VT Shooter, A Mac user....
MuahMan
sad story, wtf has happened to this country.
http://blog.oregonlive.com/breakingnews/2007/04/newspaper_report_shooter_left.html
--
"Mac OS X still remains safer than Windows because its relatively
small installed base is a less attractive target for malicious hackers
than Windows systems. But the number of flaws being discovered in the
operating system is leaving its reputation as a secure alternative to
Windows "in tatters," according to the semiannual update to the SANS
Top 20 list of Internet vulnerabilities. "
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=111047
-hh
> Ugh. They really need to start monitoring people that buy Macs. Such a
> sad story, wtf has happened to this country.
>
Nowhere in that article (which was from AP's feed) does it say what
brand of computer was found by the authorities.
Try again.
-hh
Edwin
Don't you have any common human decency?
Dr. zara
"-hh" <recscub...@huntzinger.com> wrote in message
news:1176833988....@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
It certainly was a mac. Latest pic was on CNN.
Timberwoof
-hh <recscub...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
The little shit is perfectly capable of quibbling his way out of this
one: he did say "(maybe, maybe not)" in the thread title. So he had
absolutely no intention of doing anything other than stirring up some
shit.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com> http://www.timberwoof.com
Level 1 Linux technical support: Read The Fscking Manual!
Level 2 Linux technical support: Write The Fscking Code Yourself!
MuahMan
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1176834692.3...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> Don't you have any common human decency?
>
Edwin
> "-hh" <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote in message
This tragedy is not fodder for computer advocacy.
Dave Fritzinger
> "Edwin" <thorn...@juno.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1176834692.3...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Don't you have any common human decency?
>
> I'm not kidding and yes I do. Read the link. It's fucking sad.
Where in the article you cited was there a mention of what kind of
computer the killer used? I didn't see it, either in the short article
you referenced, or in the longer one that it links to. Show us the
reference to the killer using a Mac, or apologize to the human race
for being a lowlife piece of scum.
--
Dave Fritzinger
Honolulu, HI
Edwin
> "Edwin" <thorn...@juno.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1176834692.3...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Don't you have any common human decency?
>
> I'm not kidding and yes I do. Read the link. It's fucking sad.
I read the link. Nothing there about Macs.
Now apologize and be ashamed.
Mayor of R'lyeh
chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
So what if he did own a Mac? His killing didn't have anything to do
with that.
--
"A president who breaks the law is a threat to the
very structure of our government."
Al Gore
Bill Clinton became eligible for reinstatement to the
bar on January 19,2006 after losing his law license
in 2001 for comitting perjury.
tom_elam@earthlinkdotnet
wrote:
>Ugh. They really need to start monitoring people that buy Macs. Such a
>sad story, wtf has happened to this country.
>
>http://blog.oregonlive.com/breakingnews/2007/04/newspaper_report_shooter_left.html
As a prof I find you to be totally despicable.
Tom Elam
MuahMan
"Mayor of R'lyeh" <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:i68a23llgf0du9qd6...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:00:25 -0400, "MuahMan" <mua...@yahoo.com>
> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>
>>
>>"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote in message
>>news:1176834692.3...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> Don't you have any common human decency?
>>>
>>I'm not kidding and yes I do. Read the link. It's fucking sad.
>
> So what if he did own a Mac? His killing didn't have anything to do
> with that.
>
Some people make it clear they don't want to fit in. They make it clear they
will be different and punish the world. They are "thinking different". This
anti-social behavior that goes hand-in-hand with the use of a Mac is
dangerous and bears watching. That's all I'm saying.
Mayor of R'lyeh
chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>
>"Mayor of R'lyeh" <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:i68a23llgf0du9qd6...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:00:25 -0400, "MuahMan" <mua...@yahoo.com>
>> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>>
>>>
>>>"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote in message
>>>news:1176834692.3...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>> Don't you have any common human decency?
>>>>
>>>I'm not kidding and yes I do. Read the link. It's fucking sad.
>>
>> So what if he did own a Mac? His killing didn't have anything to do
>> with that.
>>
>
>Some people make it clear they don't want to fit in. They make it clear they
>will be different and punish the world. They are "thinking different". This
>anti-social behavior that goes hand-in-hand with the use of a Mac is
>dangerous and bears watching. That's all I'm saying.
Tryng to link Maccies and mass killers is really beyond the pale.
MuahMan
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:43:41 -0400, "MuahMan" <mua...@yahoo.com>
> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>
>>
>>"Mayor of R'lyeh" <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:i68a23llgf0du9qd6...@4ax.com...
>>> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:00:25 -0400, "MuahMan" <mua...@yahoo.com>
>>> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:1176834692.3...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't you have any common human decency?
>>>>>
>>>>I'm not kidding and yes I do. Read the link. It's fucking sad.
>>>
>>> So what if he did own a Mac? His killing didn't have anything to do
>>> with that.
>>>
>>
>>Some people make it clear they don't want to fit in. They make it clear
>>they
>>will be different and punish the world. They are "thinking different".
>>This
>>anti-social behavior that goes hand-in-hand with the use of a Mac is
>>dangerous and bears watching. That's all I'm saying.
>
> Tryng to link Maccies and mass killers is really beyond the pale.
>
I bet not. I bet most pyschos are Mac users. They use Macs simply to not fit
in. There is no other reason to use one.
Edwin
> "Mayor of R'lyeh" <mayor.of.rl...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:i68a23llgf0du9qd6...@4ax.com...
>
> > On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:00:25 -0400, "MuahMan" <muah...@yahoo.com>
> > chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>
> >>news:1176834692.3...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>> Don't you have any common human decency?
>
> >>I'm not kidding and yes I do. Read the link. It's fucking sad.
>
> > So what if he did own a Mac? His killing didn't have anything to do
> > with that.
>
> Some people make it clear they don't want to fit in. They make it clear they
> will be different and punish the world. They are "thinking different". This
> anti-social behavior that goes hand-in-hand with the use of a Mac is
> dangerous and bears watching. That's all I'm saying.
