How to Killfile Snit, Carroll, Krinkle, Sandman, MacKay
Oxford
Snit
Steve Carroll
Krinkle Frys
Sandman
Steve Mackay
and for a Bonus I did Gactimus
If you are using MT-Newswatcher:
Select offending Author, example Snit...
Go to the Filters Menu, Choose "Kill this Author"
Click "OK"
Then Repeat with each annoying Author of your choice.
Then to see your work...
Choose the Filter Menu again,
Then "Refilter Articles"...
Bam! No more boring, pointless bickering about nothing.
Enjoy!!!!!
oxford
-
Randall Bischoff
says...
> I've rarely kill filed Authors over the years but today I cleared out:
>
> Snit
> Steve Carroll
> Krinkle Frys
> Sandman
> Steve Mackay
Oxford
I feel your pain... This group has pretty much degenerated into nothing
but silly bickering over nothing...
Pardon me for asking, but aren't all your killfile residents listed
above, supposed to be Mac advocates?
--
R. Bischoff
- Tell me what you're doing, and I'll tell you why it's wrong- V. Mackie
Snit
MPG.1b882ba84...@news.individual.net on 8/14/04 12:01 PM:
> In article <csma-B34425.1...@news.uswest.net>, cs...@mac.com
> says...
>> I've rarely kill filed Authors over the years but today I cleared out:
>>
>> Snit
>> Steve Carroll
>> Krinkle Frys
>> Sandman
>> Steve Mackay
>
> Oxford
>
> I feel your pain... This group has pretty much degenerated into nothing
> but silly bickering over nothing...
Prove it! (yeah, I am just kidding)
>
> Pardon me for asking, but aren't all your killfile residents listed
> above, supposed to be Mac advocates?
At least the Mac advocates are not *all* drones. :)
--
"If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law."
Roy Santoro, Psycho Proverb Zone (http://smallurl.com/?i=15235)
Oxford
> I feel your pain... This group has pretty much degenerated into nothing
> but silly bickering over nothing...
>
> Pardon me for asking, but aren't all your killfile residents listed
> above, supposed to be Mac advocates?
yeah, they used to be... they've all been around for years... but for
some reason they are all crying to one another... i'm just tired of
digging through them to find "advocacy"... kinda sad...
Oxford
Mathue <mathu/e...@spymac.com> wrote:
> One thing I do is set a date for the filter to expire, my default is
> 15 days. I'm sure this will die down and all.
that's a good idea... i'll may make that change...
Snit
on 8/14/04 12:35 PM:
I think I may be the one that does the most advocacy, and the most troll
busting.
I am just a swell guy. :)
Snit
on 8/14/04 12:36 PM:
Seems, other than for Steve Carroll and myself, have died down. It should
be safe to un-kf the others.
Of course, if you have me kf's, you may need to wait for someone to quote me
to see that. :)
Tim Adams
Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
> "Oxford" <cs...@mac.com> wrote in csma-B3E172.1...@news.uswest.net
> on 8/14/04 12:35 PM:
>
> > Randall Bischoff <RBis...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I feel your pain... This group has pretty much degenerated into nothing
> >> but silly bickering over nothing...
> >>
> >> Pardon me for asking, but aren't all your killfile residents listed
> >> above, supposed to be Mac advocates?
> >
> > yeah, they used to be... they've all been around for years... but for
> > some reason they are all crying to one another... i'm just tired of
> > digging through them to find "advocacy"... kinda sad...
>
> I think I may be the one that does the most advocacy, and the most troll
> busting.
NOT - you just post the most lies.
>
> I am just a swell guy. :)
NOT
Snit
teadams$2$0$0$3-08AF00.17...@news05.east.earthlink.net on 8/14/04
2:37 PM:
Well, I point the most lies out... so I suppose your wording may be poor but
your point accurate.
>>
>> I am just a swell guy. :)
>
> NOT
Oh, the pain... the horrid pain of reading that NOT. Oh please, please take
it back.
C Lund
Oxford <cs...@mac.com> wrote:
> I've rarely kill filed Authors over the years but today I cleared out:
> Snit
> Steve Carroll
> Krinkle Frys
> Sandman
> Steve Mackay
> and for a Bonus I did Gactimus
(procedure snipped)
> Bam! No more boring, pointless bickering about nothing.
The problem is that Snit, Carroll, MacKay, and Sandman only turn to
pointless bickering when they're in the same thread - what some have
dubbed the "Snit circus". The posts they make when not replying to
each other aren't no better or worse than the others here.
BTW: Why didn't you kf Elisabot while you were at it? She's also a
part of Snit's troupe.
> oxford
>
> -
--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund
C Lund
Oxford <cs...@mac.com> wrote:
> yeah, they used to be... they've all been around for years... but for
> some reason they are all crying to one another... i'm just tired of
> digging through them to find "advocacy"... kinda sad...
All you need to do is just junk all subthreads that have been
hi-jacked by the "Snit-circus". (and no, Snit is not the only one to
blame for those subthreads)
--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund
Tim Adams
Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
> "Tim Adams" <teadams$2$0$0$3...@earthlink.net> wrote in
> teadams$2$0$0$3-08AF00.17...@news05.east.earthlink.net on 8/14/04
> 2:37 PM:
>
> > In article <BD43D31F.5C593%snit-...@cableone.net>,
> > Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
> >
> >> "Oxford" <cs...@mac.com> wrote in csma-B3E172.1...@news.uswest.net
> >> on 8/14/04 12:35 PM:
> >>
> >>> Randall Bischoff <RBis...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I feel your pain... This group has pretty much degenerated into nothing
> >>>> but silly bickering over nothing...
> >>>>
> >>>> Pardon me for asking, but aren't all your killfile residents listed
> >>>> above, supposed to be Mac advocates?
> >>>
> >>> yeah, they used to be... they've all been around for years... but for
> >>> some reason they are all crying to one another... i'm just tired of
> >>> digging through them to find "advocacy"... kinda sad...
> >>
> >> I think I may be the one that does the most advocacy, and the most troll
> >> busting.
> >
> > NOT - you just post the most lies.
>
> Well, I point the most lies out... so I suppose your wording may be poor but
> your point accurate.
I worded it correctly - you just have problems READING what's written.
Oxford
> BTW: Why didn't you kf Elisabot while you were at it? She's also a
> part of Snit's troupe.
thanks, done!
Snit
3:50 PM:
No. I just do not accept lies. I tried to assume you were correct.
Seems I was wrong. Sorry.
Snit
clund-B45A46....@amstwist00.chello.com on 8/14/04 3:29 PM:
> The problem is that Snit, Carroll, MacKay, and Sandman only turn to
> pointless bickering when they're in the same thread - what some have
> dubbed the "Snit circus". The posts they make when not replying to
> each other aren't no better or worse than the others here
Why do you think that is?
Tim Smith
> and for a Bonus I did Gactimus
If your newsreader can handle it, an alternative that gets almost all of his
posts is to kill anything that is crossposted to four or more groups. In
addition to almost everything from Gactimus, that gets rid of a lot of other
worthless crap.
He's not in this group much yet, but if Bailo of COLA infamy ever shows up
here, a useful thing to note is that he posts through Earthlink (like I do,
by the way). If you check the Path: header of posts from Earthlink, such as
mine, you'll see an 8 digit hex number in there.
That number is derivied or looked-up based on the authentication used to
access the Earthlink news server, and does *NOT* change when the poster
plays name shifting games, as long as they still come through their
Earthlink account. So, if your newsreader can kill based on that, you can
kill all posts from Bailo (or me) without them coming back when they name
shift (Bailo name shifts a lot, in order to evade killfiles).
--
--Tim Smith
Oxford
interesting tim...
Path:
news.uswest.net!feed.news.qwest.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwe
ll.syr.edu!elnk-pas-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink
.net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net.POST
ED!00d81f24!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Tim Smith <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com>
Subject: Re: How to Killfile Snit, Carroll, Krinkle, Sandman, MacKay
References: <csma-B34425.1...@news.uswest.net>
Organization: Institute of Lawsonomy, Department of Suction and Pressure
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.0 (Linux)
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <ZvyTc.20444$nx2....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 00:55:21 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.34.217.150
X-Complaints-To: ab...@earthlink.net
X-Trace: newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net 1092531321 69.34.217.150 (Sat,
14 Aug 2004 17:55:21 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 17:55:21 PDT
Xref: feed.news.qwest.net comp.sys.mac.advocacy:658817
so is? 00d81f24 the correct number "for example"? it's the only 8 digit
portion that makes sense... newswatcher can filter on this number, but
is it the right one? please advise...
oxford
-
Steve Carroll
Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
No need to be sorry. You're perfect recored of being wrong is still
safe. Your reading comprehension problems are bordering on legendary at
this point. I think it's safe to say that, when no less than a dozen
different people have pointed it out, you can believe you have a reading
problem. Better start believing, Snit... no joke, it's quite real.
