> On Nov 2, 6:56 am, This account has been banned because it violated
> the Google Groups Terms Of Use <laugh...@u.kook> wrote:
> > AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA Andrew Wilson
> > > What does any of that have to do with Nebulous?
> > Your nebulou...@gmail.com was also caught using the same IP addresses as
> > those socks, P<SPANK>
> What do you mean by "the same IP addresses", plural? If you're simply
> stating that he posted from the same net block as one of those other
> posters, that just means they share an ISP -- at most. Are you
> admitting that your evidence linking nebulous to those others is even
> weaker than your highly-circumstantial evidence linking them to each
> other?
> > > And you do realize
> > > that dynamic IPs can easily get reassigned over the space of several
> > > hours, right?
> > Wrong, Paul; the DSLAM will not re-assign a new IP address to the connection
> > unless there is a break in communications between the DSLAM and the modem.
> Which there is if one guy posts and logs off, and another guy logs on
> and posts and logs off, and another guy logs on and posts, etc.
> Not everyone leaves their internet connection up 24/7, kooky.
> You've been told this before, you BRAINLESS KOOK.
> > You've been told this before, you stupid cunt.
> <cackle>
> > > And that people can post as "Paul Derbyshire" to, say,
> > > stir kooks like you up, without actually being Paul Derbyshire, right?
> > They certainly stir you up, Paul, when they post as Paul Derbyshire - like
> > Bowtie did when he trolled you, you stupid cunt.
> You mean, when he proved your k'lame that because someone once posted
> from Google Groups as "Paul Derbyshire", that someone was necessarily
> named Paul Derbyshire, to be COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY WRONG?
> Remember also that, according to the same "logic" you used to "prove"
> that that GG poster was actually named Paul Derbyshire, Nadegda is
> Abraham Lincoln's zombie.
> And now the same "logic" plus your k'lame a couple of posts ago appear
> to indicate that you must believe that a single person has both the
> legal name Paul Derbyshire and the legal name Jerry Gerrone. After
> all, you're k'laming that a single person took out gmail accounts in
> both names and posted to Usenet with both names. If his doing so as
> "Paul Derbyshire" makes him the real Paul Derbyshire, then mustn't his
> doing so as "Jerry Gerrone" also make him the real Jerry Gerrone? Only
> that seems to be a MASSIVE CONTRADICTION in your kooky frame of
> reference, KOOK!
> Now you're going to have to backpedal a whole lot and maybe even pick
> up a Lance Armstrong nom in trying to get out of this -- or else you
> could, you know, man up and admit that your whole kooky house of cards
> has come tumbling down and you made a mistake and nobody here is
> Derbyshire.
> But we all know which one of those two options you'll choose, don't
> we, kook?
> > > Oh, why am I even asking. Of course you don't realize any of those
> > > things, because you're a FUCKING PARNOID NUT!
> > Ranting<SPANK>
> You've done enough ranting for one day. Get some sleep!
> Grow up, you stupid kook. Admit you made several egregious errors in
> your kooky crusade to expose people you think are Derbyshire, just
> like your hero Murphy did before you. (And before you had a falling
> out with him and tried to nominate him for a Pickett, despite being
> disenfranchised in AUK.)
> > --
> > "Sweetness Seal Of Approval" #4
> > Co-winning trainer, Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog-Whistle - August 2012
> > Winner of multiple fake awards from serial Usenet kook, Paul G. Derbyshire
> Obsession noted, kook!
> > If you want to see something lamer than John Edward Kook's frogeries of
> > Aratzio, check out Scatboi's forgeries.
> Continuing obsession noted, kook! When are you going to boot that
> phantom bum out of your head, or at least make him pay rent, kook?
> <cackle>
I wonder why it's so damned important for you socks to convince us you're not Derbyshit socks? If you weren't, why would you give a fuck if people thought you were?
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
"You can sit there all you want and spit out all the denial you can
muster, it still doesn't change the fact that you are the current king shit of the puppeteers in this group."
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by Checkmate!
First, check out what Andrew Wilson said:
> On Nov 2, 9:25 am, i...@ster.invalid (I M Poster) wrote:
> > Andrew Wilson <awils984...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > ... man up and admit that your whole kooky house of
> > > cards has come tumbling down and you made a mistake and
> > > here is Derbyshire.