Please stop. Even if you can't see what's wrong with what you're
suggesting. Work it out privately. Get some consoling if you can.
-hh
> > brand of computer was found by the authorities.
>
> > Try again.
>
> It certainly was a mac. Latest pic was on CNN.
Yet no URL is provided to try to prove the claim.
-hh
mmoore321
> Ugh. They really need to start monitoring people that buy Macs. Such a
> sad story, wtf has happened to this country.
>
>
> --
Whatever little entertainment you had as a Wintroll is now over. You
are a sad and pathetic person to take something tragic and make it a
shot at Macintosh users. And as you can see you are alone in your
warped sense of humor. Neither Mac or Windows user find anything funny
about the post. I hope the day never comes that you would have to
experience that kind of sensless tradegy in your life.
I'd say PLONK but Google doesn't have that option. So all I can say is
buzz off, loser!.
Mayor of R'lyeh
chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>
>"Mayor of R'lyeh" <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:5f9a23tvt59qh2rim...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:43:41 -0400, "MuahMan" <mua...@yahoo.com>
>> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>>
>>>
>>>"Mayor of R'lyeh" <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:i68a23llgf0du9qd6...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:00:25 -0400, "MuahMan" <mua...@yahoo.com>
>>>> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:1176834692.3...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Don't you have any common human decency?
>>>>>>
>>>>>I'm not kidding and yes I do. Read the link. It's fucking sad.
>>>>
>>>> So what if he did own a Mac? His killing didn't have anything to do
>>>> with that.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Some people make it clear they don't want to fit in. They make it clear
>>>they
>>>will be different and punish the world. They are "thinking different".
>>>This
>>>anti-social behavior that goes hand-in-hand with the use of a Mac is
>>>dangerous and bears watching. That's all I'm saying.
>>
>> Tryng to link Maccies and mass killers is really beyond the pale.
>>
>
>I bet not. I bet most pyschos are Mac users. They use Macs simply to not fit
>in. There is no other reason to use one.
Please cut it out. You have to know how stupid this is. All you're
doing is giving non-Maccies a blackeye with this kind of shrill
nonsense.
And if you actually believe this tripe then get some help.
--
Why settle for the lesser evil?
Cthulhu for President 2008
-hh
>
> The little shit is perfectly capable of quibbling his way out of this
> one: he did say "(maybe, maybe not)" in the thread title.
Actually, I added that in my response to show that there is
uncertainty.
> So he had absolutely no intention of doing anything other
> than stirring up some shit.
That's been blatantly obvious from the start; this is merely one more
inane troll from Muahman that reenforces the fact that he has *zero*
credibility.
And that doesn't even begin to address how utterly shameful it all
is. If anyone had had any doubts as to just how low "Wintrolls" will
stoop, Muahman has provided a stellar example.
-hh
Steve Carroll
Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:43:41 -0400, "MuahMan" <mua...@yahoo.com>
> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>
> >
> >"Mayor of R'lyeh" <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:i68a23llgf0du9qd6...@4ax.com...
> >> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:00:25 -0400, "MuahMan" <mua...@yahoo.com>
> >> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote in message
> >>>news:1176834692.3...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> >>>>
> >>>> Don't you have any common human decency?
> >>>>
> >>>I'm not kidding and yes I do. Read the link. It's fucking sad.
> >>
> >> So what if he did own a Mac? His killing didn't have anything to do
> >> with that.
> >>
> >
> >Some people make it clear they don't want to fit in. They make it clear they
> >will be different and punish the world. They are "thinking different". This
> >anti-social behavior that goes hand-in-hand with the use of a Mac is
> >dangerous and bears watching. That's all I'm saying.
>
> Tryng to link Maccies and mass killers is really beyond the pale.
Yeah... it's even worse than linking Maccies to people who issue death
threats. My take: Mass murdering can be linked to people committing mass
murder. Issuing death threats can be linked to people who issue death
threats. A person's choice of computer has nothing to do with the kind
of instability that is required to undertake either activity.
--
"None of you can be honest... you are all pathetic." - Snit
"I do not KF people" - Snit
"Not only do I lie about what others are claiming,
I show evidence from the records".-Snit
"You should take one of my IT classes some day." - Snit
Dave Fritzinger
To be fair, I am very pleased that the majority of the Windows
advocates here have, rightly, slammed Muahman, as he deserves. This
shows that, though we disagree with them about computer choice (and,
in some cases, much else), they are reasonable people. I certainly
wouldn't put Windows advocates such as Tom Elam, Edwin and the Mayor
in the same catagory as Zara and Muahman.
-hh
>
> To be fair, I am very pleased that the majority of the Windows
> advocates here have, rightly, slammed Muahman, as he deserves. This
> shows that, though we disagree with them about computer choice (and,
> in some cases, much else), they are reasonable people. I certainly
> wouldn't put Windows advocates such as Tom Elam, Edwin and the Mayor
> in the same catagory as Zara and Muahman.
Agreed.
-hh
Dr. zara
"Dave Fritzinger" <dfri...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1176842984....@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
But I would definitely put you in the same category as the shooter.
C Lund
"MuahMan" <mua...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Ugh. They really need to start monitoring people that buy Macs. Such a
> sad story, wtf has happened to this country.
>
> http://blog.oregonlive.com/breakingnews/2007/04/newspaper_report_shooter_left.
> html
Wow, pratt, you've managed to go so low even the wintrolls have turned
on you.
--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund
MuahMan
"Dr. zara" <dr...@darkspeed.net> wrote in message
news:QLaVh.8230$vD4.3893@bigfe9...
Seriously, If someone of Arab descent sits next to me on an airplane you
better believe I'm worried about him trying to blow me and the plane up.