--
"I may just be the primary topic of this group"
"You really need to learn the whole concept of context"
- Michael Glasser (AKA Snit)
--
Steve C
Snit
fretwizz-350251...@netnews.comcast.net on 8/14/04 8:37 PM:
Wow... more accusations with... get this... NO support.
You are in a real mood tonight.
Tim Smith
> Path:
> news.uswest.net!feed.news.qwest.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwe
> ll.syr.edu!elnk-pas-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink
> .net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net.POST
> ED!00d81f24!not-for-mail
> so is? 00d81f24 the correct number "for example"? it's the only 8 digit
> portion that makes sense... newswatcher can filter on this number, but is
> it the right one? please advise...
Right. Check anyone posting from Earthlink, and there will be a number like
that, I believe always after the "POSTED!" if you want to be careful, and
that is the same no matter how much the person name shifts, as long as they
are using the same Earthlink account.
Unfortunately, the Path header is NOT in the XOVER data from most servers.
XOVER is a command to the news server that gets an overview of the
newsgroups. It gets the date, from, references, subject, and some other
information for every article in a range requested by the news client.
News servers are usually designed so they can serve this up very
efficiently, and it is all a newsreader needs to show the user what threads
are available in the group. If the newsreader filters on a header that is
not in the XOVER data, it has to ask the server for the full headers for
each article, and that is usually considerable slower than getting the XOVER
data, and takes considerable more bandwidth. So, for many people, putting
something in a kilfile that has to look at Path will cause a noticable
slowdown in entering groups.
Earthlink has the right idea here (providing a way to identify name
shifters), but it would have been better if they had, say, put it in the
message ID...that's in the XOVER data.
--
--Tim Smith
Steve Carroll
Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
You just gave all the support anyone with a brain needs. Hmmm, that must
be why you are whining about there being none.
Snit
Wow... you really can not even recognize support.
Someday I would love to find out if you are as dumb as you act in here.
Hard to believe. Really.
Steve Carroll
Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
Sure I do... I just told you that you gave all that was needed for those
with a brain. It's a shame you don't qualify... it would save a lot of
time.
> Someday I would love to find out if you are as dumb as you act in here.
> Hard to believe. Really.
I can honestly say that I don't have this doubt about you. I'm sure you
are as dumb as you act in here... probably even more so because you
wouldn't have as much reaction time.
Sandman
Tim Smith <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> On 2004-08-14, Oxford <cs...@mac.com> wrote:
> > and for a Bonus I did Gactimus
>
> If your newsreader can handle it, an alternative that gets almost all of his
> posts is to kill anything that is crossposted to four or more groups. In
> addition to almost everything from Gactimus, that gets rid of a lot of other
> worthless crap.
Of course MT-NewsWatcher can handle it:
Kill if "Xref" matches the regular expression "[^:]*\:[^:]*\:[^:]*\:[^:]*\:"
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
Tim Smith <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
The client is the one creating the message id, and unless the nameshifters
change their client, one could always filter on that.
--
Sandman[.net]
C Lund
Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
> "C Lund" <cl...@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in
> clund-B45A46....@amstwist00.chello.com on 8/14/04 3:29 PM:
>
> > The problem is that Snit, Carroll, MacKay, and Sandman only turn to
> > pointless bickering when they're in the same thread - what some have
> > dubbed the "Snit circus". The posts they make when not replying to
> > each other aren't no better or worse than the others here
> Why do you think that is?
I don't know. But please - when you get sucked into a discussion with
the others listed above, just drop the subthread. I'm not putting the
blame anywhere (and I know what arguing with Carroll is like), but you
do tend to become the pivotal figure in those arguments.
--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund
Wally
----------
In article <BD43D541.5C59E%snit-...@cableone.net>, Snit
<snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
<snip>
> Well, I point the most lies out...
Finally you say something truthful!.....considering for the most part your
*facts* are lies, you do indeed point out the most lies, But lets not let
the fact that they are your lies spoil this unique occasion. :=)
IRO
Randall Bischoff <RBis...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Pardon me for asking, but aren't all your killfile residents listed
> above, supposed to be Mac advocates?
Maybe, but that doesn't preclude them from being idiots. Sandman ain't
so bad, he seems to have made some sensible contributions to this thread.
I guess the best solution in the long run is to never reply to trolls
and OT subjects. NEVER, ever, not no-how! It only encourages them.
------
~IRO
My ambition in Life is to build something that will
REALLY last....at least until I've finished building it.
Sandman
IRO <iro...@ihug.dot.co.dot.nz> wrote:
> > Pardon me for asking, but aren't all your killfile residents listed
> > above, supposed to be Mac advocates?
>
> Maybe, but that doesn't preclude them from being idiots. Sandman ain't
> so bad, he seems to have made some sensible contributions to this thread.
Oh, don't say that. When trolls go overboard like Snit does, I usually follow.
As it seems, I made up 12% of the Snit circus, but I think my sigmond FAQ
worked as an ignition for Snit.
> I guess the best solution in the long run is to never reply to trolls
> and OT subjects. NEVER, ever, not no-how! It only encourages them.
Well, that's true for most newsgroups, but csma is specifically created to deal
with the trolls that otherwise would plague the ordinary mac groups. It's doing
its job quite allright, but sometimes a troll like Snit comes around, and even
this group can't handle it. Michael is the kind of person that everyone should
just killfile. His noise/content ratio is off the scale.
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
Sounds reasonable. I humored Steve Carroll for a while... but if you look
at my last post to him I let him know he has, again, simply bored me. There
is only so long I can talk to someone who refused to answer questions... so
it is unlikely I will respond to any of his attacks for a while.
That means most of the others in the list have KF'd me - so that should not
be a problem. Steve Carroll will reply to a good portion of my posts with
silly attacks, but he is easy to ignore... and I, for the most part, will go
back to advocacy.... with the occasional dig at Steve 'cause I like to goad
him into his self proclaimed "troll hunting".
Steve Carroll
C Lund <cl...@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> wrote:
I know what arguing with you is like too, Lund. This doesn't change the
fact that Snit is always the center of attention, though, as you rightly
pointed out. And, don't look now... but like I warned this NG long ago,
it isn't just me anymore that he pulls his bullshit with. If you think
the arguments you and I have had can compare with ANY of the lying
disingenuous bullshit Snit pulls daily (with a small army of posters
now), I'd like to see the arguments you have in mind. Like a lot of
people in here that have clashed, you and I have had our run-ins... but
this is completely different. Snit is a troll of the highest order. If
you cannot see that it's because you aren't looking.
Steve Carroll
> In article <MPG.1b882ba84...@news.individual.net>,
> Randall Bischoff <RBis...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Pardon me for asking, but aren't all your killfile residents listed
> > above, supposed to be Mac advocates?
>
>
> Maybe, but that doesn't preclude them from being idiots. Sandman ain't
> so bad, he seems to have made some sensible contributions to this thread.
>
> I guess the best solution in the long run is to never reply to trolls
> and OT subjects. NEVER, ever, not no-how! It only encourages them.
I won't comment about the OT threads, but not responding to trolls in
ANY thread makes sense and you are one of several people that have
proposed it during the weekend. The only problems are that you can't get
enough people to do it and the fact that this NG was created to filter
out the trolls from the other Mac NGs. People like having trolls in
here. In Snit's case, perhaps troll isn't the right word, though...
'newsgroup rapist' springs to mind.
> ------
> ~IRO
> My ambition in Life is to build something that will
> REALLY last....at least until I've finished building it.
Love the sig:)
Snit
on 8/15/04 4:43 AM:
> In article <irotemp-6E949E...@lust.ihug.co.nz>,
> IRO <iro...@ihug.dot.co.dot.nz> wrote:
>
>>> Pardon me for asking, but aren't all your killfile residents listed
>>> above, supposed to be Mac advocates?
>>
>> Maybe, but that doesn't preclude them from being idiots. Sandman ain't
>> so bad, he seems to have made some sensible contributions to this thread.
>
> Oh, don't say that. When trolls go overboard like Snit does, I usually follow.
> As it seems, I made up 12% of the Snit circus, but I think my sigmond FAQ
> worked as an ignition for Snit.
Well, I did enjoy pointing out the 24 known deceptions in it.
>
>> I guess the best solution in the long run is to never reply to trolls
>> and OT subjects. NEVER, ever, not no-how! It only encourages them.
