I used to like Linux, now I hate it.
Terry Porter
participated almost on a full time scale, in the COLA usenet group, and
I even used to publish Troll statistics based upon daft Roy Culley's
COLA stats, each week.
I am now cured. I always felt Linux was a little bit shit, but my eyes
were opened up the day my hard drive got hosed, and I lost all my data!
Where I live, in the outback of Australia, the power is not reliable.
I had just finished building my Gentoo installation, and puting all my
data onto it, when the power went kaput! 2 hours later, when the power
returned, I restarted my PC, only to discover that the crock of shit
ext3 file system was not so journaling, as I had been led to believe by
the so called hippie community Linux advocates. Disk totaly hosed to
death, by Linux.
Luckily, I had a backup tape of my data. I then loaded up a 3 month
timebomb version of windows 2003, that I had been given at some
computer show once, and downloaded a shareware tar tape extraction
utility for windows. I managed to recover all my data. Thank god.
But it made me think. I then got my credit card out, picked up the
telephone, called my nearest Microsoft vendor. In 2 minutes, I had
ordered a full copy of Windows 2003 server, which I duly received about
a week later. It was installed in 30 minutes. Sweat.
I now reflect upon my time with Linux, and wonder why on earth I wasted
so much of my time with it, sometimes spending endless nights getting
simple hardware devices to work. I now know Windows and Microsoft (not
Micro$oft, as I used to insult them with) are very valuable assets to
the global ecomony, and Linux with its band of hippie beatnicks and
communists, are attempting to bring down our western democratic values.
God bless Windows. God bless Microsoft.
mlw
This was clearly *not* from Terry Porter, at least not the Terry Porter that
the post claims to be from.
linux nut
> Where I live, in the outback of Australia, the power is not reliable.
> I had just finished building my Gentoo installation, and puting all my
> data onto it, when the power went kaput! 2 hours later, when the power
> returned, I restarted my PC, only to discover that the crock of shit
> ext3 file system was not so journaling, as I had been led to believe by
> the so called hippie community Linux advocates. Disk totaly hosed to
> death, by Linux.
Interesting troll, but oddly enough I also live in outback Australia and
have similar power problems with maximum times between outages of about 40
days. Mostly the power is out a lot more often. I use ext3 on all 9 PC's
here and never have hosed a complete filesystem yet in many years of use...
On rare occasions there have been minor losses of maybe a couple of files,
but nothing substanstial...
So either I'm very lucky or OP is really unlucky - or just FOS...
.
Snit
4/4/05 6:31 AM:
> Terry Porter wrote:
>
> This was clearly *not* from Terry Porter, at least not the Terry Porter that
> the post claims to be from.
>
Ya' think? :)
There does seem to be a bit of forging going on around CSMA and COLA
recently... I know I have been forged in several posts.
I do not know who is doing it, but Steve Mackay has let on that he knows who
has been forging my name - though he will not say who or how he knows. To
be specific, he claims to know that a photoshopped image of me that a forger
pointed to was not made by Elizabot - who has posted such altered images of
me in the past.
I am not saying that Steve Mackay knows who is forging everyone, or that it
even comes from the same person, but it is clear he is involved with at
least some of the forgery.
--
God made me an atheist - who are you to question his authority?
_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 120,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account
Peter Köhlmann
> I was a long time advocate of the Linux operating system. I
> participated almost on a full time scale, in the COLA usenet group, and
> I even used to publish Troll statistics based upon daft Roy Culley's
> COLA stats, each week.
You are simply a liar. You are not Terry Porter
you also post as
Moonlight Strip Club
Freddy
John Bailo
Puppet, Sock
Adolf Torvalds
Dr. Cretin
Anthony Kirkpatrick
Chris Vest
Frank Jameson
Kandy Man
Mike Cox
Mike Forgery Cox
Not Mike Cox
Roger Mi
Snot
dodo
Jimmy Fibber
and several other handles
Interesting array of crossposts you start with, really
Snit
[snip]
> Ya' think? :)
>
> There does seem to be a bit of forging going on around CSMA and COLA
> recently... I know I have been forged in several posts.
>
> I do not know who is doing it, but Steve Mackay has let on that he
knows who
> has been forging my name - though he will not say who or how he
knows. To
> be specific, he claims to know that a photoshopped image of me that a
forger
> pointed to was not made by Elizabot - who has posted such altered
images of
> me in the past.
>
> I am not saying that Steve Mackay knows who is forging everyone, or
that it
> even comes from the same person, but it is clear he is involved with
at
> least some of the forgery.