Why? Because I've seen and heard them do it hundreds of times. When I see a
Mac user in public, I keep my eye on them because they are "thinking
different" and I don't want to be one of their victims. I don't see why this
statement is so out of line. Mac users are by and large anti-social and
that worries me. They are hints as to when someone is going to do
something stupid, dressing all in black, black nail polish, Mac usage, etc.
are all signs a person is about to snap. So all of you can kiss my ass.
Dr. zara
Remember when you expressed the desire to shoot and kill me? If you
forgot - I didn't.
Snit
jDbVh.5845$Zm3....@bignews1.bellsouth.net on 4/17/07 3:13 PM:
People in CSMA often have no idea what liability their online threats and
accusations can lead to... dishonest accusations of rape and inappropriate
sexual advances, claims of illegal drug use, or even of just accusations of
making calls and emails to someone's home based on Usenet debates have been
thrown around in CSMA, for example.
Those who toss around such things in a public forum are putting themselves
in a position to be held legally liable... something they clearly are too
ignorant to understand.
--
€ Nuclear arms are arms
€ OS X's Command+Scroll wheel function does not exist in default XP
€ Technical competence and intelligence are not the same thing
Steve Carroll
"MuahMan" <mua...@yahoo.com> wrote:
This guy was a Compaq user... you can sleep now, you dimwit.
Steve Carroll
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> "Dr. zara" <dr...@darkspeed.net> stated in post
> jDbVh.5845$Zm3....@bignews1.bellsouth.net on 4/17/07 3:13 PM:
>
> >
> > "-hh" <recscub...@huntzinger.com> wrote in message
> > news:1176843977.1...@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> >> On Apr 17, 4:49 pm, Dave Fritzinger <dfrit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> To be fair, I am very pleased that the majority of the Windows
> >>> advocates here have, rightly, slammed Muahman, as he deserves. This
> >>> shows that, though we disagree with them about computer choice (and,
> >>> in some cases, much else), they are reasonable people. I certainly
> >>> wouldn't put Windows advocates such as Tom Elam, Edwin and the Mayor
> >>> in the same catagory as Zara and Muahman.
> >
> > Remember when you expressed the desire to shoot and kill me? If you
> > forgot - I didn't.
> >
> >
> People in CSMA often have no idea what liability their online threats and
> accusations can lead to... dishonest accusations of rape and inappropriate
> sexual advances, claims of illegal drug use, or even of just accusations of
> making calls and emails to someone's home based on Usenet debates have been
> thrown around in CSMA, for example.
>
> Those who toss around such things in a public forum are putting themselves
> in a position to be held legally liable... something they clearly are too
> ignorant to understand.
Go tell your lawyer that in the forum you posted under an alias while
trolling a newsgroup people said things you didn't like. Come back and
talk about that experience. You'll get a really expensive lesson in
reality... and I'll get another laugh at your expense. You can't be this
stupid... you just CAN'T be...
Chu-En Ginsberg
> Ugh. They really need to start monitoring people that buy Macs. Such
> a sad story, wtf has happened to this country.
This from the same cunt who proclaimed that Columbia was brought down by
OS X.
You are an offensive, immoral little wanker who deserves the utter
contempt of everyone here. Apologise immediately or reveal yourself to
be an appalling excuse for a human being.
On a personal note, my heart goes out to all the victims and their
family and friends. You will all be in my thought and prayers this evening.
Chu
--
chuenginsberg at mac dot com
VISTA = Virus Inside - Switch To Apple
Snit
noone-ADEB1B....@newsgroups.comcast.net on 4/17/07 3:25 PM:
You should offer a retraction and apology for those baseless comments and
silly insults, Steve. But you are neither honest nor honorable, so you will
not.
--
€ There is no known malware that attacks OS X in the wild
€ There are two general types of PCs: Macs and PCs (odd naming conventions!)
€ Mac OS X 10.x.x is a version of Mac OS
Dave Fritzinger
> In article <gbSdnXdPv7P_3bjbnZ2dnUVZ_hqdn...@adelphia.com>,
>
>
>
> "MuahMan" <muah...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "Dr. zara" <d...@darkspeed.net> wrote in message
> >news:QLaVh.8230$vD4.3893@bigfe9...
>
> > > "Dave Fritzinger" <dfrit...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
I seem to recall that something similar to this happened during the
Washington, DC sniper shootings, with someone (I forget whom)
suggesting that the shooters were Mac users. It turned out then that
the computer they used was a Sony Viao, IIRC.
I also want to offer my condolences to anyone from Virginia Tech, and
to the families and friends of the victims of this horrendous crime.
Please understand that most of the people who participate in this
group are not like the subhuman trash (that would be you, Muahman and
zara) who are trying to turn this into some sort of Mac vs. PC issue.
It isn't.
Dr. zara
"Snit" <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
news:C24A95FE.7DA9E%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com...
> "Dr. zara" <dr...@darkspeed.net> stated in post
> jDbVh.5845$Zm3....@bignews1.bellsouth.net on 4/17/07 3:13 PM:
>
>>
>> "-hh" <recscub...@huntzinger.com> wrote in message
>> news:1176843977.1...@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Apr 17, 4:49 pm, Dave Fritzinger <dfrit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> To be fair, I am very pleased that the majority of the Windows
>>>> advocates here have, rightly, slammed Muahman, as he deserves. This
>>>> shows that, though we disagree with them about computer choice (and,
>>>> in some cases, much else), they are reasonable people. I certainly
>>>> wouldn't put Windows advocates such as Tom Elam, Edwin and the Mayor
>>>> in the same catagory as Zara and Muahman.
>>
>> Remember when you expressed the desire to shoot and kill me? If you
>> forgot - I didn't.
>>
>>
> People in CSMA often have no idea what liability their online threats and
> accusations can lead to... dishonest accusations of rape and inappropriate
> sexual advances, claims of illegal drug use, or even of just accusations
> of
> making calls and emails to someone's home based on Usenet debates have
> been
> thrown around in CSMA, for example.
>
> Those who toss around such things in a public forum are putting themselves
> in a position to be held legally liable... something they clearly are too
> ignorant to understand.
