Which Windiot pegs the stupid meter?
Tom Bates
Homey
Foo
mayor
Edwin
Slade
Dan Johnson
toady
nasty
--
Yours,
Tom
John
> Zero
>
> Homey
>
> Foo
>
> mayor
>
> Edwin
>
> Slade
>
> Dan Johnson
>
> toady
>
> nasty
Zara is by far the dumbest of the Wintrolls.
Tom Bates
John <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
Zero 1
the rest, 0
--
Yours,
Tom
MuahMan
"Tom Bates" <t...@offthehk.lk> wrote in message
news:tb-CE7FDB.20...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
Mayor of R'lyeh
to bless us with the following wisdom:
>Zero
>
>Homey
>
>Foo
>
>mayor
>
>Edwin
>
>Slade
>
>Dan Johnson
>
>toady
>
>nasty
How cute. Young Master Bates figured out how to make a list and make
personal attacks at the same time. You're getting to be a big boy now.
Yes you are! oh, yes you are!
--
"A president who breaks the law is a threat to the
very structure of our government."
Al Gore
Bill Clinton became eligible for reinstatement to the
bar on January 19,2006 after losing his law license
in 2001 for comitting perjury.
Tom Bates
"MuahMan" <mua...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Gosh, I forgot muah-prattly. So, lets revise
Zero
Homey
Foo
mayor
Edwin
Slade
Dan Johnson
toady
nasty
Muah-prattly
--
Yours,
Tom
Tim Crowley
likely the same sad troll.,
Sandman
Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 20:47:48 -0600, Tom Bates <t...@offthehk.lk> chose
> to bless us with the following wisdom:
>
> >Zero
> >
> >Homey
> >
> >Foo
> >
> >mayor
> >
> >Edwin
> >
> >Slade
> >
> >Dan Johnson
> >
> >toady
> >
> >nasty
>
>
> How cute. Young Master Bates figured out how to make a list and make
> personal attacks at the same time. You're getting to be a big boy now.
> Yes you are! oh, yes you are!
Ouch, what a retort, Clyde! You really got him there. Got him baaaad.
He'll be hurting for weeks now.
--
Sandman[.net]
John Slade
on Windows users he happens to disagree with. Maybe if Bates here actually
spent studying the subject he wouldn't be so bitter and then he wouldn't
waste his time making idiotic posts.
John
Jim Lee Jr.
Sandman <m...@sandman.net> wrote:
The reason Clyde said "Master Bates" is because he is the Master of
Bation.
--
Microsoft and Windoze: The combination that made computing dangerous.
Apple and OS X: The combination that made computing insanely great.
"VISTA" an acronym for the top five Windows problems: Viruses,
Intrusions, Spyware, Trojans and Adware.
As long as the OS was from Apple and not MS I wouldn't care
Timberwoof
"Tim Crowley" <timmyt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would have to vote for Greycloud or Muaaaah Muaaah. But they are most
> likely the same sad troll.,
I don't think so. Greycloud is occasionally lucid, but MuahMan is just mean.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com> http://www.timberwoof.com
Timberwoof
"John Slade" <hitm...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> I rank the person who started a whole thread just to do personal attacks
> on Windows users he happens to disagree with.
Never mind about the thread. The OP only listed the most obnoxious ones -- none
of the Windroids with any real points worth mentioning hot listed.
> Maybe if Bates here actually
> spent studying the subject he wouldn't be so bitter and then he wouldn't
> waste his time making idiotic posts.
>
> John
Funny ... the same thing could be said for everyone on the list. But again,
never mind. The list didn't contain the names of any serious debaters ... just
Wintrolls.
Joey Jojo Junior Shabadoo
Tom Bates <t...@offthehk.lk> wrote:
but how could you forget that ol' Tommy Lame? Surely he should be back
soon, after counting all the Mac boxes at CompUSA :)
--
making Usenet safer - one troll at a time!
Mojo
Tom Bates <t...@offthehk.lk> wrote:
> Zero
>
> Homey
>
> Foo
>
> mayor
>
> Edwin
>
> Slade
>
> Dan Johnson
>
> toady
>
> nasty
They are all inbred retards.
Snit
timberwoof-D41D4...@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net on 2/20/06 1:38
AM:
> In article <1140415124.9...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "Tim Crowley" <timmyt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I would have to vote for Greycloud or Muaaaah Muaaah. But they are most
>> likely the same sad troll.,
>
> I don't think so. Greycloud is occasionally lucid, but MuahMan is just mean.
When is GreyCloud lucid? Can you point to any recent examples?
--
Sex-based crimes are not synonymous with sex
http://www.prevent-abuse-now.com/
http://www.registeredoffenderslist.org/
_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account
Tom Bates
Well, ha, ha mayor. It doesn't let me be the liar you're accused of
being around here. I'd hate to have to live that down. You've done some
pretty crappy things to be called that.
--
Yours,
Tom
Tom Bates
Tommie is not a lying, mean one. He's just a good example of a troll in
it's glory. I find that, well, entertaining. That's why I didn't include
him. He's also not just purely mean and obnoxious like the rest.
--
Yours,
Tom
Mayor of R'lyeh
to bless us with the following wisdom:
>In article <mr-DB7D0A.08...@individual.net>,
> Sandman <m...@sandman.net> wrote:
>
>> In article <n1kiv1t9nikfj0t39...@4ax.com>,
>> Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 20:47:48 -0600, Tom Bates <t...@offthehk.lk> chose
>> > to bless us with the following wisdom:
>> >
>> > >Zero
>> > >
>> > >Homey
>> > >
>> > >Foo
>> > >
>> > >mayor
>> > >
>> > >Edwin
>> > >
>> > >Slade
>> > >
>> > >Dan Johnson
>> > >
>> > >toady
>> > >
>> > >nasty
>> >
>> >
>> > How cute. Young Master Bates figured out how to make a list and make
>> > personal attacks at the same time. You're getting to be a big boy now.
>> > Yes you are! oh, yes you are!
>>
>> Ouch, what a retort, Clyde! You really got him there. Got him baaaad.
>> He'll be hurting for weeks now.
>
>Well, ha, ha mayor. It doesn't let me be the liar you're accused of
>being around here. I'd hate to have to live that down. You've done some
>pretty crappy things to be called that.
LOL! Given that the only people calling me liar are some of the
biggest liars and/or just plain hateful assholes in here I'm not
worried about my reputation.
Steve Carroll
Says the plain hateful asshole who claimed a cancer patient lied about
having cancer simply to avoid some stupid usenet argument with Edwin.
--
"I am not fond of "me too" posts..." - Snit
Steve Carroll
Snit <SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> wrote:
> "Timberwoof" <timbe...@stimpberawoofm.com> stated in post
> timberwoof-D41D4...@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net on 2/20/06 1:38
> AM:
>
> > In article <1140415124.9...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> > "Tim Crowley" <timmyt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I would have to vote for Greycloud or Muaaaah Muaaah. But they are most
> >> likely the same sad troll.,
> >
> > I don't think so. Greycloud is occasionally lucid, but MuahMan is just mean.
>
> When is GreyCloud lucid? Can you point to any recent examples?
It might be even more entertaining if you were to explain to Timberwoof
your theory on how the sexual activity he engages in isn't "sex".
Snit
noone-A2D3B8....@comcast.dca.giganews.com on 2/20/06 10:16 AM:
>> LOL! Given that the only people calling me liar are some of the
>> biggest liars and/or just plain hateful assholes in here I'm not
>> worried about my reputation.
>
> Says the plain hateful asshole who claimed a cancer patient lied about
> having cancer simply to avoid some stupid usenet argument with Edwin.
Says the admitted moron and asshole (Steve Carroll) who has spent untold
hours hunting through my site on my health concerns and digging through
years-old posts to other forums so you can try to use my health concerns in
your trolling against me. Heck, you found out that there have been times in
my life I have used prescription medications and use that to defend your
accusations of drug and alcohol abuse. The reality: you are clearly
projecting; you accuse others of what you do in order to feel better about
yourself. You have made this very, very clear:
<http://snipurl.com/Steves_admission>.