>
>
> --
> God made me an atheist - who are you to question his authority?
>
>
>
> _________________________________________
> Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
> More than 120,000 groups
> Unlimited download
> http://www.usenetzone.com to open account
Are you the real Snit, or are you the forger, or both. It's very
strange you just happened to pop up in this thread, to make your wild,
baseless and true alegations.
Roy Culley
<1112619978.3...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
"Terry Porter" <elena...@lycos.com> writes:
>
> I was a long time advocate of the Linux operating system. I
> participated almost on a full time scale, in the COLA usenet group,
> and I even used to publish Troll statistics based upon daft Roy
> Culley's COLA stats, each week.
You're just a lying nym shifting troll. If you were the real Terry
Porter you would know that he originally posted the COLA stats and I
took it over from him.
You must try harder.
Terry Porter
How sad can anybody get. Making a collection of sock puppet names as a
hobby. May I suggest you broaden your horizons, and start stamp
collecting or a coin collection instead. It's still very lame, but may
help get some of your dignity back.
Peter Köhlmann
How sad can anybody get. Using a collection of sock puppet names like you do
May I suggest you broaden your horizons, and start knitting instead
Peter Jensen
Hash: SHA1
(Faked) Terry Porter wrote:
> How sad can anybody get. Making a collection of sock puppet names as a
> hobby.
It's not like it's hard or anything. At least not on an OS with proper
tools for the job:
$ grep '^NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.77.121.19$' \
/var/spool/news/slrnpull/news/comp/os/linux/ -rl |\
xargs grep -h ^From: | sort | cut -d" " -f2- | uniq -c
3 "Adolf Torvalds" <john...@linuxmail.org>
1 "Anthony Kirkpatrick" <Lumini...@netscape.net>
1 "Beef Curtains" <Lumini...@netscape.net>
5 "Chris Venereal" <Lumini...@netscape.net>
2 "Chris Vest" <Lumini...@netscape.net>
4 "Dr. Cretin" <elena...@lycos.com>
3 "Dr. Cretin" <john...@linuxmail.org>
10 "Freddy" <fred_j...@fsmail.net>
1 "Jimmy Fibber" <Lumini...@netscape.net>
6 "John Bailo" <john...@linuxmail.org>
2 "Kandy Man" <john...@linuxmail.org>
12 "Moonlight Strip Club, Str. Magaziei, nr. 19, Cluj-Napoca" <Luminitacurva@ne
4 "Moonlight Strip Club, Str. Magaziei, nr. 19, Cluj-Napoca" <simoncooke@linux
1 "Morc" <Lumini...@netscape.net>
1 "Not Mike Cox" <mik...@linuxmail.org>
2 "Puppet, Sock" <Lumini...@netscape.net>
1 "Ripskit" <Lumini...@netscape.net>
5 "Roger Mi" <Lumini...@netscape.net>
2 "Roger Mi" <elena...@lycos.com>
1 "Sinister Pigshit" <Lumini...@netscape.net>
1 "Snit" <elena...@lycos.com>
1 "Terry Porter" <Lumini...@netscape.net>
2 "Terry Porter" <elena...@lycos.com>
1 "Truth Be Out" <Lumini...@netscape.net>
1 "chrisv" <Lumini...@netscape.net>
Sure looks like Microsoft has outsourced their trolling to Romania,
recently ... ;-)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFCUUmWd1ZThqotgfgRAlXNAKCJ43wdg096FmnzlWdf0DAOKFzzMQCgyQep
nPrBTnIVmRmSuY3uRIJhRXY=
=J4sf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
PeKaJe
Stupid, n.:
Losing $25 on the game and $25 on the instant replay.
Mark Kent
Terry Porter <elena...@lycos.com> espoused:
Not the real Terry Porter.
Begone, foul id thieving troll from the bowels of Redmond.
--
end
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
BE ALOOF! (There has been a recent population explosion of lerts.)
Lord Puppet of the socks
Ah, but I have a mission. You see my mission is to clear out of COLA
all the REAL trolls that hang about here, and you being one of them.
Once my mission is complete, then I, Lord Puppet of the socks, shall
reign supreme.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!
7
Before that it was coming from south america and soon afterwards
a big news story broke out that Brazillian government
is dumping microshaft. The astro turfers must have been hired to
post their astroturfing letters into Brazil by microshat.
Brazil and other governments should look at legalizing
astro turfing, its the only way to bring it under control.
If so much trolling activity is increasing from Romania, they must
have opened up a big trolling center there and are up to no
good posting letters from there. May be manufacturing the letters there?