Amen.
Dr. zara
Why don't you offer your condolences to the other fifty people who were shot
to death yesterday and the fifty today, in the US? You bleeding heart
hypocrite.
MuahMan
Because it's not a news story and they don't get PC points for pointing that
out. It's all posturing on the Maccies part because they all know they are
unstable.
Dr. zara
"Chu-En Ginsberg" <nos...@nospamhere.comINVALID> wrote in message
news:GPmdnUUd7MAj1Ljb...@eclipse.net.uk...
> MuahMan wrote:
>> Ugh. They really need to start monitoring people that buy Macs. Such a
>> sad story, wtf has happened to this country.
>
>
> This from the same cunt who proclaimed that Columbia was brought down by
> OS X.
>
> You are an offensive, immoral little wanker who deserves the utter
> contempt of everyone here. Apologise immediately or reveal yourself to be
> an appalling excuse for a human being.
>
> On a personal note, my heart goes out to all the victims and their family
> and friends. You will all be in my thought and prayers this evening.
Touching.
There were at least a hundred more shooting deaths in this country since
then. Will they all be in your thoughts also? Will you light a candle?
Dave Fritzinger
Keep it up, zero. Keep letting the world know what an insufferable ass
you are...
John
"MuahMan" <mua...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Yc2dnVSdCqfNmbjb...@adelphia.com...
> Ugh. They really need to start monitoring people that buy Macs. Such a
> sad story, wtf has happened to this country.
>
>
> --
> "Mac OS X still remains safer than Windows because its relatively
Actually it has been established that the guy had a new computer with
Windows Vista. Probably all the bugs drove him crazy.
Jesus
> "Mayor of R'lyeh" <mayor.of.rl...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:i68a23llgf0du9qd6...@4ax.com...
>
> > On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:00:25 -0400, "MuahMan" <muah...@yahoo.com>
> > chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>
> >>news:1176834692.3...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>> Don't you have any common human decency?
>
> >>I'm not kidding and yes I do. Read the link. It's fucking sad.
>
> > So what if he did own a Mac? His killing didn't have anything to do
> > with that.
>
> Some people make it clear they don't want to fit in. They make it clear they
> will be different and punish the world. They are "thinking different". This
> anti-social behavior that goes hand-in-hand with the use of a Mac is
> dangerous and bears watching. That's all I'm saying.
So you're saying Mac users are murderers? What the fuck is wrong with
your head? That is so blatantly offensive and despicable you should
retract this whole fucking thread right now and APOLOGIZE to every
single freakin' Mac user you just falsely implied were potential
murderers due to their choice of computer.
John
"Steve Carroll" <no...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:noone-ADEB1B....@newsgroups.comcast.net...
FACT: When Steve went away for a week 95% of BS off-topic trolling went
away!
Jesus
> "Dave Fritzinger" <dfrit...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Fuck off, Zara.
Dave Fritzinger
> "MuahMan" <muah...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:Yc2dnVSdCqfNmbjb...@adelphia.com...
>
> > Ugh. They really need to start monitoring people that buy Macs. Such a
> > sad story, wtf has happened to this country.
>
>
> > --
> > "Mac OS X still remains safer than Windows because its relatively
>
> Actually it has been established that the guy had a new computer with
> Windows Vista. Probably all the bugs drove him crazy.
John, you aren't helping matters at all by responding to Muahman in
kind...
Jesus
> "Dr. zara" <d...@darkspeed.net> wrote in message
>
> news:QLaVh.8230$vD4.3893@bigfe9...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Dave Fritzinger" <dfrit...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Please stop talking. You just keep showing over and over what a
disgusting human being you are.
Jesus
> "MuahMan" <muah...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:Yc2dnVSdCqfNmbjb...@adelphia.com...
>
> > Ugh. They really need to start monitoring people that buy Macs. Such a
> > sad story, wtf has happened to this country.
>
>
> > --
> > "Mac OS X still remains safer than Windows because its relatively
>
> Actually it has been established that the guy had a new computer with
> Windows Vista. Probably all the bugs drove him crazy.
John, you miserable lying, insensitive, son-of-a-bitch fuck-up of a
human being, don't you DARE blame the shooting on ANY FREAKING
OPERATING SYSTEM OR ANY COMPUTER. The callous insensitivity it
must've taken to write that shit astounds me. Get the fuck away from
your computer and have yourself committed.
Jesus
You think that douchebag's goal is to help?
Jesus
> "Steve Carroll" <n...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
>
> news:noone-ADEB1B....@newsgroups.comcast.net...
>
>
>
> > In article <C24A95FE.7DA9E%C...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> > Snit <C...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
> >> "Dr. zara" <d...@darkspeed.net> stated in post
> >> jDbVh.5845$Zm3.1...@bignews1.bellsouth.net on 4/17/07 3:13 PM:
>
> >> > "-hh" <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote in message
Steve showed senitivity and actually condemned MuahMan's post. You
responded by making equally obnoxious and disgusting comments. I
think you just won this contest for being a fucking dick.
Steve, I apologize for anything I may have said about you that was
untrue. John, you can go to hell.
John
"Jesus" <rustybu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1176857849.4...@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Jesus THE DUMBEST ASS of them all. Not only are you technically incompetent
but you failed to notice I responded to Steve based on his trolling of Snit.
Fuck off loser dumbass.
John
Fuck off technically incompetent loser Jesus!
Mayor of R'lyeh
chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>
Actually its only about 30 a day that die from firearms in the US.
True to form most 'news' stories give the number of firearms deaths in
another country but the total murder rate in the US.
Another thing that goes unreported is, that in the US, most murders
are criminals killing other criminals. I have a friend of a friend who
is a retired FBI employee. He once told me that if you stay away from
drugs and people involved in drugs your chances of getting murdered in
the US drop pretty close to zero. Obviously not close enough given the
events in Virginia.