Such comments, coming from you Steve, are more than lame; you have *no* leg
to stand on. :)
Snit
Ok, Steve, I will bite on your troll: what non-sex sexual activity are you
talking about? Do you even bother to read what you write? LOL! Sexual
activities are sex by definition, you moron.
Here is my guess: you still have not come to understand that a partial
subset of a whole is not synonymous with the whole. You really are *that*
stupid.
Oh, and Steve, I do not care what sexual practices you and your friends
partake in [1]. Unlike you I do not hold such bigotry that I declare people
of any sexuality as "parasites" - keep in mind that you have done just that
and then spent post after post trying to explain your bigotry away.
--
Sex-based crimes are not synonymous with sex
http://www.prevent-abuse-now.com/
http://www.registeredoffenderslist.org/
[1] though if you post definite evidence of committing the sex crimes you
have discussed I *will* report you to the police
Steve Carroll
Snit <SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> wrote:
> "Steve Carroll" <no...@nowhere.net> stated in post
> noone-A2D3B8....@comcast.dca.giganews.com on 2/20/06 10:16 AM:
>
> >> LOL! Given that the only people calling me liar are some of the
> >> biggest liars and/or just plain hateful assholes in here I'm not
> >> worried about my reputation.
> >
> > Says the plain hateful asshole who claimed a cancer patient lied about
> > having cancer simply to avoid some stupid usenet argument with Edwin.
>
> Says the admitted moron and asshole (Steve Carroll) who has spent untold
> hours hunting through my site
Where is your proof I've spent untold hours hunting through your site?
Hurry up and fabricate some;)
Steve Carroll
Snit <SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> wrote:
> "Steve Carroll" <no...@nowhere.net> stated in post
> noone-800559....@comcast.dca.giganews.com on 2/20/06 10:19 AM:
>
> > In article <C01F2B97.45DB1%SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID>,
> > Snit <SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> wrote:
> >
> >> "Timberwoof" <timbe...@stimpberawoofm.com> stated in post
> >> timberwoof-D41D4...@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net on 2/20/06 1:38
> >> AM:
> >>
> >>> In article <1140415124.9...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> >>> "Tim Crowley" <timmyt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I would have to vote for Greycloud or Muaaaah Muaaah. But they are most
> >>>> likely the same sad troll.,
> >>>
> >>> I don't think so. Greycloud is occasionally lucid, but MuahMan is just
> >>> mean.
> >>
> >> When is GreyCloud lucid? Can you point to any recent examples?
> >
> > It might be even more entertaining if you were to explain to Timberwoof
> > your theory on how the sexual activity he engages in isn't "sex".
>
> Ok, Steve, I will bite on your troll: what non-sex sexual activity are you
> talking about?
I said sexual activity, Snit... not non-sexual activity.
> Do you even bother to read what you write? LOL!
Yeah, I read it...now why don't you give it another try but put the glue
tube away first.
> Sexual activities are sex by definition, you moron.
So you've defined... but you shy away from talking about any specific
activity, you coward. Is oral sex a sexual activity? How about anal sex?
I can hardly wait to see your answers on this;)
(snip Snit's crap)
Snit
> In article <C01F492D.45E5E%SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID>,
> Snit <SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> wrote:
>
>> "Steve Carroll" <no...@nowhere.net> stated in post
>> noone-A2D3B8....@comcast.dca.giganews.com on 2/20/06 10:16 AM:
>>
>>>> LOL! Given that the only people calling me liar are some of the
>>>> biggest liars and/or just plain hateful assholes in here I'm not
>>>> worried about my reputation.
>>>
>>> Says the plain hateful asshole who claimed a cancer patient lied about
>>> having cancer simply to avoid some stupid usenet argument with Edwin.
>>
>> Says the admitted moron and asshole (Steve Carroll) who has spent untold
>> hours hunting through my site on my health concerns and digging through
>> years-old posts to other forums so you can try to use my health concerns in
>> your trolling against me. Heck, you found out that there have been times in
>> my life I have used prescription medications and use that to defend your
>> accusations of drug and alcohol abuse. The reality: you are clearly
>> projecting; you accuse others of what you do in order to feel better about
>> yourself. You have made this very, very clear:
>> <http://snipurl.com/Steves_admission>.
>>
>> Such comments, coming from you Steve, are more than lame; you have *no* leg
>> to stand on. :)
>
> Where is your proof I've spent untold hours hunting through your site?
> Hurry up and fabricate some;)
Gee, Steve, can you explain why you are all panicky about my having web
logs! You own posts to CSMA showed you know you and your girlfriend have
done *exactly* what I say. Heck, that is why you will not post any support
for your recent accusations about web logs. LOL! Once again, Steve, your
hatred got the better of you.
Oh, and why did you ask about *that* comment of mine and ignore your BS
accusations of drug and alcohol abuse? Oh wait, you snipped the rest of my
post. Gee, Steve, you are slipping; you usually deny all of your actions,
not just some of them. Tee hee!
Oh, don't forget to whine that I am "running" from your lies when I go back
to ignoring your posts.
Snit
>>> It might be even more entertaining if you were to explain to Timberwoof
>>> your theory on how the sexual activity he engages in isn't "sex".
>>
>> Ok, Steve, I will bite on your troll: what non-sex sexual activity are you
>> talking about?
>
> I said sexual activity, Snit... not non-sexual activity.
But then you said whatever sexual activity you are babbling about was not
sex. Do you see your problem yet?
What do you mean by a sexual activity that is not sex, Steve? Can you make
any sense of your BS?
>
>> Do you even bother to read what you write? LOL!
>
> Yeah, I read it...now why don't you give it another try but put the glue
> tube away first.
>
>> Sexual activities are sex by definition, you moron.
>
> So you've defined... but you shy away from talking about any specific
> activity, you coward. Is oral sex a sexual activity? How about anal sex?
All sexual activities are sexual activities: why would you even ask such
stupid questions? For the record, though, I have no desire to discuss the
details of any sexual activity with you nor partake in any such activity
with you *or* any of your friends. You really need to get that through your
head.
> I can hardly wait to see your answers on this;)
And I look forward to what would make you come to your bizarre implication
in your question that some sexual activities are not sexual activities.
Your question is moronic.
>> Here is my guess: you still have not come to understand that a partial subset
>> of a whole is not synonymous with the whole. You really are *that* stupid.
Gee: you snipped my guess as to where you came up with your moronic view.
My guess: you will snip it again. You see, Steve, your moronic views are
too predictable; I suppose at least you can say you are consistent in your
stupidity. :)
--
Sex-based crimes are not synonymous with sex
http://www.prevent-abuse-now.com/
http://www.registeredoffenderslist.org/
_________________________________________
Tom Bates
Snit <SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> wrote:
> "Steve Carroll" <no...@nowhere.net> stated in post
> noone-A2D3B8....@comcast.dca.giganews.com on 2/20/06 10:16 AM:
>
> >> LOL! Given that the only people calling me liar are some of the
> >> biggest liars and/or just plain hateful assholes in here I'm not
> >> worried about my reputation.
> >
> > Says the plain hateful asshole who claimed a cancer patient lied about
> > having cancer simply to avoid some stupid usenet argument with Edwin.
>
> Says the admitted moron and asshole (Steve Carroll) who has spent untold
> hours hunting through my site on my health concerns and digging through
> years-old posts to other forums so you can try to use my health concerns in
> your trolling against me. Heck, you found out that there have been times in
> my life I have used prescription medications and use that to defend your
> accusations of drug and alcohol abuse. The reality: you are clearly
> projecting; you accuse others of what you do in order to feel better about
> yourself. You have made this very, very clear:
> <http://snipurl.com/Steves_admission>.
>
> Such comments, coming from you Steve, are more than lame; you have *no* leg
> to stand on. :)
Do you have to turn any thread you post in into one of your Circus acts?
This is getting real tiring. Stop it.
--
Yours,
Tom
Jim Polaski
The one's you call liars are the ones disputing your lies and strawmen.
It's one of those automatic, knee-jerk reactions from you.
--
Regards,
JP
"The measure of a man is what he will do while
expecting that he will get nothing in return!"
Sandman
Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Well, ha, ha mayor. It doesn't let me be the liar you're accused of
> >being around here. I'd hate to have to live that down. You've done some
> >pretty crappy things to be called that.