>
> Well, that's true for most newsgroups, but csma is specifically created to
> deal with the trolls that otherwise would plague the ordinary mac groups. It's
> doing its job quite allright, but sometimes a troll like Snit comes around,
> and even this group can't handle it. Michael is the kind of person that
> everyone should just killfile. His noise/content ratio is off the scale.
LOL. When you point at me... three fingers are pointing right back at you.
:)
Steve Carroll
Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
> "Sandman" <m...@sandman.net> wrote in mr-67583A.13...@individual.net
> on 8/15/04 4:43 AM:
>
> > In article <irotemp-6E949E...@lust.ihug.co.nz>,
> > IRO <iro...@ihug.dot.co.dot.nz> wrote:
> >
> >>> Pardon me for asking, but aren't all your killfile residents listed
> >>> above, supposed to be Mac advocates?
> >>
> >> Maybe, but that doesn't preclude them from being idiots. Sandman ain't
> >> so bad, he seems to have made some sensible contributions to this thread.
> >
> > Oh, don't say that. When trolls go overboard like Snit does, I usually
> > follow.
> > As it seems, I made up 12% of the Snit circus, but I think my sigmond FAQ
> > worked as an ignition for Snit.
>
> Well, I did enjoy pointing out the 24 known deceptions in it.
You got the first letter right (I suppose that is a major accomplishment
for you) but you misspelled 'delusions'.
> >> I guess the best solution in the long run is to never reply to trolls
> >> and OT subjects. NEVER, ever, not no-how! It only encourages them.
> >
> > Well, that's true for most newsgroups, but csma is specifically created to
> > deal with the trolls that otherwise would plague the ordinary mac groups.
> > It's
> > doing its job quite allright, but sometimes a troll like Snit comes around,
> > and even this group can't handle it. Michael is the kind of person that
> > everyone should just killfile. His noise/content ratio is off the scale.
>
> LOL. When you point at me... three fingers are pointing right back at you.
> :)
Lemme guess... sigmond, Krinkle Frys and Brock McNuggets?
Steve Carroll
Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
> "C Lund" <cl...@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in
> clund-C75D39....@amstwist00.chello.com on 8/15/04 1:27 AM:
>
> > In article <BD43FF70.5C5D7%snit-...@cableone.net>,
> > Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
> >
> >> "C Lund" <cl...@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in
> >> clund-B45A46....@amstwist00.chello.com on 8/14/04 3:29 PM:
> >>
> >>> The problem is that Snit, Carroll, MacKay, and Sandman only turn to
> >>> pointless bickering when they're in the same thread - what some have
> >>> dubbed the "Snit circus". The posts they make when not replying to
> >>> each other aren't no better or worse than the others here
> >> Why do you think that is?
> >
> > I don't know. But please - when you get sucked into a discussion with
> > the others listed above, just drop the subthread. I'm not putting the
> > blame anywhere (and I know what arguing with Carroll is like), but you
> > do tend to become the pivotal figure in those arguments.
>
> Sounds reasonable. I humored Steve Carroll for a while... but if you look
> at my last post to him I let him know he has, again, simply bored me. There
> is only so long I can talk to someone who refused to answer questions... so
> it is unlikely I will respond to any of his attacks for a while.
>
Translation: Steve has broken my spirit again and taken all the air out
of my trolling sails with his constant use of reality and demands that
word context be adhered to.
> That means most of the others in the list have KF'd me - so that should not
> be a problem. Steve Carroll will reply to a good portion of my posts with
> silly attacks, but he is easy to ignore... and I, for the most part, will go
> back to advocacy.... with the occasional dig at Steve 'cause I like to goad
> him into his self proclaimed "troll hunting".
Translation: I need time to think up new ways to take a shot at Steve.
Even *I* am sick of the same old crap I keep spewing. It's not really
working anyway and everyone sees it. Hell, even I have some pride... not
much... but some.
Nash*ton
> In article <irotemp-6E949E...@lust.ihug.co.nz>,
> IRO <iro...@ihug.dot.co.dot.nz> wrote:
>
>
>>>Pardon me for asking, but aren't all your killfile residents listed
>>>above, supposed to be Mac advocates?
>>
>>Maybe, but that doesn't preclude them from being idiots. Sandman ain't
>>so bad, he seems to have made some sensible contributions to this thread.
>
>
> Oh, don't say that. When trolls go overboard like Snit does, I usually follow.
> As it seems, I made up 12% of the Snit circus, but I think my sigmond FAQ
> worked as an ignition for Snit.
>
>
>>I guess the best solution in the long run is to never reply to trolls
>>and OT subjects. NEVER, ever, not no-how! It only encourages them.
>
>
> Well, that's true for most newsgroups, but csma is specifically created to deal
> with the trolls that otherwise would plague the ordinary mac groups.
Even though this notion has been thrown around ad vitam aeternam, there
is little or no proven validity to it.
If anything, it perpetuates and reinforces the laziness and sloppiness
of the kind of Mac "advocacy" one encounters in these parts.
This group attracts "trolls" because most of the Mac advocates display
the behavior of kooks.
Nicolas
Nash*ton
Furthemore, you yourself have displayed trollish behavior in the past
and this, according to your own criteria of what a troll is.
Nicolas
C Lund
Steve Carroll <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote:
> > I don't know. But please - when you get sucked into a discussion with
> > the others listed above, just drop the subthread. I'm not putting the
> > blame anywhere (and I know what arguing with Carroll is like), but you
> > do tend to become the pivotal figure in those arguments.
> I know what arguing with you is like too, Lund. This doesn't change the
> fact that Snit is always the center of attention, though, as you rightly
> pointed out.
And if you and the rest of the "circus" didn't keep on replying to
him, there would be no attention for him to be the centre of. Snit
can't keep the "Snit circus" alive by himself. He needs your support,
and you're all to willing to give it to him.
> And, don't look now... but like I warned this NG long ago,
> it isn't just me anymore that he pulls his bullshit with. If you think
> the arguments you and I have had can compare with ANY of the lying
> disingenuous bullshit Snit pulls daily (with a small army of posters
> now), I'd like to see the arguments you have in mind. Like a lot of
> people in here that have clashed, you and I have had our run-ins... but
> this is completely different. Snit is a troll of the highest order. If
> you cannot see that it's because you aren't looking.
No, I'm not looking. It's been a long while since I last read a post
from the "Snit circus". If he's such a big troll then I would suggest
you stop feeding him.
--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund
C Lund
> Maybe, but that doesn't preclude them from being idiots. Sandman ain't
> so bad, he seems to have made some sensible contributions to this thread.
Sandman is perfectly reasonable - when he's posting outside the "Snit
Circus".
--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund
Elizabot
> In article <fretwizz-6B19FC...@netnews.comcast.net>,
> Steve Carroll <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>I don't know. But please - when you get sucked into a discussion with
>>>the others listed above, just drop the subthread. I'm not putting the
>>>blame anywhere (and I know what arguing with Carroll is like), but you
>>>do tend to become the pivotal figure in those arguments.
>>
>>I know what arguing with you is like too, Lund. This doesn't change the
>>fact that Snit is always the center of attention, though, as you rightly
>>pointed out.
>
>
> And if you and the rest of the "circus" didn't keep on replying to
> him, there would be no attention for him to be the centre of. Snit
> can't keep the "Snit circus" alive by himself. He needs your support,
> and you're all to willing to give it to him.
It's not only the "circus" that feeds him, it's *anybody* who replies to
his posts.
Perhaps you don't realize it, but Snit likes to post about security
issues because IMO he's still indirectly trolling for Dawg Tail.
>>And, don't look now... but like I warned this NG long ago,
>>it isn't just me anymore that he pulls his bullshit with. If you think
>>the arguments you and I have had can compare with ANY of the lying
>>disingenuous bullshit Snit pulls daily (with a small army of posters
>>now), I'd like to see the arguments you have in mind. Like a lot of
>>people in here that have clashed, you and I have had our run-ins... but
>>this is completely different. Snit is a troll of the highest order. If
>>you cannot see that it's because you aren't looking.
>
>
> No, I'm not looking. It's been a long while since I last read a post
> from the "Snit circus". If he's such a big troll then I would suggest
> you stop feeding him.
Other people are still feeding him by replying to his on topic posts.
Perhaps the others might think that they are encouraging him in a
positive way (to stay on topic) by doing so, but the reality is, they
are keeping him alive until he comes up with a "new" way to troll. The
only way to get totally stop him is for the entire group to ignore him
no matter what he posts. I don't see that happening.
You are feeding Nashton and McNorton. I don't see how you have much room
to complain.