> PEF.
> Wait. Did ... did you just claim that Account Banned is Derbyshire?
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
"You can sit there all you want and spit out all the denial you can
muster, it still doesn't change the fact that you are the current king shit of the puppeteers in this group."
> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by > Checkmate!
> First, check out what Andrew Wilson said:
> > On Nov 2, 6:56 am, This account has been banned because it violated
> > the Google Groups Terms Of Use <laugh...@u.kook> wrote:
> > > AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA Andrew Wilson
> > > > What does any of that have to do with Nebulous?
> > > Your nebulou...@gmail.com was also caught using the same IP addresses as
> > > those socks, P<SPANK>
> > What do you mean by "the same IP addresses", plural? If you're simply
> > stating that he posted from the same net block as one of those other
> > posters, that just means they share an ISP -- at most. Are you
> > admitting that your evidence linking nebulous to those others is even
> > weaker than your highly-circumstantial evidence linking them to each
> > other?
> > > > And you do realize
> > > > that dynamic IPs can easily get reassigned over the space of several
> > > > hours, right?
> > > Wrong, Paul; the DSLAM will not re-assign a new IP address to the connection
> > > unless there is a break in communications between the DSLAM and the modem.
> > Which there is if one guy posts and logs off, and another guy logs on
> > and posts and logs off, and another guy logs on and posts, etc.
> > Not everyone leaves their internet connection up 24/7, kooky.
> > You've been told this before, you BRAINLESS KOOK.
> > > You've been told this before, you stupid cunt.
> > <cackle>
> > > > And that people can post as "Paul Derbyshire" to, say,
> > > > stir kooks like you up, without actually being Paul Derbyshire, right?
> > > They certainly stir you up, Paul, when they post as Paul Derbyshire - like
> > > Bowtie did when he trolled you, you stupid cunt.
> > You mean, when he proved your k'lame that because someone once posted
> > from Google Groups as "Paul Derbyshire", that someone was necessarily
> > named Paul Derbyshire, to be COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY WRONG?
> > Remember also that, according to the same "logic" you used to "prove"
> > that that GG poster was actually named Paul Derbyshire, Nadegda is
> > Abraham Lincoln's zombie.
> > And now the same "logic" plus your k'lame a couple of posts ago appear
> > to indicate that you must believe that a single person has both the
> > legal name Paul Derbyshire and the legal name Jerry Gerrone. After
> > all, you're k'laming that a single person took out gmail accounts in
> > both names and posted to Usenet with both names. If his doing so as
> > "Paul Derbyshire" makes him the real Paul Derbyshire, then mustn't his
> > doing so as "Jerry Gerrone" also make him the real Jerry Gerrone? Only
> > that seems to be a MASSIVE CONTRADICTION in your kooky frame of
> > reference, KOOK!
> > Now you're going to have to backpedal a whole lot and maybe even pick
> > up a Lance Armstrong nom in trying to get out of this -- or else you
> > could, you know, man up and admit that your whole kooky house of cards
> > has come tumbling down and you made a mistake and nobody here is
> > Derbyshire.
> > But we all know which one of those two options you'll choose, don't
> > we, kook?
> > > > Oh, why am I even asking. Of course you don't realize any of those
> > > > things, because you're a FUCKING PARNOID NUT!
> > > Ranting<SPANK>
> > You've done enough ranting for one day. Get some sleep!
> > Grow up, you stupid kook. Admit you made several egregious errors in
> > your kooky crusade to expose people you think are Derbyshire, just
> > like your hero Murphy did before you. (And before you had a falling
> > out with him and tried to nominate him for a Pickett, despite being
> > disenfranchised in AUK.)
> > > --
> > > "Sweetness Seal Of Approval" #4
> > > Co-winning trainer, Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog-Whistle - August 2012
> > > Winner of multiple fake awards from serial Usenet kook, Paul G. Derbyshire
> > Obsession noted, kook!
> > > If you want to see something lamer than John Edward Kook's frogeries of
> > > Aratzio, check out Scatboi's forgeries.
> > Continuing obsession noted, kook! When are you going to boot that
> > phantom bum out of your head, or at least make him pay rent, kook?
> > <cackle>
> I wonder why it's so damned important for you socks to convince us you're > not Derbyshit socks? If you weren't, why would you give a fuck if people > thought you were?