>
> LOL! Given that the only people calling me liar are some of the
> biggest liars and/or just plain hateful assholes in here I'm not
> worried about my reputation.
Now, how predictable wasn't THAT? Come *ON* Clyde, you have to do
better than that.
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
tb-87DF38.13...@comcast.dca.giganews.com on 2/20/06 12:15 PM:
Please note: I merely responded to Steve's trolling.
>
> This is getting real tiring. Stop it.
I have been responding to Steve's trolling less, but if you want to be
consistent are you going to ask him to stop also?
MuahMan
"Steve Carroll" <no...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:noone-D8B01F....@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
Hey! I want in on this liar shit! YOU ARE A LIAR! LIAR LIAR PANTS ON
FIRE!!!! NANNNYYY NNANNNNYY BOOOO BOOOOOO!!!!!! MY DAD IS GONNA KICK UR
DADS ASS!!!!!!!!
Lars Träger
> I vote for whoever started this thread.
That would be a vote for all Wintrolls from the guy who can't use what
isn't newsreader (and constantly gets caught in his lies because they
are so obvios).
--
Lars T.
Lars Träger
> LOL! Given that the only people calling me liar are some of the
> biggest liars and/or just plain hateful assholes in here I'm not
> worried about my reputation.
So mumuman and you yourself call you a liar. See, it's easy to be
truthful for a change.
--
Lars T.
Snit
jZWdnTVoTf6vuGfe...@adelphia.com on 2/20/06 1:23 PM:
>
> "Steve Carroll" <no...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
> news:noone-D8B01F....@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
>> In article <C01F492D.45E5E%SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID>,
>> Snit <SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> wrote:
>>
>>> "Steve Carroll" <no...@nowhere.net> stated in post
>>> noone-A2D3B8....@comcast.dca.giganews.com on 2/20/06 10:16 AM:
>>>
>>>>> LOL! Given that the only people calling me liar are some of the
>>>>> biggest liars and/or just plain hateful assholes in here I'm not
>>>>> worried about my reputation.
>>>>
>>>> Says the plain hateful asshole who claimed a cancer patient lied about
>>>> having cancer simply to avoid some stupid usenet argument with Edwin.
>>>
>>> Says the admitted moron and asshole (Steve Carroll) who has spent untold
>>> hours hunting through my site
>>
>>
>> Where is your proof I've spent untold hours hunting through your site?
>> Hurry up and fabricate some;)
>
> Hey! I want in on this liar shit! YOU ARE A LIAR! LIAR LIAR PANTS ON
> FIRE!!!! NANNNYYY NNANNNNYY BOOOO BOOOOOO!!!!!! MY DAD IS GONNA KICK UR
> DADS ASS!!!!!!!!
LOL!
This is the game Steve is playing:
* I posted a screenshot to help someone
* Steve claims I will use web logs in some inappropriate way but can
point to no other example than when he and his girlfriend spend
untold hours hunting through my site for material to use in their
trolling
* I, and others, point out the absurdity of Steve's comments
* Steve demands I prove he did what he has made very clear he
is warning others not to do based on his own experience!
Gee, Steve, you sure showed me! LOL!
GreyCloud
> I would have to vote for Greycloud or Muaaaah Muaaah. But they are most
> likely the same sad troll.,
>
Still pissing in your pants, pervert??
--
Where are we going?
And why am I in this handbasket?
GreyCloud
> "Timberwoof" <timbe...@stimpberawoofm.com> stated in post
> timberwoof-D41D4...@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net on 2/20/06 1:38
> AM:
>
>
>>In article <1140415124.9...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>> "Tim Crowley" <timmyt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I would have to vote for Greycloud or Muaaaah Muaaah. But they are most
>>>likely the same sad troll.,
>>
>>I don't think so. Greycloud is occasionally lucid, but MuahMan is just mean.
>
>
> When is GreyCloud lucid? Can you point to any recent examples?
>
Guffaw!!! You'll never be lucid. The day you get your nose off the
glue tube is the day you stop posting to CSMA.
Snit
hM6dnQjrx43QrWfe...@bresnan.com on 2/20/06 2:07 PM:
>>> I don't think so. Greycloud is occasionally lucid, but MuahMan is just mean.
>>
>> When is GreyCloud lucid? Can you point to any recent examples?
>
> Guffaw!!! You'll never be lucid.
Hmmm, I am not the one who has pushed such stupid things as:
* Hillary Clinton has already been hand picked for our next president.
* Polls are not to ever be trusted.
* The cure to cancer is merely to give up the fear
* All major models that show global warming being caused by man
(at least in part) are forgetting to represent the laws of
thermodynamics in their models
* Apple had a "short lived" wireless Might Mouse in late 2005
or early 2006.
* OS X requires users to enter a root password to set up
their computers
LOL! Too damned funny. How many more ignorant claims will you spew into
CSMA? How many times will you bring up NAMBLA and drug abuse to obfuscate
your idiotic claims?
Alan Baker
Pretty much everyone calls you a liar, Clyde.
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect
if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
Tim Crowley
GreyCloud wrote:
> Tim Crowley wrote:
>
> > I would have to vote for Greycloud or Muaaaah Muaaah. But they are most
> > likely the same sad troll.,
> >
>
> Still pissing in your pants, pervert??
hahaha, you sure proved me wrong, eh? You show exactly the same
intellegence level as MuaaaahMuaaah.
Mayor of R'lyeh
Cite?
Oh,wait. This Alan 'I'll cry like a little girl until you give me a
URL but I'll never back up anything I say with one' Baker. Nevermind.
Josh McKee
"John Slade" <hitm...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> I rank the person who started a whole thread just to do personal attacks
> on Windows users he happens to disagree with. Maybe if Bates here actually
> spent studying the subject he wouldn't be so bitter and then he wouldn't
> waste his time making idiotic posts.
Agreed. It's the only thing that they're good at. Haven't seen a
rational argument from the regular Mac zealots in a long time.
Josh
Mayor of R'lyeh
<jpol...@NOSPMync.net> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
The ones I call liars are the ones telling big lies.
>It's one of those automatic, knee-jerk reactions from you.
To call liars liars.
Mayor of R'lyeh
If you bothered to look up Mr. Naylor's record you'd see that he had
a history of claiming some injury when he got return fire for his
nastiness. He would then claim that it was unfair to pick on him since
he was injured. There was no reason to think that his claims of cancer
were any different.
Like most Maccies he thought that he could be as mean spirited,
vicious and hateful as he wanted and that it was unfair to call him on
it.
>simply to avoid some stupid usenet argument with Edwin.
We made our peace. It was good enough for him. Why isn't it for you?
Alan Baker
Cites? For people calling you a liar? How many would you like?
LOL
>
> Oh,wait. This Alan 'I'll cry like a little girl until you give me a
> URL but I'll never back up anything I say with one' Baker. Nevermind.
At least I don't think its cute to put filthy innuendoes into replies
when people use my real name. Your reputation for utter lack of
integrity was confirmed by that little trick, Mr. Stoekel.
Alan Baker
Cites?
> Like most Maccies he thought that he could be as mean spirited,
> vicious and hateful as he wanted and that it was unfair to call him on
> it.
You mean like you and your mean-spirited little missives, Clyde?
>
> >simply to avoid some stupid usenet argument with Edwin.
>
> We made our peace. It was good enough for him. Why isn't it for you?
--
zara
"Alan Baker" <alang...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:alangbaker-9F422...@news.telus.net...
tsk, tsk-- touched that nerve, eh. Good.
Alan Baker
"zara" <zsp...@aol.com> wrote:
You would think it good, zero.
MuahMan
"Jim Polaski" <jpol...@NOSPMync.net> wrote in message
news:jpolaski-A70BAD...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
But Jim you are a liar so what you say is meaningless.
MuahMan
"Sandman" <m...@sandman.net> wrote in message
news:mr-82D186.20...@individual.net...
MuahMan
""Lars Träger"" <Lars.T...@epost.de> wrote in message
news:1hb2tjv.yl1r36140jrj6N%Lars.T...@epost.de...
MuahMan
MuahMan
Alan is a liar!!
zara
"MuahMan" <mua...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:FrGdnaI6h5i...@adelphia.com...