Sandman
<Na...@nash.com> wrote:
>>>> Pardon me for asking, but aren't all your killfile residents listed
>>>> above, supposed to be Mac advocates?
>>>
>>> Maybe, but that doesn't preclude them from being idiots. Sandman
>>> ain't so bad, he seems to have made some sensible contributions to
>>> this thread.
>>
>> Oh, don't say that. When trolls go overboard like Snit does, I
>> usually follow. As it seems, I made up 12% of the Snit circus, but I
>> think my sigmond FAQ worked as an ignition for Snit.
>>>
>>> I guess the best solution in the long run is to never reply to
>>> trolls and OT subjects. NEVER, ever, not no-how! It only encourages
>>> them.
>>
>> Well, that's true for most newsgroups, but csma is specifically
>> created to deal with the trolls that otherwise would plague the
>> ordinary mac groups.
>
> Even though this notion has been thrown around ad vitam aeternam,
> there is little or no proven validity to it. If anything, it
> perpetuates and reinforces the laziness and sloppiness of the kind of
> Mac "advocacy" one encounters in these parts. This group attracts
> "trolls" because most of the Mac advocates display the behavior of
> kooks.
So what behaviour of these imaginary "kooks" attracted you?
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
<Na...@nash.com> wrote:
*yawn* If you want to keep the Snit circus going, be my guest, but do it with
Snit, not me.
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
C Lund <cl...@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> wrote:
I promised I wouldn't cry... *sniff* :)
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
on 8/15/04 10:31 AM:
>> Furthemore, you yourself have displayed trollish behavior in the past
>> and this, according to your own criteria of what a troll is.
>
> *yawn* If you want to keep the Snit circus going, be my guest, but do it with
> Snit, not me.
Even when Nashton does not agree with me, he does not troll, as you do... as
has been shown by the Sandman Trolling FAQ.
Snit
I don't know. He *is* sometimes reasonable... no doubt. But look at some
of his recent posting that do not have my name in them:
http://smallurl.com/?i=16906
http://smallurl.com/?i=16907
http://smallurl.com/?i=16908
http://smallurl.com/?i=16909
http://smallurl.com/?i=16910
http://smallurl.com/?i=16911
At the same time, as I looked for those, it does seem that as I, and others,
question his trolling he is doing so less and less.
Call it a win for csma.
Snit
> In article <fretwizz-6B19FC...@netnews.comcast.net>,
> Steve Carroll <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote:
>
>>> I don't know. But please - when you get sucked into a discussion with
>>> the others listed above, just drop the subthread. I'm not putting the
>>> blame anywhere (and I know what arguing with Carroll is like), but you
>>> do tend to become the pivotal figure in those arguments.
>> I know what arguing with you is like too, Lund. This doesn't change the
>> fact that Snit is always the center of attention, though, as you rightly
>> pointed out.
>
> And if you and the rest of the "circus" didn't keep on replying to
> him, there would be no attention for him to be the centre of. Snit
> can't keep the "Snit circus" alive by himself. He needs your support,
> and you're all to willing to give it to him.
The claim is that I have some amazing power to control Steve and others.
That is a classic external locus of control issue that many people who see
themselves as victims have.
I, on the other hand, take full responsibility for my actions.
>
>> And, don't look now... but like I warned this NG long ago,
>> it isn't just me anymore that he pulls his bullshit with. If you think
>> the arguments you and I have had can compare with ANY of the lying
>> disingenuous bullshit Snit pulls daily (with a small army of posters
>> now), I'd like to see the arguments you have in mind. Like a lot of
>> people in here that have clashed, you and I have had our run-ins... but
>> this is completely different. Snit is a troll of the highest order. If
>> you cannot see that it's because you aren't looking.
>
> No, I'm not looking. It's been a long while since I last read a post
> from the "Snit circus". If he's such a big troll then I would suggest
> you stop feeding him.
Makes sense... but Steve posts almost exclusively about me. He thinks I
have some sort of control over him or something. Weird.
Steve Carroll
Elizabot <toolittl...@poo.com> wrote:
Gee. Snit's only done exactly what you just stated for the better part
of a year. You don't expect people to learn it this quickly, do you? :)
> The
> only way to get totally stop him is for the entire group to ignore him
> no matter what he posts. I don't see that happening.
>
> You are feeding Nashton and McNorton. I don't see how you have much room
> to complain.
There are plenty of people feeding trolls here, always have been. Snit
is worse than an ordinary troll, though, he is essentially a NG
rapist... a bit of a difference. It doesn't bother me that people
killfile me while I chase him around the NG, in fact, I recommend it.
C Lund
> > In article <fretwizz-6B19FC...@netnews.comcast.net>,
> > Steve Carroll <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote:
> >>>I don't know. But please - when you get sucked into a discussion with
> >>>the others listed above, just drop the subthread. I'm not putting the
> >>>blame anywhere (and I know what arguing with Carroll is like), but you
> >>>do tend to become the pivotal figure in those arguments.
> >>I know what arguing with you is like too, Lund. This doesn't change the
> >>fact that Snit is always the center of attention, though, as you rightly
> >>pointed out.
> > And if you and the rest of the "circus" didn't keep on replying to
> > him, there would be no attention for him to be the centre of. Snit
> > can't keep the "Snit circus" alive by himself. He needs your support,
> > and you're all to willing to give it to him.
> It's not only the "circus" that feeds him, it's *anybody* who replies to
> his posts.
Not all his posts are of the "Snit Circus" variety.
> Perhaps you don't realize it, but Snit likes to post about security
> issues because IMO he's still indirectly trolling for Dawg Tail.
In that case, any technical post in here is a troll for [insert name
here].
> > No, I'm not looking. It's been a long while since I last read a post
> > from the "Snit circus". If he's such a big troll then I would suggest
> > you stop feeding him.
> Other people are still feeding him by replying to his on topic posts.
What's wrong with replying to posts that do not otherwise stand out
from the rest of CSMA's activities? But I have noticed that even when
Snit makes what would be considered to be a typical CSMA post, you or
other members of the "Snit Circus" jump in and start the thing again.
Sometimes Snit starts the circus, sometimes it's you, or Carrol, or ...
> Perhaps the others might think that they are encouraging him in a
> positive way (to stay on topic) by doing so, but the reality is, they
> are keeping him alive until he comes up with a "new" way to troll. The
> only way to get totally stop him is for the entire group to ignore him
> no matter what he posts. I don't see that happening.
No. I will not ignore him entirely. I ignore the "Circus" posts
because I do not want to be a part of that. And yes - I realise I am
in real danger of getting sucked in now. But that depends on the
direction this thread takes now.
> You are feeding Nashton and McNorton. I don't see how you have much room
> to complain.
Have you ever heard of the "Lund Circus"? No? That's because there is
no such thing. The "Snit Circus" threads / subthreads are not like
other CSMA threads.
--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund
Rick
C Lund <cl...@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> wrote:
>
> No. I will not ignore him entirely. I ignore the "Circus" posts
> because I do not want to be a part of that. And yes - I realise I am
> in real danger of getting sucked in now. But that depends on the
> direction this thread takes now.
I tend to agree with this viewpoint. I've not had much interaction with
Snit et al. but what little I've had, has been no worse than with
*anybody* else.
>
> > You are feeding Nashton and McNorton. I don't see how you have much room
> > to complain.
>
> Have you ever heard of the "Lund Circus"? No? That's because there is
> no such thing. The "Snit Circus" threads / subthreads are not like
> other CSMA threads.
I suspect that it is mostly an unfortunate collision of personalities.
Some people don't seem able to let things go, to realize that there is
nothing to gain from beating a point to a fine dust.
--
Rick...
Elizabot
Actually, I tend NOT to respond to his on topic posts for fear that Snit
will turn it into another circus thread.
>>Perhaps the others might think that they are encouraging him in a
>>positive way (to stay on topic) by doing so, but the reality is, they
>>are keeping him alive until he comes up with a "new" way to troll. The
>>only way to get totally stop him is for the entire group to ignore him
>>no matter what he posts. I don't see that happening.
>
>
> No. I will not ignore him entirely. I ignore the "Circus" posts
> because I do not want to be a part of that. And yes - I realise I am
> in real danger of getting sucked in now. But that depends on the
> direction this thread takes now.
I understand.
>>You are feeding Nashton and McNorton. I don't see how you have much room
>>to complain.
>
>
> Have you ever heard of the "Lund Circus"? No? That's because there is
> no such thing.
No such a term had been coined for any of the rest of us either.
