Steve Carroll has admitted to being Sigmond
Snit
"I did post as sigmond and create that sex webpage starring elizabot...
what of it?"
After all this time and all the accusations against me, the troll finally
admitted to the fact that it was, in deed, him.
But this is Steve....
He has since tried to attribute this quote to me, but if you do a search on
Google you will see that is simply not the case - it is from Steve...
Please feel free to check there and other sources in case someone thinks my
post is not on Google. I suggest:
http://www.talkaboutmac.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/
But also check your own records or whatever else you need... the fact is
clear that Steve Carroll is the author of this quote (confession) and is now
trying to back peddle and attribute it to me.
While I do not expect an apology from all those that tried to accuse me of
what Steve has admitted he did, it would be appreciated.
Steve M., you were the loudest of the accusers... are you willing to admit,
in the light of Steve Carroll's confession, that you were wrong about me?
Are you willing to apologize?
I am of mixed feeling on this... I commend Steve for finally coming clean on
this, but am disappointed in both that it took him so long to do so, and how
he now wants to attribute his quote to me!
Then again, as is also seen in my .sig, Steve has admitted that he is "here
to troll".
At least he has now had moments of honesty...
--
"OK... so I'm here to troll." - Steve C.
-----
"I did post as sigmond and create that sex webpage starring elizabot...
what of it?" - Steve C.
Wally
----------
In article <BCECDFDE.54263%snit-...@cableone.net>, Snit
<snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
> In a recent post Steve Carroll authored the following quote:
>
> "I did post as sigmond and create that sex webpage starring elizabot...
> what of it?"
It would save a lot of peoples time if you supplied a direct link (as you
usually do) to where Steve C "authored" this quote, and attributed it to
himself as in a "confession", why now do you expect people to "do a search
on Google" surely it would be far more satisfying for you to supply such a
link?.........Can you?
> After all this time and all the accusations against me, the troll finally
> admitted to the fact that it was, in deed, him.
I look forward to reading where this occurred, ....link?
<snip>
Snit
yuSxc.17167802$Id.28...@news.easynews.com on 6/9/04 10:39 PM:
>> In a recent post Steve Carroll authored the following quote:
>>
>> "I did post as sigmond and create that sex webpage starring elizabot...
>> what of it?"
>
> It would save a lot of peoples time if you supplied a direct link (as you
> usually do) to where Steve C "authored" this quote, and attributed it to
> himself as in a "confession", why now do you expect people to "do a search
> on Google" surely it would be far more satisfying for you to supply such a
> link?.........Can you?
>
>> After all this time and all the accusations against me, the troll finally
>> admitted to the fact that it was, in deed, him.
>
> I look forward to reading where this occurred, ....link?
>
He actually stated it several times, though he attempted to attribute the
quote to me...
The earliest I see the quote is in this post:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=fretwizz-435D3E.14582909062004%40netnew
s.comcast.net&output=gplain
If you can find evidence that anyone stated anything even similar to what he
states in that post, I would like to see it.
I suppose the other possibility is that he is just outright lying... which
do you think it is?
--
See responses to flames
news://alt.flame.macintosh
ed
Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> typed:
*sigh*. so you are just blatantly lying that steve confessed w/ that quote?
what's the point? quit the crap already.
Snit
jCSxc.82601$bu.7...@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com on 6/9/04 10:47 PM:
How else do you interpret someone saying:
"I did post as sigmond and create that sex webpage starring elizabot... what
of it?"
Do you find such a comment from Steve, or anyone for that matter, to be
reasonable if he did not, in fact, post as sigmond and make the webpage in
question?
Steve has admitted to his deeds... and has tried to push the admission onto
me.
ed
Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> typed:
ok, so you *ARE* either retarded, or an unrepenting liar. glad that's
absolutely, 100% without question now.
Snit
gWSxc.82604$YF.5...@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com on 6/9/04 11:09 PM:
> ok, so you *ARE* either retarded, or an unrepenting liar. glad that's
> absolutely, 100% without question now.
>
How do you interpret Steve's quote?
Again, it was Steve who stated:
"I did post as sigmond and create that sex webpage starring elizabot... what
of it?"
