OT:Why does Snit persist in believing that people are as stupid as he needs them to be?
Steve Carroll
and blamed Steve Mackay:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/b13233ce3d208f83?dmode=source
In his reply to Sandman this time, Snit, still trying to pretend that
he was the victim instead of the forger, makes the following false
claim regarding "copies" of PDFs:
"And yet you say that when the only copies you point to are the ones
are on
your own servers! You know, the ones where you have enough control to
even
fake posting dates and times!
Sandman goes out of his way to show he is a liar. Amazing."
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/2c81cfe05f70a522?dmode=source
Note that Snit is claiming that the "only copies" which Sandman points
to on his site are ones that are on Sandman's own servers... hence the
basis for Snit's claim that Sandman has "control" over them.
Here is the section of Sandman's site dealing with Snit's forgery:
http://csma.sandman.net/pages/PDFforgery
Now go down to the area on this webpage labeled "The Files" and click
the first link labeled "Original file", you will be pointed to the
following link:
http://web.archive.org/web/20050120142452/home.wi.rr.com/mackays/email.pdf
(go ahead, click and of the other 3 links in this section, same
result)
I now await Snit's proof for his claim that Sandman has "enough
control to even fake posting dates and times" over files located on
the web.archive.org servers.
LOL!
Of course Snit can't ever produce proof for his ridiculous claim of
his here. Snit is obviously lying... again... and Google and the
Wayback Machine prove it in concrete fashion for any sane, honest and
honorable reader.
(all we need now is for friend "Joel" to come along and deny this is
proof that Snit is lying his ass off... again ;)
Joel
>(all we need now is for friend "Joel" to come along and deny this is
>proof that Snit is lying his ass off... again ;)
Actually, I simply don't know and don't care. None of you can prove
it one way or another, afaict, and it's not worth my concern, either
way.
That having been said, though, I would give Snit the benefit of the
doubt, over all his troll enemies.
And, you're a fucking fruit of a pussy.
--
Joel Crump
Snit
1:34 PM:
Just for fun, I decided to follow Steve on his tour of pretzel logic. Here:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/forgery.mov>
The twists and turns Sandman and Carroll make to try to somehow show "proof"
for a completely unrelated claim is just amazing. Steve is running from the
current topic to a topic from 2004 which he simply makes a fool of himself
over (by claiming to trust Sandman). The fact is, HPT is lying when he
claims I forged the video that shows the problems with Ubuntu's copy and
paste. Steve does not even pretend to be able to show anything contrary to
that, so he returns to making claims about the year he never left.
Steve: it is no longer 2004. You lost some silly debated over half a decade
ago. Move on. Let it go. Now you can lose some silly debates from the
current year. :)
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Steve Carroll
> Steve Carroll <fretw...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >(all we need now is for friend "Joel" to come along and deny this is
> >proof that Snit is lying his ass off... again ;)
>
> Actually, I simply don't know and don't care. None of you can prove
> it
False. I just proved that Snit lied when he said:
"And yet you say that when the only copies you point to are the ones
are on your own servers!"
Again... here is the section of Sandman's site dealing with Snit's
forgery:
http://csma.sandman.net/pages/PDFforgery
Again... go down to the area on this webpage labeled "The Files" and
click the first link labeled "Original file", you will be pointed to
the following link:
http://web.archive.org/web/20050120142452/home.wi.rr.com/mackays/emai...
Hint: Contrary to Snit's delusion Sandman does *not* own any servers
connected to web.archive.org
Poor "Joel"... he did *exactly* what I said he was going to do...
again. LOL!
(snip ramblings of a delusional nitwit that ignores reality almost
every chance he gets)
Steve Carroll
> Joel stated in post 2mpqh5d0e9959dtg149anmiqam9c3ko...@4ax.com on 12/7/09
> 1:34 PM:
>
> > Steve Carroll <fretw...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >> (all we need now is for friend "Joel" to come along and deny this is
> >> proof that Snit is lying his ass off... again ;)
>
> > Actually, I simply don't know and don't care. None of you can prove
> > it one way or another, afaict, and it's not worth my concern, either
> > way.
>
> > That having been said, though, I would give Snit the benefit of the
> > doubt, over all his troll enemies.
>
> > And, you're a fucking fruit of a pussy.
>
> Just for fun
... you told another easily proven lie and were busted... again.
>I decided to follow Steve
... yet, you somehow didn't click on the "Original file" link located
at the webpage at this address:
http://csma.sandman.net/pages/PDFforgery
Anyone doing so will see your claim that "the only copies" Sandman
pointed to are on his "servers".
"And yet you say that when the only copies you point to are the ones
are on your own servers! You know, the ones where you have enough
control to even fake posting dates and times!
Sandman goes out of his way to show he is a liar. Amazing." - Snit
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/2c81cfe05f70a522?dmode=source
Poor Snit... reality is just kickin' the snot outta him and his loony
friend "Joel"... again. LOL!
Joel
>Just for fun, I decided to follow Steve on his tour of pretzel logic. Here:
>
> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/forgery.mov>
Looks right to me. OK, Steve C., I *will* back Snit up.
--
Joel Crump
Joel
>Hint: Contrary to Snit's delusion Sandman does *not* own any servers
>connected to web.archive.org
Is that supposed to be relevant? I can clearly see that you are
lying, and Snit is not, AGAIN.
--
Joel Crump
Snit
7:10 PM:
LOL! I await Steve's reply to that. I bet it is filled with obfuscations
and outright lies.
The funny thing is how Sandman and Steve are now looking to the site they
dismissed when I used it to prove that Sandman was lying. This focus on the
BS accusations of my being blamed for forgery came from these PDFs (in
2007!):
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/sandmancheck-html.pdf>
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/sandmancheck-css.pdf>
Those prove that the archived copies of Sandman's home page did not
validate. Not a single one: HTML or CSS. I created those when Sandman
altered his site to get it to validate (I had noted it did not and he
insisted it did). Sandman then accused me of forging the PDFs (focusing on
the CSS one for whatever reason) and I was able to prove that every single
piece of data I showed was verifiable:
<http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/f0420f6675f60cbd>
I also showed where Sandman changed his story repeatedly:
<http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/55059e10b247c5c4>
The other accusation really cannot be proved by either "side", but this one
can... which is the very reason Carroll and Sandman avoid it and always jump
to the debate from 2004.
In the end, the fact his site did not validate is not a big deal: Google.com
does not! But Sandman's reaction to it (and the support he got from
Carroll) showed how little character the two of them have.
Before that, Sandman was not as rabidly tied to the "clique" as he is now...
and I will grant he seems to be pulling away from them finally. If he would
just take down the lies about me from his site he could show he was getting
better.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
7:10 PM:
> Steve Carroll <fret...@comcast.net> wrote:
Steve now thinks I said Sandman owns web.archive.org? What?
He is insane. Absolutely insane.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Joel
>Steve now thinks I said Sandman owns web.archive.org? What?
>
>He is insane. Absolutely insane.
Even he can't be *that* insane (or stupid). He's just a shameless
piece-of-crap liar.
--
Joel Crump
Snit
8:05 PM:
OK, I stand corrected.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Sandman
<5a2be895-81c4-4984...@u8g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
Steve Carroll <fret...@comcast.net> wrote:
Haha, amazing.
Yeah, Mackay removed the files quite some time ago, and I made sure to
find them on archive.org so that the only reference wouldn't be files
on my servers.
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
12/8/09 1:25 PM:
>> I now await Snit's proof for his claim that Sandman has "enough
>> control to even fake posting dates and times" over files located on
>> the web.archive.org servers.
>
> Haha, amazing.
>
> Yeah, Mackay removed the files quite some time ago, and I made sure to
> find them on archive.org so that the only reference wouldn't be files
> on my servers.
Your "evidence" is utter rubbish. As I proved:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/forgery.mov>
Care to take your lies about me off of your website? Even you call your
form of argument "obfuscation". And elsewhere you admit having such BS on
your site is a sign you are a troll.
Why don't you try to rise above such BS? What about being a troll appeals
to you?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Steve Carroll
> Sandman stated in post mr-948F96.21254808122...@News.Individual.NET on
> 12/8/09 1:25 PM:
>
> >> I now await Snit's proof for his claim that Sandman has "enough
> >> control to even fake posting dates and times" over files located on
> >> the web.archive.org servers.
>
> > Haha, amazing.
>
> > Yeah, Mackay removed the files quite some time ago, and I made sure to
> > find them on archive.org so that the only reference wouldn't be files
> > on my servers.
>
> Your "evidence" is
... not where you falsely claimed (on Sandman's servers) it is, the
evidence lives on the web.archive.org servers... as the link from
Sandman's site to it proves.
(snip Snit's BS and feeble attempts at obfuscating reality)
Tim Adams
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Sandman stated in post mr-948F96.21...@News.Individual.NET on
> 12/8/09 1:25 PM:
>
> >> I now await Snit's proof for his claim that Sandman has "enough
> >> control to even fake posting dates and times" over files located on
> >> the web.archive.org servers.
> >
> > Haha, amazing.
> >
> > Yeah, Mackay removed the files quite some time ago, and I made sure to
> > find them on archive.org so that the only reference wouldn't be files
> > on my servers.
>
> Your "evidence" is utter rubbish. As I proved:
>
> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/forgery.mov>
still pushing your porn web site I see. Can't understand how to access the
_real_ evidence that's been saved on the web.archive.org servers? Much more
reliable that looking at posts from a proven forger!
>
> Care to take your lies about me off of your website? Even you call your
> form of argument "obfuscation". And elsewhere you admit having such BS on
> your site is a sign you are a troll.
>
> Why don't you try to rise above such BS? What about being a troll appeals
> to you?
--
regarding Snit "You are not flamed because you speak the truth,
you are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting
the newsgroup." Andrew J. Brehm
Snit
teadams$2$0$0$3-FAE00F.21...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net on
12/8/09 7:20 PM:
>> Your "evidence" is utter rubbish. As I proved:
>>
>> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/forgery.mov>
>
> still pushing your porn web site I see. Can't understand how to access the
> _real_ evidence that's been saved on the web.archive.org servers? Much more
> reliable that looking at posts from a proven forger!
How did you forget I am the one who used the WayBackMachine to prove Sandman
lied about his CSS? And why not even try to refute my proof that Sandman's
site does not prove - nor even really show any support for - the claim you
and your lying buddies spew?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Tim Adams
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Tim Adams stated in post
> teadams$2$0$0$3-FAE00F.21...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net on
> 12/8/09 7:20 PM:
>
> >> Your "evidence" is utter rubbish. As I proved:
> >>
> >> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/forgery.mov>
> >
> > still pushing your porn web site I see. Can't understand how to access the
> > _real_ evidence that's been saved on the web.archive.org servers? Much more
> > reliable that looking at posts from a proven forger!
>
> How did you forget I am the one who used the WayBackMachine to prove Sandman
> lied about his CSS?
yet it is you that forgets that Alan Baker proved you forged the pdf file that
you claimed to maintain the 'original of' on your web site. You know, the file
that constantly changed the modified date as well as content and fonts used. yet
you continued claiming it was the original. That forged pdf file had NOTHING to
do with Sandman's web site.
keep running snit
Steve Carroll
> In article <C7446581.583CE%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
>
> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> > Tim Adams stated in post
> > 12/8/09 7:20 PM:
>
> > >> Your "evidence" is utter rubbish. As I proved:
>
> > >> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/forgery.mov>
>
> > > still pushing your porn web site I see. Can't understand how to access the
> > > _real_ evidence that's been saved on the web.archive.org servers? Much more
> > > reliable that looking at posts from a proven forger!
>
> > How did you forget I am the one who used the WayBackMachine to prove Sandman
> > lied about his CSS?
>
> yet it is you that forgets that Alan Baker proved you forged the pdf file that
> you claimed to maintain the 'original of' on your web site. You know, the file
> that constantly changed the modified date as well as content and fonts used. yet
> you continued claiming it was the original. That forged pdf file had NOTHING to
> do with Sandman's web site.