The manufactured letters being posted by different astroturds
all have a common problem indicating its all being assembled
at one point in a standard format before being dispatched
to various centers for repost.
May be the Romanian and EU countries as well as amerikkka
should also think about legalizing the framework for
astroturfing. The astro turfing profession is truly getting its hand
into everything in a massive global way.
Sinister Midget
On 2005-04-04, quoth Peter Jensen <use...@pekajemaps.homeip.net>:
> 1 "Ripskit" <Lumini...@netscape.net>
> 1 "Sinister Pigshit" <Lumini...@netscape.net>
> 1 "chrisv" <Lumini...@netscape.net>
One of the bad side effects of using decent filtering: one doesn't get
to see the childish attempts at getting a rise out of others or
oneself. Still, it's not worth the load of crap that's included in the
rest of the post just to see a single 'From" address that might be
mildly amusing.
> Sure looks like Microsoft has outsourced their trolling to Romania,
> recently ... ;-)
There are other countries that are even poorer at it and need the jobs
more (read: cheap labor). I don't know why they'd go for Romania when
they could just have easily used Burmese or something.
--
"Ironically, Microsoft's efforts to deny interoperability of Windows with
legitimate non-Microsoft applications have created an environment in which
Microsoft's programs interoperate efficiently only with Internet viruses."
- Dan Geer.
Elizabot v2.0.2
> Snit wrote:
> [snip]
>
>
> Are you the real Snit, or are you the forger, or both.
My best guess is that he's both.
> It's very
> strange you just happened to pop up in this thread, to make your wild,
> baseless and true alegations.
It probably didn't occur to him to have one of his sock puppets to speak
for him. And it's also my opinion that Snit's allegations concerning
Steve M. are false.
--
Cuiva nwalca Carnirasse! Nai yarvaxea rasselya taltuva notto-carinnar!!
By responding to Elizabot v2.0.2 you implicitly agree to the TOS at:
http://elizabot.spymac.net/
Grug
God I needed a laugh today "Lord Puppet of the socks" LOL
Thanks!
-Grug
ray
Strikes me a bit odd that Terry Porter would be using an e-mail address of
'elenacurva' but what the hell do I know.
Anyway, living in Southeastern Idaho, which is hardly the center of the
universe, we've had a few power outages, as well. I'm running mostly
Reiserfs, with a few ext3 as well, and for some strange reason, I've never
noticed any lost data.
7
> Anyway, living in Southeastern Idaho, which is hardly the center of the
> universe, we've had a few power outages, as well. I'm running mostly
> Reiserfs, with a few ext3 as well, and for some strange reason, I've never
> noticed any lost data.
I regularly pull the power when in a hurry - I know I'm bad.
But there is a purpose to it - to make it fail and so far,
I have never had a failure.
Windopes - oh yeah - I'm fscked utterly butterly.
I used to run workshop for a big co - some 2000 PCs there.
When power fails to the building, 30 PCs fail
at a time. What a fskcing nightmare!
I can imagine with GNU/Linux, that that number would be close to zero
barring any hardware failures (surge can vaporize atleast 4 PCs).
Snit
11530ak...@corp.supernews.com on 4/4/05 11:03 AM:
> Snit wrote:
>> Snit wrote:
>> [snip]
>
>>
>>
>> Are you the real Snit, or are you the forger, or both.
>
> My best guess is that he's both.
>
>> It's very
>> strange you just happened to pop up in this thread, to make your wild,
>> baseless and true alegations.
>
> It probably didn't occur to him to have one of his sock puppets to speak
> for him. And it's also my opinion that Snit's allegations concerning
> Steve M. are false.
Which allegations are you in reference to... the one where I point out that
when Steve Mackay stated:
P.S. The image didn't come from Ebot you little fucktard!
He was making it very clear that he knows who did not (and who did) create
the image linked to by the forger... and therefore almost certainly knows
who is forging my name (and likely others).
Steve Mackay may or may not be the forger, but he almost certainly knows who
it is. If not, how could he be so certain it was not you?
--
"If a million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."
- Anatole France
Elizabot v2.0.2
> "Elizabot v2.0.2" <Eliz...@NsOpSyPmAaMc.com> stated in post
> 11530ak...@corp.supernews.com on 4/4/05 11:03 AM:
>
>
>>Snit wrote:
>>
>>>Snit wrote:
>>>[snip]
>>
>>>
>>>Are you the real Snit, or are you the forger, or both.
>>
>>My best guess is that he's both.
>>
>>
>>>It's very
>>>strange you just happened to pop up in this thread, to make your wild,
>>>baseless and true alegations.