I look forward to hearing your interpretation of those comments made by
Steve Carroll
Wally
----------
In article <BCED439D.542B1%snit-...@cableone.net>, Snit
<snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
> "Wally" <wa...@wally.world.net> wrote in
> yuSxc.17167802$Id.28...@news.easynews.com on 6/9/04 10:39 PM:
>
>>> In a recent post Steve Carroll authored the following quote:
>>>
>>> "I did post as sigmond and create that sex webpage starring elizabot...
>>> what of it?"
>>
>> It would save a lot of peoples time if you supplied a direct link (as you
>> usually do) to where Steve C "authored" this quote, and attributed it to
>> himself as in a "confession", why now do you expect people to "do a search
>> on Google" surely it would be far more satisfying for you to supply such a
>> link?.........Can you?
>>
>>> After all this time and all the accusations against me, the troll finally
>>> admitted to the fact that it was, in deed, him.
>>
>> I look forward to reading where this occurred, ....link?
>>
> He actually stated it several times, though he attempted to attribute the
> quote to me...
You really should have put a bit more thought into this nonsense, in your op
you state........
"He has since tried to attribute this quote to me"
"has since"?...since what or when?, the earliest instance of that quote that
you can produce is one that clearly attributes that quote to you, you simply
have removed that part of the quote that does the attributing ie: "- Snit"
and replaced it with "- Steve C." and then called it a "confession" had you
been honest and posted that quote accurately it should have read something
like......
"I did post as sigmond and create that sex webpage starring elizabot...
what of it? - Snit" - Steve C.
Then all you need do is ask Steve to indicate where that quote came from,
unless of course you already know?
>
> The earliest I see the quote is in this post:
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=fretwizz-435D3E.14582909062004%40netnew
> s.comcast.net&output=gplain
Then "has since" in your op is irrelevant, and inaccurate
> If you can find evidence that anyone stated anything even similar to what he
> states in that post, I would like to see it.
My question is why you would doctor that quote rather than ask Steve where
it originated, perhaps you already know?
> I suppose the other possibility is that he is just outright lying... which
> do you think it is?
That isn't a possibility until such times as he is given a chance to explain
where the quote originated.
Snit
UoTxc.17262277$Of.28...@news.easynews.com on 6/9/04 11:41 PM:
>> He actually stated it several times, though he attempted to attribute the
>> quote to me...
>
> You really should have put a bit more thought into this nonsense, in your op
> you state........
>
> "He has since tried to attribute this quote to me"
>
> "has since"?...since what or when?, the earliest instance of that quote that
> you can produce is one that clearly attributes that quote to you, you simply
> have removed that part of the quote that does the attributing ie: "- Snit"
> and replaced it with "- Steve C." and then called it a "confession" had you
> been honest and posted that quote accurately it should have read something
> like......
>
> "I did post as sigmond and create that sex webpage starring elizabot...
> what of it? - Snit" - Steve C.
> Then all you need do is ask Steve to indicate where that quote came from,
> unless of course you already know?
It is a good question.
Ok Steve C., if this quote did not originate directly from you, where did it
come from?
I already know the answer, as I suspect you do: Steve C. is the author of
that quote.
Tommy
well as the human race. I am ashamed even being on the same planet as
you. Oh wait... I'm not.
Snit
7de4cc6c.04060...@posting.google.com on 6/9/04 11:48 PM:
> Please shut the fuck up, you are a disgrace to the Mac community as
> well as the human race. I am ashamed even being on the same planet as
> you. Oh wait... I'm not.
The fact that you are ashamed of aspects of yourself seems to be a good
start...
:)
Wally
----------
In article <BCED51EB.542E0%snit-...@cableone.net>, Snit
<snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
> "Wally" <wa...@wally.world.net> wrote in
> UoTxc.17262277$Of.28...@news.easynews.com on 6/9/04 11:41 PM:
>
>>> He actually stated it several times, though he attempted to attribute the
>>> quote to me...
>>
>> You really should have put a bit more thought into this nonsense, in your op
>> you state........
>>
>> "He has since tried to attribute this quote to me"
>>
>> "has since"?...since what or when?, the earliest instance of that quote that
>> you can produce is one that clearly attributes that quote to you, you simply
>> have removed that part of the quote that does the attributing ie: "- Snit"
>> and replaced it with "- Steve C." and then called it a "confession" had you
>> been honest and posted that quote accurately it should have read something
>> like......