Elizabot
Guess I did. :(
>
>>The
>>only way to get totally stop him is for the entire group to ignore him
>>no matter what he posts. I don't see that happening.
>>
>>You are feeding Nashton and McNorton. I don't see how you have much room
>>to complain.
>
>
> There are plenty of people feeding trolls here, always have been. Snit
> is worse than an ordinary troll, though, he is essentially a NG
> rapist... a bit of a difference. It doesn't bother me that people
> killfile me while I chase him around the NG, in fact, I recommend it.
I prefer to watch him grow bored and stir the pot with new people. Only
then will they learn.
Snit
4120de75$0$212$7586...@news.frii.net on 8/16/04 9:19 AM:
>> What's wrong with replying to posts that do not otherwise stand out
>> from the rest of CSMA's activities? But I have noticed that even when
>> Snit makes what would be considered to be a typical CSMA post, you or
>> other members of the "Snit Circus" jump in and start the thing again.
>> Sometimes Snit starts the circus, sometimes it's you, or Carrol, or ...
>
> Actually, I tend NOT to respond to his on topic posts for fear that Snit
> will turn it into another circus thread.
Which is probably the reason why the vast, vast majority of your posts
reference me in one way or another... right?
Oh, you did stop for a while when I pointed it out and repeatedly challenged
you to go a whole ten posts without referencing me.
I bet you think others have not noticed your obsession with me, right?
Steve Carroll
Rick <Ri...@dot.dot> wrote:
I truly don't believe you or C.Lund have read many of Snit's posts. Even
Nashton, who used to support Snit at virtually every opportunity, has
killfiled him (or claimed to have).
C Lund
Steve Carroll <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote:
> I truly don't believe you or C.Lund have read many of Snit's posts.
I have read his non-"Circus" posts. They're no better or worse than
any other non-wintroll posts made here.
> Even
> Nashton, who used to support Snit at virtually every opportunity, has
> killfiled him (or claimed to have).
I don't care what Nashton does or does not do.
> Steve C
--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund
Snit
> In article <fretwizz-6F23F9...@netnews.comcast.net>,
> Steve Carroll <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote:
>
>> I truly don't believe you or C.Lund have read many of Snit's posts.
>
> I have read his non-"Circus" posts. They're no better or worse than
> any other non-wintroll posts made here.
Out of curiosity, what do you think of Steve's non-"Circus" posts... if
there are any...
>
>> Even Nashton, who used to support Snit at virtually every opportunity, has
>> killfiled him (or claimed to have).
>
> I don't care what Nashton does or does not do.
Good to see that you make your own opinions based on the facts (as you see
them) and not on some idea of "consensus reality".
And, yeah, this is probably a "Circus" post. At least I admit when I am
partaking in such games. :)
Still, the question about Steve is a real one: what do you think of Steve
Carroll's non-"Circus" posts.
Steve Carroll
Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
> "C Lund" <cl...@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in
> clund-9ED3BF....@amstwist00.chello.com on 8/16/04 11:28 PM:
>
> > In article <fretwizz-6F23F9...@netnews.comcast.net>,
> > Steve Carroll <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I truly don't believe you or C.Lund have read many of Snit's posts.
> >
> > I have read his non-"Circus" posts. They're no better or worse than
> > any other non-wintroll posts made here.
>
> Out of curiosity, what do you think of Steve's non-"Circus" posts... if
> there are any...
> >
> >> Even Nashton, who used to support Snit at virtually every opportunity, has
> >> killfiled him (or claimed to have).
> >
> > I don't care what Nashton does or does not do.
>
> Good to see that you make your own opinions based on the facts (as you see
> them) and not on some idea of "consensus reality".
>
> And, yeah, this is probably a "Circus" post. At least I admit when I am
> partaking in such games. :)
>
> Still, the question about Steve is a real one: what do you think of Steve
> Carroll's non-"Circus" posts.
Still having that little comprehension problem, I see. Was it not enough
for you that he's just told you YOUR posts are no better or worse than
any other non-wintroll posts? Or have you already created a delusion
where you have C. Lund calling me a wintroll?
Rick
Steve Carroll <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote:
> In article <Rick-FC340F.0...@news.telus.net>,
> Rick <Ri...@dot.dot> wrote:
>
> > In article <clund-8CA9D2....@amstwist00.chello.com>,
> > C Lund <cl...@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > No. I will not ignore him entirely. I ignore the "Circus" posts
> > > because I do not want to be a part of that. And yes - I realise I am
> > > in real danger of getting sucked in now. But that depends on the
> > > direction this thread takes now.
> >
> > I tend to agree with this viewpoint. I've not had much interaction with
> > Snit et al. but what little I've had, has been no worse than with
> > *anybody* else.
> >
> > >
> > > > You are feeding Nashton and McNorton. I don't see how you have much
> > > > room
> > > > to complain.
> > >
> > > Have you ever heard of the "Lund Circus"? No? That's because there is
> > > no such thing. The "Snit Circus" threads / subthreads are not like
> > > other CSMA threads.
> >
> > I suspect that it is mostly an unfortunate collision of personalities.
> > Some people don't seem able to let things go, to realize that there is
> > nothing to gain from beating a point to a fine dust.
>
> I truly don't believe you or C.Lund have read many of Snit's posts. Even
> Nashton, who used to support Snit at virtually every opportunity, has
> killfiled him (or claimed to have).
Well, this bring up the question of how many posts are enough?
I've not had much direct contact with Snit, but I can't say that it's
been unpleasant. Ditto for some of the other 'classic' rivalries.
In my direct dealings with the people here, I can't say that anybody has
been unpleasant or rude to me. However I can say that the tone of the
participants involved in these battles changes markedly when they are
responding to their respective nemesises.(sp?)
Edwin is fine, until he starts talking with Alan; Snit is alright, until
he gets involved with his group; you also seem rational, until Snit is
around. There are more rivalries, obviously, but I don't think I need to
outline each and every struggle to a regular here.
So, in short, "Yes, I have read many of Snit's posts. I don't really
feel like sorting out the entire tangled 'Who said what to whom' or why
2+2 may or may not be equal to 4, except on alternate Sundays." I will
take each poster as presented to me, and judge them solely on their
interaction with me.
Seems to work, so far...
--
Rick...
Snit
8/17/04 8:00 AM:
>> I truly don't believe you or C.Lund have read many of Snit's posts. Even
>> Nashton, who used to support Snit at virtually every opportunity, has
>> killfiled him (or claimed to have).
>
> Well, this bring up the question of how many posts are enough?
>
> I've not had much direct contact with Snit, but I can't say that it's
> been unpleasant. Ditto for some of the other 'classic' rivalries.
>
> In my direct dealings with the people here, I can't say that anybody has
> been unpleasant or rude to me. However I can say that the tone of the
> participants involved in these battles changes markedly when they are
> responding to their respective nemesises.(sp?)
Good point. I have commented that I act very much as a mirror... generally
I respond well to reasonable posts and have no trouble belittling posts that
are clearly trolling. I suppose in that I have been unfair to Steve Mackay
- many of his posts are reasonable, and I have responded in less than kind
ways - making references to our disagreements. As much as I do have
disagreements with him, he often posts in reasonable ways. I think your
post serves as a good reminder that I should lay off making snide comments
to his non-trolling posts. Thanks.
I do the same to Steve Carroll, but, if you look at his posts, virtually all
of them are attacks... and the vast, vast majority of those are directed at
me. He and I each have our own claims as to why or how I worked him up to
such a frothy anger, but it is clear that the man has gone 'round the bend.
> Edwin is fine, until he starts talking with Alan; Snit is alright, until
> he gets involved with his group; you also seem rational, until Snit is
> around. There are more rivalries, obviously, but I don't think I need to
> outline each and every struggle to a regular here.
>
> So, in short, "Yes, I have read many of Snit's posts. I don't really
> feel like sorting out the entire tangled 'Who said what to whom' or why
> 2+2 may or may not be equal to 4, except on alternate Sundays."
When did Steve Carroll claim that they hold court on alternate Sundays?
See, I have no problem taunting him. :)
> I will take each poster as presented to me, and judge them solely on their
> interaction with me.
>
> Seems to work, so far...
Roughly what I do as well. Makes complete sense.
Rick
Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
Perhaps NOT taunting him would be in the same vein as not "making snide
comments to his non-trolling posts." As I said, I'm judging you on your
interactions with me. Taunting Steve Carroll under the guise of
discussing general concepts with me seems to serve no useful purpose
except to lessen my opinion of you.
>
> > I will take each poster as presented to me, and judge them solely on their
> > interaction with me.
> >
> > Seems to work, so far...
>
> Roughly what I do as well. Makes complete sense.