Good point, well made.
-- "My brother has Asperger's, which is kind of like
a high functioning form of autism"
Ian Derbyshire talking about his freaky brother Paul.
http://kydaimon.livejournal.com/
Discussion subject changed to "NOMINATION - Paul Derbyshire for VVFWS <was - Re: In Which Socky re-spins his old lies>" by This account has been banned because it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use
This account has been banned because it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use
> On Nov 2, 6:56 am, This account has been banned because it violated
> the Google Groups Terms Of Use <laugh...@u.kook> wrote:
>> AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA Andrew Wilson
>> > What does any of that have to do with Nebulous?
>> Your nebulou...@gmail.com was also caught using the same IP addresses as >> those socks, Paul, as shown when I spanked you with the evidence again in >> MID <62k8pk.b0e.1...@news.alt.net>, you stupid cunt.
> What do you mean by "the same IP addresses", plural?
The plain English meaning of the words above is quite clear in the context in which I wrote them, Paul. But since you are a stupid cunt who snipped the reference because you were terrified by the contents of it, it's no wonder you're even more confused than is usual for a retarded little Aspie like you.
> If you're simply
> stating that he posted from the same net block as one of those other
> posters, that just means they share an ISP -- at most.
Paul, at different times, several of your socks posted from exactly the same unproxied IP address within minutes of each other (or during the same connection session), you stupid cunt. Ten examples were documented in MID <62k8pk.b0e.1...@news.alt.net> - a post from which you ran away and didn't even dare make any of your feeble attempts to respond to or reply.
> Are you
> admitting that your evidence linking nebulous to those others is even
> weaker than your highly-circumstantial evidence linking them to each
> other?
Since I don't admit the former, I don't concede the latter either, Paul;
only an insane stupid cunt like you would keep up your denials at this point.
Especially after you ran away from MID <62k8pk.b0e.1...@news.alt.net>.
>> > And you do realize
>> > that dynamic IPs can easily get reassigned over the space of several
>> > hours, right?
>> Wrong, Paul; the DSLAM will not re-assign a new IP address to the >> connection unless there is a break in communications between the DSLAM >> and the modem.
> Which there is if one guy posts and logs off, and another guy logs on
> and posts and logs off, and another guy logs on and posts, etc.
Dear gawd, Paul; that's stupid, even for you. Logging in and out of your different Google Groups won't change the IP address of your DSL connection.
To even imply that a layer 7 session has any effect on the layer 2 xDSL connection in these circumstances only shows everyone again what an ignorant, clueless. and stupid cunt you are - and your kind of cluelessness deserves an award.
Victor von Frankenstein Weird Science Award
Given to those inspired, pioneering visionaries with their worthy inventions, institutions, and prides-of-joys, who have reasoned it out, who KNOW The Answer, who would know how to use it to make for a better humanity... if only somebody would listen to them.
For asserting that when "one guy posts and logs off, and another guy logs on and posts and logs off," etc is capable of changing the IP address of an xDSL connection, I hereby nominate Paul "Two Socks / Pauldelbrot" Derbyshire for the AUK November 2012 Victor von Frankenstein Weird Science Award.
Seconds?
(space reserved above for the stupid cunts' inevitable whining and denials of this nomination)
<chortle>
-- "Sweetness Seal Of Approval" #4 Co-winning trainer, Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog-Whistle - August 2012
Winner of multiple fake awards from serial Usenet kook, Paul G. Derbyshire
If you want to see something lamer than John Edward Kook's frogeries of Aratzio, check out Scatboi's forgeries.
Discussion subject changed to "In Which Banned Re-Spins His Old Lies And Tries To Redirect Rebuttals To A Nonexistent Newsfroup, The Coward." by Nadegda
On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 03:44:44 -0700, Stalemate wrote:
> I wonder why it's so damned important for you socks to convince us
> you're not Derbyshit socks? If you weren't, why would you give a fuck
> if people thought you were?
It's not. We're proving, to other readers, that you're delusional kooks. Since one of your delusions is that we're "Derbyshit socks", and it's an easy thing to *prove* is a delusion, proving we're not "Derbyshit socks" is an easy way to prove you're delusional kooks.
So, in short, proving we're not "Derbyshit socks" isn't the goal. It's a side effect. The goal is proving you to be kooks, which, as FNVWs and kookologists, is our duty here.