For some reason most people don't really feel the same empathy when
Drug Dealer A kills Drug Dealer B as they do when a madman slaughters
a bunch of innocent kids on the verge of starting their adult lives.
If you have even an iota of humanity rattling around in the black lump
you call a heart you'll be able to figure out why that is.
--
"A president who breaks the law is a threat to the
very structure of our government."
Al Gore
Bill Clinton became eligible for reinstatement to the
bar on January 19,2006 after losing his law license
in 2001 for comitting perjury.
Jesus
> "Jesus" <rustybucket...@gmail.com> wrote in message
You failed to notice I was reacting to that in combination with your
insensitive comments.
Mayor of R'lyeh
chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>
>"Dave Fritzinger" <dfri...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1176842984....@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>> On Apr 17, 10:21 am, -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>>> Timberwoof <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > The little shit is perfectly capable of quibbling his way out of this
>>> > one: he did say "(maybe, maybe not)" in the thread title.
>>>
>>> Actually, I added that in my response to show that there is
>>> uncertainty.
>>>
>>> > So he had absolutely no intention of doing anything other
>>> > than stirring up some shit.
>>>
>>> That's been blatantly obvious from the start; this is merely one more
>>> inane troll from Muahman that reenforces the fact that he has *zero*
>>> credibility.
>>>
>>> And that doesn't even begin to address how utterly shameful it all
>>> is. If anyone had had any doubts as to just how low "Wintrolls" will
>>> stoop, Muahman has provided a stellar example.
>>
>> To be fair, I am very pleased that the majority of the Windows
>> advocates here have, rightly, slammed Muahman, as he deserves. This
>> shows that, though we disagree with them about computer choice (and,
>> in some cases, much else), they are reasonable people. I certainly
>> wouldn't put Windows advocates such as Tom Elam, Edwin and the Mayor
>> in the same catagory as Zara and Muahman.
>
>But I would definitely put you in the same category as the shooter.
>
You're in a category all by yourself. Even the father rapers moved
away from you when you sat down on the bench.
Mayor of R'lyeh
chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>
>"Mayor of R'lyeh" <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:5f9a23tvt59qh2rim...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:43:41 -0400, "MuahMan" <mua...@yahoo.com>
>> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>>
>>>
>>>"Mayor of R'lyeh" <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:i68a23llgf0du9qd6...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:00:25 -0400, "MuahMan" <mua...@yahoo.com>
>>>> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:1176834692.3...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Don't you have any common human decency?
>>>>>>
>>>>>I'm not kidding and yes I do. Read the link. It's fucking sad.
>>>>
>>>> So what if he did own a Mac? His killing didn't have anything to do
>>>> with that.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Some people make it clear they don't want to fit in. They make it clear
>>>they
>>>will be different and punish the world. They are "thinking different".
>>>This
>>>anti-social behavior that goes hand-in-hand with the use of a Mac is
>>>dangerous and bears watching. That's all I'm saying.
>>
>> Tryng to link Maccies and mass killers is really beyond the pale.
>>
>
>I bet not. I bet most pyschos are Mac users. They use Macs simply to not fit
>in. There is no other reason to use one.
Its just another machine. Not even the biggest Apple Kool-Aid guzzler
in here comes close to being a killer. You're really crossing the line
here, Sparky.
John
I never fail to notice that you NEVER read before responding and rank right
up there with the most clueless who have ever posted to this group.
Mayor of R'lyeh
to bless us with the following wisdom:
>
Oh, yeah. Now everything's all better. John meet your seperated at
birth twin brother zara.
-hh
>
> Remember when you expressed the desire to shoot and kill me? If you
> forgot - I didn't.
I don't shoot to kill.
Post your home address and I'll prove it.
-hh
tom_...@earthlink.net
wrote:
They are, and I will. Every night.
Tom Elam
Snit
BoednVEuWa6r6rjb...@netlojix.com on 4/17/07 6:41 PM:
>>>>>> Go tell your lawyer that in the forum you posted under an alias while
>>>>>> trolling a newsgroup people said things you didn't like. Come back and
>>>>>> talk about that experience. You'll get a really expensive lesson in
>>>>>> reality... and I'll get another laugh at your expense. You can't be this
>>>>>> stupid... you just CAN'T be...
>>>
>>>>> FACT: When Steve went away for a week 95% of BS off-topic trolling
>>>>> went
>>>>> away!
>>>
>>>> Steve showed senitivity and actually condemned MuahMan's post. You
>>>> responded by making equally obnoxious and disgusting comments. I
>>>> think you just won this contest for being a fucking dick.
>>>
>>>> Steve, I apologize for anything I may have said about you that was
>>>> untrue. John, you can go to hell.
>>>
>>> Jesus THE DUMBEST ASS of them all. Not only are you technically
>>> incompetent
>>> but you failed to notice I responded to Steve based on his trolling of
>>> Snit.
>>>
>>> Fuck off loser dumbass.
>>
>> You failed to notice I was reacting to that in combination with your
>> insensitive comments.
Look at Steve's comments:
Go tell your lawyer that in the forum you posted under an
alias while trolling a newsgroup people said things you
didn't like. Come back and talk about that experience.
You'll get a really expensive lesson in reality... and I'll
get another laugh at your expense. You can't be this
stupid... you just CAN'T be...
Steve spewed, into a public forum, all sorts of accusations and insults. If
he was honest and honorable he would offer a retraction. Sure, John could
have merely noted that... but look at what good it does to ask Steve to take
responsibility for his actions - he simply does not do so. If that was not
clear before, look at my exchanges with him over the last 24 hours - he
proved it over and over.
Steve does not care how despicable and dishonest his comments are - he
simply will blame others for their content. It is what he calls a "victim
mentality".
--
€ It is OK to email yourself files and store them there for a few weeks
€ No legislation supercedes the Constitution (unless it amends it)
€ Apple's video format is not far from NTSC DVD and good enough for most
Snit
Only the worst of the worst trolls in CSMA would not see this or respond in
a negative way... it really is a very obvious point to anyone with even
moderate common sense.