He's a sad tomato, fifty miles of bad road.
Steve Carroll
Snit <SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> wrote:
What I wrote was fact. If you knew anything about the other half of your
brain cell (Mayor)... you'd have known what kind of guy you were sharing
synapses with.
> >
> > This is getting real tiring. Stop it.
>
> I have been responding to Steve's trolling less, but if you want to be
> consistent are you going to ask him to stop also?
Why aren't you asking Mayor to be consistent? Edwin also put out alerts
about your site... I don't see you practicing what you are asking of
others, Mr Hypocrite.
Steve Carroll
Snit <SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> wrote:
> "Steve Carroll" <no...@nowhere.net> stated in post
> noone-314BF7....@comcast.dca.giganews.com on 2/20/06 11:06 AM:
>
> >>> It might be even more entertaining if you were to explain to Timberwoof
> >>> your theory on how the sexual activity he engages in isn't "sex".
> >>
> >> Ok, Steve, I will bite on your troll: what non-sex sexual activity are you
> >> talking about?
> >
> > I said sexual activity, Snit... not non-sexual activity.
>
> But then you said whatever sexual activity you are babbling about was not
> sex.
Uh... no, I didn't say anything about what *I* see as "sex" or "not
sex"... but I, and others, have noted your problem with this and I'm
trying to get you clarify something really simple... though, you still
seem to be having a problem with it.
> Do you see your problem yet?
Yeah... you can't read and, while tiring at times, it's really not much
of a problem for me.
>
> What do you mean by a sexual activity that is not sex, Steve? Can you make
> any sense of your BS?
> >
> >> Do you even bother to read what you write? LOL!
> >
> > Yeah, I read it...now why don't you give it another try but put the glue
> > tube away first.
> >
> >> Sexual activities are sex by definition, you moron.
> >
> > So you've defined... but you shy away from talking about any specific
> > activity, you coward. Is oral sex a sexual activity? How about anal sex?
>
> All sexual activities are sexual activities:
Your inability to comprehend what you read is getting in the way again.
Is oral sex a sexual activity? Is anal sex a sexual activity?
(snip Snit's crap)
Snit
> In article <C01F564F.45E86%SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID>,
> Snit <SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> wrote:
>
>> "Steve Carroll" <no...@nowhere.net> stated in post
>> noone-314BF7....@comcast.dca.giganews.com on 2/20/06 11:06 AM:
>>
>>>>> It might be even more entertaining if you were to explain to Timberwoof
>>>>> your theory on how the sexual activity he engages in isn't "sex".
>>>>
>>>> Ok, Steve, I will bite on your troll: what non-sex sexual activity are you
>>>> talking about?
>>>
>>> I said sexual activity, Snit... not non-sexual activity.
>>
>> But then you said whatever sexual activity you are babbling about was not
>> sex.
>
> Uh... no, I didn't say anything about what *I* see as "sex" or "not
> sex"...
Yes, Steve, you did. You admitted you believed I had talked about some
"theory on how the sexual activity he engages in isn't "sex"."
Of course in reality I have done no such thing - so it is *your* idea you
are talking about. So what non-sex sexual activity are you babbling about?
You will run from this question every time being that you made up this BS
and tried to attribute your own ideas to me. The fact is you have no idea
what the hell you are talking about.
All sexual activities are sexual activities, Steve.
A partial subset is not synonymous with the whole.
When push comes to shove you will likely try to pretend those ideas are in
conflict, but I look forward to seeing you support your BS accusation about
me.
>
>> Do you see your problem yet?
>
> Yeah... you can't read and, while tiring at times, it's really not much
> of a problem for me.
>
>>
>> What do you mean by a sexual activity that is not sex, Steve? Can you make
>> any sense of your BS?
>>>
>>>> Do you even bother to read what you write? LOL!
>>>
>>> Yeah, I read it...now why don't you give it another try but put the glue
>>> tube away first.
>>>
>>>> Sexual activities are sex by definition, you moron.
>>>
>>> So you've defined... but you shy away from talking about any specific
>>> activity, you coward. Is oral sex a sexual activity? How about anal sex?
>>
>> All sexual activities are sexual activities:
>
> Your inability to comprehend what you read is getting in the way again.
> Is oral sex a sexual activity? Is anal sex a sexual activity?
Read what you are responding to, Steve:
All sexual activities are sexual activities
Do you know what that means? Can you comprehend such easy to understand
concepts? Are you really so dense that when someone tells you that all
sexual activities are sexual activities you need to ask about specific ones?
Ok, we have another concept you do not understand:
All partial subsets of a whole are partial subsets of the whole.
Really, Steve, can you show off how stupid you are just a little bit more?
>> why would you even ask such stupid questions? For the record, though, I have
>> no desire to discuss the details of any sexual activity with you nor partake
>> in any such activity with you *or* any of your friends. You really need to
>> get that through your head.
Note: No comment from Steve Carroll.
>>
>>> I can hardly wait to see your answers on this;)
>>>
>> And I look forward to what would make you come to your bizarre implication in
>> your question that some sexual activities are not sexual activities. Your
>> question is moronic.
Note: No comment from Steve Carroll.
>>
>>>> Here is my guess: you still have not come to understand that a partial
>>>> subset of a whole is not synonymous with the whole. You really are *that*
>>>> stupid.
>>>>
>> Gee: you snipped my guess as to where you came up with your moronic view. My
>> guess: you will snip it again. You see, Steve, your moronic views are too
>> predictable; I suppose at least you can say you are consistent in your
>> stupidity. :)
Note: No comment from Steve Carroll.
Poor Steve: all he can do is run from his moronic views and accusations.
Snit
What I wrote about you was fact as well. If the facts of your behavior
offend you so much you should alter your behavior.
>>>
>>> This is getting real tiring. Stop it.
>>
>> I have been responding to Steve's trolling less, but if you want to be
>> consistent are you going to ask him to stop also?
>
> Why aren't you asking Mayor to be consistent? Edwin also put out alerts
> about your site... I don't see you practicing what you are asking of
> others, Mr Hypocrite.
Ahhh, poor Stevie: feeling persecuted because I point out your BS and do not
pay attention to your claims of others. Wah wah. The Carroll defense: he
is not so bad 'cause he thinks others are bad, too.
Get over it cry baby.
Steve Carroll
Snit <SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> wrote:
(snip Snit's crap)
> > Your inability to comprehend what you read is getting in the way again.
> > Is oral sex a sexual activity? Is anal sex a sexual activity?
>
> Read what you are responding to, Steve
I have, I still see no answer to the simple questions I asked... just a
lot of verbal diarrhea coming from you. Care to answer the questions now?
A yes or no answer for each will suffice.
Is oral sex a sexual activity? - Snit's yes or no answer goes here - ( )
Is anal sex a sexual activity? - Snit's yes or no answer goes here - ( )
Steve Carroll
Snit <SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> wrote:
No, what you wrote about me spending untold hours on your site is total
bullshit. If you keep a log then you know it's bullshit, though, I don't
expect you to admit to it as you're a known liar. What you wrote about
me trolling here was also bullshit. Reality shows I, and others, have
pointed to Mayor's crap with Jim Naylor... in fact, Mayor doesn't even
bother to deny it...not that it would do him any good to try.
> If the facts of your behavior
> offend you so much you should alter your behavior.
> >>>
> >>> This is getting real tiring. Stop it.
> >>
> >> I have been responding to Steve's trolling less, but if you want to be
> >> consistent are you going to ask him to stop also?
> >
> > Why aren't you asking Mayor to be consistent? Edwin also put out alerts
> > about your site... I don't see you practicing what you are asking of
> > others, Mr Hypocrite.
>
> Ahhh, poor Stevie: feeling persecuted
Telling me how I feel again? Sorry, I'm not feeling anything like
that... I'm merely pointing out your obvious hypocrisy and how wrong you
were above.
Tom Bates
"John Slade" <hitm...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> I rank the person who started a whole thread just to do personal attacks
> on Windows users he happens to disagree with. Maybe if Bates here actually
> spent studying the subject he wouldn't be so bitter and then he wouldn't
> waste his time making idiotic posts.
