst the more vocal UKRMers of
the past.

On Monday, 21 February 2022 at 10:33:14 UTC, YTC#1 wrote:
> On 21/02/2022 10:05, ChrisND @UKRM wrote:
> > On 21/02/2022 00:08, Boots wrote:
> >> Much as I'd like to ditch WA there's way too many contacts on it
> >> including my banks
> >
> > Banks? I find that scary. Whatsapp is social media. The clue is in the
> > name surely? Its not for business (IMHO obvs)
> Yeah, worried me as well. But he is in furrin places and they probably
> care less.

Frankly if my bank was using Whatsapp rather than SMS to send me
'codes' to enable transactions I've setup on another channel,or to
send me 'we've just seen a transaction for £37.50 to account ending
0014' or 'we've just received a payment of £32.75' I would not
have any concerns.

My bank's messages (albeit sent via SMS) don't disclose my full
account number, name or anything apart from occasional and partial payment
/deposit details. It would (in principle) allow a hacker to know who I bank
with but I think that's all. Much less information than I give away if i
write a cheque or sign up a DD with someone.

I think that's safe enough.

> >
> >>> For everyone else I resort to good old SMS.
> >>
> >> Blimey, the only thing SMS gets used for is 2FA these days.
> >
> > I always tell people that if they want to contact me urgently (or 'out
> > of hours') then a phone call or text will get through whereas anything
> > else may not because I frequently turn off phone data at night to avoid
> > being disturbed by trivia.
> Due to shite mobile signal in house, messanging services are usually
> better. However new phone has wireless calling enabled, so I presume
> that works for SMS.

Not always, depends on the network and whether the integration to the
SMSC was made. I know they are coming on line but at first the
priority was for calls.

On Monday, 21 February 2022 at 11:00:43 UTC, wessie wrote:

> he's morphed into a pipe & slippers, grandfather type with a BMW R-GS
> motorcycle, a motorhome, a pick-up, a puppy and a suburban house in a
> Lancashire commuter town. He's not unique amongst the more vocal UKRMers of
> the past.

'Get Old or Die Trying'

On 21/02/2022 10:53, wessie wrote:
> "ChrisND @UKRM" <chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote in
> news:j7h6fdFfgtvU1@mid.individual.net:
>
>> On 21/02/2022 00:08, Boots wrote:
>>>
>>> Much as I'd like to ditch WA there's way too many contacts on it
>>> including my banks
>>
>> Banks? I find that scary. Whatsapp is social media. The clue is in
>> the name surely? Its not for business (IMHO obvs)
>>
>
> we use Whatsapp at work
>
> my work Android phone only has apps installed that are approved for use in
> local government. I work in Children's Services and I can use Whatsapp to
> communicate with colleagues, parents and children. During the various
> lockdowns it was a critical tool for keeping in touch with vulnerable
> people where face to face was not possible.
>
Yes, I can see the value in that instance.
Chris

--
The Deuchars BBB#40 COFF#14
Yamaha XV750SE & Suzuki GS550t
http://www.Deuchars.org.uk

On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 10:05:33 +0000, "ChrisND @UKRM"
<chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote:

>> Much as I'd like to ditch WA there's way too many contacts on it including my banks

>Banks? I find that scary. Whatsapp is social media. The clue is in the
>name surely?

I'm similarly cynical about WhatsApp (owned, as it is, by
Faceb^h^h^h^h^h Meta), but I can't work out how the name "WhatsApp"
says "social media" to you?
--
Champ
neal at champ dot org dot uk

I don't know, but I been told
You never slow down, you never grow old

ChrisND @UKRM wrote:

> I can use Whatsapp to communicate with colleagues, parents and children.
> During the various lockdowns it was a critical tool for keeping in touch with
> vulnerable people where face to face was not possible.

But if it never existed, you'd presumably have found something else, AFAIK
WhatsApp requires the user to have a mobile?

On 21/02/2022 12:17, Stephen Packer wrote:
> On Monday, 21 February 2022 at 10:33:14 UTC, YTC#1 wrote:
>> On 21/02/2022 10:05, ChrisND @UKRM wrote:
>>> On 21/02/2022 00:08, Boots wrote:
>>>> Much as I'd like to ditch WA there's way too many contacts on it
>>>> including my banks
>>>
>>> Banks? I find that scary. Whatsapp is social media. The clue is in the
>>> name surely? Its not for business (IMHO obvs)
>> Yeah, worried me as well. But he is in furrin places and they probably
>> care less.
>
> Frankly if my bank was using Whatsapp rather than SMS to send me
> 'codes' to enable transactions I've setup on another channel,or to
> send me 'we've just seen a transaction for £37.50 to account ending
> 0014' or 'we've just received a payment of £32.75' I would not
> have any concerns.
>
> My bank's messages (albeit sent via SMS) don't disclose my full
> account number, name or anything apart from occasional and partial payment
> /deposit details. It would (in principle) allow a hacker to know who I bank
> with but I think that's all. Much less information than I give away if i
> write a cheque or sign up a DD with someone.

Always amused me that, people just never seemed to realise that their
account details were on every check:-)

<snip>
>> Due to shite mobile signal in house, messanging services are usually
>> better. However new phone has wireless calling enabled, so I presume
>> that works for SMS.
>
> Not always, depends on the network and whether the integration to the
> SMSC was made. I know they are coming on line but at first the
> priority was for calls.

Vodafone. So, all bets off :-)

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 21/02/2022 10:53, wessie wrote:
> "ChrisND @UKRM" <chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote in
> news:j7h6fdFfgtvU1@mid.individual.net:
>
>> On 21/02/2022 00:08, Boots wrote:
>>>
>>> Much as I'd like to ditch WA there's way too many contacts on it
>>> including my banks
>>
>> Banks? I find that scary. Whatsapp is social media. The clue is in
>> the name surely? Its not for business (IMHO obvs)
>>
>
> we use Whatsapp at work
>
> my work Android phone only has apps installed that are approved for use in
> local government. I work in Children's Services and I can use Whatsapp to
> communicate with colleagues, parents and children. During the various
> lockdowns it was a critical tool for keeping in touch with vulnerable
> people where face to face was not possible.
>

Widely used in the NHS as well. But they seem to love being tied into
major corps.

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/