>>
>>It probably didn't occur to him to have one of his sock puppets to speak
>>for him. And it's also my opinion that Snit's allegations concerning
>>Steve M. are false.
>
>
> Which allegations are you in reference to... the one where I point out that
> when Steve Mackay stated:
>
> P.S. The image didn't come from Ebot you little fucktard!
>
> He was making it very clear that he knows who did not (and who did) create
> the image linked to by the forger... and therefore almost certainly knows
> who is forging my name (and likely others).
>
> Steve Mackay may or may not be the forger, but he almost certainly knows who
> it is. If not, how could he be so certain it was not you?
Here is what *I* think happened:
_sigmond composed it.
Sigmond made up the image.
$¡gm◊π∂ uploaded it to the web site.
And sigmond posted it to the newsgroups!!
Snit
> $¡gm׼ uploaded it to the web site.
>
> And sigmond posted it to the newsgroups!!
LOL... OK... for once you actually said something funny. I will give credit
where credit is due... :)
Now do you have any real thoughts on why Steve Mackay is either forging my
name or protecting someone he knows to be doing so... or any other
possibility that would fit the facts?
--
"Innovation is not about saying yes to everything. It's about saying NO to
all but the most crucial features." -- Steve Jobs
Elizabot v2.0.2
I do have thoughts about why you think he meant such, but I found it
more interesting to wonder how you knew that it was only one poster
forging posts with your name on them? How do you know that there aren't
several?
For instance, maybe Sigmond posted the one on April Fool's Day and
sigmond posted the ones last week.
I also wonder why you are complaining so loudly about one April Fool's
Day post. It did seem different to me than the other forgeries. Why
aren't you complaining about the forgeries that happened to you before
4/1 and the forgery earlier today by that "cola poster."
Snit
>>>>> It probably didn't occur to him to have one of his sock puppets to speak
>>>>> for him. And it's also my opinion that Snit's allegations concerning
>>>>> Steve M. are false.
You never did say why you feel my claims against Steve Mackay are, according
to you, false. Do you disagree with my evaluation of his comments, and if
so, why?
>>>> Which allegations are you in reference to... the one where I point out that
>>>> when Steve Mackay stated:
>>>>
>>>> P.S. The image didn't come from Ebot you little fucktard!
>>>>
>>>> He was making it very clear that he knows who did not (and who did) create
>>>> the image linked to by the forger... and therefore almost certainly knows
>>>> who is forging my name (and likely others).
>>>>
>>>> Steve Mackay may or may not be the forger, but he almost certainly knows
>>>> who
>>>> it is. If not, how could he be so certain it was not you?
>>>
>>> Here is what *I* think happened:
>>>
>>> _sigmond composed it.
>>>
>>> Sigmond made up the image.
>>>
>>> $¡gm×¼� uploaded it to the web site.
>>>
>>> And sigmond posted it to the newsgroups!!
>>
>> LOL... OK... for once you actually said something funny. I will give credit
>> where credit is due... :)
>>
>> Now do you have any real thoughts on why Steve Mackay is either forging my
>> name or protecting someone he knows to be doing so... or any other
>> possibility that would fit the facts?
>
> I do have thoughts about why you think he meant such, but I found it
> more interesting to wonder how you knew that it was only one poster
> forging posts with your name on them? How do you know that there aren't
> several?
I suppose there could be, but see no reason to assume such. Occam's
Razor... though there are enough cretins in CSMA following me around where
it *could* be more than one.
>
> For instance, maybe Sigmond posted the one on April Fool's Day and
> sigmond posted the ones last week.
Oh my... you used that joke already.
>
> I also wonder why you are complaining so loudly about one April Fool's
> Day post. It did seem different to me than the other forgeries. Why
> aren't you complaining about the forgeries that happened to you before
> 4/1 and the forgery earlier today by that "cola poster."
That post stirred up the trolls more *and*, more importantly, that is the
post which got Steve Mackay to she he likely knows who has been forging my
name - if it is not Steve himself.
With the image, though, it did seem more your style. Then again, I have no
doubt that Steve Mackay knows full well how to forge images... the fact that
he can is certainly not in question by anyone who has followed CSMA for any
length of time.
--
I am one of only .3% of people who have avoided becoming a statistic.
Elizabot v2.0.2
> "Elizabot v2.0.2" <Eliz...@NsOpSyPmAaMc.com> stated in post
> 1153b1h...@corp.supernews.com on 4/4/05 2:05 PM:
>
>
>>>>>>It probably didn't occur to him to have one of his sock puppets to speak
>>>>>>for him. And it's also my opinion that Snit's allegations concerning
>>>>>>Steve M. are false.