Snit forged that PDF, too? LOL!
Steve Carroll
> Joel stated in post bcdrh5p1dcvvu95v10k61u0vdq1d67q...@4ax.com on 12/7/09
> 7:10 PM:
>
> > Steve Carroll <fretw...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >> Hint: Contrary to Snit's delusion Sandman does *not* own any servers
> >> connected to web.archive.org
>
> > Is that supposed to be relevant? I can clearly see that you are
> > lying, and Snit is not, AGAIN.
>
> Steve now thinks I said Sandman owns web.archive.org?
That's exactly what you're arguing.
High Plains Thumper
> Steve Carroll wrote:
>
>> Hint: Contrary to Snit's delusion Sandman does *not* own any
>> servers connected to web.archive.org
>
> Is that supposed to be relevant? I can clearly see that you
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/8e52595453f84034
LOL! Proof that Joel the Troel is Snit! Again.
--
HPT
High Plains Thumper
> Steve Carroll wrote:
>
>> Hint: Contrary to Snit's delusion Sandman does *not* own any
>> servers connected to web.archive.org
>
> Is that supposed to be relevant? I can clearly see that you
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/8e52595453f84034
LOL! Evidence supporting that Joel the Troel is Snit! Unbelievable.
--
HPT
Snit
096033b9-e1a6-468a...@p30g2000vbt.googlegroups.com on
12/11/09 9:47 PM:
It takes an idiot such as you, HPT, to think you have proved something that
is not true.
Next will you be "proving" the sun rises in the West?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
12/11/09 9:58 PM:
Gee, someone calls your buddies on their lies.
Go cry in your coffee, HPT. You are stupid.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Joel
>Go cry in your coffee, HPT. You are stupid.
He's just another pathetic Internet lamer who discovered he can
pretend to be bad anonymously.
--
Joel Crump
High Plains Thumper
> Snit wrote:
>
>> Go cry in your coffee, HPT. You are stupid.
>
> He's just another pathetic Internet lamer who discovered he
> can pretend to be bad anonymously.
So we have this new comer who all of a sudden has knowledge of and
supports COLA troll accusations toward me that without any thread of
evidence, I supposedly am using anonymising NNTP remailer proxies to
post in COLA regularly, who also hand-in-hand agrees 100% with the
worst troll inhabiting both COLA and CSMA, not to mention other Usenet
groups.
Very Snit like. Of course.
Snit, who freely nymshifts with a history of sock puppets, Sigmond,
Rhino Plastee, ThunderCleats, and ad nauseum.
It is no coincidence. Joel Crump is his sock puppet. Wally found
that out with his other sock, Rhino Plastee:
[quote]
>> "Nope: I quote you directly and in context:"-Snit
>>
>> Proving that High Plains Thumper is correct, Snit does
>> nymshift as Rhino Plastee.
>
> Nope. Nice try though!
You wished!
Rhino Plastee states....
"Clearly this is a bigoted postion you are pushing, Wally".
http://tinyurl.com/6uhx65
Wally replies....
"Clearly for your argument to hold up you need to put words in my
mouth! tsk, tsk!"
http://tinyurl.com/9xm9ea
Snit shoots himself in the foot and replies....
"Nope: I quote you directly and in context:"
http://tinyurl.com/7hlnq2
ROTFLMAO!
[/quote]
Yup, lie all you want Snit, but it is very obvious Joel Crump is your
sock puppet.
--
HPT
Snit
12/12/09 5:48 AM:
> Joel wrote:
>> Snit wrote:
>>
>>> Go cry in your coffee, HPT. �You are stupid.
>>
>> He's just another pathetic Internet lamer who discovered he
>> can pretend to be bad anonymously.
>
> So we have this new comer who all of a sudden has knowledge
Reading is a mystery to you. Amazing.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
11:29 PM:
And he keeps bragging about how stupid he is:
So we have this new comer who all of a sudden has knowledge
of and supports COLA troll accusations toward me that without
any thread of evidence
The fact you can read *and* understand what you are reading, he claims, is a
complete and total mystery to him.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Joel
>And he keeps bragging about how stupid he is:
>
> So we have this new comer who all of a sudden has knowledge
> of and supports COLA troll accusations toward me that without
> any thread of evidence
>
>The fact you can read *and* understand what you are reading, he claims, is a
>complete and total mystery to him.
Well, all I had even done was point out how moronic it was for him to
accuse us of being the same person, when people were accusing him of
similar crap. I didn't say I *believed* the accusations against him,
and in fact I pretty clearly implied I didn't. But he "doth protest
too much", perhaps ...
--
Joel Crump
High Plains Thumper
Yes it is for Snit, because he could not read what follows and snipped
it all, as stated by:
7- BaJoRi:
Snit: "You are, of course, lying."
BaJoRi: "No, I am not. You know it, and I know it, and everyone else who
has read your idiocy knows it. I took your statement, showed it to be
wrong, then added even more, just to be a dick and REALLY show you to be
a fool. You need to judiciously snip out pertinent points because you
are an intellectually dwarfed turd-burglar." 11 Nov 2008
Here is what Snit snipped:
Snit can run, but he can't hide. Joel Crump is a Snit sock.
--
HPT
High Plains Thumper
> Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> And he keeps bragging about how stupid he is:
>>
>> and supports COLA troll accusations toward me that without any
>> thread of evidence
Here, let me reintroduce what Snit snipped:
[quote]
So we have this new comer who all of a sudden has knowledge of and
supports COLA troll accusations toward me that without any thread of
[quote]
You wished!
Rhino Plastee states....
Wally replies....
ROTFLMAO!
[/quote]
[/quote]
>> The fact you can read *and* understand what you are reading, he
>> claims, is a complete and total mystery to him.
>
> Well, all I had even done was point out how moronic it was for him
> to accuse us of being the same person, when people were accusing him
> of similar crap. I didn't say I *believed* the accusations against
> him, and in fact I pretty clearly implied I didn't. But he "doth
> protest too much", perhaps ...
Yes, it is moronic that Snit has to rely on sock puppets, as stated:
22- Edward Stanfield: "Snit thinks the rules that apply to honest and
honorable people apply to him. That is absurd. He is the biggest liar
in Usenet history. Mackay posted the email to prove Snit was using sock
puppets and he still is. Snit can not give up his socks puppets and
shills. They are the only ones who ever support him." 28 Jan 2009
--
HPT
Snit
on 12/13/09 12:26 AM:
Curious: are you stupid enough to believe your BS or are you just trying to
get a reaction? If the latter, what reaction?
Thanks!
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
on 12/13/09 12:38 AM:
Again: are you stupid enough to believe the above or just working to get
attention? I suspect the former.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
High Plains Thumper
> High Plains Thumper stated:
>> Joel wrote:
Snit is the one begging for attention. As observed by this prolific
COLA troll:
Hadron (COLA): "... your constant repetition could send an acid tab to
sleep ... Why not do yourself and the rest of us a favour and kill file
the dickhead?" 09 Dec 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/6533c646468adc42
Latest poster quote, No. 133 on the Snit Circus of Pathological Lies:
133- Tony(UK) (COLA):
Snit: "You let someone on Usenet push you to an OS because they attacked
people who use your preferred OS? Huh?"
Tony(UK): "Don't be so utterly ridiculous - I used and advocated Linux -
I was ridiculed and attacked. [...] Your email address in your headers
just about sums the Linux world up. Nothing to do with the OS, it is the
*uckwits involved in the whole arena and have posted before on this. If
in doubt, deride, insult and attack. Look inwardly carefully before
judging me." 10 Dec 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/533042ed18cefba3
Here's what the rest of the 132 posters have observed on the Snit Circus
of Pathological Lies:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/1a31bdb877dd400b
1- Adam Kesher: "Steve, IIRC Sandman's website has a member area and a
login. If you forget your password, you can ask it to e-mail it to you,
and a bot will send an e-mail. *That* is the e-mail Snit got from
Sandman's website, and yes he's that fucked in the head and starved for
attention that he'd claim it to be an e-mail from Sandman himself. So,
don't get sucked into his little circus. The e-mail, in this particular
instance, did probably originate from Sandman.net." 27 Feb 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/dac74355552b4cc7
2- Alan Baker: "People's perceptions of you are *formed* by behaviour
and not withstanding your occasional on topic posts, I wish you'd leave
too. Please note that despite the amazing silliness that is Edwin, I
have never made the same wish of him." 27 Feb 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/4a7c3ebf3fc10221
3- Andrew J. Brehm: "You are not flamed because you speak the truth, you
are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting the
newsgroup."
4- AZ Nomad: "The fact that you routinely change your headers to weasel
out of killfiles proves that you're an asshole." 25 Jun 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/51b43d6c9613c9da
5- Andy/news/nospam: "Why do you keep these things up, Snit? Why not
just let them go away and show how responsible a member of CSMA you are?
You could show your enemies up by being better than then, rise above the
low level you so obviously dislike. Anything, just stop...." 26 Apr 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/d6ffb6b06aa237e5
6- B.B.: "Does the From: header contain the string "Snit"? If yes, then
troll. Otherwise, maybe. Dunno why I had my KF on you set to expire, but
it's fixed now." 13 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/8a98d179b2ff9578
7- BaJoRi:
Snit: "You are, of course, lying."
BaJoRi: "No, I am not. You know it, and I know it, and everyone else who
has read your idiocy knows it. I took your statement, showed it to be
wrong, then added even more, just to be a dick and REALLY show you to be
a fool. You need to judiciously snip out pertinent points because you
are an intellectually dwarfed turd-burglar." 11 Nov 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.vacation.las-vegas/msg/647944511b74b82f
8- bobinnv: "I learned some time ago how much better this group can be
if you kill file Snit. I have never understood why more people don't do
the same.." 5 Aug 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/0706dbef8ce1f903
9- Bob S: "This has always been pretty much a free-for-all group, but
since Snit showed up, its become almost impossible to have a decent
discussion about anything." 27 Dec 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3d2f1dff196ca190
The solution is to NOT REPLY TO SNIT. But for some reason, some people
just can't stop feeding him."
10- �b� unny: Subject "snit makes me sad", Text "really actually =:-("
9 Oct 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/4e31cb49c1e2d432
11- buzz off: "Snit is obviously mentally ill..."
12- Carlo Coggi: "He must believe he is surrounded by 'trolls' ... in
the groups he trolls in, that is. I wondered if the idiotrollers like
snit would reply to this thread. Of course, I didn't see his posts, only
your reply".
13- chrisv (cola): "No, she called him 'shit', and rightly so, for they
way he was so ignominiously birthed into a toilet at the bus depot, and
simply refused to die, despite repeated flushes. It's now far too late
to *flush* him, but we can still *plonk* him..." 12 Sep 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/18099f8aa067f4a5
14- C Lund: "Snit is not my responsibility. Maybe it's time for you to
learn how to use your kill-filter. I am assuming, of course, that your
Usenet browser has a kill-filter." 5 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/2c390a34b05b24a9
15- cc (COLA): "Snit posts all the time. You don't have to dig up months
old articles where he brings up years old topics. Just respond to a
current message." 22 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5a712e3312ba9f8a
Snit: "And, yes, I know the facts will go over your head. You are an
insane moron... and you have nothing of value to say. Here: you will
prove it with your response and I will merely note you did so. 100%
predictable."
cc: "What facts? The fact that you don't know what a hypothetical
situation is? The fact that you can't answer any questions? The fact
that you continue to run away when faced with simple questions? I am
100% predictable to you because you simply cannot understand what has
been placed in front of you. It's all just a jumble of words to your
pea-sized brain, and therefore it always looks the same." 15 Nov 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/f6ce4429806e9de6
16- Code Orange: "Then why post it? What need is there for you to "win"
an argument? They don't like you, you don't like them. Why must you keep
this up? What results are you expecting?"