--
€ A partial subset is not synonymous with the whole
€ A person's actions speak more about him than what others say
€ Apple doesn't provide as many options as the rest of the PC industry
Snit
1176862856....@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com on 4/17/07 7:20 PM:
That is the type comment I was in reference to when I talked about people
crossing a line:
People in CSMA often have no idea what liability their
online threats and accusations can lead to... dishonest
accusations of rape and inappropriate sexual advances,
claims of illegal drug use, or even of just accusations of
making calls and emails to someone's home based on Usenet
debates have been thrown around in CSMA, for example.
Those who toss around such things in a public forum are
putting themselves in a position to be held legally
liable... something they clearly are too ignorant to
understand.
Do yourself a favor and learn from your mistake. Do not repeat it and,
frankly, you should offer a public statement of retraction and apology.
David Fritzinger
Steve Carroll
"John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
Sorry, John... as I see it... you, Snit, Zara and Pratt picked the wrong
kind of thread topic to pull your BS in. Snit shouldn't have been so
stupid to try using his tired old legal threat trolling again... not in
this particular thread. You shouldn't have used the Pratt-like tactic
you used regarding Vista. Zara and Pratt shouldn't be spouting the
ridiculous crap they're spouting. IMO all of you guys need to step back
away from your narcissism and gain a bit of perspective.
--
"None of you can be honest... you are all pathetic." - Snit
"I do not KF people" - Snit
"Not only do I lie about what others are claiming,
I show evidence from the records".-Snit
"You should take one of my IT classes some day." - Snit
Jesus
> "John" <nos...@nospam.com> stated in post
That's great. That's not the point of my post. Steve righfully
condemned Zara's and MuahMan's posts, while John took the same tactic
by blaming Vista for pepole getting shot. Does that not bother you,
Snit? How much of an insensitive dick does John have to be to think
that is at all appropriate? John owes ALL Windows users and ALL the
people affected by that shooting an apology. Why are you more
interested in Steve accusing you of posting under a different alias
than getting John to apologize? Even worse, why are you replying on
behalf of John again?
Jesus
> "Dr. zara" <d...@darkspeed.net> stated in post
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Snit" <C...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
> >news:C24A95FE.7DA9E%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com...> >> jDbVh.5845$Zm3.1...@bignews1.bellsouth.net on 4/17/07 3:13 PM:
>
> >>> "-hh" <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote in message
So that bullshit from the past bothers you more than Muahman and Zara
saying Mac users (THAT INCLUDES YOU) are mentally unstable and are
liable to shoot people?
Snit
1176870255....@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com on 4/17/07 9:24 PM:
...
>>>> accusations can lead to... dishonest accusations of rape and inappropriate
>>>> sexual advances, claims of illegal drug use, or even of just accusations of
>>>> making calls and emails to someone's home based on Usenet debates have been
>>>> thrown around in CSMA, for example.
>>>>
>>>> Those who toss around such things in a public forum are putting themselves
>>>> in a position to be held legally liable... something they clearly are too
>>>> ignorant to understand.
>>
>>> Amen.
>>
>> Only the worst of the worst trolls in CSMA would not see this or respond in
>> a negative way... it really is a very obvious point to anyone with even
>> moderate common sense.
>
> saying Mac users (THAT INCLUDES YOU) are mentally unstable and are
> liable to shoot people?
I support neither... but I think it is worse to point to specific people and
accuse them of rape and the like. To say, for example, that all Windows
users are likely to kill people (clearly not true) is not as bad as me
claiming *you* had killed someone (no reason to think that is true!)
--
€ Deleting from a *Save* dialog is not a sign of well done design
€ A personal computer without an OS is crippled by that lacking
Steve Carroll
Dave Fritzinger <dfri...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 17, 12:22 pm, Steve Carroll <n...@nowhere.net> wrote:
> > In article <gbSdnXdPv7P_3bjbnZ2dnUVZ_hqdn...@adelphia.com>,
> >
> >
> >
> > "MuahMan" <muah...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > "Dr. zara" <d...@darkspeed.net> wrote in message
> > >news:QLaVh.8230$vD4.3893@bigfe9...
> >
> > > > "Dave Fritzinger" <dfrit...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > >news:1176842984....@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> > > >> On Apr 17, 10:21 am, -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
> > > >>> Timberwoof <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote:
> >
> > > >>> > The little shit is perfectly capable of quibbling his way out of
> > > >>> > this
> > > >>> > one: he did say "(maybe, maybe not)" in the thread title.
> >
> > > >>> Actually, I added that in my response to show that there is
> > > >>> uncertainty.
> >
> > > >>> > So he had absolutely no intention of doing anything other
> > > >>> > than stirring up some shit.
> >
> > > >>> That's been blatantly obvious from the start; this is merely one more
> > > >>> inane troll from Muahman that reenforces the fact that he has *zero*
> > > >>> credibility.
> >
> > > >>> And that doesn't even begin to address how utterly shameful it all
> > > >>> is. If anyone had had any doubts as to just how low "Wintrolls" will
> > > >>> stoop, Muahman has provided a stellar example.
> >
> > > >> To be fair, I am very pleased that the majority of the Windows
> > > >> advocates here have, rightly, slammed Muahman, as he deserves. This
> > > >> shows that, though we disagree with them about computer choice (and,
> > > >> in some cases, much else), they are reasonable people. I certainly
> > > >> wouldn't put Windows advocates such as Tom Elam, Edwin and the Mayor
> > > >> in the same catagory as Zara and Muahman.
> >
> > > > But I would definitely put you in the same category as the shooter.
> >
> > > Seriously, If someone of Arab descent sits next to me on an airplane you
> > > better believe I'm worried about him trying to blow me and the plane up.