>
> John
Whoa there pud-boy. I asked the NG to rate some posters. Guess you can't
stand the heat in the kitchen because you're giving the NG reason to
vote.
--
Yours,
Tom
Mayor of R'lyeh
According to you its everyone. So you need to cite everyone calling me
a liar or admit to being one yourself.
>
>LOL
>
>>
>> Oh,wait. This Alan 'I'll cry like a little girl until you give me a
>> URL but I'll never back up anything I say with one' Baker. Nevermind.
>
>At least I don't think its cute to put filthy innuendoes into replies
>when people use my real name. Your reputation for utter lack of
>integrity was confirmed by that little trick, Mr. Stoekel.
The world awaits the day when Alan Baker puts away the things of a
child; molests no more the patience of decent men and joins the world
as an adult. The world is setting itself up for disappointment.
There's no innuendoes, filthy or otherwise in there. I'm outright
saying that you're behaving like a child.
Mayor of R'lyeh
Its Mr Carroll who wants to wander around in ancient history. Let him
provide the fossils.
And as I said before - I made my peace with Jim. It was good enough
for him. Why isn't it for you?
>
>> Like most Maccies he thought that he could be as mean spirited,
>> vicious and hateful as he wanted and that it was unfair to call him on
>> it.
>
>You mean like you and your mean-spirited little missives, Clyde?
Cite?
>
>>
>> >simply to avoid some stupid usenet argument with Edwin.
>>
>> We made our peace. It was good enough for him. Why isn't it for you?
--
Elizabot v2.0.3
Alan Baker
> child; (disgusting innuendo removed) no more the patience of decent men and joins the world
> as an adult. The world is setting itself up for disappointment.
> There's no innuendoes, filthy or otherwise in there. I'm outright
> saying that you're behaving like a child.
Sure you are, Clyde. You're a true asshole.
Alan Baker
Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >Well, ha, ha mayor. It doesn't let me be the liar you're accused of
> >> >> >being around here. I'd hate to have to live that down. You've done
> >> >> >some
> >> >> >pretty crappy things to be called that.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> LOL! Given that the only people calling me liar are some of the
> >> >> biggest liars and/or just plain hateful assholes in here I'm not
> >> >> worried about my reputation.
> >> >
> >> >Says the plain hateful asshole who claimed a cancer patient lied about
> >> >having cancer
> >>
> >> If you bothered to look up Mr. Naylor's record you'd see that he had
> >> a history of claiming some injury when he got return fire for his
> >> nastiness. He would then claim that it was unfair to pick on him since
> >> he was injured. There was no reason to think that his claims of cancer
> >> were any different.
> >
> >Cites?
>
> Its Mr Carroll who wants to wander around in ancient history. Let him
> provide the fossils.
Sorry, Clyde. It was you who made the claim that Mr. Naylor had lied.
> And as I said before - I made my peace with Jim. It was good enough
> for him. Why isn't it for you?
>
> >
> >> Like most Maccies he thought that he could be as mean spirited,
> >> vicious and hateful as he wanted and that it was unfair to call him on
> >> it.
> >
> >You mean like you and your mean-spirited little missives, Clyde?
>
> Cite?
<rk8lv19jmdm2880jr...@4ax.com>
Mayor of R'lyeh
The paragraph plainly says what I say it says. If you've got some kind
of paranoid affliction that's not my fault and there's not much I can
do about it anyway.
Mayor of R'lyeh
chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>In article <it8lv1pqbs8fjnfu3...@4ax.com>,
> Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >> >> >Well, ha, ha mayor. It doesn't let me be the liar you're accused of
>> >> >> >being around here. I'd hate to have to live that down. You've done
>> >> >> >some
>> >> >> >pretty crappy things to be called that.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> LOL! Given that the only people calling me liar are some of the
>> >> >> biggest liars and/or just plain hateful assholes in here I'm not
>> >> >> worried about my reputation.
>> >> >
>> >> >Says the plain hateful asshole who claimed a cancer patient lied about
>> >> >having cancer
>> >>
>> >> If you bothered to look up Mr. Naylor's record you'd see that he had
>> >> a history of claiming some injury when he got return fire for his
>> >> nastiness. He would then claim that it was unfair to pick on him since
>> >> he was injured. There was no reason to think that his claims of cancer
>> >> were any different.
>> >
>> >Cites?
>>
>> Its Mr Carroll who wants to wander around in ancient history. Let him
>> provide the fossils.
>
>Sorry, Clyde. It was you who made the claim that Mr. Naylor had lied.
And I made my peace with Jim. As far as I'm concerned that closed the
matter years ago. If Mr. Carroll sees some benefit to resurrecting it
for his own purposes then let him do the heavy lifting.
>
>> And as I said before - I made my peace with Jim. It was good enough
>> for him. Why isn't it for you?
>>
>> >
>> >> Like most Maccies he thought that he could be as mean spirited,
>> >> vicious and hateful as he wanted and that it was unfair to call him on
>> >> it.
>> >
>> >You mean like you and your mean-spirited little missives, Clyde?
>>
>> Cite?
>
><rk8lv19jmdm2880jr...@4ax.com>
Have you considered trying lithium?
Steve Carroll
You want me to provide evidence for your lie about Jim Naylor's cancer?
Are you fucking serious? No wonder you carry a gun... you're a
blithering idiot who probably feels the need to defend himself against
the silly bullshit he tries to shovel onto to others who won't stand for
it.
> And as I said before - I made my peace with Jim. It was good enough
> for him. Why isn't it for you?
In other words... you're as full of shit as you always are. Tell me...
did you ever get your tumor dealt with, Mayor?
Steve Carroll
Well, you should know exactly what it feels like to behave like a child
as you do it so often. Of course, you lie often, as well... so it's no
surprise that you'll call Alan a child for asking you to back your own
bullshit.
Steve Carroll
...it says? Yes it does:
"I stand by my assessment that Jim's a liar. Of course if someone mails
me a copy of his death certificate with cancer listed as cause of death
I'll admit I'm wrong."
And you never were able to produce anything remotely resembling proof
that Jim lied. In other words, you were as full of shit that day as you
are today.
> I say it says. If you've got some kind
> of paranoid affliction that's not my fault and there's not much I can
> do about it anyway.
It's a "paranoid affliction" that would have a guy state another guy
would lie about cancer to get out of a stupid usenet argument.
Steve Carroll
"Elizabot v2.0.3" <Eliz...@NsOpSyPmAaMc.com> wrote:
Really;)
Mayor of R'lyeh
I had mistakenly assumed that you were interested in the truth about
the incident. I see now that I was wrong. You just want to cherry pick
things to bash people with. Apparently you've gotten tired of being
pummeled by Snit and decided to come get slapped around by me for
awhile.
> No wonder you carry a gun... you're a
>blithering idiot who probably feels the need to defend himself against
>the silly bullshit he tries to shovel onto to others who won't stand for
>it.
Unable to provide any facts, Mr. Carroll resorts to namecalling.
>
>
>> And as I said before - I made my peace with Jim. It was good enough
>> for him. Why isn't it for you?
>
>In other words... you're as full of shit as you always are.
Do you imagine that if you tell that lie often enough it will remove
the knowledge that I did the right thing and made peace with the man
before he died from my mind?
>Tell me... did you ever get your tumor dealt with, Mayor?
I let it get as big as it would get, named it Steve Carroll and pushed
it out into the world.
Mayor of R'lyeh
What did your doctor tell you about projecting, Steve?
> Of course, you lie often, as well... so it's no
>surprise that you'll call Alan a child for asking you to back your own
>bullshit.
--
Mayor of R'lyeh
Do you imagine that if you repeat that lie often enough that it will
remove the knowledge that I did the right thing and made peace with
the man before he died from my mind?
>
>> I say it says. If you've got some kind
>> of paranoid affliction that's not my fault and there's not much I can
>> do about it anyway.
>
>It's a "paranoid affliction" that would have a guy state another guy
>would lie about cancer to get out of a stupid usenet argument.
I always did have you pegged as an expert on paranoid afflictions.
Steve Carroll
Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Feb 2006 22:49:47 -0700, Steve Carroll <no...@nowhere.net>
> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
(snip)
> >You want me to provide evidence for your lie about Jim Naylor's cancer?
> >Are you fucking serious?