17- CozmicDebris: "I'm done with your three year old games. The archives
show my answers and your inability to process them. Keep posting your
list and proving that you are an idiot troll. I will not address it any
further- you being too stupid to realize and accept that is not my
problem". 22 Nov 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.cellular.attws/msg/0aa65b7a132dbfe8
18- Dawg Tail: "You've already apologized for having already misread
what I had previously written. What makes you think that you're
correctly understanding what I'm writting now. You've got a history of
reading into things what you wanted people to have said instead of what
they really said.
I suggest you get over this limitation of yours. It's making you look
foolish."
Dawg Tail: "PC advocates, Mac advocates, Linux advocates. Almost all of
them are making similar claims about Snit. When you have so many diverse
people who share a common perception where do you think the problem
lies? With Snit? Or almost everyone else? The answer doesn't require an
advanced degree to figure out." 30 Dec 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/73edac32c3ad530b
19- Dave Fritzinger: "[snip of stuff I really don't care to read] Snit,
please go away. Get a life, meet a woman, do something, but please,
please, please, GO AWAY!!!!" 2 Jun 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/57bb2fc42ec0f290
20- Donald L McDaniel: "Jesus, snit. You're a teacher. I thought you
knew what a metaphor was, and could recognize one when it was presented
to you. I guess I had too much confidence in you." 30 Nov 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3254ec7af27bfb0f
21- ed: "snit, you continually amaze me with how much of a liar and
loser you are. you may notice a semi-regular pattern with me where i
stop responding to your posts for stretches at a time, then start up
responding as if you were a normal person. i suppose it's tough for the
magnitude of your 'loserdom' to stick, so it loses some of it's
sharpness when i stop responding to you. you almost always start
responding back in a semi normal way, but inevitably degenerate. it's
once again that time. i can only ask that you pass my condolences to
your wife and unborn child for having to put up with such a dishonest
fool as yourself. (well, if your wife is a loser as well, just pass
those condolences to the rug-rat to be; if not, double condolences to
her). " 30 Apr 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/71f74dd6d806ce77
22- Edward Stanfield: "Snit thinks the rules that apply to honest and
honorable people apply to him. That is absurd. He is the biggest liar
in Usenet history. Mackay posted the email to prove Snit was using sock
puppets and he still is. Snit can not give up his socks puppets and
shills. They are the only ones who ever support him." 28 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5b52494d96d12229
23- Edwin: "You've got to be out of your mind, Snit. You're the worst
troll this group has ever seen. You're a liar and a forger, and you've
almost destroyed this group single-handedly. For you to post a list of
out of context arguments, and lies, and forgeries about your enemies
labled as a "peace effort" has to be one of the craziest stunts you've
pulled. It's all about your sick need for attention, your need to be
center stage at all times. You'd publicly eat dog turd if you thought it
would make people look at you." 18 May 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/37e4a720619642a0
24- Elijah Baley: "Seriously, Snit, you need psychiatric help. Go see a
doctor." 24 Aug 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/6f6c88356b54fc15
25- Elizabot v2.0.2: "I see you were unable to respond to the points in
my post and you are back to your repetitious regurgitation mode. How
childishly typical of you, Snit." 16 Nov 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/55214ccfb7414fe5
26- Fa-groon: "I don't read Snit period. He's been killfiled since the
first day I posted here. [....] I don't want to 'do like Snit'. As far
as I'm concerned, Snit doesn't even exist." 15 Aug 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/dcfbff305ba8b7f0
27- fibercut: "That is the problem. In the years I have been coming to
CSMA I have seen in the past year a real hatred among people, besides
the typical Mac vs. Windows typical argument. I feel that it is like
being in a room of really young children trying there best to best the
other person. The one common thing among all of this seems to be you. I
hate to be like this, but facts are facts. You seem to be in the middle
of a great percentage of arguments. CSMA has become less about Macs and
more about "look everybody, I think he lied". Is there no end then all
this picking at each other on such a personal level. CSMA has always
been al little adversarial but you have personally crank it up to the
point that this place is no longer fun. Congratulations on stopping CSMA
and making this place your own personal circus." 12 Jan 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/bbe695bbc3424ab6
28- Geezer:
Snit: "Steve Carroll has no sense of morality"
Geezer: "Whined the guy who cannot directly address those who uncover
his lies and deceit;)"
Snit: "and no clue about the law."
Geezer: 'Said the guy who believes his unsupported opinions are "proof".
LOL! (snip more of Snit's unsupported lies)' 1 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/d0517ced5134934d
29- Geoff M. Fitton (COLA): "The Prescott Computer Guy *still* showing
how stupid he is... What a mar00n". 30 Aug 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/f9401b4b57c59865
30- George Graves: "Jason. You have started an argument with the Snit
(AKA Michael Glasser), this should not be done. He will drive you crazy
with his twisted logic, his deep-rooted need to be ALWAYS right at any
cost. He will move goalposts, set up strawmen, and bore you into
submission with his endless pedanticism. The only way to engage him is
to hit and run. NEVER engage him, it's a futile, empty procedure that
will only anger you and feed him. Take my advice and STAY AWAY!" 27
Oct 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3d3af33ce25a11fd
31- gimme_this_gimme_t...@yahoo.com: "Hitting the vodka tonight Snit?"
4 Mar 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/b457a7b378264794
32- Greycloud: "You really shouldn't lie like that. Everyone else
notices that you are not honest and you have no honor." 21 Jan 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3b92f11a1ab00f91
33- H: "Your crappy posts are still showing up in seperate threads, are
you doing this on purpose to piss people off? I dont ever censor people
cause that's just retarded but if you dont fix it I'm gonna have to
cause I dont wanna see your name 40 times in a row. So uh, change your
client or something". 12 Sep 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/f36ee6b458c86499
34- Hadron (COLA):
Snit: "Now why not end your silliness and either just stop your BS or
actually give reasoned comments on the screen shots you keep asking for
and I keep providing?
Hadron: "err, he just did. And you snipped it all you weasel." 30 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/de49f2b7471d2e1a
Snit: "Sigh: 100% predictable, you will not answer *any* question I just
asked. You will run... your whole goal is to beg for attention, not to
make or support a point."
Hadron: "nice. You made it into my new killfile. Jesus, stop repeating
the same garbage." 6 Apr 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/c86ab53a759ea728
35- Henry Flam: "Who gives a damn about this shit? Snit, once in a
while, I make the mistake in thinking that that you are starting to make
sense in your posts; I tend to agree with your politics. Then you post
stuff like this and it destroys any respect that I have for you." 16
Aug 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/f048bedfe0d67d66
Henry Flam: "You on the other hand must a deeply trouble individual who
has a fragile ego. I needn't agree nor disagree with the points above. I
don't care about them. Your constant complaints, whines, rages, etc.,
wars with the regular Mac advocates, whom you mislabel as trolls, arise
from your sense that any conversation or thread must orbit around you.
People have pointed that out to you but you don't accept that. Snit I
feel sorry for you. Please go and see a doctor about your solipsism.
There must be a cure for you deep psychological travail." 18 Aug 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/b9bb48e6e6da75c8
36- Heywood Mogroot: "*plonk*"
37- -hh: 'Perversion has utterly nothing to do with the definition of
"synonymous". It is, however, a very clear example of how you attempt
to maliciously debase against anyone who disagrees with you. As such, I
consider this to be a purposeful attempt by you to try to libel me.
This is your only warning to consider rescinding your remark, with the
reminder that you, and you alone are responsible for that accusation,
both in the ethical as well as the full legal meaning of the word
"responsible".' 25 Feb 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/5496641a3426293a
38- High Plains Thumper: "I can understand why posters get sick and
tired of your lame ad hominem attacks, your cowardly statements shifting
the goal posts, your continuous rambling drivel of how everyone seems to
be against you. No one cares a wooden nickel about your incessant flame
wars that are self created. You pretend to be an advocate but you
manage to cause everyone's hand to be against you." 6 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/b27ba196819ad38f
Only once in a blue moon does he have anything worth reading. I just
got through his circus of repetitive ad hominem crap. I am surprised
that with the stunts he has pulled in COLA and this newsgroup, that he
hasn't suffered a worse fate in real life. If he hasn't, one of these
days he will pull that stunt on the wrong person, and *B-O-O-M-!*,
someone will pull the trigger. One ought to really pity him (or as
Steve Travis stated, "Or perhaps we should set up a fund to get him more
happy glue (and the appropriate plastic bags)." 8 Jul 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/2666237bba82b97a
39- Homer (COLA):
HPT: "Snit in a period of 2 minutes has copied a post of mine, posting
the same following message over and over, in false pretense as a Linux
advocate."
Homer: "That kind of behaviour is not normal, to say the least. I don't
mean this as a personal insult, but I'm perfectly serious when I say
'Snit' (Michael Glasser) is obviously mentally ill, and needs help. I
was going to suggest that someone alerts his wife to the problem, but I
have to assume she's already aware of his condition, if she is in fact
still living with him. It's possible, I suppose, that he's already
undergoing counselling and/or on medication, but if he is then it
doesn't seem to be helping much. Maybe he just missed his 'meds' today
(again, I mean that sincerely). 26 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/e061874ea94e9ce8
40- hophead: "I have been reading and occasionally posting to CSMA for a
long time now, since 1995 at least. There have always been trolls and
morons, but I've never seen anything quite so disruptive as the Snit
circus. Snit will *never* back down or stop, and neither will most of
his opponents. A good kill file is your only hope." 20 Aug 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3161a78667e299eb
hophead: "It's best to killfile snit, and if you can, set up a filter to
kill any responses to snit. Or (as I've been forced to do) killfile
those who insist on responding to him. Yes, you do miss some advocacy
from some of those people, but the joy of not seeing snit or any
responses to him far outweighs the cost. Of course, snit also uses
sockpuppets. They are pretty easy to identify fortunately and are easily
killed as well." 19 Aug 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/d0cb5d4f4d1cba91
41- Jamie Hart (cola): "It seems that since you are unable to offer
support for your statements, you're reduced to personal attacks on me.
Incidentally, anyone reading this post can see that I have offered no
straw men, and have only asked you to explain how the things you state
as facts can be true. I'm really sorry that you're taking this attitude,
the topic is an interesting one and I thought you might have some
insights. I've snipped the rest, since you dislike long posts and avoid
answering any of the questions I asked by saying everything was just
repeated." 6 Dec 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/8e07cde31f4eecf6
42- Jason McNorton: "You're one of the many, many paranoid people on
usenet that should be confined most likely. You sit there and refresh
your screen endlessly. You post the same nonsense over and over. Either
you're a super troll, or you're a super mess." 1 Nov 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/7a8e091c0b248eb0
43- JEDIDIAH (cola): "You're simply full of shit."
44- Jeff B.: "Yo, Snit. We're not pals. I think you're a git." 23 Dec 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/0ec649345d433a2d
45- Jeff Hoppe: "This is a Macintosh Advocacy newsgroup. Not a 12-step
recovery plan. Your medical problems or conditions won't help me achieve
a greater understanding of my Mac. In fact, it detracts from it and
those kinds of discussions have no place in a newsgroup such as this."
18 Nov 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/947a2cc0301a2862
46- Jesus: "Really, Snit. It's annoying. What are you accomplishing
besides being annoying? Is that your goal?" 25 Apr 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/e3d5029d34cde243
47- Jim Lee Jr.: "Snit, read the thread's title, is Bush mentioned in
it? You (and Carroll) ought to learn to stay on topic and not hijack
threads."
48- Jim Polaski: "Why is it that nearly every thread you're involved in
seems like it turns into some tit-for-tat, dozens of responses to OT
things and garbage? Cmon there Snit. Someone has to take the lead and
stop this crap. Try. How about it?" 25 Apr 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/5b5c22490ab9649b
49- Jim Richardson (cola): "And yet again, Snit runs away, rather than
actually provide evidence for his claims. Par for the course I suppose."