In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 03:44:44 -0700, Stalemate wrote:
>> I wonder why it's so damned important for you socks to convince us
>> you're not Derbyshit socks? If you weren't, why would you give a fuck
>> if people thought you were?
> It's not.
Yet it's all you try to do.
-- gburn...@databasix.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How you look depends on where you go.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
| ?????????????????????????????????
Gary L. Burnore | ?????????????????????????????????
| ?????????????????????????????????
Black Helicopter Repair Services | ??? 3 4 1 4 2 ???? 6 9 0 6 9 ???
| Official Proof of Purchase
======================================================================
Where's all the China Blue food? <chine.b...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article <k74vt8$6c...@dont-email.me>, Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> > wrote:
>> It's not. We're proving, to other readers, that you're delusional kooks.
> Isn't odd how the entire tetraps disappears at the same time, and then returns > together. Almost as if it were a single person pulling the strings....
Shit (she/he/it) even makes the same grammar miss steaks.
-- gburn...@databasix.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How you look depends on where you go.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
| ?????????????????????????????????
Gary L. Burnore | ?????????????????????????????????
| ?????????????????????????????????
Black Helicopter Repair Services | ??? 3 4 1 4 2 ???? 6 9 0 6 9 ???
| Official Proof of Purchase
======================================================================
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by Checkmate!
First, check out what Where's all the China Blue food? said:
> In article <k74vt8$6c...@dont-email.me>, Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> > wrote:
> > It's not. We're proving, to other readers, that you're delusional kooks.
> Isn't odd how the entire tetraps disappears at the same time, and then returns > together. Almost as if it were a single person pulling the strings....
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
"You can sit there all you want and spit out all the denial you can
muster, it still doesn't change the fact that you are the current king shit of the puppeteers in this group."
> In article <k74vt8$6c...@dont-email.me>, Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> > wrote:
>> It's not. We're proving, to other readers, that you're delusional kooks.
> Isn't odd how the entire tetraps disappears at the same time, and then returns > together. Almost as if it were a single person pulling the strings....
Isn't it odd how your assessment of the situation is completely out of line with reality? Almost as if you were a babbling kook...
<snicker>
--
/\ Properly known as Bill
\ /\ The Monster You Kooks Can't Handle
\ / \ THERE IS NO CABAL - LONG LIVE THE NEW CABAL
\/ The AUK coup is complete. The Old Cabal is no more.
> Where's all the China Blue food? <chine.b...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> In article <k74vt8$6c...@dont-email.me>, Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>> It's not. We're proving, to other readers, that you're delusional kooks.
>> Isn't odd how the entire tetraps disappears at the same time, and then returns
>> together. Almost as if it were a single person pulling the strings....
> Shit (she/he/it) even makes the same grammar miss steaks.
And those would be what, exactly, kOok? Please get right to *proving* your k'laim.
-- "To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain
the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks
> In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>> On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 03:44:44 -0700, Stalemate wrote:
>>> I wonder why it's so damned important for you socks to convince us
>>> you're not Derbyshit socks? If you weren't, why would you give a fuck
>>> if people thought you were?
>> It's not.
> Yet it's all you try to do.
Proof, ko0ky? In particular, how did our nominating and awarding the 9/11 truthers for a Weird Science award do so? Keep in mind, either it *did* do so or your k'laim that it's "all we try to do" is a lie. Which is it, ko0ky? Inquiring minds want to know.
-- "To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain
the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by Checkmate!
First, check out what kensi said:
> On 04/11/2012 7:41 AM, Gary Burnore wrote:
> > Where's all the China Blue food? <chine.b...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> In article <k74vt8$6c...@dont-email.me>, Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid>
> >> wrote:
> >>> It's not. We're proving, to other readers, that you're delusional kooks.
> >> Isn't odd how the entire tetraps disappears at the same time, and then returns
> >> together. Almost as if it were a single person pulling the strings....
> > Shit (she/he/it) even makes the same grammar miss steaks.
> And those would be what, exactly, kOok? Please get right to *proving* > your k'laim.
Are... are you denying you all sound the same, for fuck's sake?
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
"You can sit there all you want and spit out all the denial you can
muster, it still doesn't change the fact that you are the current king shit of the puppeteers in this group."