>
> I had mistakenly assumed that you were interested in the truth about
> the incident. I see now that I was wrong. You just want to cherry pick
> things to bash people with. Apparently you've gotten tired of being
> pummeled by Snit and decided to come get slapped around by me for
> awhile.
If you assume this then slap away with your "truth". Even if you, as you
claim, made peace, it doesn't remove the fact that you said it... but
that's not your real problem. See, you're still spouting the same shit
here over Jim N... so you'll have to forgive me if I don't believe you.
>
> > No wonder you carry a gun... you're a
> >blithering idiot who probably feels the need to defend himself against
> >the silly bullshit he tries to shovel onto to others who won't stand for
> >it.
>
> Unable to provide any facts, Mr. Carroll resorts to namecalling.
Unable to counter the fact that Mayor suggested I provide proof for his
bullshit he resorts to denial.
> >
> >
> >> And as I said before - I made my peace with Jim. It was good enough
> >> for him. Why isn't it for you?
> >
> >In other words... you're as full of shit as you always are.
>
> Do you imagine that if you tell that lie often enough it will remove
> the knowledge that I did the right thing and made peace with the man
> before he died from my mind?
So you called his doctor as he suggested, then? Or had enough people
finally hounded you into doing the right thing and your felt forced into
dropping your lie? You said you assumed I was interested in "the
truth"... let's see if you are interested in actually telling it for a
change. Point to the post you retracted the statement.
> >Tell me... did you ever get your tumor dealt with, Mayor?
>
> I let it get as big as it would get, named it Steve Carroll and pushed
> it out into the world.
In other words, you're full of it... just as I said. Gee... everyone
will just be crushed and crestfallen over this.
Steve Carroll
He told me not to follow your lead.
>
> > Of course, you lie often, as well... so it's no
> >surprise that you'll call Alan a child for asking you to back your own
> >bullshit.
--
Steve Carroll
Do you imagine that if you say you proved Jim was lying you will have
automatically convinced others this is so?
>
> >
> >> I say it says. If you've got some kind
> >> of paranoid affliction that's not my fault and there's not much I can
> >> do about it anyway.
> >
> >It's a "paranoid affliction" that would have a guy state another guy
> >would lie about cancer to get out of a stupid usenet argument.
>
> I always did have you pegged as an expert on paranoid afflictions.
Wow... great comeback. Wanna show your proof that jim lied now?
Mayor of R'lyeh
chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>In article <3cblv1le2cevepcck...@4ax.com>,
> Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 20 Feb 2006 22:49:47 -0700, Steve Carroll <no...@nowhere.net>
>> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>
>(snip)
>
>> >You want me to provide evidence for your lie about Jim Naylor's cancer?
>> >Are you fucking serious?
>>
>> I had mistakenly assumed that you were interested in the truth about
>> the incident. I see now that I was wrong. You just want to cherry pick
>> things to bash people with. Apparently you've gotten tired of being
>> pummeled by Snit and decided to come get slapped around by me for
>> awhile.
>
>If you assume this then slap away with your "truth". Even if you, as you
>claim, made peace, it doesn't remove the fact that you said it...
No one said it did.
> but
>that's not your real problem. See, you're still spouting the same shit
>here over Jim N... so you'll have to forgive me if I don't believe you.
Its still the truth that he frequently pulled up lame when he got
return fire.
>
>>
>> > No wonder you carry a gun... you're a
>> >blithering idiot who probably feels the need to defend himself against
>> >the silly bullshit he tries to shovel onto to others who won't stand for
>> >it.
>>
>> Unable to provide any facts, Mr. Carroll resorts to namecalling.
>
>Unable to counter the fact that Mayor suggested I provide proof for his
>bullshit he resorts to denial.
You're the one insisting on rooting around in the past, like a woman.
>
>> >
>> >
>> >> And as I said before - I made my peace with Jim. It was good enough
>> >> for him. Why isn't it for you?
>> >
>> >In other words... you're as full of shit as you always are.
>>
>> Do you imagine that if you tell that lie often enough it will remove
>> the knowledge that I did the right thing and made peace with the man
>> before he died from my mind?
>
>So you called his doctor as he suggested, then? Or had enough people
>finally hounded you into doing the right thing and your felt forced into
>dropping your lie?
Actually his continual insistence that he wasn't lying finally
convinced me. That was very un-Naylor like.
> You said you assumed I was interested in "the
>truth"... let's see if you are interested in actually telling it for a
>change. Point to the post you retracted the statement.
Most of it happened via email but there is this post.
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/c678cbaf384db3c1?dmode=source&hl=en
That was easily found. Anyone interested in the truth could have found
it.
>
>> >Tell me... did you ever get your tumor dealt with, Mayor?
>>
>> I let it get as big as it would get, named it Steve Carroll and pushed
>> it out into the world.
>
>In other words, you're full of it... just as I said. Gee... everyone
>will just be crushed and crestfallen over this.
LOL! what is it with Maccies needing to claim that 'everyone' is on
their side?
Alan Baker
And now you feel free to lie about a dead man.
Nice.
>
>
> >
> >> And as I said before - I made my peace with Jim. It was good enough
> >> for him. Why isn't it for you?
> >>
> >> >
> >> >> Like most Maccies he thought that he could be as mean spirited,
> >> >> vicious and hateful as he wanted and that it was unfair to call him on
> >> >> it.
> >> >
> >> >You mean like you and your mean-spirited little missives, Clyde?
> >>
> >> Cite?
> >
> ><rk8lv19jmdm2880jr...@4ax.com>
>
>
> Have you considered trying lithium?
I've no need for it.
Have you considered integrity...
...honesty...
...honour?
Mayor of R'lyeh
Which explain why you're second to none when it comes to spleen
venting.
>
>>
>> > Of course, you lie often, as well... so it's no
>> >surprise that you'll call Alan a child for asking you to back your own
>> >bullshit.
--
Mayor of R'lyeh
The incident is a closed book as far as I'm concerned. If you want to
play in it be my guest. Just don't expect me to join you.
Alan Baker
Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
> >> >> I say it says. If you've got some kind
> >> >> of paranoid affliction that's not my fault and there's not much I can
> >> >> do about it anyway.
> >> >
> >> >It's a "paranoid affliction" that would have a guy state another guy
> >> >would lie about cancer to get out of a stupid usenet argument.
> >>
> >> I always did have you pegged as an expert on paranoid afflictions.
> >
> >Wow... great comeback. Wanna show your proof that jim lied now?
>
> The incident is a closed book as far as I'm concerned. If you want to
> play in it be my guest. Just don't expect me to join you.
Riiiight.
When you want to justify calling a guy with cancer a liar, it's fair
game, but now when you're asked to produce evidence, it's "a closed
book".
More of that fabled "Mayoral" integrity.
Sandman
Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> The world awaits the day when Alan Baker puts away the things of a
> >> child; molests no more the patience of decent men and joins the world
> >> as an adult. The world is setting itself up for disappointment.
> >> There's no innuendoes, filthy or otherwise in there. I'm outright
> >> saying that you're behaving like a child.
> >
> >Well, you should know exactly what it feels like to behave like a child
> >as you do it so often.
>
> What did your doctor tell you about projecting, Steve?
You and Snit are so alike in that you both are huge trolls but refuse
to admit that you are since you imagine that it would somehow hurt
some imaginary amount of credibility you think you have left.
It's like "No, I won't admit that I'm a troll since then no one would
listen to what I have to say".
News flash, Mayor - no one does anyway.
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Says the plain hateful asshole who claimed a cancer patient lied about
> >having cancer
>
> If you bothered to look up Mr. Naylor's record you'd see that he had
> a history of claiming some injury when he got return fire for his
> nastiness. He would then claim that it was unfair to pick on him since
> he was injured. There was no reason to think that his claims of cancer
> were any different.
> Like most Maccies he thought that he could be as mean spirited,
> vicious and hateful as he wanted and that it was unfair to call him on
> it.
So you're a Maccie now? That describes you in perfect detail.
> >simply to avoid some stupid usenet argument with Edwin.
>
> We made our peace. It was good enough for him. Why isn't it for you?
Why isn't anyone posting in this thread to support you, Clyde?