"Evasion noted. Snit runs away again rather than produce evidence for
his claims. At least come up with some original insults Snit! I mean,
you *are* capable of original thoughts! Right? Snit?" 8 Feb 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/e33321cc3343fc44
50- Joey Jojo Junior Shabadoo: "and Snithead has even farther to fall -
in a few weeks he'll be out on the street after midnight, yelling at
passersby 'sucky sucky, $2...'" 23 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/57cf69f66571a5a7
51- John C. Randolph: "You're nothing but a troll yourself. What are you
bitching about?"
52- JohnOfArc (cola): "I'm not sure "troll" does it justice- more like a
black hole! But hey, if we all promise to never again even entertain an
unkind thought re Apple, will you take it back and lock it up? Please??"
11 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/e2891b1f3984e121
53- John Q. Public: "I have not been bothered to read Snit's postings
since I figured out who he is. I don't bother to filter his posts, I
just consider the source and skip to the next one when I see his name."
7 Jan 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/7d34c1bd05c877d2
54- John Slade: "I don't get posts from Snit. I wouldn't be shocked that
he has some kind of disorder. He made up stuff about being a computer
repairman and teacher. He's just plain loony and best ignored. Let him
deal with his disorder by medication. He's here to do one thing, get
attention from people. He says the crazy stuff just to get a reaction.
You say you like to beat him over the head. Well that's what he's
counting on, he says stuff he knows isn't true in hopes to get a rise
out of people like you. Ignore him, you won't regret it." 3 Apr 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/394a53a65c28d314
"Snit, you have a enough problems as it is without adding drinking booze
to the list. How the hell did you manage to get out of my killfile? Oh
well back into the cage you go, PLONK." 13 Oct 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.food.wine/msg/992a796786a541d8
55- Josh McKee: "Snit, I assume there was some point to this posting?
Because I certainly cannot find it."
56- K E: "I haven't read this board for awhile but I see that even
though the trolls still roam free at least the worst troll of the lot is
mostly being ignored by readers on this bb. If the few stragglers that
keep replying to him would just stop responding to Snit at all this
place could be worth coming back to. There's a good chance he'll pack up
and take his trolling to more fertile ground." 22 Oct 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/0b9dca7df1f677f4
57- KK: 'Whoa there, ad hominem man. You started off your sentence with
"Ah" like you'd just realized something profound.' 29 Oct 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.howard-stern/msg/6a89029a5b5be5f8
58- Kelsey Bjarnason (cola): "Funny how you simply don't bother reading
the posts that rip your entire thesis to bleeding gobbets of putrid
excrescence. Maybe some day you'll learn how to support your position,
instead of sticking your fingers in your ears and humming, hoping it'll
all go away." 7 Mar 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/96d064a7a5c6074a
59- Ku Karlovsky (cola): "You repeatedly chastise others for ad hominem
attacks while in the same sentence make your own ad hominem attacks. You
make silly claims and then avoid the subject of your silliness. You're a
liar and a hypocrite and you always have been." 14 Jul 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/d1e3f9ac5c72c6ee
60- Lars Trager: "Yes, you are stupid." 7 Jan 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/a9bedf6689f9a54f
61- Lefty Bigfoot: "Okay, I tried to put up with it for a long time, but
the few times you post something worth reading just aren't worth it
anymore. *plonk*" 16 Dec 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/5520adae01120e83
62- Liam Slider (cola): "Maybe he's responding to the fact you've been
an annoying little fuckwit lately. You started out with the pretense of
trying to be fair, but lately all there is from you in COLA is trashtalk
about Linux and you acting every bit the troll." 16 Jul 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/ad7d6c42c5e4cf2f
63-libcrushersmith: "Snit also thinks Dan Rather still anchors CBS News
and that Gitmo terrorists are innocent! Any time Snit is cornered, he
changes the subject and will never admit he's wrong." 28 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/fbc516717f3b7ccf
64- libsnightmare:
Snit: "Who said Bush did not flip flop?"
libsnightmare: "Never said that. I put back in what you cut out. He
never flip-flopped on the war, even when it was unpopular, like "Kerry
and all the other libs" did. You're a sore loser who has resorted to
fifth grade tactics. How fucking sad - all this clown has left is to
edit posts and post fake bullshit. You can't debate... so you lie. Once
again, you have proved Steve Carroll right about you. Sad..." 4 May 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/a80c93f80bd6bc3e
65- Linonut (cola): "Snit is a Tholenoid."
"Indeed. Snit may be the first retraction of my general killfile
amnesty. The volume of cavilling, whining, foot-stomping,
back-tracking, goal-post shifting, and petulance generated by that
effete candy-ass beggars belief". 30 Aug 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/cc4827fd7e8ad574
66- Lloyd Parsons: "Well, I don't know if Oxford is the most cretinous,
I would think that would be reserved for Snit! ;-)" 18 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b6cd3ac4bf1e08d6
67- Mark Kent (cola): "The problem with someone like Mr Glasser is the
same as it is with Mr Wong, even if he were to be honest now, it would
be impossible to determine where the honesty starts and the usual
dishonesty ends. In my primary school, one of the teachers was very keen
on proverbs, and I recall her going over the "cry wolf" story. Mr
Glasser could "cry wolf" over and over now, and I would not come to help
him with his sheep, because I do not know any way of determining if he's
ever telling the truth, or indeed, if he ever has." 2 Dec 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3f30aa1b65a972b3
68- Mayor of R'lyeh: "The fact is that he's probably pulling it to this
post since its all about him and he managed to make me think about him
today. A friend of mine has a toddler. I went over to her house and
videotaped her kid doing a bunch of cute toddler stuff then burned a DVD
of it for her. While we were watching the DVD her kid got mad. He got
mad because we quit making him the center of attention and made that kid
on the tv the center of attention. He even ran up to the tv and tried to
block our view of it. That's how Snit lives his whole life." 30 Sep 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/9935f4154d5a290b
69- Michelle Ronn: "The real topic here is that one someone refutes your
'facts', you run away and ignore them. Refuting your 'facts' is easily
done in this case. I did it, and you ignored it." 9 Feb 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/c050c82720737b32
70- Mike: "Nonsense. I never see you "advocate" anything. All I see you
doing is engage in endless semantic arguments with everyone. You're the
TholenBot of CSMA. BTW, that's *not* a compliment!" 8 Jul 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/7c5b72d70b87ffbd
71- Mike Dee: "I will no longer accuse you of lying here. Instead I can
only say that you are a complete and delusional kook that happens to
inhabit CSMA for the time being. That you are unaware of how deranged
you actually behave further reinforces this notion. Please seek
professional help."
"The point that keeps whooshing over your head Snit, is Elizabot made no
threat to you before you went to the police. She made a promise.
Admittedly, to your delusional spaced out paranoiac view point, Elizabot
was suddenly "threatening" to you. In so much as you had to take your
kooky self down to your local police shop and blub on their shoulders
about how much in danger you were in [sob, whine], and they had to waste
valuable policing time consoling you over your stupidity. I bet they
have Kook with a capital "K" written at the top of your profile, Snit."
2 Sep 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/9cf45bc88a324f40
72- mmoore321: "Snit is a human car-accident and we are all
rubbernecking. We know it is bad form, but yet strangely curious. Treat
him the same way, look but just keep moving on." 18 Aug 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/f1c3041d89504c07
73- Mojo: "Actually, these facts piss everybody off because they are
off-topic, unnecessarily confrontational, extremely boring and clearly
show that you are crying out for attention." 20 Sep 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/a38f07b9a4811a80
74- Mr. Blonde: "Lastly, I can't help but comment on the fact that your
obsession with Sandman has actually grown since you claimed to KF him.
Killfilling someone generally implies you're ignoring that person, yet
you piggyback onto virtually every reply to him here and and check his
website's validation status more often than most people check their
e-mail. These are not the actions of a mentally balanced individual."
19 Jan 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/2b005666ab303e2b
75- MR_ED_of_Course: "Seriously, spend half a day at any pre-school or
kindergarten and see if the kids there can't teach you a thing or two
about social behavior." 16 May 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/55c03a6a0b7813a4
76- Muahman: "Ummm, dude you post 1000 posts a day. 999 of them are
trolls, if anyone here has issues it's not me." 24 Sep 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/ad9daff74ee1e0bd
Muahman: "LOL, everyone hates Snit. I know I'd push him in front of a
bus if I could." 15 May 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/e5ee46bf5bf04d00
Muahman: "Ahhhh shit, another thread lost to the Snit retard circus!!!
I actually dread seeing Snit reply to a thread because that
automatically means it's in the toilet." 8 Jul 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/92e776d521dfa701
77- Nashton/Nasht0n: "Oh for crying out loud, if I wasn't convinced that
snit is a total loser, and I rarely call people losers, I certainly am
now. Why bother responding to his stupidities anyway?" 29 Nov 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/be1a326a81441508
78- New Bee: "Honest and honorable? You? You've either got a wry sense
of humor, or you're completely nuts. Either way you're just a waste of
time, and you've done more than anybody to make this group a cesspool.
Then you revel in wallowing in your own filth." 14 May 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/2856277b085d0274
79- Not Important: "I get this mental image of you and a sibling as
children in the back seat of the family car saying:
Mom, 'snits' touching me ... and you responding much as you do now ...
I'm not touching you, you're touching me! The problem is that by now you
should've grown out of that type of poke and complain interaction with
others. But, of course, you've haven't learned how to interact with
others in a more 'constructive' and mutually beneficial manner even
now." 03 Jul 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/d16279e9003ca8f4
80- OldCSMAer: "What's he been doing? Am I going to be sorry I killfiled
him?" 27 Nov 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/23b808d9646cd257
81- OldSage: "What drives me nuts is your unrelenting ability and desire
to argue on the head of a pin about the most trivial of things." 2 Oct 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/88457f8e7c25273e
82- Oxford: "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!!!!!" 14 Aug 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/1d7f9181e95ed9ec
83- Patrick Nihill: "I mean, honestly, who would you rather discuss
something with; Dan, or someone like Zara? Or, for that matter, Snit,
for whom the work 'troll' seems so painfully inadequate?" 13 Aug 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/f93db68e683ad769
84- Pawel Wojciak: "Jesus Christ, snit... <plonk> "
85- PC Guy: "Forget it Snit, you're a waste of time. For someone who
talks about everyone else not being "honest and honorable" you appear to
be the least honest and honorable of anyone here." 22 Apr 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/36bf51df2a2662a4
86- Peter: "I've never felt the need to use the filters in Newswatcher
but I thought Id try the Kill this Author.. option with Snit. Ten
seconds later and he's gone! Amazing." 30 Dec 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/011eef01d7bcd56c
87- Peter Bjorn Perlso: "Plonked for 60 days. Now stfu and take your
argument with sandman into the private room." 13 Dec 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/ae4651ec99be3c77
88- Peter Hayes: "True, but that removes Snit completely, and someti...
err..... occasiona.... errrrr..... once in a blue moon he has something
useful to say."
89- Peter Jensen (cola): "Where has he ever said that they were not
different windowing environments? Message-ID, please. Experience has
told me not to trust you on anything without backing evidence."
90- Peter Kohlmann (cola): "Snot is a hideous troll. Nobody is as
dishonest as that piece of unadultered garbage. There are csma posters
even more stupid than Snot. Oxford comes to mind. There are certainly
other csma posters who lie nearly as much. But no others are so intent
on trolling in whatever way possible as Snot" 15 Mar 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3409d9582dcebd25
91- PeterBP: "Oh will you stfu".
92- Phil Earnhardt: "You're only interested in trying to get superficial
snipes and extrapolate inappropriate conclusions." 1 Nov 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/ad24a97d5dc86277
93- Rapskat (cola): "For instance, your sig you reference a long
standing war you have going with some person from csma. It's like you
single out persons to target your attentions upon and then continuously
berate them with constant barbs and goads to perpetuate their
acrimonious responses, which in turn you respond in kind, etc. ad
infinitum. Above all things, your affinity for Macs and your overbearing
pompous nature aside, this is what convinces me that your primary
purpose for frequenting this and other groups is to troll." 07 Sep 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/a09c6b8e3e63f42d
94- RichardK: "Just killfile him already."