>>
>> "I did post as sigmond and create that sex webpage starring elizabot...
>> what of it? - Snit" - Steve C.
>> Then all you need do is ask Steve to indicate where that quote came from,
>> unless of course you already know?
>
> It is a good question.
>
> Ok Steve C., if this quote did not originate directly from you, where did it
> come from?
There that wasn't too hard was it? and no doctoring necessary, it's amazing
what can be achieved with a bit of honesty and common sense. <shrug>
> I already know the answer, as I suspect you do: Steve C. is the author of
> that quote.
We shall see, now that you have finally got round to asking the right
question!
Nashton
> "ed" <ne...@no-atwistedweb-spam.com> wrote in
> gWSxc.82604$YF.5...@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com on 6/9/04 11:09 PM:
>
>
>>ok, so you *ARE* either retarded, or an unrepenting liar. glad that's
>>absolutely, 100% without question now.
>>
>
> How do you interpret Steve's quote?
>
> Again, it was Steve who stated:
>
> "I did post as sigmond and create that sex webpage starring elizabot... what
> of it?"
>
> I look forward to hearing your interpretation of those comments made by
> Steve Carroll
>
Sure Snit. He was attemtping to quote you.
It was a sig with words he was attributing to you.
Nicolas
Snit
qrXxc.56392$Np3.2...@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca on 6/10/04 4:17 AM:
Attempting to quote me? From when and where. I assure I did not author
such a phrase.
Snit
B1Wxc.17269769$Of.28...@news.easynews.com on 6/10/04 2:41 AM:
Fair enough...
I started another thread to give him this chance....
Steve Carroll
Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
I did both? How does that work? I can't wait to hear:)
--
Steve C
Steve Mackay
> In a recent post Steve Carroll authored the following quote:
>
> "I did post as sigmond and create that sex webpage starring elizabot...
> what of it?"
Why not include to whole quote? Or a google link to support your claim?
> After all this time and all the accusations against me, the troll finally
> admitted to the fact that it was, in deed, him.
No.
>
> But this is Steve....
>
> He has since tried to attribute this quote to me, but if you do a search on
> Google you will see that is simply not the case - it is from Steve...
It is the case. However you're just playing your same old games.
>
> Please feel free to check there and other sources in case someone thinks my
> post is not on Google. I suggest:
>
> http://www.talkaboutmac.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/
>
> But also check your own records or whatever else you need... the fact is
> clear that Steve Carroll is the author of this quote (confession) and is now
> trying to back peddle and attribute it to me.
As many have shown you. You're doing much of what you did on your little
shrine to Steve C. Just out of context quotes.
>
> While I do not expect an apology from all those that tried to accuse me of
> what Steve has admitted he did, it would be appreciated.
>
> Steve M., you were the loudest of the accusers... are you willing to admit,
> in the light of Steve Carroll's confession, that you were wrong about me?
> Are you willing to apologize?
No.
>
> I am of mixed feeling on this... I commend Steve for finally coming clean on
> this, but am disappointed in both that it took him so long to do so, and how
> he now wants to attribute his quote to me!
>
> Then again, as is also seen in my .sig, Steve has admitted that he is "here
> to troll".
>
> At least he has now had moments of honesty...
When is your moment going to begin?
Stop polluting the group with your bullshit.
Snit
explain his authoring of the quote.
I agreed that this was fair, and even started a new thread to give him a
chance to do just that.
As of now, he has done nothing but try to evade the issue.
"Steve Mackay" <steve_...@hotmail.com> wrote in
pan.2004.06.10....@hotmail.com on 6/10/04 8:58 AM:
--
Elizabot
"I admit I have posted under the name Sigmond." -Snit 5/15/2004
Sigmond posted that disgusting web page about me.
Therefore: Snit posted that disgusting web page about me.
Anybody who has followed any this already knows the truth on this matter.
You only had 5 hours to sleep last night, Snit. No wonder you're so
delusional. Your csma obsession is destroying you. Seek help.