> First, check out what kensi said:
>> On 04/11/2012 7:41 AM, Gary Burnore wrote:
>>> Where's all the China Blue food? <chine.b...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> Isn't odd how the entire tetraps disappears at the same time, and then returns
>>>> together. Almost as if it were a single person pulling the strings....
>>> Shit (she/he/it) even makes the same grammar miss steaks.
>> And those would be what, exactly, kOok? Please get right to *proving*
>> your k'laim.
> Are... are you denying you all sound the same, for fuck's sake?
Are... are you failing to provide the requested evidence to support a ko0ky klame? Oh, wait, of course you are. *snicker*
-- "To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain
the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks
> On 07/11/2012 4:12 PM, Checkmate wrote:
> > First, check out what kensi said:
> >> On 04/11/2012 7:41 AM, Gary Burnore wrote:
> >>> Where's all the China Blue food? <chine.b...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>> Isn't odd how the entire tetraps disappears at the same time, and then returns
> >>>> together. Almost as if it were a single person pulling the strings....
> >>> Shit (she/he/it) even makes the same grammar miss steaks.
> >> And those would be what, exactly, kOok? Please get right to *proving*
> >> your k'laim.
> > Are... are you denying you all sound the same, for fuck's sake?
> Are... are you failing to provide the requested evidence to support a > ko0ky klame? Oh, wait, of course you are. *snicker*
Are... are you failing to understand that I'm mocking you?
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
"You can sit there all you want and spit out all the denial you can
muster, it still doesn't change the fact that you are the current king shit of the puppeteers in this group."
Discussion subject changed to "In Which A Spankling Socky comes crawling back after days of butthurt" by This account has been banned because it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use
This account has been banned because it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use
On Sun, 4 Nov 2012 06:19:14 +0000, This account has been banned because it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use <laugh...@u.kook> wrote:
> AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA Nadegda > <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>> Since one of your delusions is that we're "Derbyshit socks", and it's an >> easy thing to *prove* is a delusion, proving we're not "Derbyshit socks" >> is an easy way to prove you're delusional kooks.
> If it's so easy, why have you failed to do any of the above, you stupid cunt?
<crickets>
> <chortle>
-- "Sweetness Seal Of Approval" #4 Co-winning trainer, Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog-Whistle - August 2012
Winner of multiple fake awards from serial Usenet kook, Paul G. Derbyshire
If you want to see something lamer than John Edward Kook's frogeries of Aratzio, check out Scatboi's forgeries.
Discussion subject changed to "In Which Pauldelbrot does another PeeWee" by This account has been banned because it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use
This account has been banned because it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use
AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA kensi
<kensi_kensing...@zoonoses.invalid> wrote:
> Are... are you failing to provide the requested evidence<SPANK>
But Paul, you stupid cunt, MID <62sgud.nfp.1...@news.alt.net> awaits you.
-- "Sweetness Seal Of Approval" #4 Co-winning trainer, Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog-Whistle - August 2012
Winner of multiple fake awards from serial Usenet kook, Paul G. Derbyshire
If you want to see something lamer than John Edward Kook's frogeries of Aratzio, check out Scatboi's forgeries.
Discussion subject changed to "In Which Banned Re-Spins His Old Lies And Tries To Redirect Rebuttals To A Nonexistent Newsfroup, The Coward." by Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler {One Of Four}
> Are... are you failing to understand that I'm mocking you?
Suck Monkey, yer too stupid to mock anyone. It's we who mock you.
<mock, mock>
<snicker>
--
/\ Properly known as Bill
\ /\ The Monster You Kooks Can't Handle
\ / \ THERE IS NO CABAL - LONG LIVE THE NEW CABAL
\/ The AUK coup is complete. The Old Cabal is no more.
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
"You can sit there all you want and spit out all the denial you can
muster, it still doesn't change the fact that you are the current king shit of the puppeteers in this group."
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
"You can sit there all you want and spit out all the denial you can
muster, it still doesn't change the fact that you are the current king shit of the puppeteers in this group."
Discussion subject changed to "NOMINATION - Paul Derbyshire for VVFWS <was - Re: In Which Socky re-spins his old lies>" by Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler
>AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA Andrew Wilson ><awils984...@gmail.com> wrote:
><alt.paul-derbyshire.fix.it.now - restored>
>> On Nov 2, 6:56 am, This account has been banned because it violated
>> the Google Groups Terms Of Use <laugh...@u.kook> wrote:
>>> AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA Andrew Wilson
>>> > What does any of that have to do with Nebulous?