>
>
> You never did say why you feel my claims against Steve Mackay are, according
> to you, false. Do you disagree with my evaluation of his comments, and if so, why?
I considered the source of your claims -- YOU!! lol
Snit personality A and Snit personality B. One person, two cretins...
>>For instance, maybe Sigmond posted the one on April Fool's Day and
>>sigmond posted the ones last week.
>
>
> Oh my... you used that joke already.
Oh my...
>>I also wonder why you are complaining so loudly about one April Fool's
>>Day post. It did seem different to me than the other forgeries. Why
>>aren't you complaining about the forgeries that happened to you before
>>4/1 and the forgery earlier today by that "cola poster."
>
>
> That post stirred up the trolls more *and*, more importantly, that is the
> post which got Steve Mackay to she he likely knows who has been forging my
> name - if it is not Steve himself.
>
> With the image, though, it did seem more your style. Then again, I have no
> doubt that Steve Mackay knows full well how to forge images... the fact that
> he can is certainly not in question by anyone who has followed CSMA for any
> length of time.
I've seen examples of you altering your own image before too, Snit. And
they weren't pretty I might add.
Snit
>> You never did say why you feel my claims against Steve Mackay are, according
>> to you, false. Do you disagree with my evaluation of his comments, and if
>> so, why?
>
> I considered the source of your claims -- YOU!! lol
I am not surprised you let your bias get in your way of answering based on
logic and reason.
This is pretty much where most of your posts gets to - I show strong support
for something, and then you and the rest of the cretin crew deny it based on
nothing other than your own biases... and then congratulate each other for a
job well done.
I would hope that you would be able to rise above this and actually at least
try to see past your biases and *think* instead of *feel*. Clearly that is
too much of me to ask of you, as you are just not capable of it.
Elizabot v2.0.2
"I've seen examples of you altering your own image before too, Snit. And
they weren't pretty I might add."
It was part of the reason why I do not trust that you might not have
photoshopped the image yourself.
Snit
> I see you dishonestly snipped part of my post.
>
> "I've seen examples of you altering your own image before too, Snit. And
> they weren't pretty I might add."
>
> It was part of the reason why I do not trust that you might not have
> photoshopped the image yourself.
What do you find dishonest about my snipping? I am merely trying to get you
focus on the topic at hand - your inability to see past your emotions and
biases and deal with logic.
If getting an answer is so important to you, I have no problem answering -
there are many people, including myself, who likely have the ability to
alter images. I mentioned Steve Mackay because he has shown he has
knowledge of who actually did do the altering in question... and there is
little doubt he has the skill. The fact that other people *also* have the
skills needed is simply not important, unless the skills were strikingly
rare, which they are not.
I have granted you a full, complete, and honest answer to your question -
one based on logic and reasoning and not bias or emotion. Are you willing
and able to do the same for my comments, below?
I hope so, but you have given me no reason to believe so and plenty of
reason to think that you simply do not have the capacity.
>
>
>
> Snit wrote:
>> "Elizabot v2.0.2" <Eliz...@NsOpSyPmAaMc.com> stated in post
>> 1153cnc...@corp.supernews.com on 4/4/05 2:34 PM:
>>
>>
>>>> You never did say why you feel my claims against Steve Mackay are,
>>>> according
>>>> to you, false. Do you disagree with my evaluation of his comments, and if
>>>> so, why?
>>>
>>> I considered the source of your claims -- YOU!! lol
>>
>> I am not surprised you let your bias get in your way of answering based on
>> logic and reason.
>>
>> This is pretty much where most of your posts gets to - I show strong support
>> for something, and then you and the rest of the cretin crew deny it based on
>> nothing other than your own biases... and then congratulate each other for a
>> job well done.
>>
>> I would hope that you would be able to rise above this and actually at least
>> try to see past your biases and *think* instead of *feel*. Clearly that is
>> too much of me to ask of you, as you are just not capable of it.
--
Picture of a tuna soda: http://snipurl.com/bid1
Feel free to ask for the recipe.
Elizabot v2.0.2
"I've seen examples of you altering your own image before too, Snit. And
they weren't pretty I might add."
It was part of the reason why I do not trust that you might not have
photoshopped the image yourself.
Snit
> I see you dishonestly snipped part of my post.
>
> "I've seen examples of you altering your own image before too, Snit. And
> they weren't pretty I might add."
>
> It was part of the reason why I do not trust that you might not have
> photoshopped the image yourself.