--
Rick...
Elizabot
> "Rick" <Ri...@dot.dot> wrote in Rick-0F15D8.0...@news.telus.net on
> 8/17/04 8:00 AM:
>
>
>>>I truly don't believe you or C.Lund have read many of Snit's posts. Even
>>>Nashton, who used to support Snit at virtually every opportunity, has
>>>killfiled him (or claimed to have).
>>
>>Well, this bring up the question of how many posts are enough?
>>
>>I've not had much direct contact with Snit, but I can't say that it's
>>been unpleasant. Ditto for some of the other 'classic' rivalries.
>>
>>In my direct dealings with the people here, I can't say that anybody has
>>been unpleasant or rude to me. However I can say that the tone of the
>>participants involved in these battles changes markedly when they are
>>responding to their respective nemesises.(sp?)
>
>
> Good point. I have commented that I act very much as a mirror...
I'll definitely agree that you act very much like one of those
distorting mirrors found in a circus funhouse.
[snip]
Rick
Elizabot <toolittl...@poo.com> wrote:
Is there any chance that we can move the 'cheap shots' to another group?
Anybody?
--
Rick...
Snit
41222616$0$208$7586...@news.frii.net on 8/17/04 8:36 AM:
I am not your toy.
You will have to learn that some day. Today is a good time for you to start
accepting that your obsession with me will not get you to any place you want
to be.
Snit
8/17/04 8:41 AM:
I spend some time trying to get such shots moved to alt.flame.macintosh.
There were no takers.
Rick
Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
Well, I appreciate the effort, thanks.
Perhaps the problem was simply one of convenience / lack of respect for
the rest of the group? It is much simpler just to 'let one fly' in situ
then to change the headers first. Just trying now...
Let's see. (Using MT Newswatcher, seems to be the most popular)
Click one disclosure triangle.
Click in Newsgroups line.
add a comma
type in the new group, spelling it correctly.
Hey! I'll set followups too...
Seemed easy enough. I guess the problem wasn't that it wasn't
convenience that was the issue...
--
Rick...
Snit
8/17/04 9:22 AM:
LOL. I missed that you cross posted this... I already responded in the
other group.
Rick
Rick <Ri...@dot.dot> wrote:
Well, it really was that easy. (BTW, please ignore the sentence "I guess
the problem wasn't...", it hurts *my* head trying to parse that, and I
wrote it)
I added comp.sys.mac.advocacy back to the newsgroups line, the followups
are respected in MT-NewsWatcher, so responding to those posts defaults
to sending it directly to that group.
Snit, if you're still game about using alt.flame.macintosh, this may
help...
--
Rick...
Snit
8/17/04 9:29 AM:
I am. Will go back to using it for a while to see if we can move some of
the meaningless insults, at least, over there.
I hope that others in csma are willing to do the same... would make csma a
more pleasant place.
Steve Carroll
Rick <Ri...@dot.dot> wrote:
According to what you just wrote, your opinion of Snit is now lessened.
Rick
Steve Carroll <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote:
Yes. Was my text not clear in that regard?
By taunting you without reason, my opinion of Snit was lessened.
I had thought that that was obvious.
--
Rick...
Elizabot
Rick wrote:
> In article <BD478A4F.5CDB1%snit-...@cableone.net>,
> Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
>
>
>>"Rick" <Ri...@dot.dot> wrote in Rick-2790D9.1...@news.telus.net on
>>8/17/04 10:00 AM:
>>
>>
>>>In article <BD478451.5CDA7%snit-...@cableone.net>,
>>>Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>Well, I chose this/that group partially because of its traffic. I'm
>>>>>getting no more than what I came to see.
>>>>
>>>>True... csma would be a bit boring without at least some of the fighting...
>>>>I think you would be hard pressed to find any regular who is not currently
>>>>or has not recently been in what is ... essentially... a meaningless fight
>>>>that *nobody* cares about. Well... on reflection, I think some people do
>>>>care about it... and they either seem to get truly upset or do things that
>>>>are just absurd like threaten to send garbage to someone's employer or even
>>>>call the police and make false allegations.
>>>
>>>OK, I may regret this, but what the hell was this dustup all about?
>>>(Short version if possible - I've read lots of allegations)
>>
>>dustup?
>>
>>If you mean the pushing things into the "real" world... I blamed Elizabot of
>>being obsessive over me... somewhat to irk her and somewhat because almost
>>all of her posts *are* about me (I showed stats that is was, I believe 98%,
>>and she came back that it was only 96% or something silly like that). Well,
>>she decided that this constituted a risk, so she hunted down my home city
>>(not hard to do) and threatened to call the police because show though I was
>>close to crossing some line...
>
>
> show though == she thought?
>
>>This was a serious enough threat where I did go to the police... and talked
>>to her local police and her ISP (her ISP got me in contact with her local
>>police department). I filed a complaint, but made it clear I was not
>>looking to press charges unless she carried out her threats.
>>
>>I would like to think she is just joking... but you never know online. In
>>my view that really is the only thing I have ever seen in csma to cross any
>>line of what is reasonable in an advocacy group.
>>
>>Since then she has also suggested she would like to see someone send her
>>claims to my employer... and has done the research to track that down as
>>well... not real hard but certainly a bit odd. She has continued to make a
>>few other similar threats.
>>
>>When I say I see her as a potential danger I am neither joking nor
>>exaggerating. If I ever see her make similar threats to anyone else I will
>>be happy to share my experiences in more detail and to provide the person
>>with the names of the officers I have spoken to and the case numbers so they
>>can reference them if they need to defend themselves against her or wish to
>>press charges against her.
>
>
> OK, now, since she's over here. I'd like to ask Elizabot to put forward
> her account. Your account seems reasonable.
This is the first that I've heard that he actually contacted my local
police and that he filed a complaint. I have never contacted the police,
although I did threaten to *if he crossed the line*. Snit gets so wound
up that I thought he might take the flame war into the real world.
Apparently I was right to presume so because he has.
In a post that I wrote to counter a bunch of his accusations and lies
about me, I wrote "You are very near to crossing the line. I will not
hesitate to contact the Prescott Police Department if you do. And that's
a promise." That's what set Snit off.
Apparently the police told Snit that I was not someone he should be
talking to, but you see, Snit still does, so I can't believe he is
serious about any of this.
Snit has used this whole incident as an excuse to harass me further.
Like with you, Rick, for instance. He tried with another poster too. I
find Snit thouroughly reprehensible and believe he deserves any
discomfort I serve him. He absolutely thrives on this stuff! It stirs up
his pathetic and otherwise dull life.
Your volley, Snit. Make it a good one this time.
Steve Mackay
LOL, we all know he *THOUGHT* he was trying to do a pre-emptive strike, by
contacting your police department.
Did you check with your local department to actually SEE if he filed some
type of bullshit report against you? Or are you taking him on his word? I
wouldn't be surprised if he did file. It also wouldn't surprise me that he
would lie about something like that. Someone who lies so consistantly in
here, has got to spill over in to his "real world" also.
Rick
Elizabot <toolittl...@poo.com> wrote:
Which set of police? Your local police? You have not contacted the
police in Prescott, so I presume that you know that the police told him
not to talk to you only through his posts.
>
> Snit has used this whole incident as an excuse to harass me further.
> Like with you, Rick, for instance.
Well, this was in a response to me asking him/you to move this out of
the main discussion area, so I don't think that he orchestrated the
whole thing...
> He tried with another poster too. I
> find Snit thouroughly reprehensible and believe he deserves any
> discomfort I serve him. He absolutely thrives on this stuff! It stirs up
> his pathetic and otherwise dull life.
>
> Your volley, Snit. Make it a good one this time.
Hey, as an outside observer who is trying to limit his exposure to all
the crap, without simultaneously removing potentially valuable and
interesting commentary, I'd like to make a suggestion, if I may.
I realize that I don't have the history here to comment authoritatively
on this mess, but I think that at least Snit has attempted to move the
crap out of here. Could I ask the people who feel compelled to address
him, to at least do so in the otherwise dead flame group?
--
Rick...
Elizabot
Nope.
> Or are you taking him on his word?
That why I started off with "Or so he claims..."
> I wouldn't be surprised if he did file.
I wouldn't either.
> It also wouldn't surprise me that he would lie about something like that.
Me neither.
>Someone who lies so consistantly in
> here, has got to spill over in to his "real world" also.
I have reason not to be concerned, but will not explain it here, where
you-know-who can read it.
:)
--
"You see, my invisible green dragon tells me that God is real, and is
even a pretty nice guy, but can not hold his liquor well."