Elizabot
40c88b24$0$206$7586...@news.frii.net on 6/10/04 9:24 AM:
> Bottom line is you have already admitted to posting as Sigmond:
>
> "I admit I have posted under the name Sigmond." -Snit 5/15/2004
>
> http://www.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&c2coff=1&safe=off&selm=BCCBD1A
> 8.5006D%25snit%40nospam.cableone.net&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DISO
> -8859-1%26safe%3Doff%26c2coff%3D1%26q%3Dsigmond%2Bposted%2Bauthor%253Asnit%26b
> tnG%3DSearch
I did... in the flame group to help shut Steve up. For the record, it
worked. The whole silliness went away for a while, until Steve Carroll
brought it back up.
Steve Carroll *is* the author of the following comment / confession:
"I did post as sigmond and create that sex webpage
starring elizabot... what of it?"
> Sigmond posted that disgusting web page about me.
>
> Therefore: Snit posted that disgusting web page about me.
>
> Anybody who has followed any this already knows the truth on this matter.
In case you miss it, in the flame group I just posted a message under the
name "Elizabot".
Does this mean that I posted all content you have ever posted? Of course
not.
Your understanding of how Usenet works is amazingly misguided.
> You only had 5 hours to sleep last night, Snit. No wonder you're so
> delusional. Your csma obsession is destroying you. Seek help.
Is your obsession with me coming back? It was good to see it go away, if
only for a while.
Snit
forgot to set my name back to Snit. Well, I suppose this is just more proof
for Elizabot to demonstrate her lack of understanding.
Also, Elizabot, I notice how when given two pieces of info:
1) from me, suggesing I have posted under the name sigmond
2) from Steve Carroll, specifically stating he posted an offensive message
about you
You immediately believe your perception of my comments, and do not believe
Steve Carroll.
Good to see that even if you do not understand how Usenet works, you are
smart enough to not trust quotes authored by Steve Carroll.
"Elizabot" <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote in
BCEDDAF0.5449C%snit-...@cableone.net on 6/10/04 9:31 AM:
Elizabot
your place(s) of work:
1)
Snit wrote:
"Snit was recently in a teacher position over Elizabot." -Snit 1/25/2004
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=BC39A9D7.3B6F7%25snit%40nospam-cableone.net&output=gplain
2)
Sigmond posted a sexually harassing and disgusting post about Elizabot.
Although Sigmond cancels all his posts, Elizabot replied to Sigmond's
post in full to ensure it's documentation.
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=4072eff2%240%24195%2475868355%40news.frii.net&output=gplain
3)
Snit admits he is Sigmond.
"I admit I have posted under the name Sigmond." -Snit 5/15/2004
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=BCCBD1A8.5006D%25snit%40nospam.cableone.net&output=gplain
4)
Snit acts a sex pervert who has fantasized that Elizabot is a little
girl and that he is her teacher. Snit should be stopped before he harms
someone with his sickness.
-----
Repost of sigmond's post:
sigmond wrote:
> http://tinyurl.com/3eewv
>
> March 22, 2004
>
>
>
> It's likely that you've never heard of Elizabot, but soon people all
> around the world will be talking about her and watching her naked on
> the Internet!
>
> Elizabot will be the star of her own all-free / all-the-time adult web
> site showcasing her wild sexual desires that can no longer be
> contained, supported only by advertising revenue. Elizabot looks like
> your average woman, but she says that she's been living a double life
> of wild sexual exploration.
>
> When interviewed by UJ reporters, Elizabot said, "My friends and
> family will be shocked by this news, but I can no longer pretend to be
> a by-the-rules average person who they all think I am! I love sex and
> I can't get enough! If a day goes by without sex, it's a wasted day.
> Whether it's a stranger I met at a bar, another woman, or 3 men
> filling every hole at the same time, I'm happy and feel satisfied."
>
> Elizabot said that getting laid everyday by dozens of men, and making
> money doing it via a web site is a dream job! This is what made her
> decision to launch this venture an easy one. "I really had no idea how
> much money you could make on the Internet until I started selling
> personalized porno videos and pictures to lonely men on eBay. I made a
> lot of money very quickly.", said Elizabot.
>
> Elizabot says that she practices safe sex and always requires her
> partners to wear a condom when being penetrated, but loves the taste
> of semen and usually asks her partners to ejaculate in her mouth or on
> her breasts.
>
> The beta launch of her web site can be found here, with a full launch
> expected later this month.
Snit
threat, but I doubt my reaction is the one were looking for.
"Elizabot" <toolittl...@poo.com> wrote in
40c892d9$0$207$7586...@news.frii.net on 6/10/04 9:56 AM:
--
Steve Mackay
> You are not the first to suggest I should give Steve Carroll a chance to
> explain his authoring of the quote.