In what way do you find it dishonest for me to not reply to your comments?
You do not even have a question in there for my to answer!
It is clear you have seen me point out others (including your own) snipping
that *is* dishonest and you are unable to figure out why some snipping is
honest and some is not.
Not all snipping is dishonest, Elizabot - but it is telling that you are
unable to differentiate between honestly and dishonesty. Sad, really...
I will help you:
When someone runs from questions via snipping and then characterizes the
data snipped in a dishonest and trolling manner, that is not honest.
Snipping comments that one has no response to, esp. when no response is even
requested, is not dishonest.
You have repeatedly been avoiding giving any honest answer to how you
believe Steve Mackay is so sure that you are not the one who created the
image and has been forging my posts. Clearly he knows more than is publicly
available, but based on your emotions and biases you will not even admit to
that - nor offer any other alternative explanation for his comments based on
logic and reasoning.
You frequently avoid questions by not answering them and asking your own -
and then not understanding why I want you to answer my question first... or
still refusing to answer my question once I have answered yours. I am open
and honest and trusting - while you are not.
Of course, you will likely pull out your silly tests (with or without your
outrageous question about how the concept of incest makes me feel) and claim
I am not open because I have no desire to play your silly games.
>>>> You never did say why you feel my claims against Steve Mackay are,
>>>> according to you, false. Do you disagree with my evaluation of his
>>>> comments, and if so, why?
>>>
>>> I considered the source of your claims -- YOU!! lol
>>
>>
>> I am not surprised you let your bias get in your way of answering based on
>> logic and reason.
>>
>> This is pretty much where most of your posts gets to - I show strong support
>> for something, and then you and the rest of the cretin crew deny it based on
>> nothing other than your own biases... and then congratulate each other for a
>> job well done.
>>
>> I would hope that you would be able to rise above this and actually at least
>> try to see past your biases and *think* instead of *feel*. Clearly that is
>> too much of me to ask of you, as you are just not capable of it.
You have stated nothing which shows my comments here to be anything other
than 100% true and accurate... nor, likely, will you.
--
"Innovation is not about saying yes to everything. It's about saying NO to
all but the most crucial features." -- Steve Jobs
Elizabot v2.0.2
> "Elizabot v2.0.2" <Eliz...@NsOpSyPmAaMc.com> stated in post
>
>
>>I see you dishonestly snipped part of my post.
>>
>>"I've seen examples of you altering your own image before too, Snit. And
>>they weren't pretty I might add."
>>
>>It was part of the reason why I do not trust that you might not have
>>photoshopped the image yourself.
>
>
> What do you find dishonest about my snipping?
My point that you have altered your own images in an unflattering
manner. I'd say that the 4/1 post image is very much like images I have
seen elsewhere - images that you yourself have made.
> I am merely trying to get you
> focus on the topic at hand - your inability to see past your emotions and
> biases and deal with logic.
I do not doubt that you believe that.
> If getting an answer is so important to you, I have no problem answering -
> there are many people, including myself, who likely have the ability to
> alter images. I mentioned Steve Mackay because he has shown he has
> knowledge of who actually did do the altering in question... and there is
> little doubt he has the skill. The fact that other people *also* have the
> skills needed is simply not important, unless the skills were strikingly
> rare, which they are not.
>
> I have granted you a full, complete, and honest answer to your question -
> one based on logic and reasoning and not bias or emotion. Are you willing
> and able to do the same for my comments, below?
>
> I hope so, but you have given me no reason to believe so and plenty of
> reason to think that you simply do not have the capacity.
It seems to be that maybe Steve may have made an error in writing what
he wrote, and, knowing that you would not accept clarification, dropped
the matter.
I think it's much more likely that *you* forged the post, as you have
used individual.net, you have posted using other names, and you have
altered your own image in an unflattering manner. These are all easily
documented.
>>
>>
>>Snit wrote:
>>
>>>"Elizabot v2.0.2" <Eliz...@NsOpSyPmAaMc.com> stated in post
>>>1153cnc...@corp.supernews.com on 4/4/05 2:34 PM:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>You never did say why you feel my claims against Steve Mackay are,
>>>>>according
>>>>>to you, false. Do you disagree with my evaluation of his comments, and if
>>>>>so, why?
>>>>
>>>>I considered the source of your claims -- YOU!! lol
>>>
>>>I am not surprised you let your bias get in your way of answering based on
>>>logic and reason.
>>>
>>>This is pretty much where most of your posts gets to - I show strong support
>>>for something, and then you and the rest of the cretin crew deny it based on
>>>nothing other than your own biases... and then congratulate each other for a
>>>job well done.