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >You want me to provide evidence for your lie about Jim Naylor's cancer?
> >Are you fucking serious?
>
> I had mistakenly assumed that you were interested in the truth about
> the incident. I see now that I was wrong. You just want to cherry pick
> things to bash people with. Apparently you've gotten tired of being
> pummeled by Snit and decided to come get slapped around by me for
> awhile.
Haha! Good one! It's always funny to see the beat up guy say something
like "Ha, watch out or I'll give your knuckles another round with my
face!"
--
Sandman[.net]
Mayor of R'lyeh
chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>In article <22elv1dblgpdpbvcp...@4ax.com>,
> Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> >> >> I say it says. If you've got some kind
>> >> >> of paranoid affliction that's not my fault and there's not much I can
>> >> >> do about it anyway.
>> >> >
>> >> >It's a "paranoid affliction" that would have a guy state another guy
>> >> >would lie about cancer to get out of a stupid usenet argument.
>> >>
>> >> I always did have you pegged as an expert on paranoid afflictions.
>> >
>> >Wow... great comeback. Wanna show your proof that jim lied now?
>>
>> The incident is a closed book as far as I'm concerned. If you want to
>> play in it be my guest. Just don't expect me to join you.
>
>Riiiight.
>
>When you want to justify calling a guy with cancer a liar, it's fair
>game, but now when you're asked to produce evidence, it's "a closed
>book".
>
>More of that fabled "Mayoral" integrity.
I admitted I was wrong and made my peace with the man years ago. Why
do you imagine that your opinion carries more weight than his in this
regard?
Alan Baker
Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 06:54:19 GMT, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>
> >In article <22elv1dblgpdpbvcp...@4ax.com>,
> > Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >> >> >> I say it says. If you've got some kind
> >> >> >> of paranoid affliction that's not my fault and there's not much I can
> >> >> >> do about it anyway.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >It's a "paranoid affliction" that would have a guy state another guy
> >> >> >would lie about cancer to get out of a stupid usenet argument.
> >> >>
> >> >> I always did have you pegged as an expert on paranoid afflictions.
> >> >
> >> >Wow... great comeback. Wanna show your proof that jim lied now?
> >>
> >> The incident is a closed book as far as I'm concerned. If you want to
> >> play in it be my guest. Just don't expect me to join you.
> >
> >Riiiight.
> >
> >When you want to justify calling a guy with cancer a liar, it's fair
> >game, but now when you're asked to produce evidence, it's "a closed
> >book".
> >
> >More of that fabled "Mayoral" integrity.
>
> I admitted I was wrong and made my peace with the man years ago. Why
> do you imagine that your opinion carries more weight than his in this
> regard?
As I said: *you* made claims that the man had lied as justification for
calling him a liar when he had cancer, and now when asked to provide any
evidence of that, you try and make out that *others* are bring it up?
LOL
Snit
3cblv1le2cevepcck...@4ax.com on 2/20/06 11:10 PM:
> Unable to provide any facts, Mr. Carroll resorts to namecalling.
And accusations of drug and alcohol abuse, altering of quotes, snipping and
running, etc. Did you see my list of concepts Steve has completely missed:
Lund says he does not hate the US.
Steve concludes Lund hates the US.
Snit says "I just checked my IP, that is not it, though mine
does begin with 24.117."
Steve concludes "Notice the last line where Snit says his IP
doesn't begin with 24.117?"
Snit says "All sexual activities are sexual activities, Steve."
Steve concludes Snit believes "the sexual activity he engages
in isn't "sex"."
Snit stated years ago in another group he has used prescription meds
Steve concludes that is the same as abusing drugs and alcohol
Snit says he is a teacher and gives examples of things that have
happened in class - and Steve's girlfriend tracks down some of Snit's
classes.
Steve concludes that Snit is not - according to Steve - a teacher
Snit talks about how he gives people second chances after he asked
someone why they would talk to someone
Steve accuses Snit of flip flopping and then begs someone else to create
a story to support Steve's accusations.
Steve still thinks that he somehow is able to tell people what they meant
even when they tell him otherwise. He simply cannot understand the written
word; when caught he resorts to all sorts of games instead of admitting to
his errors.
--
Sex-based crimes are not synonymous with sex
http://www.prevent-abuse-now.com/
http://www.registeredoffenderslist.org/
_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account
Snit
suclv118djf5mitru...@4ax.com on 2/20/06 11:46 PM:
>> In other words, you're full of it... just as I said. Gee... everyone
>> will just be crushed and crestfallen over this.
>
> LOL! what is it with Maccies needing to claim that 'everyone' is on
> their side?
It is a very common Steve Carroll tactic. He spews all sorts of BS and then
when asked for support he just says he has no need to support his lies
because "everyone" agrees with him. Of course he never shows how "everyone"
agrees with him *nor* explains why even if they did such group-think would
be support for his lies. Steve is just a moron who spews lies he can never
support.
Snit
mr-47AEA9.08...@individual.net on 2/21/06 12:15 AM:
Gee, Sandman, how many times have you denied your lies despite the
overwhelming proof of them? LOL!
Steve Carroll
Sandman <m...@sandman.net> wrote:
Snit is here giving him support;)
Steve Carroll
Your feeble attempt at insulting women won't change the stuff you've
said about Jim... stuff like:
"he frequently pulled up lame when he got return fire".
Oh... but that's not in the past, is it? That's from *this* post. Below,
you point to a post where you show you finally believe he had cancer,
yet, you make a stupid statement like this... as if cancer might not
have anything to do with him not feeling well at times. Not that you've
proven this assertion anyway...
> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> And as I said before - I made my peace with Jim. It was good enough
> >> >> for him. Why isn't it for you?
> >> >
> >> >In other words... you're as full of shit as you always are.
> >>
> >> Do you imagine that if you tell that lie often enough it will remove
> >> the knowledge that I did the right thing and made peace with the man
> >> before he died from my mind?
> >
> >So you called his doctor as he suggested, then? Or had enough people
> >finally hounded you into doing the right thing and your felt forced into
> >dropping your lie?
>
> Actually his continual insistence that he wasn't lying finally
> convinced me. That was very un-Naylor like.
So you were willing to believe a guy whom you continually called a liar
when he told you he wasn't lying simply because it "was very un-Naylor
like"?
It's amazing you think anyone would actually buy this kind of an answer.
Where is your proof of your other assertion that he often lied about
illnesses because of usenet?
> > You said you assumed I was interested in "the
> >truth"... let's see if you are interested in actually telling it for a
> >change. Point to the post you retracted the statement.
>
> Most of it happened via email but there is this post.
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/c678cbaf384db3c1?dmod
> e=source&hl=en
> That was easily found. Anyone interested in the truth could have found
> it.
There's another truth there, Clyde... at least we know what kind of
activity to expect from you when you get angry at small things. I think
most of us already suspected as much... but to think that you carry a
gun around is scary.
> >
> >> >Tell me... did you ever get your tumor dealt with, Mayor?
> >>
> >> I let it get as big as it would get, named it Steve Carroll and pushed
> >> it out into the world.
> >
> >In other words, you're full of it... just as I said. Gee... everyone
> >will just be crushed and crestfallen over this.
>
> LOL! what is it with Maccies needing to claim that 'everyone' is on
> their side?
Gee... how difficult do you think it'd be to drum up a bunch of posts
where you reference a consensus? When the topic is you being full of
shit, every sane person is on one side... that's why only Snit is
sharing synapses with you here.
Steve Carroll
Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
(snip)
> The incident is a closed book as far as I'm concerned. If you want to
> play in it be my guest. Just don't expect me to join you.
The book on you was written long ago, Clyde.
Snit
noone-CF9CE6....@comcast.dca.giganews.com on 2/21/06 8:58 AM:
>> LOL! what is it with Maccies needing to claim that 'everyone' is on
>> their side?
>
> Gee... how difficult do you think it'd be to drum up a bunch of posts
> where you reference a consensus? When the topic is you being full of
> shit, every sane person is on one side... that's why only Snit is
> sharing synapses with you here.
I will *always* trust logic and evidence over group-think. This, Steve, is
a concept that offends you. Of course, Steve, when the consensus is about
your lying, your inability to understand context, your lack of comprehension
skills, your silly use of semantic games, etc. you suddenly decide that
consensus is not good enough for you. You also run from logic and evidence.