>>> Your nebulou...@gmail.com was also caught using the same IP addresses as >>> those socks, Paul, as shown when I spanked you with the evidence again in >>> MID <62k8pk.b0e.1...@news.alt.net>, you stupid cunt.
>> What do you mean by "the same IP addresses", plural?
>The plain English meaning of the words above is quite clear in the >context in which I wrote them, Paul. But since you are a stupid >cunt who snipped the reference because you were terrified by the >contents of it, it's no wonder you're even more confused than is >usual for a retarded little Aspie like you.
>> If you're simply
>> stating that he posted from the same net block as one of those other
>> posters, that just means they share an ISP -- at most.
>Paul, at different times, several of your socks posted from exactly the >same unproxied IP address within minutes of each other (or during the >same connection session), you stupid cunt. Ten examples were documented >in MID <62k8pk.b0e.1...@news.alt.net> - a post from which you ran away >and didn't even dare make any of your feeble attempts to respond to or reply.
>> Are you
>> admitting that your evidence linking nebulous to those others is even
>> weaker than your highly-circumstantial evidence linking them to each
>> other?
>Since I don't admit the former, I don't concede the latter either, Paul;
>only an insane stupid cunt like you would keep up your denials at this point.
>Especially after you ran away from MID <62k8pk.b0e.1...@news.alt.net>.
>>> > And you do realize
>>> > that dynamic IPs can easily get reassigned over the space of several
>>> > hours, right?
>>> Wrong, Paul; the DSLAM will not re-assign a new IP address to the >>> connection unless there is a break in communications between the DSLAM >>> and the modem.
>> Which there is if one guy posts and logs off, and another guy logs on
>> and posts and logs off, and another guy logs on and posts, etc.
>Dear gawd, Paul; that's stupid, even for you. Logging in and out of your >different Google Groups won't change the IP address of your DSL connection.
>To even imply that a layer 7 session has any effect on the layer 2 xDSL >connection in these circumstances only shows everyone again what an ignorant, >clueless. and stupid cunt you are - and your kind of cluelessness deserves >an award.
>Victor von Frankenstein Weird Science Award
>Given to those inspired, pioneering visionaries with their worthy inventions, >institutions, and prides-of-joys, who have reasoned it out, who KNOW The Answer, >who would know how to use it to make for a better humanity... if only somebody >would listen to them.
>For asserting that when "one guy posts and logs off, and another guy logs >on and posts and logs off," etc is capable of changing the IP address of >an xDSL connection, I hereby nominate Paul "Two Socks / Pauldelbrot" Derbyshire >for the AUK November 2012 Victor von Frankenstein Weird Science Award.
>Seconds?
Nomination accepted.
>(space reserved above for the stupid cunts' inevitable whining and denials >of this nomination)
<gburn...@databasix.com> wrote:
>In alt.usenet.kooks This account has been banned because it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use <laugh...@u.kook> wrote:
>> AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA Andrew Wilson >> <awils984...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <alt.paul-derbyshire.fix.it.now - restored>
>>> On Nov 2, 6:56 am, This account has been banned because it violated
>>> the Google Groups Terms Of Use <laugh...@u.kook> wrote:
>>>> AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA Andrew Wilson
>>>> > What does any of that have to do with Nebulous?
>>>> Your nebulou...@gmail.com was also caught using the same IP addresses as >>>> those socks, Paul, as shown when I spanked you with the evidence again in >>>> MID <62k8pk.b0e.1...@news.alt.net>, you stupid cunt.
>>> What do you mean by "the same IP addresses", plural?
>> The plain English meaning of the words above is quite clear in the >> context in which I wrote them, Paul. But since you are a stupid >> cunt who snipped the reference because you were terrified by the >> contents of it, it's no wonder you're even more confused than is >> usual for a retarded little Aspie like you.
>>> If you're simply
>>> stating that he posted from the same net block as one of those other
>>> posters, that just means they share an ISP -- at most.