>>>
>>>I would hope that you would be able to rise above this and actually at least
>>>try to see past your biases and *think* instead of *feel*. Clearly that is
>>>too much of me to ask of you, as you are just not capable of it.
>
--
Elizabot v2.0.2
--
Snit
> Snit wrote:
>> "Elizabot v2.0.2" <Eliz...@NsOpSyPmAaMc.com> stated in post
>> 1153dau...@corp.supernews.com on 4/4/05 2:45 PM:
>>
>>
>>> I see you dishonestly snipped part of my post.
>>>
>>> "I've seen examples of you altering your own image before too, Snit. And
>>> they weren't pretty I might add."
>>>
>>> It was part of the reason why I do not trust that you might not have
>>> photoshopped the image yourself.
>>
>> What do you find dishonest about my snipping?
>
> My point that you have altered your own images in an unflattering
> manner. I'd say that the 4/1 post image is very much like images I have
> seen elsewhere - images that you yourself have made.
You are welcome to that opinion, but that does not answer my question - what
do you find dishonest about my snipping.
Keep in mind that you did not even ask me a question - nor did I
characterize the comments of yours I snipped in *any* way... which is very
different than the running from questions and dishonestly mischaracterizing
them that has been repeatedly doing to me...
I find it sad that you can not tell the difference between dishonesty and
snipping for brevity. I am not, however, surprised that the concept of
honesty eludes you.
>
>> I am merely trying to get you focus on the topic at hand - your inability to
>> see past your emotions and biases and deal with logic.
>
> I do not doubt that you believe that.
I do not merely *believe* that, I have been pointing to clear examples
supported by logic and reason.
Again, you are struggling to differentiate the two.
>
>> If getting an answer is so important to you, I have no problem answering -
>> there are many people, including myself, who likely have the ability to
>> alter images. I mentioned Steve Mackay because he has shown he has
>> knowledge of who actually did do the altering in question... and there is
>> little doubt he has the skill. The fact that other people *also* have the
>> skills needed is simply not important, unless the skills were strikingly
>> rare, which they are not.
>>
>> I have granted you a full, complete, and honest answer to your question -
>> one based on logic and reasoning and not bias or emotion. Are you willing
>> and able to do the same for my comments, below?
>>
>> I hope so, but you have given me no reason to believe so and plenty of
>> reason to think that you simply do not have the capacity.
>
> It seems to be that maybe Steve may have made an error in writing what
> he wrote, and, knowing that you would not accept clarification, dropped
> the matter.
It is possible that his comment was in error - though he sure seems *very*
sure of himself as he writes it:
P.S. The image didn't come from Ebot you little fucktard!
Certainly if he wrote that *in error* he should own up to it and apologize.
Still, you have provided an alternative possibility: it is possible that
Steve Mackay has no knowledge of the forgery and merely is a crude jerk
unwilling to admit to his errors or apologize for such offensive language.
> I think it's much more likely that *you* forged the post, as you have
> used individual.net, you have posted using other names, and you have
> altered your own image in an unflattering manner. These are all easily
> documented.
You may have whatever opinion you like, but please keep in mind that in
order to hold such an opinion about me you *also* have to take the leap of
faith that Steve Mackay was in error or lying when he made his comment and
that his is as I describe above: a crude jerk unwilling to admit to his
errors or apologize for such offensive language.
In any case, thank you for rising to my challenge and at least *trying* to
see past your biases and emotions to form a reasoned opinion - even if your
opinion differs from mine and the success of your attempt is questionable...
>
>>>> "Elizabot v2.0.2" <Eliz...@NsOpSyPmAaMc.com> stated in post
>>>> 1153cnc...@corp.supernews.com on 4/4/05 2:34 PM:
>>>>
>>>>>> You never did say why you feel my claims against Steve Mackay are,
>>>>>> according to you, false. Do you disagree with my evaluation of his
>>>>>> comments, and if so, why?
>>>>>>
>>>>> I considered the source of your claims -- YOU!! lol
>>>>>
>>>> I am not surprised you let your bias get in your way of answering based on
>>>> logic and reason.
>>>>
>>>> This is pretty much where most of your posts gets to - I show strong
>>>> support for something, and then you and the rest of the cretin crew deny it
>>>> based on nothing other than your own biases... and then congratulate each
>>>> other for >>>> a job well done.
>>>>
>>>> I would hope that you would be able to rise above this and actually at
>>>> least try to see past your biases and *think* instead of *feel*. Clearly
>>>> that is too much of me to ask of you, as you are just not capable of it.