What Steve says, you think, is better than all of that: better than what
others think and better than logic and evidence.
Look at your accusations about my e-mailing your unmarried "wife". You
spewed these dishonest accusations and then expect them to be taken as truth
even though you have not a shred of evidence. You simply made up a story.
You do this often: you claimed I admitted to stealing your CSMA Moderator
ID, wanted USB2 to replace Firewire, made up stories of drug and alcohol
abuse, have denied I was 100% right when I told you that one can be actually
guilty but never tried nor convicted, when you fantasize about me making
inappropriate sexual advances... etc.
You have made it clear you are willing to make up all sorts of stories and
lie about those that point out your games. When people get to the point
where they just assume every word you type is a lie you get offended.
Yeah, I know, you will say the same thing about me: but you will lack
reasoned examples you can back up. Sure, you can play your asinine semantic
games, Steve, but you cannot back up your claims with reason and logic.
When you try you end up contradicting yourself repeatedly, as you did in the
debate on what it means to be actually guilty. You expressed no less than
four contradictory views. How do you handle that: you deny, deny, deny and
pretend that some imaginary context makes your lies go away.
When this is pointed out to you all you can do is blame others and beg them
to "cap off" your trolling. You, Steve, are the only one who can cap off
your BS - this is true no matter how many times you try to attribute your
poor behavior to others.
Snit
> In article <22elv1dblgpdpbvcp...@4ax.com>,
> Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> (snip)
>
>> The incident is a closed book as far as I'm concerned. If you want to
>> play in it be my guest. Just don't expect me to join you.
>
> The book on you was written long ago, Clyde.
And will be repeated, re-written, exaggerated, modified, and repeatedly
posted to CSMA by Steve as long as he feels the need to obfuscate whatever
lie he is running from.
How long until you completely contradict your own stories, Steve, as you did
with your four (or more) contradictory views about the concept of being
actually guilty? Keep in mind that your four contradictory views were all
in the context of the question if Bush can be actually guilty of a crime but
never tried nor convicted. Did you ever decide which of your stated views
you actually believe?
"Actually guilty: The act of admitting you are guilty" - Steve Carroll
That makes five contradictory views on the same topic - all from you. LOL!
Mayor of R'lyeh
chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>"Mayor of R'lyeh" <mayor.o...@gmail.com> stated in post
>suclv118djf5mitru...@4ax.com on 2/20/06 11:46 PM:
>
>>> In other words, you're full of it... just as I said. Gee... everyone
>>> will just be crushed and crestfallen over this.
>>
>> LOL! what is it with Maccies needing to claim that 'everyone' is on
>> their side?
>
>It is a very common Steve Carroll tactic. He spews all sorts of BS and then
>when asked for support he just says he has no need to support his lies
>because "everyone" agrees with him. Of course he never shows how "everyone"
>agrees with him *nor* explains why even if they did such group-think would
>be support for his lies. Steve is just a moron who spews lies he can never
>support.
The best part is that they really can't see how bad this makes them
looks. The conversation is going:
Alan and Steve: You said bad things about a man who later died of
cancer. You're an evil liar!
Me: I admitted I was wrong and Jim Naylor accepted my apologies. We
parted on good terms. All of this was five years ago anyway. Why do
you imagine that you two bozos' opinion on the matter count for more
that Mr. Naylor's?
Alan and Steve: We're more important than everyone else because we say
so and everyone agrees with us. Right everyone! - crickets chirp;
tumbleweeds blow by - See everyone agrees with us!
You're an evil liar! Repeat ad infinitum
Me: Lessee here - I made a mistake five years ago; corrected it and
recieved absolution from the aggreived party but you two
self-important jackasses think that counts for nothing and that your
newly discovered 'outrage' counts for everything?
Alan and Steve: Still chanting 'evil liar' non-stop.
Me: Well you guys enjoy the spleen venting. I'm going to go do grownup
things.
Alan and Steve: Evil liar! And everyone agrees with us! Right
everyone? - crickets chirp; tumbleweeds blow by - Right then! See
everyone does agree with us!
Me: Whatever. Enjoy the perpetual kindergarten sessions that are your
lives
zara
"Alan Baker" <alang...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:alangbaker-5CE66...@news.telus.net...
Actually, the man did lie. You are another Maccie sissy bitch, who craves
attention. That's why you have repeated yourself at least a dozen times on
this thread.. Trying to re-write history?? Cant you dweebs come up with a
better argument than "provide evidence"?
The real evidence is that most of you Maccies are just, lying sacks of shit.
love
ZERO
Elizabot v2.0.3
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 07:58:38 -0700, Snit <SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID>
> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>
>
>>"Mayor of R'lyeh" <mayor.o...@gmail.com> stated in post
>>suclv118djf5mitru...@4ax.com on 2/20/06 11:46 PM:
>>
>>
>>>>In other words, you're full of it... just as I said. Gee... everyone
>>>>will just be crushed and crestfallen over this.
>>>
>>>LOL! what is it with Maccies needing to claim that 'everyone' is on
>>>their side?
>>
>>It is a very common Steve Carroll tactic. He spews all sorts of BS and then
>>when asked for support he just says he has no need to support his lies
>>because "everyone" agrees with him. Of course he never shows how "everyone"
>>agrees with him *nor* explains why even if they did such group-think would
>>be support for his lies. Steve is just a moron who spews lies he can never
>>support.
>
>
> The best part is that they really can't see how bad this makes them
> looks. The conversation is going:
> Alan and Steve: You said bad things about a man who later died of
> cancer. You're an evil liar!
> Me: I admitted I was wrong and Jim Naylor accepted my apologies.
The post you pointed out
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/c678cbaf384db3c1?dmode=source&hl=en
shows no response from Naylor. Is this your example of him accepting
your apology?
> We
> parted on good terms. All of this was five years ago anyway. Why do
> you imagine that you two bozos' opinion on the matter count for more
> that Mr. Naylor's?
> Alan and Steve: We're more important than everyone else because we say
> so and everyone agrees with us. Right everyone! - crickets chirp;
> tumbleweeds blow by - See everyone agrees with us!
> You're an evil liar! Repeat ad infinitum
> Me: Lessee here - I made a mistake five years ago; corrected it and
> recieved absolution from the aggreived party
The post you pointed out
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/c678cbaf384db3c1?dmode=source&hl=en
shows no response from Naylor. Is this your example of "recieving" (sic)
absolution from the aggrieved party?
GreyCloud
> "GreyCloud" <mi...@cumulus.com> stated in post
> hM6dnQjrx43QrWfe...@bresnan.com on 2/20/06 2:07 PM:
>
>
>>>>I don't think so. Greycloud is occasionally lucid, but MuahMan is just mean.
>>>
>>>When is GreyCloud lucid? Can you point to any recent examples?
>>
>>Guffaw!!! You'll never be lucid.
>
>
> Hmmm, I am not the one who has pushed such stupid things as:
>
> * Hillary Clinton has already been hand picked for our next president.
> * Polls are not to ever be trusted.
> * The cure to cancer is merely to give up the fear
> * All major models that show global warming being caused by man
> (at least in part) are forgetting to represent the laws of
> thermodynamics in their models
> * Apple had a "short lived" wireless Might Mouse in late 2005
> or early 2006.
> * OS X requires users to enter a root password to set up
> their computers
>
> LOL! Too damned funny. How many more ignorant claims will you spew into
> CSMA? How many times will you bring up NAMBLA and drug abuse to obfuscate
> your idiotic claims?
>
Yeah, you are too damned funny. Like your bringing up off topic posts
to CSMA?? You reaped what you deserve, pervert.
--
Where are we going?
And why am I in this handbasket?
GreyCloud
> GreyCloud wrote:
>
>>Tim Crowley wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I would have to vote for Greycloud or Muaaaah Muaaah. But they are most
>>>likely the same sad troll.,
>>>
>>
>>Still pissing in your pants, pervert??
>
>
> hahaha, you sure proved me wrong, eh? You show exactly the same
> intellegence level as MuaaaahMuaaah.
>
Yet you still are just trolling CSMA.
Guffaw!!!