- Snit (aka 尬≡) on 4/27/04
John
Someone that spends hours googling for something to attack people on
does not present the image of a rational person. So some people like
Snit who don't know you may think you capable of stalking people in the
real world. Personally I think you're a harmless person with too much
time on her hands.
Elizabot
> Someone that spends hours googling for something to attack people on
> does not present the image of a rational person. So some people like
> Snit who don't know you may think you capable of stalking people in the
> real world. Personally I think you're a harmless person with too much
> time on her hands.
I believe that's the nicest thing you've ever said about me, John! Thank
you!!
Rick
John <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> Someone that spends hours googling for something to attack people on
> does not present the image of a rational person. So some people like
> Snit who don't know you may think you capable of stalking people in the
> real world. Personally I think you're a harmless person with too much
> time on her hands.
I tend to agree, but this whole encounter has too many RL entanglements
to be absolutely certain. I find that both sides, at least in their
dealings with me, are reasonable.
As for everything else, for the people who were here at the time, I can
sympathize with their positions, but I'm one of those people who tends
to believe the best about people, until I've been bitten.
Of course, I'm trusting enough that it sometimes takes a couple of
bites, but so far, I've no direct reason to make any deep pronouncements.
--
Rick...
Steve Carroll
Rick <Ri...@dot.dot> wrote:
Quite clear, to me.
> By taunting you without reason, my opinion of Snit was lessened.
> I had thought that that was obvious.
My only goal here was to clarify it for Snit and get it on record at
google. You may soon find out why I bothered to do this...
Rick
Steve Carroll <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote:
I may indeed. So far I have not. Actually, I have been conversing
relatively politely with both him and Elizabot in alt.flame.macintosh
for much of this morning, would you like to join us?
--
Rick...
C Lund
> clund-9ED3BF....@amstwist00.chello.com on 8/16/04 11:28 PM:
> > In article <fretwizz-6F23F9...@netnews.comcast.net>,
> > Steve Carroll <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote:
> >> I truly don't believe you or C.Lund have read many of Snit's posts.
> > I have read his non-"Circus" posts. They're no better or worse than
> > any other non-wintroll posts made here.
> Out of curiosity, what do you think of Steve's non-"Circus" posts... if
> there are any...
Hmm.. His maccie posts are ok. However, in political threads he tends
to resort to ad hominems, straw-men, and a weird form of pretzel
logic. He also supported one of faux's* myriad accusations of me being
an anti-Semite. IIRC he ignored my demands for an explanation of that
support. You can find samples of what I'm talking about by googling
with keywords from this paragraph.
* I think it was faux. On this charge he's guilty until proven
innocent.
--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund
Tim Adams
Yet snit claimed you contacted them first. Even spent a couple of days
arguing the point with me.
Elizabot
LOL. I remember that! I never contacted them. I mentioned possibly
contacting them first.
Bob S
Elizabot <toolittl...@poo.com> wrote:
> > Yet snit claimed you contacted them first. Even spent a couple of days
> > arguing the point with me.
>
> LOL. I remember that! I never contacted them. I mentioned possibly
> contacting them first.
Have you considered taking a sabbatical from CSMA? I would be concerned
if someone were actually reaching outside of cyberspace to wreak havoc
in my life.
You could always lurk while you sit it out.
--
Cheers,
Bob S
Snit
teadams$2$0$0$3-8141D3.17...@news04.east.earthlink.net on 8/17/04
2:27 PM:
>> Your volley, Snit. Make it a good one this time.
>
> Yet snit claimed you contacted them first. Even spent a couple of days
> arguing the point with me.
Please point to such a post. Elizabot *talked about* contacting the police
before I *did* contact them. I have never claimed otherwise.
Again, I welcome you showing any post that says otherwise.
Snit
412278ba$0$206$7586...@news.frii.net on 8/17/04 2:29 PM:
>> Yet snit claimed you contacted them first. Even spent a couple of days
>> arguing the point with me.
>
> LOL. I remember that! I never contacted them. I mentioned possibly
> contacting them first.
If you remember it, please provide a link to the post.
I have never stated you contacted the police. You commented about doing
so... I did so.
Snit
> In article <BD46F76F.5C96F%snit-...@cableone.net>,
> Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
>> "C Lund" <cl...@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in
>> clund-9ED3BF....@amstwist00.chello.com on 8/16/04 11:28 PM:
>>> In article <fretwizz-6F23F9...@netnews.comcast.net>,
>>> Steve Carroll <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote:
>>>> I truly don't believe you or C.Lund have read many of Snit's posts.
>>> I have read his non-"Circus" posts. They're no better or worse than
>>> any other non-wintroll posts made here.
>> Out of curiosity, what do you think of Steve's non-"Circus" posts... if
>> there are any...
>
> Hmm.. His maccie posts are ok. However, in political threads he tends
> to resort to ad hominems, straw-men, and a weird form of pretzel
> logic. He also supported one of faux's* myriad accusations of me being
> an anti-Semite. IIRC he ignored my demands for an explanation of that
> support. You can find samples of what I'm talking about by googling
> with keywords from this paragraph.
I would love to see your support of this claim.
What comment of yours did I ever claim was anti-Semitic?
I will be happy to offer an explanation (meet your "demand") if you can
point to what it is you are even talking about.
Steve Carroll
Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
> "C Lund" <cl...@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in
> clund-14D7AF....@amstwist00.chello.com on 8/17/04 2:10 PM:
>
> > In article <BD46F76F.5C96F%snit-...@cableone.net>,
> > Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
> >> "C Lund" <cl...@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in
> >> clund-9ED3BF....@amstwist00.chello.com on 8/16/04 11:28 PM:
> >>> In article <fretwizz-6F23F9...@netnews.comcast.net>,
> >>> Steve Carroll <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote:
> >>>> I truly don't believe you or C.Lund have read many of Snit's posts.
> >>> I have read his non-"Circus" posts. They're no better or worse than
> >>> any other non-wintroll posts made here.
> >> Out of curiosity, what do you think of Steve's non-"Circus" posts... if
> >> there are any...
> >
> > Hmm.. His maccie posts are ok. However, in political threads he tends
> > to resort to ad hominems, straw-men, and a weird form of pretzel
> > logic. He also supported one of faux's* myriad accusations of me being
> > an anti-Semite. IIRC he ignored my demands for an explanation of that
> > support. You can find samples of what I'm talking about by googling
> > with keywords from this paragraph.
>
> I would love to see your support of this claim.
>
> What comment of yours did I ever claim was anti-Semitic?
>
> I will be happy to offer an explanation (meet your "demand") if you can
> point to what it is you are even talking about.
Geezus, Snit take a reading comprehension course... and quickly. Lund
was answering YOU... talking about ME. This is exactly what so many
people have been talking about... and you do it constantly.
Snit
fretwizz-C73A42...@netnews.comcast.net on 8/17/04 4:11 PM:
Steve, I have responded to your flame in the appropriate news group:
alt.flame.macintosh
If you would like to continue our flame wars, while I have told you I will
mostly ignore you in here, I will play with you a bit longer in there.
GreyCloud
Snit wrote:
> "C Lund" <cl...@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in
> clund-14D7AF....@amstwist00.chello.com on 8/17/04 2:10 PM:
>
>
>>In article <BD46F76F.5C96F%snit-...@cableone.net>,
>>Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
>>
>>>"C Lund" <cl...@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in
>>>clund-9ED3BF....@amstwist00.chello.com on 8/16/04 11:28 PM:
>>>
>>>>In article <fretwizz-6F23F9...@netnews.comcast.net>,
>>>>Steve Carroll <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I truly don't believe you or C.Lund have read many of Snit's posts.
>>>>
>>>>I have read his non-"Circus" posts. They're no better or worse than
>>>>any other non-wintroll posts made here.
>>>
>>>Out of curiosity, what do you think of Steve's non-"Circus" posts... if
>>>there are any...
>>
>>Hmm.. His maccie posts are ok. However, in political threads he tends
>>to resort to ad hominems, straw-men, and a weird form of pretzel
>>logic. He also supported one of faux's* myriad accusations of me being
>>an anti-Semite. IIRC he ignored my demands for an explanation of that
>>support. You can find samples of what I'm talking about by googling
>>with keywords from this paragraph.
>
>
> I would love to see your support of this claim.
>
> What comment of yours did I ever claim was anti-Semitic?
>
I've often wondered about that. Doesn't anti-Semitic mean against self?
> I will be happy to offer an explanation (meet your "demand") if you can
> point to what it is you are even talking about.
>
>
>
--
---------------------------------
The Golden Years Sux.