--
"Innovation is not about saying yes to everything. It's about saying NO to
all but the most crucial features." -- Steve Jobs
_________________________________________
Steve Carroll
"Elizabot v2.0.2" <Eliz...@NsOpSyPmAaMc.com> wrote:
So, all the *real* evidence here points more to Snit than to anyone
else. Why am I not surprised.
--
"What makes you think I am interested in "winning" a discussion?" - Snit
Steve
Snit
noone-1A3DF0....@comcast.dca.giganews.com on 4/4/05 3:32 PM:
What evidence, Steve... Elizabot's conjecture based on her biases and
emotional problems do not count.
--
God made me an atheist - who are you to question his authority?
Steve Carroll
Snit <SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> wrote:
(snip)
> Still, you have provided an alternative possibility: it is possible that
> Steve Mackay has no knowledge of the forgery and merely is a crude jerk
> unwilling to admit to his errors or apologize for such offensive language.
LOL! It's amazing how delusional you are. Anyone can see that you were
being purposefully obtuse in that discussion where he asked you to
support your contention... the one that now turns out to be a lie on
your part. Calling your lie a "mistake" is just more of your bullshit.
> > I think it's much more likely that *you* forged the post, as you have
> > used individual.net, you have posted using other names, and you have
> > altered your own image in an unflattering manner. These are all easily
> > documented.
>
> You may have whatever opinion you like,
Change glue bags, Snit... if she documents this, it'll be reality at the
point... whether you choose to deny its existence or not.
> but please keep in mind that in
> order to hold such an opinion about me you *also* have to take the leap of
> faith that Steve Mackay was in error or lying when he made his comment and
> that his is as I describe above: a crude jerk unwilling to admit to his
> errors or apologize for such offensive language.
<shaking head in disbelief>
llort
wrote:
>Terry Porter wrote:
>
>
>> Where I live, in the outback of Australia, the power is not reliable.
>> I had just finished building my Gentoo installation, and puting all my
>> data onto it, when the power went kaput! 2 hours later, when the power
>> returned, I restarted my PC, only to discover that the crock of shit
>> ext3 file system was not so journaling, as I had been led to believe by
>> the so called hippie community Linux advocates. Disk totaly hosed to
>> death, by Linux.
>
>Interesting troll, but oddly enough I also live in outback Australia and
>have similar power problems with maximum times between outages of about 40
>days. Mostly the power is out a lot more often. I use ext3 on all 9 PC's
>here and never have hosed a complete filesystem yet in many years of use...
>On rare occasions there have been minor losses of maybe a couple of files,
>but nothing substanstial...
>
>So either I'm very lucky or OP is really unlucky - or just FOS...
>
Maybe you guys need to invest in some solar power or something out
there :)
Edwin
"Terry Porter" <elena...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:1112619978.3...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>I was a long time advocate of the Linux operating system. I
> participated almost on a full time scale, in the COLA usenet group, and
> I even used to publish Troll statistics based upon daft Roy Culley's
> COLA stats, each week.
>
> I am now cured. I always felt Linux was a little bit shit, but my eyes
> were opened up the day my hard drive got hosed, and I lost all my data!
>
> I had just finished building my Gentoo installation, and puting all my
> data onto it, when the power went kaput! 2 hours later, when the power
> returned, I restarted my PC, only to discover that the crock of shit
> ext3 file system was not so journaling, as I had been led to believe by
> the so called hippie community Linux advocates. Disk totaly hosed to
> death, by Linux.
>
> timebomb version of windows 2003, that I had been given at some
> computer show once, and downloaded a shareware tar tape extraction
> utility for windows. I managed to recover all my data. Thank god.
> But it made me think. I then got my credit card out, picked up the
> telephone, called my nearest Microsoft vendor. In 2 minutes, I had
> ordered a full copy of Windows 2003 server, which I duly received about
> a week later. It was installed in 30 minutes. Sweat.
>
> I now reflect upon my time with Linux, and wonder why on earth I wasted
> so much of my time with it, sometimes spending endless nights getting
> simple hardware devices to work. I now know Windows and Microsoft (not
> Micro$oft, as I used to insult them with) are very valuable assets to
> the global ecomony, and Linux with its band of hippie beatnicks and
> communists, are attempting to bring down our western democratic values.
>
> God bless Windows. God bless Microsoft.
You should have kept Linux and bought a UPS instead of Windows.
Now throw another shrimp on the barby...
--
"If someone wanted to buy pipe wrenches with sequins, what's wrong with
someone selling them?" -- Joe Ragosta, aka TravelinMan