95- Rick (cola): "Snit, you are a liar. And an ignorant one. You trash
people that are trying their level best to cope with a horrendous
situation. And you do it without the slightest idea of what is going
on." 06 Sep 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/fcad2955ac5cb03b
96- Rick G.: "Just to be plain here, I have no doubt that he is a troll.
I am tolerant of his nature, not blind to it. However, as a troll, he is
... somewhat clumsy." 22 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/198b88e3d0064a92
97- Robert F.: "Um, perhaps you misunderstand. I don't care if you quote
Mayor McCheese claiming the Earth is a flat plate perched on the shell
of a tortoise, I was merely pointing out that you run the risk of
looking ridiculous when you quote something patently stupid. If that's
your goal, you're on the right track, and more power to you." 11 Jan 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/4dc22433eae8803d
98- RonB (COLA): "Snit is a crank fixated on one issue, who's thing is
twisting your words so he can win an argument against a straw man.
That's enough to killfile him." 1 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usenet.kooks/msg/ce8550d4cc5b1b42
99- Rotten Apple:
Snit: "The truth? Carroll has openly admitted he does what he accuses
others of... now there is evidence he is committing identity theft - the
very thing he accuses me of based on his claiming I am not the person he
has tracked me down to be."
Rotten Apple: "You make trolls like me look like choir boys." 14 Sep 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/7a92988bcbce8fdb
Snit: "No need for him to worry - unlike him, I would not even threaten
to contact his wife. I simply will not sink to his level. I suspect
his wife will find out anyway - people are not as stupid as he wants
them to be."
Rotten Apple: "Your meds are really kicking your ass!" 15 Sep 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/5e414c27d6357a4a
100- Roy Culley (cola): "You appear to be in the latter category.
Starting crossposted threads for the simple purpose of hoping to
generate a flame war. If you truly want to learn more about Linux and
how it can help you and your supposed users why aren't you requesting
help from a more technical Linux newsgroup than an advocacy group? As
the old saying goes, those who can do, those who can't teach. Your posts
seem to confirm that saying IMHO." 12 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/d521a80051e24d08
101- S'mee (Keith, rec.motorcycles): "Liar...forger and worthless. You
must be related to our resident racist troll, he lies as much as you."
29 Dec 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/ab08c00330c8b58d
102- Sandman: "He is by far the most killfiled person in the -HISTORY-
of csma. I've never seen someone so disliked, almost hated, in a news
group before. He has the ability to turn just about any person against
him in just a few posts. On usenet, trolls do this daily, but the funny
part with Michael is that I actually think he DOESN'T consider himself
be a troll - damn what -EVERYONE ELSE- is calling him. Obviously they
are wrong. Only Tholen himself can match this behaviour." 18 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/51c0735c774215c2
103- sav: "You really need to take a rest somewhere nice. Honestly, even
the nutters who hang out down on Brighton seafront made more sense than
this. You been doing drugs or something?" 25 May 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/1b251baa5c641370
104- Sean Burke: If you're dumb enough to respond to snit, you're
probably dumb enough to click on a spam attachment that promises to
remove smut from your harddrive." 21 Jan 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/e166032d8959c0e1
105- Sermo Malifer (COLA):
Snit: "Why do so many people in COLA argue *against* me..."
Sermo Malifer: "Because you're a narcissistic troll who posts trash just
to get people talking about you." 21 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5ddf14f502e9b3f1
106- spike1: "The thought is probably to show everyone here just how bad
a troll snit is".
107- ShutterBugz: "so snit-zel has some kind of problem expressing
anger, i guess. he has to vent his frustrations in other ways. and he
thinks he's making sense: well the syntax is there and he figures he's
pretty smart. indeed, he tells us, he's done the personality tests and
the iq tests and he's okay! aaaaahhhhh, you see he's soooooooo well
adjusted." 3 Mar 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/7f9fa1cf90490298
108- Steve Carroll: "The only things we are sure about Snit is that he has:
* a monumental reading comprehension problem.
* nym-shifted numerous times to avoid kill-files.
* built too many straw-men to count... some, the size of small cities.
* been labeled a disingenuous liar/troll(or worse) by the vast majority.
* used numerous sock-puppets and admitted to it.
* stolen IDs and admitted to it.
* gotten booted off by ISPs for his behavior.
* twisted more context than all csma posters combined.
* made more unsupported accusations than all csma posters combined.
* virtually no life outside of csma."
109- Steve Mackay: "Just killfile Snit, the dishonest piece of elephant
dung, and all would go away. Sure, I got caught up in the "Snit Circus",
but then the cotton candy began to sour, and CSMA begun to smell like
elephant dung." 18 Aug 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/9fc11094133dfcdf
Welcome to the Snit circus, where the popcorn and cotton candy are
stale, and the smell of elephant dung is everywhere. 27 Dec 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/614daf295b50413f
110- Steven de Mena: "Sorry, you have now lost all credibility with me
for your rediculous argument regarding this." 26 Sep 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/1c8777d39c34e293
111- Steve Travis: "Oh oh... Now look what we've done. Snit has lost
all self respect and has sunk to the point of using words like 'asses'
when referring to others. Oh, how could the morally superior snit have
fallen so low.. Please take a moment out of your busy schedule to feel
embarassed for him. Or perhaps we should set up a fund to get him more
happy glue (and the appropriate plastic bags)." 27 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3edd9ab69425a6c5
112- Stuart Krivis: "You might as well just give up and plonk him then.
A snit is a snit is a snit and always will be." 15 Aug 2006 (post not
available except in reply)
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/5b382420a696f140
113- Tattoo Vampire (COLA): "In other words, in another attempt to
troll, you made yourself look like a fool. Again". 28 Aug 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/b2676d3540e09f38
114- The Lost Packet (COLA): "well, he's found a seat in my killbin, I
can't be doing with him." 27 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/2007526a552b3322
115- TheLetterK: "That is merely your perception, Shit. You're the one
lacking counter evidence, and your arguments basically amount to "I'm
right, nya nya nya." No matter how many examples someone points at to
demonstrate their claim, you blindly continue to insist that they
provide no evidence, or that the evidence given is irrelevant. Worse
still, you fall back on straw men and disingenuous quote mangling to
portray the argument in your favor. You are one of the worst trolls that
inhabit CSMA, Shit. *Edwin* is more prone to fits of reason than you
are." 23 Sep 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/d488596b57132124
116- Thufir: "It's based on *your* MO that I, at least, have no problem
in stating that you're full of shit on nearly any topic. I've observed
your bullshit, and based on that pattern of bullshit, infer that you're
full of it. Your MO is the evidence, the logic is an inference based on
the evidence." 21 Aug 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/c89d3cf79e806e5f
Thufir: "You can "prove" that no one has disproved your "proof"? Again,
your assertion that no one has done so is even *less* convincing than
your claim that some PDF "proves" whatever point you're trying to make
precisely because I'm familiar with your MO. That is, you're a dumb-ass
who would claim that that something is proved when it's not, and who
would ignore counter-examples disproving your contention. I don't know
what this *ages old* thread is about, but I know that you're full of
shit." 21 Aug 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/5114623055c01092
117-Tim Adams: "I'd kill file you but then I'd miss the fun. you see,
you never cease to amaze me at just how stupid you really are. Why just
the other day I had a great laugh when I saw you, the king of liars (in
this NG anyway) calling somebody else a liar." 13 Nov 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/40c7f9407179ff2a
118- Tim Crowley: "I don't know - I think you might have more
compassion. Snit is sick. He needs help. This is the only way the poor
sick fool can get attention. My fucking God, he's taken to hanging out
with and supporting racist pig fuckers like MuahMuah. It is true that
no-one likes him and those that pretend they do are just using him or
don't know him - but come on- it's not his fault. He's sick. Have some
compassion, eh? All these idiot trolls, Zara, Stew, Tommy,
MuaaaahMuaaah, and Snit - they are all so alike. I pity each and every
one of them" 19 Apr 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/67f0f174110bfa0a
119- Tim Smith: "No, he didn't, and there is no reasonable way you could
actually believe he lied. You are purely trying to troll here." 14 Apr 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/6e3cfd9240ac4871
120- Timberwoof: "*Plonk!*"
121- Tom Bates: "Do you have to turn any thread you post in into one of
your Circus acts?" 20 Feb 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/25f0e481b605e71f
122- Tommy: "In case you did not get it, I think the moral was: Stop
polluting the world with your infantile and obsessive "writings". You
give Mac advocacy a bad name. If that was your goal you have succeeded!
That also goes for all that bullshit on your website" 11 Jun 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/03610d2080321d33
123- TravelinMan: "I still can't figure out what's wrong with Snit. Most
people have him kill-filed and the few who don't mostly restrict their
responses to 'why don't you go away, no one wants you here'. Just what
would keep someone in this group with all of that animosity? Must be
some kind of severe mental illness." 17 Mar 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/45197fbb46d491df
124- Wally: "Because by your own admission "honor and honesty" are
nothing more than a "game" to you, as such not only do you wish to
define the rules, but no doubt you will also attempt to alter or bend
the rules when inevitably things do not go to your liking, for this
reason I doubt anyone would be foolish enough to play your game." 16
May 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/b9b3ed1ee20e5220
125- WhoMe: "F michael IS a teacher, it's no wonder he's home more than
he's anywhere near a classroom".
126- William Poaster: "Good grief. If anyone's having a mental breakdown
it's the Prescott Computer Guy, Michael Snit Glasser. What a f#cked up
mess he is." 29 Aug 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/914d1e74855fb461
127- William R. Walsh: "Now, if you'll excuse me, and accept my sincere
apologies for this, PLONK! Feel proud about that. You're the first
person to be plonked from my new computer! :-) " 10 Feb 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/313c7368f6369c49
128- Woofbert: "*Plonk*"
129- zara: "Look - I'm not into combing through thousands of posts, to
prove what was said or not said - I leave stuff like that to people
without lives, like Snit. But it is assuredly, in the record. Ping Snit
to do a search - you will flatter him, and give meaning to his tawdry
little life." 25 Oct 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/a1d4fc7120a6a538
130- Zaren Ankleweed: "And with that, Snit goes in the global killfile.
No subject, no author, no nothing. Buh-bye". 11 Sep 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/12f7c34f24d43624
131- Znu: "I think your 'I'll go start a new thread to try to draw more
people into the debate I'm currently having with Steve/Elizabot/etc'
tactic is fairly trollish."
132- Mutley (AUK):
Snit: "None are supportable. None are real. HPT made them up and is
scared to even try to support them. He knows he cannot. He knows his
lies are being shoved in his face and that people are laughing at his
failure. I know I am. He is a sad pathetic little man."
Mutley: "For the record ... I'll be done when I decide that there's more
shit on your face than there is on the sole of my shoe." 01 Nov 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/1802ad3aa000098b
--
HPT
Snit
on 12/13/09 4:37 AM:
>> Again: are you stupid enough to believe the above or just working to
>> get attention? I suspect the former.
>
> Snit is the one begging for attention.
OK, you really are *that* stupid. OK.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
High Plains Thumper
> High Plains Thumper stated:
>
>>> get attention? I suspect the former.
>>
>> Snit is the one begging for attention.
>
> OK, you really are *that* stupid. OK.
Nope, I leave that for trolls like you and your idiot socks Joel
Crump, Rhino Plastee, ThunderCleats, Sigmond and ad nauseum.
Snit still has yet to give an adequate reply to:
[quote]
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Joel <joelcr...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 00:59:34 -0500
Subject: Re: Glasser Pathological Liar Compilation
[quote]
> Following are 132 poster accounts on the Snit Circus of Pathological
> Lies:
And that's supposed to convince someone that they are the good guys?
Please. I'll take one decent poster like Snit over a thousand idiot
trolls, any day.