> > > Why? Because I've seen and heard them do it hundreds of times. When I see
> > > a
> > > Mac user in public, I keep my eye on them because they are "thinking
> > > different" and I don't want to be one of their victims. I don't see why
> > > this
> > > statement is so out of line. Mac users are by and large anti-social and
> > > that worries me. They are hints as to when someone is going to do
> > > something stupid, dressing all in black, black nail polish, Mac usage,
> > > etc.
> > > are all signs a person is about to snap. So all of you can kiss my ass.
> >
> > This guy was a Compaq user... you can sleep now, you dimwit.
>
> I seem to recall that something similar to this happened during the
> Washington, DC sniper shootings, with someone (I forget whom)
> suggesting that the shooters were Mac users. It turned out then that
> the computer they used was a Sony Viao, IIRC.
I believe you're right.
> I also want to offer my condolences to anyone from Virginia Tech, and
> to the families and friends of the victims of this horrendous crime.
> Please understand that most of the people who participate in this
> group are not like the subhuman trash (that would be you, Muahman and
> zara) who are trying to turn this into some sort of Mac vs. PC issue.
> It isn't.
My kids did a performance tonight with their respective school bands and
I just found out that a girl from our neighborhood goes to VT. Luckily
she was not around the shooter at the time. Her parents are absolutely
blown away this happened at their daughter's school. I'm thinking back
to when we had the Columbine shootings... about 3 blocks away from where
I used to attend music rehearsal for a band I was in at the time. The
folks around here are taking this just like back then with the Columbine
shootings. I guess those kind of scars never really heal.
Jesus
> "Jesus" <rustybucket...@gmail.com> stated in post
> 1176870255.873919.97...@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com on 4/17/07 9:24 PM:
...except that didn't happen in this thread, so where is that coming
from?
Snit
> That's great. That's not the point of my post. Steve righfully
> condemned Zara's and MuahMan's posts, while John took the same tactic
> by blaming Vista for pepole getting shot.
If John did that it was not right. Above, however, it looks like John was
responding to the comments I quoted and merely noted:
FACT: When Steve went away for a week 95% of BS off-topic
trolling went away!
The full post of Steve's that John replied to can be seen here:
<http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/a18f3409ffa7708e>
Steve was not condemning Zara or Muahman with those comments, he was
responding to my stating that people should be careful of the accusations
they toss around CSMA. I did not even mention Steve though, as any long
time reader of CSMA knows, he is likely the worst example of people who do
such things. Heck, he seems to take pride in his inappropriate actions.
> Does that not bother you, Snit? How much of an insensitive dick does John
> have to be to think that is at all appropriate? John owes ALL Windows users
> and ALL the people affected by that shooting an apology. Why are you more
> interested in Steve accusing you of posting under a different alias than
> getting John to apologize? Even worse, why are you replying on behalf of John
> again?
If John did as you said I do not approve... but I responded to John's
comments about Steve's comments because Steve was responding to my
comments... there is nothing wrong with that.
Steve Carroll
Jesus <rustybu...@gmail.com> wrote:
No need to apologize... it's just the usual newsgroup ruckus. I do wish
that folks like John, Zara, Snit, Pratt etc. would keep their crap out
of threads based on this kind of content... it's in really poor taste as
I see... but people are who they are.
p.s. By the way... the reason I ask Snit for "PROOF" so often is because
he does it constantly to almost everyone... so I hand it back to him,
(actually, several of us do this). It's not just Snit we do this to...
but he's the worst of the worst.
Snit
noone-8634C3....@newsgroups.comcast.net on 4/17/07 9:18 PM:
>>>> People in CSMA often have no idea what liability their online threats and
>>>> accusations can lead to... dishonest accusations of rape and inappropriate
>>>> sexual advances, claims of illegal drug use, or even of just accusations of
>>>> making calls and emails to someone's home based on Usenet debates have been
>>>> thrown around in CSMA, for example.
>>>>
>>>> Those who toss around such things in a public forum are putting themselves
>>>> in a position to be held legally liable... something they clearly are too
>>>> ignorant to understand.
>>>>
>>> Go tell your lawyer that in the forum you posted under an alias while
>>> trolling a newsgroup people said things you didn't like. Come back and talk
>>> about that experience. You'll get a really expensive lesson in reality...
>>> and I'll get another laugh at your expense. You can't be this stupid... you
>>> just CAN'T be...
>>
>> FACT: When Steve went away for a week 95% of BS off-topic trolling went
>> away!
>>
> Sorry, John... as I see it... you, Snit, Zara and Pratt picked the wrong kind
> of thread topic to pull your BS in. Snit shouldn't have been so stupid to try
> using his tired old legal threat trolling again...
Finally! Steve shows he does feel some guilt over his actions. What other
explanation is there for why you, Steve, would see my comments as any kind
of "threat"? How you react to your feelings on this will say something
about you, Steve. Will you do the honest and honorable thing and apologize
for your actions? I hope so, but I seriously doubt it.
> not in this particular thread.
Are you responding to some other comment of mine from another thread... in
this thread? What? That is odd. What comment by the way? You accuse me
of posting some threat... something I did not do.
Will you do the honest and honorable thing and retract your accusations and
apologize?
> You shouldn't have used the Pratt-like tactic you used regarding Vista. Zara
> and Pratt shouldn't be spouting the ridiculous crap they're spouting. IMO all
> of you guys need to step back away from your narcissism and gain a bit of
> perspective.
What does Vista have to do with your response to my above comments? What do
Zara and Pratt? Are you pulling in yet other threads? You sure are having
a hard time staying focused! Does that have anything to do with your
repeated comments about drugs?
--
€ There is no known malware that attacks OS X in the wild
€ There are two general types of PCs: Macs and PCs (odd naming conventions!)
€ Mac OS X 10.x.x is a version of Mac OS
Snit
> On Apr 18, 12:28 am, Snit <C...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> "Jesus" <rustybucket...@gmail.com> stated in post
>> 1176870255.873919.97...@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com on 4/17/07 9:24 PM:
>> ...