Snit
on 8/17/04 8:38 PM:
>
>
> Snit wrote:
>
>> "C Lund" <cl...@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in
>> clund-14D7AF....@amstwist00.chello.com on 8/17/04 2:10 PM:
>>
>>
>>> In article <BD46F76F.5C96F%snit-...@cableone.net>,
>>> Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "C Lund" <cl...@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in
>>>> clund-9ED3BF....@amstwist00.chello.com on 8/16/04 11:28 PM:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <fretwizz-6F23F9...@netnews.comcast.net>,
>>>>> Steve Carroll <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I truly don't believe you or C.Lund have read many of Snit's posts.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have read his non-"Circus" posts. They're no better or worse than
>>>>> any other non-wintroll posts made here.
>>>>
>>>> Out of curiosity, what do you think of Steve's non-"Circus" posts... if
>>>> there are any...
>>>
>>> Hmm.. His maccie posts are ok. However, in political threads he tends
>>> to resort to ad hominems, straw-men, and a weird form of pretzel
>>> logic. He also supported one of faux's* myriad accusations of me being
>>> an anti-Semite. IIRC he ignored my demands for an explanation of that
>>> support. You can find samples of what I'm talking about by googling
>>> with keywords from this paragraph.
>>
>>
>> I would love to see your support of this claim.
>>
>> What comment of yours did I ever claim was anti-Semitic?
>>
>
> I've often wondered about that. Doesn't anti-Semitic mean against self?
Um, no. I against Jews. Lund has made the assertion that I supported the
claim that he made anti-Semitic comments... and he wants me to explain them.
Odd thing is he has not been able to tell me what comments he means...
I wonder if one of the known trolls will produce a PDF with "proof" and post
it to their web site...
>
>> I will be happy to offer an explanation (meet your "demand") if you can
>> point to what it is you are even talking about.
>>
>>
>>
--
Rick G
GreyCloud <mi...@cumulus.com> wrote:
> Snit wrote:
>
> > "C Lund" <cl...@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in
> > clund-14D7AF....@amstwist00.chello.com on 8/17/04 2:10 PM:
> >
> >
> >>In article <BD46F76F.5C96F%snit-...@cableone.net>,
> >>Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>>"C Lund" <cl...@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in
> >>>clund-9ED3BF....@amstwist00.chello.com on 8/16/04 11:28 PM:
> >>>
> >>>>In article <fretwizz-6F23F9...@netnews.comcast.net>,
> >>>>Steve Carroll <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>I truly don't believe you or C.Lund have read many of Snit's posts.
> >>>>
> >>>>I have read his non-"Circus" posts. They're no better or worse than
> >>>>any other non-wintroll posts made here.
> >>>
> >>>Out of curiosity, what do you think of Steve's non-"Circus" posts... if
> >>>there are any...
> >>
> >>Hmm.. His maccie posts are ok. However, in political threads he tends
> >>to resort to ad hominems, straw-men, and a weird form of pretzel
> >>logic. He also supported one of faux's* myriad accusations of me being
> >>an anti-Semite. IIRC he ignored my demands for an explanation of that
> >>support. You can find samples of what I'm talking about by googling
> >>with keywords from this paragraph.
> >
> >
> > I would love to see your support of this claim.
> >
> > What comment of yours did I ever claim was anti-Semitic?
> >
>
> I've often wondered about that. Doesn't anti-Semitic mean against self?
Only if you're Semitic. It theoretically refers mostly to a language
group found in the Middle East or northern Africa. However, it's been
extended to refer generally to Jewish people.
>
> > I will be happy to offer an explanation (meet your "demand") if you can
> > point to what it is you are even talking about.
> >
> >
> >
--
Rick...
Steve Carroll
Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
I have no need to go to another NG to watch you misread the posts of
others. I get plenty of that right here.
Snit
This is your second notice. For any future flame wars you want to start
with me, please look in that group... I will not *continue* to join you in
polluting csma with our silly wars (please note I admit to my part in our
wars in the past... wonder if you will).
In case you are not bright enough to find alt.flame.macintosh on your own:
I will, however, occasionally post the Steve Carroll's Games and Steve
Carroll's Guilt posts in here - though not as often as I have... but I will
only do so if you are posting your meaningless attacks against me... or,
perhaps, others.
Steve Carroll
Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
I've already explained to you that you are wrong about this, Snit... and
you even replied to that post around 7:30 p.m. tonight (so I know you
saw it). Why the need to keep spreading your bullshit? You've had plenty
of time to reread and find your error, yet, here you are, leveling your
trollgun at Lund... who, like you, will probably be too stubborn to
appreciate the fact that I am defending him against a lunatic like
yourself.
> Odd thing is he has not been able to tell me what comments he means...
He probably read it and decided that you really are a boorish troll like
everyone claims.
> I wonder if one of the known trolls will produce a PDF with "proof" and post
> it to their web site...
Or maybe something even more astounding will happen... maybe you will
reread this portion of the thread and show that you comprehend things
while being honest for a change.
Steve Mackay
>
>
> ----------
> In article <BD43D541.5C59E%snit-...@cableone.net>, Snit
> <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Well, I point the most lies out...
>
> Finally you say something truthful!.....considering for the most part your
> *facts* are lies, you do indeed point out the most lies, But lets not let
> the fact that they are your lies spoil this unique occasion. :=)
LOL
Well said :)
Steve Mackay
> In article <BD481E6B.5D061%snit-...@cableone.net>,
> Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
> <snip>
> I wonder if one of the known trolls will produce a PDF with "proof" and post
>> it to their web site...
Boy, he's still got his undies in a bundle over being caught in that lie. :)
>
> Or maybe something even more astounding will happen... maybe you will
> reread this portion of the thread and show that you comprehend things
> while being honest for a change.
You referenced Snit and honesty in the same sentence. You should be ashamed!
Steve Carroll
Steve Mackay <steve_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hey... I said MAYBE something would happen... something astounding:)
Wouldn't those things qualify if they actually happened? LOL! It was a
joke of sorts... but I didn't want to include the smiley because I
wanted to let Lund know I was serious... that Snit is anything but
honest and rarely comprehends what he's read. Somehow, despite Snit's
obvious troll here, I have a feeling Lund will find a way to forgive him
and denigrate me over this. No, I'm not kidding... they seem to think
alike in certain ways.
Elizabot
Holy crap, dude. Ask him to click on this instead:
news:alt.flame.macintosh
You are totally stupid about subscribing to newsgroups, huh.
Elizabot
> In article <2004081800104450073%stevemackay@hotmailcom>,
> Steve Mackay <steve_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>On 2004-08-17 23:52:37 -0500, Steve Carroll <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> said:
>>
>>
>>>In article <BD481E6B.5D061%snit-...@cableone.net>,
>>> Snit <snit-...@cableone.net> wrote:
>>><snip>
>>
>>>I wonder if one of the known trolls will produce a PDF with "proof" and post
>>>
>>>>it to their web site...
>>
>>Boy, he's still got his undies in a bundle over being caught in that lie. :)
>>
>>
>>>Or maybe something even more astounding will happen... maybe you will
>>>reread this portion of the thread and show that you comprehend things
>>>while being honest for a change.
>>
>>You referenced Snit and honesty in the same sentence. You should be ashamed!
>
>
> Hey... I said MAYBE something would happen... something astounding:)
> Wouldn't those things qualify if they actually happened? LOL! It was a
> joke of sorts... but I didn't want to include the smiley because I
> wanted to let Lund know I was serious... that Snit is anything but
> honest and rarely comprehends what he's read. Somehow, despite Snit's
> obvious troll here, I have a feeling Lund will find a way to forgive him
> and denigrate me over this. No, I'm not kidding... they seem to think
> alike in certain ways.
So Lund kf's you. No great loss there, really.
Elizabot
> In article <412278ba$0$206$7586...@news.frii.net>,
> Elizabot <toolittl...@poo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>Yet snit claimed you contacted them first. Even spent a couple of days
>>>arguing the point with me.
>>
>>LOL. I remember that! I never contacted them. I mentioned possibly
>>contacting them first.
>
>
> Have you considered taking a sabbatical from CSMA?
Yes, I have considered that, and I believe that is what Snit wants, so
I'm not going to do it.
> I would be concerned
> if someone were actually reaching outside of cyberspace to wreak havoc
> in my life.
Keep in mind that although this is the first he has admitted to filing a
complaint, this occurred many months ago, and no one has contacted me. I
have done nothing illegal. I am considering contacting the police to see
if he actually filed a complaint, though. I'm curious about what he may
have said.
> You could always lurk while you sit it out.
I don't think he'll go away, and I'm not going to let him scare me off
or bully me around.