[/quote]
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/ce419ba75106d6a6
Yup, there is no getting out of this one, bummer for Snit.
--
HPT
Joel
>Yup, there is no getting out of this one, bummer for Snit.
You're not even good at trolling, yet you keep trying. Really sad for
you, dumb nerd.
--
Joel Crump
High Plains Thumper
> Snit still has yet to give an adequate reply to:
>
> [quote]
> Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
> From: Joel <joelcr...@gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 00:59:34 -0500
> Subject: Re: Glasser Pathological Liar Compilation
>
> [quote]
>> Following are 132 poster accounts on the Snit Circus of
>> Pathological Lies:
>
> And that's supposed to convince someone that they are the good guys?
> Please. I'll take one decent poster like Snit over a thousand idiot
> trolls, any day.
> [/quote]
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/ce419ba75106d6a6
>
>
> Yup, there is no getting out of this one, bummer for Snit.
Oh, and I just wanted to add, cc (COLA) troll's comments on Snit's
posting style:
[quote]
Heh, I'm Snit.
You have made accusation X against me.
You have failed to support the accusation yet again.
Here are a list of previous accusations that you failed to support:
Irrelevant Argument from the past #1
Irrelevant Argument from the past #2
Time you accused me of being wrong, when I was
Time you accused me of being wrong, when I wasn't
Irrelevant Argument from the past #3
Please provide evidence to back up all accusations including
those made years ago by someone else. I will now cut and paste
this as my response to everything you write.
Repetitively Yours,
Snit
[/quote]
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/85c90976fe66fb80
Oh, and proof of Rhino Plastee as Snit:
[quote]
>> "Nope: I quote you directly and in context:"-Snit
>>
>> Proving that High Plains Thumper is correct, Snit does nymshift as
>> Rhino Plastee.
>
> Nope. Nice try though!
You wished!
Rhino Plastee states....
"Clearly this is a bigoted postion you are pushing, Wally".
http://tinyurl.com/6uhx65
Wally replies....
"Clearly for your argument to hold up you need to put words in my
mouth! tsk, tsk!"
http://tinyurl.com/9xm9ea
Snit shoots himself in the foot and replies....
"Nope: I quote you directly and in context:"
http://tinyurl.com/7hlnq2
ROTFLMAO!
[/quote]
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/85c90976fe66fb80
--
HPT
Snit
7:12 PM:
His goal is to impress Carroll and crew. He panders to him all the time,
even using Carroll's obsessively scavenged and forged quotes over and over
and over and over. I bet he thinks he is being clever when he does so...
and he does reach his goal: Carroll accepts him into the sick little clique.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
12/13/09 6:45 PM:
> Snit wrote:
>> High Plains Thumper stated:
>>
>>>> Again: are you stupid enough to believe the above or just working to
>>>> get attention? �I suspect the former.
>>>
>>> Snit is the one begging for attention.
>>
>> OK, you really are *that* stupid. �OK.
>
> Nope
Yet, in a bazillion word essay, you give no reason to think otherwise.
Yes: you are *that* stupid... but not quite so stupid you do not realize you
are stupid. A bit of a tragedy, really.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Joel
>His goal is to impress Carroll and crew. He panders to him all the time,
>even using Carroll's obsessively scavenged and forged quotes over and over
>and over and over. I bet he thinks he is being clever when he does so...
>and he does reach his goal: Carroll accepts him into the sick little clique.
Maybe Steve C. simply has a friend in Austria to proxy through.
--
Joel Crump
Snit
10:22 PM:
I would not put it past him. I will note that Steve, Wally and Tim are all
gone. Again. They come and go together *far* more than chance would
suggest. At the very least they coordinate their attacks against CSMA... I
do not believe any are socks of the other, but I could be wrong.
Of course, when Steve is gone his known socks do not post: his dog, CSMA
Moderator, Edward Stanfield, etc.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Joel
>> Maybe Steve C. simply has a friend in Austria to proxy through.
>
>I would not put it past him.
Nor would I. However, in this case, I don't get the *feeling* that
HPT isn't a real person. A stupid person, to be sure, but probably
real.
(But it ain't for nothing that I point out the possibility ...)
> I will note that Steve, Wally and Tim are all
>gone. Again. They come and go together *far* more than chance would
>suggest. At the very least they coordinate their attacks against CSMA... I
>do not believe any are socks of the other, but I could be wrong.
I don't think any are clones/socks/whatever, but they certainly do
sing the same tired old song.
>Of course, when Steve is gone his known socks do not post: his dog, CSMA
>Moderator, Edward Stanfield, etc.
Yes - he doth protest too much.
--
Joel Crump
High Plains Thumper
> High Plains Thumper stated:
>> Snit wrote:
>>> High Plains Thumper stated:
Snit begs for my attention. A lot.
--
HPT
High Plains Thumper
> Snit wrote:
>
>>> Maybe Steve C. simply has a friend in Austria to proxy through.
>>
>> I would not put it past him.
>
> Nor would I. However, in this case, I don't get the *feeling* that
> HPT isn't a real person. A stupid person, to be sure, but probably
> real.
Same Snit ad hominem.
> (But it ain't for nothing that I point out the possibility ...)
>
>> I will note that Steve, Wally and Tim are all gone. Again. They
>> come and go together *far* more than chance would suggest. At the
>> very least they coordinate their attacks against CSMA... I do not
>> believe any are socks of the other, but I could be wrong.
Interesting how both Joel and Snit post together, but then that is
what socks do, no?
> I don't think any are clones/socks/whatever, but they certainly do
> sing the same tired old song.
>
>> Of course, when Steve is gone his known socks do not post: his dog,
>> CSMA Moderator, Edward Stanfield, etc.
So Snit likes to attribute his Steve Carroll's Dog sock to Steve,
which has been proven a lie. Typical Snit.
> Yes - he doth protest too much.
Snit and his socks beg for my attention. A lot.
--
HPT
Wally
"Joel" <joel...@gmail.com> wrote:
The only thing "moronic" is the fact that you are admitting to using
something that you have made perfectly clear you *do not* believe but are
willing to use anyway as a reason to say that HPT should not state something
that he *does* actually believe! LOL ... Very Snit like logic IMO!
Chance Furlong
<b12c488e-556b-4d5e...@y32g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
High Plains Thumper <highplai...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Snit and his socks beg for my attention. A lot.
>
> HPT
Snit begs for everyone's attention, even from other trolls.
High Plains Thumper
> High Plains Thumper wrote:
>
>> Snit and his socks beg for my attention. A lot.
>
And even the trolls loathe it:
Hadron (COLA): "... your constant repetition could send an acid tab to
sleep" 09 Dec 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/6533c646468adc42
Another troll's perspective:
cc (COLA): "What facts? The fact that you don't know what a hypothetical
situation is? The fact that you can't answer any questions? The fact
that you continue to run away when faced with simple questions? I am
100% predictable to you because you simply cannot understand what has
been placed in front of you. It's all just a jumble of words to your
pea-sized brain, and therefore it always looks the same." 15 Nov 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/f6ce4429806e9de6
Here's an interesting history, 2004, 2007 and 2009:
Muahman: "Ummm, dude you post 1000 posts a day. 999 of them are
trolls, if anyone here has issues it's not me." 24 Sep 2004
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/ad9daff74ee1e0bd
Muahman: "LOL, everyone hates Snit. I know I'd push him in front of a
bus if I could." 15 May 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/e5ee46bf5bf04d00
Muahman: "Ahhhh sh*t, another thread lost to the Snit retard circus!!!
I actually dread seeing Snit reply to a thread because that
automatically means it's in the toilet." 8 Jul 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/92e776d521dfa701
Yup, Snit begs for everyone's attention, no doubt.
--
HPT
High Plains Thumper
> Joel wrote:
>> Snit wrote:
>>
>>> And he keeps bragging about how stupid he is:
>>>
>>> So we have this new comer who all of a sudden has knowledge
>>> of and supports COLA troll accusations toward me that without
>>> any thread of evidence
>>>
>>> The fact you can read *and* understand what you are reading, he
>>> claims, is a complete and total mystery to him.
>>
>> Well, all I had even done was point out how moronic it was for him
>> to accuse us of being the same person, when people were accusing
>> him of similar crap. I didn't say I *believed* the accusations
>> against him, and in fact I pretty clearly implied I didn't. But he
>> "doth protest too much", perhaps ...
>
> The only thing "moronic" is the fact that you are admitting to using
> something that you have made perfectly clear you *do not* believe but
> are willing to use anyway as a reason to say that HPT should not
> state something that he *does* actually believe! LOL ... Very Snit
> like logic IMO!
Must be his meds need adjustment. May be he's doubled his dose, one for
Snit, one for his sock Joel.
Speaking of drugs, conversation that is very Snit-like, such play on
words regarding "analog", similar to "synonymous", etc., and indirect
hint on past illegal drug use:
Dale DeWitt: "But absent large sums of money the court would slam dunk
ya, based upon the way the drug was "represented," either intentionally
or unintentionally (say, as a naive chemist)."
Joel Crump: "If one is representing a drug as an analogue (other than
when it would already legally be one), that is a problem, yes. That
doesn't make the drug itself an analogue, though.
Dale DeWitt: "This subject was brought up because of the initial idea
that LSD isn't actually LSD when it trades hands. And the poster wanted
the real thing."
Joel Crump: "I've never heard of anyone selling what would be expected
to be LSD as anything but "LSD" or its various street names. The
realistic view is that you very well may get an analogue of LSD, or a
"cheap substitute", but you won't know until you take it." 21 Nov 2008
Subject: Re: Real LSD still available in the world?
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.drugs/msg/90e5cc0633ba659a
ROTFLMAO!
--
HPT
High Plains Thumper
> High Plains Thumper stated:
>> Snit wrote:
>>> High Plains Thumper stated:
>>>
>>>>> Again: are you stupid enough to believe the above or just
>>>>> working to get attention? I suspect the former.
>>>>
>>>> Snit is the one begging for attention.
>>>
>>> OK, you really are *that* stupid. OK.
>>
>> Nope
>
> Yet, in a bazillion word essay, you give no reason to think
> otherwise.
>
> Yes: you are *that* stupid... but not quite so stupid you do not
> realize you are stupid. A bit of a tragedy, really.
Oh yeah, bury your head in the sand and deny all luser. Here is what a
COLA troll had to say about you:
cc (COLA): "What facts? The fact that you don't know what a hypothetical
situation is? The fact that you can't answer any questions? The fact
that you continue to run away when faced with simple questions? I am
100% predictable to you because you simply cannot understand what has
been placed in front of you. It's all just a jumble of words to your
pea-sized brain, and therefore it always looks the same." 15 Nov 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/f6ce4429806e9de6
It is obvious who is stupid, and it isn't me, luser.
--
HPT
Joel
>The only thing "moronic" is the fact that you are admitting to using
>something that you have made perfectly clear you *do not* believe but are
>willing to use anyway as a reason to say that HPT should not state something
>that he *does* actually believe! LOL ... Very Snit like logic IMO!
I could knock you out with an open-hand slap, clown.
--
Joel Crump
Steve Carroll
That last line is telling... and it explains why it doesn't occur to
"Joel" that some of the crap he took (while trying to assess if it was
*real* LSD or not) left him with permanent damage... as did the *real*
LSD he obviously took upon occasion.
Snit
You really need to take an adult literacy class. Really.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
on 12/14/09 5:32 AM:
> Snit wrote:
>> High Plains Thumper stated:
>>> Snit wrote:
>>>> High Plains Thumper stated:
>>>>
>>>>>> Again: are you stupid enough to believe the above or just
>>>>>> working to get attention? I suspect the former.
>>>>>
>>>>> Snit is the one begging for attention.
>>>>
>>>> OK, you really are *that* stupid. OK.
>>>
>>> Nope
>>
>> Yet, in a bazillion word essay, you give no reason to think
>> otherwise.
>>
>> Yes: you are *that* stupid... but not quite so stupid you do not
>> realize you are stupid. A bit of a tragedy, really.