>> Paul, at different times, several of your socks posted from exactly the >> same unproxied IP address within minutes of each other (or during the >> same connection session), you stupid cunt. Ten examples were documented >> in MID <62k8pk.b0e.1...@news.alt.net> - a post from which you ran away >> and didn't even dare make any of your feeble attempts to respond to or reply.
>>> Are you
>>> admitting that your evidence linking nebulous to those others is even
>>> weaker than your highly-circumstantial evidence linking them to each
>>> other?
>> Since I don't admit the former, I don't concede the latter either, Paul;
>> only an insane stupid cunt like you would keep up your denials at this point.
>> Especially after you ran away from MID <62k8pk.b0e.1...@news.alt.net>.
>>>> > And you do realize
>>>> > that dynamic IPs can easily get reassigned over the space of several
>>>> > hours, right?
>>>> Wrong, Paul; the DSLAM will not re-assign a new IP address to the >>>> connection unless there is a break in communications between the DSLAM >>>> and the modem.
>>> Which there is if one guy posts and logs off, and another guy logs on
>>> and posts and logs off, and another guy logs on and posts, etc.
>> Dear gawd, Paul; that's stupid, even for you. Logging in and out of your >> different Google Groups won't change the IP address of your DSL connection.
>> To even imply that a layer 7 session has any effect on the layer 2 xDSL >> connection in these circumstances only shows everyone again what an ignorant, >> clueless. and stupid cunt you are - and your kind of cluelessness deserves >> an award.
>> Victor von Frankenstein Weird Science Award
>> Given to those inspired, pioneering visionaries with their worthy inventions, >> institutions, and prides-of-joys, who have reasoned it out, who KNOW The Answer, >> who would know how to use it to make for a better humanity... if only somebody >> would listen to them.
>> For asserting that when "one guy posts and logs off, and another guy logs >> on and posts and logs off," etc is capable of changing the IP address of >> an xDSL connection, I hereby nominate Paul "Two Socks / Pauldelbrot" Derbyshire >> for the AUK November 2012 Victor von Frankenstein Weird Science Award.
>> Seconds?
>> (space reserved above for the stupid cunts' inevitable whining and denials >> of this nomination)
Discussion subject changed to "In Which Banned Re-Spins His Old Lies And Tries To Redirect Rebuttals To A Nonexistent Newsfroup, The Coward." by Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler {One Of Four}
>>> shocking news from Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler {One Of Four} >><F...@altusenetkooks.co>:
>>> >Suck
>>> ><cock, cock>
>>> ><snicker>
>>> What were you hoping for by outer-filthing Meat Plow's sister, >>> hmmm Action-packed A-Hole? ?
>>It was to teach us that outerfilthing is wrong... or something like that.
>>Word has it that Pandora's kitteis have received death threats.
A lesson that William Malone Griffith, II of North Canton, OH learned very well, right before he ran away like a coward.
He ran away out of embarrassment for being caught being a real-life stalking, outer-filthing douchebag.
Which means he's not only a real-life stalking, outer-filthing douchebag, he's a coward, too.
<snicker>
> Yea, very buggered low budget shit is what Socky is made of.
Yer so pwned by me, DonkeyFucker. Yer too cowardly to respond to me,
both of you. Two cowardly losers hiding out in the basement, hoping
that the giant outside doesn't stomp on them again.
Fee-fi-fo-fum I smell the stench of cowardly bums.
They shit themselves, when I'm near, then run away in abject fear.
<snicker>
--
/\ Properly known as Bill
\ /\ The Monster You Kooks Can't Handle
\ / \ THERE IS NO CABAL - LONG LIVE THE NEW CABAL
\/ The AUK coup is complete. The Old Cabal is no more.
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
"You can sit there all you want and spit out all the denial you can
muster, it still doesn't change the fact that you are the current king shit of the puppeteers in this group."
Bwahahaa! You cowardly kook, you're too much of a fucking pussy to
respond directly to me, but you're too obsessed to shut the fuck up
about me.
Yer pwned, kook.
<snicker>
--
/\ Properly known as Bill
\ /\ The Monster You Kooks Can't Handle
\ / \ THERE IS NO CABAL - LONG LIVE THE NEW CABAL
\/ The AUK coup is complete. The Old Cabal is no more.
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
"You can sit there all you want and spit out all the denial you can
muster, it still doesn't change the fact that you are the current king shit of the puppeteers in this group."