Where did I say that? You really need to learn how to read.
>
> I agreed that this was fair, and even started a new thread to give him a
> chance to do just that.
Chance to do what? Explain that you're up to your same old games?
>
> As of now, he has done nothing but try to evade the issue.
What issue does he have to evade? It's been explained to you. You knew it
to begin with. You know you're sigmond, I know you're sigmond. The whole
of CSMA knows you're sigmond. Give it up sockpuppet boy.
Snit
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 09:09:45 -0700, Snit wrote:
>
>> You are not the first to suggest I should give Steve Carroll a chance to
>> explain his authoring of the quote.
>
>
> Where did I say that? You really need to learn how to read.
>
>>
>> I agreed that this was fair, and even started a new thread to give him a
>> chance to do just that.
>
> Chance to do what? Explain that you're up to your same old games?
>
>>
>> As of now, he has done nothing but try to evade the issue.
>
> What issue does he have to evade? It's been explained to you. You knew it
> to begin with. You know you're sigmond, I know you're sigmond. The whole
> of CSMA knows you're sigmond. Give it up sockpuppet boy.
How do you explain Steve Carroll's quote, where he states:
"I did post as sigmond and create that sex webpage starring elizabot...
what of it?"
--
Steve Mackay
Why don't you include the entire sig line? Oh wait, I know... Because
you're a dishonest, slimy little coward.
It's been told to you, by several people in here. Do you really have that
large of a reading disability? Maybe you could get your mommy to read it
to you.
you know you're sigmond, I know you're sigmond. The whole of CSMA knows
Snit
I notice you have no explanation for Steve Carroll's quote... but you so
throw around a lot of name calling, accusations, and lies.
Funny, eh?
Steve Mackay
I notice that you still can't comprehend simple english... but you so
throw around your many, many lies.
Pathetic, eh?
Snit
More baseless accusations from you. And no explanation as to what the other
half of the Group Think Steve clique could have meant by his confession.
>
> Pathetic, eh?
Yes... the fact that you throw around such insults is pathetic... the fact
that you still defend your other half even after he has written such words
shows your *extreme* bias and dishonesty.
Tommy
> I am not sure what reaction you were hoping to get from your thinly veiled
> threat, but I doubt my reaction is the one were looking for.
>
In case you did not get it, I think the moral was: Stop polluting the
world with your infantile and obsessive "writings". You give Mac
advocacy a bad name. If that was your goal you have succeeded! That
also goes for all that bullshit on your website.
Snit
7de4cc6c.04061...@posting.google.com on 6/11/04 2:48 AM:
Which website?
In any case, the point of the post was to show that her claims were based on
ignorance of how Usenet works... she did not respond to the content, she
responded with thinly veiled threats.
It is not the first time she has done something like this...
Elizabot
Says the idiot who didn't know about arin.net until ed told him...
Snit
40c9da9c$0$208$7586...@news.frii.net on 6/11/04 9:15 AM:
I notice you have yet to respond to the comments below with anything other
than veiled threats.
-----
In case you miss it, in the flame group I just posted a message under the
name "Elizabot".
Does this mean that I posted all content you have ever posted? Of course
not.
Your understanding of how Usenet works is amazingly misguided.
ed
Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> typed:
if someone posted under the name "Elizabot", from the same ISP as the
"legit" Elizabot, from the same city, from an ip address that all
indications show Elizabot had previously used, it'd be a pretty good bet
that you can connect the posts.
Snit
W6syc.83906$qs1....@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com on 6/11/04 5:28 PM:
I tend to connect posts, when I do so, with cut and paste, or really, copy
and paste. Generally I have no need to connect posts, other than what gets
connected in standard quoting.
Elizabot
Document your claim.
You have no support for it, do you? Not surprising....
"Interesting" "debate style" you have....
You have yet to provide any actual evidence for your claim that I do not
know how USENET works. Your straw man arguments and "proclamations" are
not truths. That you apparently think so indicates more delusional
thinking on your part.
Simple concept, really.
John
You DON'T know how USENET works. You're supposed to do something OTHER
than try and look up a persons posting history on Google. Staying on
topic would be nice also.