>
> Oh yeah, bury your head in the sand and deny all luser.
I am not denying it... I am the one telling you. See: you are stupid.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
on 12/14/09 5:28 AM:
> Wally wrote:
>> Joel wrote:
>>> Snit wrote:
>>>
>>>> And he keeps bragging about how stupid he is:
>>>>
>>>> So we have this new comer who all of a sudden has knowledge
>>>> of and supports COLA troll accusations toward me that without
>>>> any thread of evidence
>>>>
>>>> The fact you can read *and* understand what you are reading, he
>>>> claims, is a complete and total mystery to him.
>>>
>>> Well, all I had even done was point out how moronic it was for him
>>> to accuse us of being the same person, when people were accusing
>>> him of similar crap. I didn't say I *believed* the accusations
>>> against him, and in fact I pretty clearly implied I didn't. But he
>>> "doth protest too much", perhaps ...
>>
>> The only thing "moronic" is the fact that you are admitting to using
>> something that you have made perfectly clear you *do not* believe but
>> are willing to use anyway as a reason to say that HPT should not
>> state something that he *does* actually believe! LOL ... Very Snit
>> like logic IMO!
>
> Must be his meds need adjustment.
Gee, for him to be able to read *and* understand is just unfathomable for
you.
Quite telling.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
12/14/09 4:06 AM:
> Joel wrote:
>> Snit wrote:
>>
>>>> Maybe Steve C. simply has a friend in Austria to proxy through.
>>>
>>> I would not put it past him.
>>
>> Nor would I. �However, in this case, I don't get the *feeling* that
>> HPT isn't a real person. �A stupid person, to be sure, but probably
>> real.
>
> Same Snit ad hominem.
That was not me... you think so because you are stupid.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
10:48 PM:
As predicted: Wally and Steve Carroll returned within hours of each other.
No, I am not saying they are the same person (one being the sock of the
other)... though it is possible Wally is merely a sock of Steve, that would
imply Steve is able to post without his tells - and he has been busted using
them too many times with his socks. Very unlikely that Wally is Steve's
sock...
But they clearly coordinate their attacks against CSMA.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Steve Carroll
> Snit stated in post C74B1FC8.5918C%use...@gallopinginsanity.com on 12/13/09
> 10:48 PM:
>
>
>
>
>
> > 10:22 PM:
>
> >> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
> >>> His goal is to impress Carroll and crew. He panders to him all the time,
> >>> even using Carroll's obsessively scavenged and forged quotes over and over
> >>> and over and over. I bet he thinks he is being clever when he does so...
> >>> and he does reach his goal: Carroll accepts him into the sick little clique.
>
> >> Maybe Steve C. simply has a friend in Austria to proxy through.
>
> > I would not put it past him. I will note that Steve, Wally and Tim are all
> > gone. Again. They come and go together *far* more than chance would
> > suggest. At the very least they coordinate their attacks against CSMA... I
> > do not believe any are socks of the other, but I could be wrong.
>
> > Of course, when Steve is gone his known socks do not post: his dog, CSMA
> > Moderator, Edward Stanfield, etc.
>
> As predicted: Wally and Steve Carroll returned within hours of each other.
So now it's "within hours of"... it's nothing short of amazing how
your delusions can encompass almost anything.
> No, I am not saying they are the same person
And you're mentioning it because... ? Oh that's right... you're still
laboring under the delusion that your "psych degree" is working...
that people are as stupid as you need them to be.
> (one being the sock of the
> other)... though it is possible Wally is merely a sock of Steve, that would
> imply Steve is able to post without his tells
Yeah... my "tells" as 'told' to a delusional newsgroup nitwit.
(snip Snit's other delusions as he tries to get people to believe
there can't possibly be numerous legitimate posters all saying the
same thing about him)
High Plains Thumper
> Snit wrote:
>
>> (one being the sock of the other)... though it is possible Wally is
>> merely a sock of Steve, that would imply Steve is able to post
>> without his tells
>
> Yeah... my "tells" as 'told' to a delusional newsgroup nitwit.
>
> (snip Snit's other delusions as he tries to get people to believe
> there can't possibly be numerous legitimate posters all saying the
> same thing about him)
So Snit is still on his "I and my socks can't provide an adequate answer
to your proof of allegations so I will snip all proof away and resort to
calling you all stupid trolls".
His dropping acid as "Joel" must have fried his brain.
--
HPT
High Plains Thumper
> High Plains Thumper wrote:
>
>> expected to be LSD as anything but "LSD" or its various street
>> names. The realistic view is that you very well may get an
>> analogue of LSD, or a "cheap substitute", but you won't know until
>> you take it." 21 Nov 2008
>>
>> Subject: Re: Real LSD still available in the world?
>>
>> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.drugs/msg/90e5cc0633ba659a
>>
>> ROTFLMAO!
>
> "Joel" that some of the crap he took (while trying to assess if it
> was *real* LSD or not) left him with permanent damage... as did the
> *real* LSD he obviously took upon occasion.
No wonder why Snit has an obsession with drugs and struggles with word
definitions. Acid must have fried his brain, or perhaps that's when he
starts tripping out and posting as socks.
--
HPT
High Plains Thumper
> Wally wrote:
>
>> The only thing "moronic" is the fact that you are admitting to
>> using something that you have made perfectly clear you *do not*
>> believe but are willing to use anyway as a reason to say that HPT
>> should not state something that he *does* actually believe! LOL
>> ... Very Snit like logic IMO!
>
> I could knock you out with an open-hand slap, clown.
You couldn't fight your way out of wet paperbag if the directions were
written on it, Snit.
--
HPT
Snit
on 12/14/09 7:42 PM:
You quote Carroll snipping... and then say what you say.
Yeah, you are stupid.
But by all means - prove again how stupid you are by "proving" that I use
socks. Have fun!
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
on 12/14/09 7:47 PM:
Yeah, but you are so stupid you cannot figure out who you are talking to.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
on 12/14/09 7:45 PM:
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Joel
Besides, I don't really agree with what he said. You don't present
yourself as violent, or anything, but sometimes that just means you
would reserve it for when you really need it. HPT is too dumb to be a
fighter - I guarantee it. A lot of it is mental.
--
Joel Crump
Snit
9:18 PM:
"Coward of the County" comes to mind. Those who have the least need to show
off their strength often are the strongest. Sometimes not. You never know.
I will say I do a very, very bad job of backing down from bullies... and I
rarely get into a position I cannot handle well.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Joel
>>> Yeah, but you are so stupid you cannot figure out who you are talking to.
>>
>> Besides, I don't really agree with what he said. You don't present
>> yourself as violent, or anything, but sometimes that just means you
>> would reserve it for when you really need it. HPT is too dumb to be a
>> fighter - I guarantee it. A lot of it is mental.
>
>"Coward of the County" comes to mind.
Amen! I'm not that much of a country fan, but that is one of the
greatest songs I've ever heard - very profound, very well delivered.
> Those who have the least need to show
>off their strength often are the strongest. Sometimes not. You never know.
So many people fail to understand that, but it is axiomatic.
>I will say I do a very, very bad job of backing down from bullies... and I
>rarely get into a position I cannot handle well.
Right on.
--
Joel Crump
Snit
9:51 PM:
> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Yeah, but you are so stupid you cannot figure out who you are talking to.
>>>
>>> Besides, I don't really agree with what he said. You don't present
>>> yourself as violent, or anything, but sometimes that just means you
>>> would reserve it for when you really need it. HPT is too dumb to be a
>>> fighter - I guarantee it. A lot of it is mental.
>>
>> "Coward of the County" comes to mind.
>
>
> Amen! I'm not that much of a country fan, but that is one of the
> greatest songs I've ever heard - very profound, very well delivered.
Agreed - only a handful of country songs appeal to me, but this is certainly
one of them.
>> Those who have the least need to show off their strength often are the
>> strongest. Sometimes not. You never know.
>
> So many people fail to understand that, but it is axiomatic.
And those who feel the need to lash out online in a relatively anonymous /
safe way and build "cliques" to feel like they have some sense of being
better than others are just showing off how poor their own self image is.
You can see this in those who clearly agree with their "crew" no matter
what... *never* showing any sign of real disagreement or calling their
buddies out on their poor behavior.
They really have no idea how obvious their low self worth is. They
apparently think they can hide it online.
>> I will say I do a very, very bad job of backing down from bullies... and I
>> rarely get into a position I cannot handle well.
>
> Right on.
The basic idea is it has very little to do with size or looking
intimidating. If you can stare a bully in the face and show little or no
fear they almost always back down.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Joel
>>> Those who have the least need to show off their strength often are the
>>> strongest. Sometimes not. You never know.
>>
>> So many people fail to understand that, but it is axiomatic.
>
>And those who feel the need to lash out online in a relatively anonymous /
>safe way and build "cliques" to feel like they have some sense of being
>better than others are just showing off how poor their own self image is.
>You can see this in those who clearly agree with their "crew" no matter
>what... *never* showing any sign of real disagreement or calling their
>buddies out on their poor behavior.
>
>They really have no idea how obvious their low self worth is. They
>apparently think they can hide it online.
Exactly. If they had any real reason for claiming that I'll end up
hating you too, they would've said it by now. My first instinct has
been proven many times over. I'm fairly disappointed by the on-topic
discussions I've had (on the whole - there are exceptions) since
coming to these groups, but at least I made a new friend.
--
Joel Crump
Snit
12:16 AM:
The on topic discussions do, on occasion, point me to new items / updates or
help me to see something in a new way. ZnU, in particular, has some pretty
good insights. He likely is the best advocate in CSMA. Frankly I wish
there was more of that in here...
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Joel
>The on topic discussions do, on occasion, point me to new items / updates or
>help me to see something in a new way. ZnU, in particular, has some pretty
>good insights. He likely is the best advocate in CSMA. Frankly I wish
>there was more of that in here...
It is true that it keeps one connected to some new things going on.
That's part of why I've stuck around, so far.
--
Joel Crump
Snit
12:35 AM:
Sadly, those who come here just to lash out and target others are, mostly,
the ones who stay. Most reasonable people quickly leave - then the cliques
can claim that they are in the right because they can pull up a lot of nasty
quotes about people... and claim that even though they cannot find actual
quotes from someone, the "eye witness" accounts should count for something
I would love to see the folks in CSMA take a logic 101 class. :)
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Joel
>Sadly, those who come here just to lash out and target others are, mostly,
>the ones who stay. Most reasonable people quickly leave - then the cliques
>can claim that they are in the right because they can pull up a lot of nasty
>quotes about people... and claim that even though they cannot find actual
>quotes from someone, the "eye witness" accounts should count for something
>
>I would love to see the folks in CSMA take a logic 101 class. :)
At least we can say we're not going to be reduced to their level.
--
Joel Crump
High Plains Thumper
Being reduced to "our level" would be an improvement to "yours". ;)
133- Tony(UK) (COLA):
Tony(UK): "Your email address in your headers just about sums the Linux
world up. Nothing to do with the OS, it is the *uckwits involved in the
whole arena and have posted before on this. If in doubt, deride, insult
and attack. Look inwardly carefully before judging me." 10 Dec 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/533042ed18cefba3
--
HPT
Tim Murray
>> Those who have the least need to show off their strength often
>> are the strongest. Sometimes not. You never know.
>
> So many people fail to understand that, but it is axiomatic.
To say a sometimes A, sometimes B situation is "axiomatic" is pretty safe,
isn't it?
Snit
7:27 AM:
> Joel wrote:
>> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Sadly, those who come here just to lash out and target others are,
>>> mostly, the ones who stay. Most reasonable people quickly leave -
>>> then the cliques can claim that they are in the right because they
>>> can pull up a lot of nasty quotes about people... and claim that
>>> even though they cannot find actual quotes from someone, the "eye
>>> witness" accounts should count for something
>>>
>>> I would love to see the folks in CSMA take a logic 101 class. :)
>>
>> At least we can say we're not going to be reduced to their level.
>
> Being reduced to "our level" would be an improvement to "yours". ;)
How so? Seriously... you have to know what a miserable piece of work you
are.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Joel
>> At least we can say we're not going to be reduced to their level.
>
>Being reduced to "our level" would be an improvement to "yours". ;)
Dream the fuck on.
--
Joel Crump
Joel
If you want to be that literal in how you read the conversation, sure.
If you take it in the proper context, your assessment is simply
flawed.
--
Joel Crump
Steve Carroll
> Joel stated in post n1fei5d6sgeh3p75ao1jkivjuc24d4m...@4ax.com on 12/15/09
Bob B:
"But to sum up your claim, basically you think that the two most
recent presidents, plus all the major party candidates for president,
plus most members of congress are war criminals."
Snit:
"No - just the ones who are actively committing war crimes, if not in
a strictly legal sense, in a moral one."
Bob B:
"So you only care about war crimes while they are happening, but not
those of the recent past? So if Bush loses the election next year, you
will just forget about his "crimes"?"
Snit:
"Never hinted, suggested, stated, or implied that this was the case."
Bob B:
"Yes you did - look above, I asked why you focus on Bush and ignore
others, and you said its because he is currently committing the
crimes. When he is out of office, he won't be committing any "crimes",
so by your own admission you won't be so interested."
Snit:
"Never hinted, suggested, stated, or implied that this was the case."
Bob B:
"Huh? Do you even read what anyone else says, or do you just cut &
paste the same "answer" no matter what the reply?"
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/7a69f1a29c422341?hl=en&dmode=source
ROFLMAO!
Steve Carroll
Me (to Snit):
"Your argument asserted that a sitting President is a war criminal.
You agreed (a few paragraphs above) that the evidence you used to
support this was 'based on legalities' (based on the breaking, or not,
of a law)."
Snit:
"Yes. Very good."
Me:
"You have just admitted that your evidence does not prove this
assertion."
Snit:
"Right. It does not offer proof. The definition of proof is: "a
formal series of statements showing that if one thing is true
something else necessarily follows from it". While the evidence in my
argument points to the conclusion and strongly supports it, it is not,
technically, in a logical sense, proof."
There Snit is... flatly stating his "evidence" (which he used to
convince only himself) that Bush was guilty of breaking the law by
engaging in an illegal war (thus making him a "war criminal" to hear
Snit tell it) contains not a single true statement from which
something else can necessarily follow (Snit's provided definition of
the word "proof").
And... in his usual bizarre fashion, Snit is also seen claiming that
his "evidence" "strongly supports" his "argument"... this, despite the
fact that it contains, by Snit's own admission, not one single true
statement from which something else can follow (hint: something from
which a "conclusion" can be drawn). The overly obvious question:
How did Snit's "evidence" "point" to the "conclusion" Snit claims is
"strongly" supported by that "evidence" when the "evidence", due to
lacking a single true statement from which anything can be deduced,
can't possibly make anything 'evident' other than, of course, the fact
that Snit admits it proves NOTHING?
ROFLMAO!
Steve Carroll
Said the guy who didn't mind publicly proving he doesn't know the
meaning of the word "axiomatic".
Priceless stuff. LOL!
(and the "evidence" mounts that "Joel" isn't a mere Snit shill but is
actually a Snit sock puppet)
Snit
12:22 PM:
HPT and Carroll just whine that others are as bad as they are or even
worse... in Carroll's case, at least, he accuses people of things to excuse
his own behavior. He has repeatedly admitted that he does what he accuses
others of doing... and even he has admitted that some of the things he
accuses people of, such as his BS about my emailing his wife, he has
absolutely no proof of. Nor even support. Nothing but his fabrications.
Steve fabricates accusations against others to take the focus off his own
actions.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
High Plains Thumper
> High Plains Thumper wrote:
>
>>> At least we can say we're not going to be reduced to their level.
>>
>> Being reduced to "our level" would be an improvement to "yours". ;)
>
> Dream the fuck on.
Thanks for verifying my point.
--
HPT
High Plains Thumper
> Joel Crump wrote:
>> Tim Murray wrote:
>>> Joel Crump wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Those who have the least need to show off their strength
>>>>> often are the strongest. Sometimes not. You never know.
>>>>
>>>> So many people fail to understand that, but it is axiomatic.
>>>
>>> To say a sometimes A, sometimes B situation is "axiomatic" is
>>> pretty safe, isn't it?
>>
>> If you want to be that literal in how you read the conversation,
>> sure. If you take it in the proper context, your assessment is
>> simply flawed.
>
> Said the guy who didn't mind publicly proving he doesn't know the
> meaning of the word "axiomatic".
>
> Priceless stuff. LOL!
>
> (and the "evidence" mounts that "Joel" isn't a mere Snit shill but is
> actually a Snit sock puppet)
That is definitely an understatement. Very obvious.
--
HPT
Joel
>HPT and Carroll just whine that others are as bad as they are or even
>worse... in Carroll's case, at least, he accuses people of things to excuse
>his own behavior. He has repeatedly admitted that he does what he accuses
>others of doing... and even he has admitted that some of the things he
>accuses people of, such as his BS about my emailing his wife, he has
>absolutely no proof of. Nor even support. Nothing but his fabrications.
>Steve fabricates accusations against others to take the focus off his own
>actions.
"They" are lucky that there are people like us, who are more human
than "they" are.
--
Joel Crump
Joel
>Said the guy who didn't mind publicly proving he doesn't know the
>meaning of the word "axiomatic".
http://www.answers.com/topic/axiomatic
Dictionary: ax�i�o�mat�ic - also ax�i�o�mat�i�cal
adj.
Of, relating to, or resembling an axiom; self-evident: "It's
axiomatic in politics that voters won't throw out a presidential
incumbent unless they think his challenger will clean house" (Peter
Grier).
http://www.answers.com/topic/axiom
Dictionary: ax�i�om
n.
1. A self-evident or universally recognized truth; a maxim: "It is
an economic axiom as old as the hills that goods and services
can be paid for only with goods and services" (Albert Jay Nock).
2. An established rule, principle, or law.
3. A self-evident principle or one that is accepted as true without
proof as the basis for argument; a postulate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Snit had stated:
"Those who have the least need to show off their strength often are
the strongest, but you never know."
Your attempt to be WHITE in reply can get shoved up your cracker ass.
--
Joel Crump
Joel
>>> Being reduced to "our level" would be an improvement to "yours". ;)
>>
>> Dream the fuck on.
>
>Thanks for verifying my point.
The sad thing is that you're probably older than me.
--
Joel Crump
Snit
8:35 PM:
Steve likes to pretend he owns the language and gets to define who
understands it and what it means. Gives him a right, in his mind, to spew
multiple contradictory claims and insist he still believes all of them. I
think I shared with you the example of his multiple views - four or five
different ones - about if someone can be actually guilty without being found
guilty.
The sad thing is this is not even a tough question - of course someone can
be actually guilty but never be caught, tried, or found guilty in a court.
And of course if you have evidence that shows guilt you can state what you
know - there is nothing against the presumption of innocence required in our
adjudication system that says we do not have freedom of though and freedom
of speech.
> Your attempt to be WHITE in reply can get shoved up your cracker ass.
Not sure what that means.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
8:35 PM:
> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
Steve knows I am a better person than he is - if he did not he would never
have posted his home address. I never did anything to try to find it... and
even assuming what he posted was accurate, I will never use it to harass
him.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
on 12/15/09 8:31 PM:
You *really* are stupid.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
on 12/15/09 8:27 PM:
Just the other day you were noting that a common trolling tactic is to make
claims you know you cannot support... and it is one of your favorite
trolling tactics to do.
People are not as stupid as, well, you.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Joel
>Steve knows I am a better person than he is - if he did not he would never
>have posted his home address. I never did anything to try to find it... and
>even assuming what he posted was accurate, I will never use it to harass
>him.
Yup.
--
Joel Crump
Joel
>> Your attempt to be WHITE in reply can get shoved up your cracker ass.
>
>Not sure what that means.
I am somewhat racist. I don't deny that. It's in favor of
non-whites (and you've seen my picture).
--
Joel Crump
Snit
10:40 PM:
I think there are jerks of every color... but I also believe that *most*
people, no matter the race, color, religion, shape, size, sexuality, taste,
smell, hair color, eye color, number of warts, size of tonsils, etc. are
good. It is the small number of cretins out there that make you have to be
careful.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
10:39 PM:
And yet Carroll makes public accusations of my having contacted his wife and
my having sexually harassed and raped him. He simply is not someone with
any sense of decency nor respectable morality.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Joel
>And yet Carroll makes public accusations of my having contacted his wife and
>my having sexually harassed and raped him. He simply is not someone with
>any sense of decency nor respectable morality.
He said you sexually harassed and raped *him*?
--
Joel Crump
Joel
>I think there are jerks of every color... but I also believe that *most*
>people, no matter the race, color, religion, shape, size, sexuality, taste,
>smell, hair color, eye color, number of warts, size of tonsils, etc. are
>good. It is the small number of cretins out there that make you have to be
>careful.
Not all people who appear white are, and not all who appear not white
are not.
--
Joel Crump
High Plains Thumper
> High Plains Thumper wrote:
>>>> Being reduced to "our level" would be an improvement to "yours". ;)
>>>
>>> Dream the fuck on.
>>
>> Thanks for verifying my point.
>
> The sad thing is that you're probably older than me.
Which means??? You want to "friend" me?
--
HPT
High Plains Thumper
> High Plains Thumper stated:
>> Joel wrote:
>>> High Plains Thumper wrote:
>>>
>>>>> At least we can say we're not going to be reduced to their
>>>>> level.
>>>>
>>>> Being reduced to "our level" would be an improvement to
>>>> "yours". ;)
>>>
>>> Dream the fuck on.
>>
>> Thanks for verifying my point.
>
> Just the other day you were noting that a common trolling tactic is
> to make claims you know you cannot support... and it is one of your
> favorite trolling tactics to do.
Snit is projecting. Again.
> People are not as stupid as, well, you.
LOL. So Snit thinks that no one can see through his lies, his
deceptions, his history of forged evidence from his website, his history
of trolling CSMA and COLA, his history of sock puppets, to name a few.
It reminds me of my son when he was 2 years old. He'd hide from us by
sticking his head behind furniture with the rest of his body sticking
out in plain sight. He thought we could not see him. So it is with Snit.
--
HPT
High Plains Thumper
> Snit wrote:
>
>>> Your attempt to be WHITE in reply can get shoved up your cracker
>>> ass.
>>
>> Not sure what that means.
>
> I am somewhat racist. I don't deny that. It's in favor of
> non-whites (and you've seen my picture).
http://prescottcomputerguy.org/assets/images/compguy1.jpg
--
HPT
Steve Carroll
> Steve Carroll <fretwiz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Said the guy who didn't mind publicly proving he doesn't know the
> >meaning of the word "axiomatic".
>
> http://www.answers.com/topic/axiomatic
>
> Dictionary: ax·i·o·mat·ic - also ax·i·o·mat·i·cal
> adj.
> Of, relating to, or resembling an axiom; self-evident: "It's
> axiomatic in politics that voters won't throw out a presidential
> incumbent unless they think his challenger will clean house" (Peter
> Grier).
>
> http://www.answers.com/topic/axiom
>
> Dictionary: ax·i·om
> n.
> 1. A self-evident or universally recognized truth; a maxim: "It is
> an economic axiom as old as the hills that goods and services
> can be paid for only with goods and services" (Albert Jay Nock).
> 2. An established rule, principle, or law.
> 3. A self-evident principle or one that is accepted as true without
> proof as the basis for argument; a postulate.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Snit had stated
... something that even *you* admitted was axiomatic
"So many people fail to understand that, but it is axiomatic."
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/a57f2527bf9e0b8a?dmode=source
LOL!
Poor "Joel"... he's already as confused as his mentor, Snit, ever
was;)