Snit
40ca6e6e$0$202$7586...@news.frii.net on 6/11/04 7:46 PM:
>> Your understanding of how Usenet works is amazingly misguided.
>
> Document your claim.
You claimed two things:
* Sigmond posted a sexually harassing and disgusting post about Elizabot.
* "I admit I have posted under the name Sigmond." -Snit 5/15/2004
From this you conclude that I must have posted that letter... the very one
that Steve Carroll commented on when he authored the quote:
I did post as sigmond and create that sex webpage starring
elizabot... what of it?
This shows two things:
1) You do not understand that on Usenet more than one person can post under
the same name - I showed you that was incorrect by posting under the name
you use: Elizabot
2) If shows that you trust your interpretation of an unspecific reference
from me more than you trust a specific comment from Steve Carroll.
>
> You have no support for it, do you? Not surprising....
Care to offer any other logical explanation. Please do not forget to
comment on the quote that Steve Carroll authored.
> "Interesting" "debate style" you have....
>
> You have yet to provide any actual evidence for your claim that I do not
> know how USENET works. Your straw man arguments and "proclamations" are
> not truths. That you apparently think so indicates more delusional
> thinking on your part.
See above. My guess is you will want more of my attention and keep trying
to get me to post - though you will offer nothing in the form of a counter
to my comments above.
>
> Simple concept, really.
Yes, very simple.
Elizabot
LOL. I see it still irks you that I know Dawg Tail's true identity and
that I won't tell you who he is! (Dawg Tail has posted under more than
one name, so your little game that I don't understand posting under
various names is totally BOGUS.)
Your claims are unfounded, and you are a complete fool.
Snit
40cb9138$0$208$7586...@news.frii.net on 6/12/04 4:26 PM:
> LOL. I see it still irks you that I know Dawg Tail's true identity and
> that I won't tell you who he is!
Never occurred to me to even wonder about Dawg Tail's "true" identity.
What, do you think this is some comic book or something. I care more about
ideas in here than silly super hero games.
I must admit to being curious: what super powers do you think *he* has in
his super identity?
> (Dawg Tail has posted under more than one name, so your little game that I
> don't understand posting under various names is totally BOGUS.)
You may have information about Dawg Tail and half the rest of csma. You may
know his home address, his mom's name, his shoe size, and his favorite
flavor of Pringles. You could have his whole DNA mapped for all I care.
I have never claimed to be the only one you have become obsessed about and
done research on. Actually it is comforting to hear you focus on someone
else. He is better for you, anyway.
I notice, however, that you do not even respond to the evidence I presented
that showed that your claims were based on faulty reasoning about how Usenet
works:
You presented two facts:
* Sigmond posted a sexually harassing and disgusting post about Elizabot.
* "I admit I have posted under the name Sigmond." -Snit 5/15/2004
From these two facts you concluded that I must have posted that letter...
the very one that Steve Carroll commented on when he authored the quote:
I did post as sigmond and create that sex webpage starring
elizabot... what of it?
This shows two things:
1) You do not understand that on Usenet more than one person can post under
the same name - I showed you that was incorrect by posting under the name
you use: Elizabot
Either that or maybe while you realize people can post under multiple
names you did not realize that multiple people can post under the same
name. Seems that is a subtly you completely missed as you tried to
defend your erroneous claims.
If you now state that you did realize this then your defense will be
reduced to showing that you were simply lying about your supposed
conclusion.
2) If shows that you trust your interpretation of an unspecific reference
from me more than you trust a specific comment from Steve Carroll.
--
Elizabot
> "Elizabot" <toolittl...@poo.com> wrote in
> 40cb9138$0$208$7586...@news.frii.net on 6/12/04 4:26 PM:
>
>
>>LOL. I see it still irks you that I know Dawg Tail's true identity and
>>that I won't tell you who he is!
>
>
> Never occurred to me to even wonder about Dawg Tail's "true" identity.
> What, do you think this is some comic book or something. I care more about
> ideas in here than silly super hero games.
Liar. You asked him "May I ask what other names you have posted to csma
under?"
[snip Snit's delusions]
Steve Carroll
Elizabot <toolittl...@poo.com> wrote:
Dawg Tail who I think it is (you know who)? It's fun to watch him rip
Snit several new assholes
--
Steve C
Elizabot
And Snit is clueless, as usual!