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> People in CSMA often have no idea what liability their online threats and
>>>>>> accusations can lead to... dishonest accusations of rape and
>>>>>> inappropriate sexual advances, claims of illegal drug use, or even of
>>>>>> just accusations of making calls and emails to someone's home based on
>>>>>> Usenet debates have been thrown around in CSMA, for example.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Those who toss around such things in a public forum are putting
>>>>>> themselves in a position to be held legally liable... something they
>>>>>> clearly are too ignorant to understand.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Amen.
>>>>>
>>>> Only the worst of the worst trolls in CSMA would not see this or respond in
>>>> a negative way... it really is a very obvious point to anyone with even
>>>> moderate common sense.
>>>>
>>> So that bullshit from the past bothers you more than Muahman and Zara saying
>>> Mac users (THAT INCLUDES YOU) are mentally unstable and are liable to shoot
>>> people?
>>>
>> I support neither... but I think it is worse to point to specific people and
>> accuse them of rape and the like. To say, for example, that all Windows
>> users are likely to kill people (clearly not true) is not as bad as me
>> claiming *you* had killed someone (no reason to think that is true!)
> ...except that didn't happen in this thread, so where is that coming
> from?
My comments most certainly were in this thread... and they were in response
to someone else talking about an inappropriate accusation or threat... I was
noting that such things are not wise to do in a public forum. And they are
not. Threatening violence against another person, accusing someone of rape,
claiming others use illegal drugs, stating someone has tracked your spouse
down and sent them emails... none of that should be seen in a public forum
and those that do such actions should know that they are opening themselves
up to legal liability.
--
€ Different version numbers refer to different versions
€ Macs are Macs and Apple is still making and selling Macs
€ The early IBM PCs and Commodores shipped with an OS in ROM
Jesus
> "Jesus" <rustybucket...@gmail.com> stated in post
He sure did.
"Actually it has been established that the guy had a new computer with
Windows Vista. Probably all the bugs drove him crazy."
> Above, however, it looks like John was
> responding to the comments I quoted and merely noted:
>
> FACT: When Steve went away for a week 95% of BS off-topic
> trolling went away!
>
> The full post of Steve's that John replied to can be seen here:
> <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/a18f3409ffa7...>
In that post... the point was that John was once again adding nothing,
except he ALSO blamed Vista for innocent people getting shot in an
earlier post in this same thread.
> Steve was not condemning Zara or Muahman with those comments,
Earlier he did.
"Yeah... it's even worse than linking Maccies to people who issue
death
threats. My take: Mass murdering can be linked to people committing
mass
murder. Issuing death threats can be linked to people who issue death
threats. A person's choice of computer has nothing to do with the kind
of instability that is required to undertake either activity."
> he was
> responding to my stating that people should be careful of the accusations
> they toss around CSMA. I did not even mention Steve though, as any long
> time reader of CSMA knows, he is likely the worst example of people who do
> such things. Heck, he seems to take pride in his inappropriate actions.
>
> > Does that not bother you, Snit? How much of an insensitive dick does John
> > have to be to think that is at all appropriate? John owes ALL Windows users
> > and ALL the people affected by that shooting an apology. Why are you more
> > interested in Steve accusing you of posting under a different alias than
> > getting John to apologize? Even worse, why are you replying on behalf of John
> > again?
>
> If John did as you said I do not approve... but I responded to John's
> comments about Steve's comments because Steve was responding to my
> comments... there is nothing wrong with that.
I was complaining that you replied to my post slamming John for his
outrageous post by seemingly excusing John and once again complaining
about Steve. You had made not one mention of John's crap, nor had you
addressed the main point of my original post in this series.
Jesus
> In article <1176857849.445288.165...@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
Sure is...
> p.s. By the way... the reason I ask Snit for "PROOF" so often is because
> he does it constantly to almost everyone... so I hand it back to him,
> (actually, several of us do this). It's not just Snit we do this to...
> but he's the worst of the worst.
'twas a joke, just like Sandman being mean with his "hard" questions
and Sandman being stupid for not knowing about Usenet and how the
Internets go through a series of tubes. :-)
Snit
>>>>> People in CSMA often have no idea what liability their online threats and
>>>>> accusations can lead to... dishonest accusations of rape and inappropriate
>>>>> sexual advances, claims of illegal drug use, or even of just accusations
>>>>> of making calls and emails to someone's home based on Usenet debates have
>>>>> been thrown around in CSMA, for example.
>>>>>
>>>>> Those who toss around such things in a public forum are putting themselves
>>>>> in a position to be held legally liable... something they clearly are too
>>>>> ignorant to understand.
>>>>>
>>>> Go tell your lawyer that in the forum you posted under an alias while
>>>> trolling a newsgroup people said things you didn't like. Come back and talk
>>>> about that experience. You'll get a really expensive lesson in reality...
>>>> and I'll get another laugh at your expense. You can't be this stupid... you
>>>> just CAN'T be...
>>>>
>>> FACT: When Steve went away for a week 95% of BS off-topic trolling went
>>> away!
>>>
>> Steve showed senitivity and actually condemned MuahMan's post. You responded
>> by making equally obnoxious and disgusting comments. I think you just won
>> this contest for being a fucking dick.
>>
>> Steve, I apologize for anything I may have said about you that was untrue.
>> John, you can go to hell.
>>
> No need to apologize... it's just the usual newsgroup ruckus. I do wish that
> folks like John, Zara, Snit, Pratt etc. would keep their crap out of threads
> based on this kind of content... it's in really poor taste as I see... but
> people are who they are.
Steve: I responded to a specific comment about how someone had made (or
allegedly made) a threat of violence against another - in this public forum.
I agreed that such threats should not be made... nor should other similar
threats. Not only are they in poor taste but they leave the person who made
the threat open for the consequences of legal liability.
There was nothing derogatory about *any* of that... it is a simple fact and
I pointed fingers at nobody. You responded by accusing me of having posted
threats and spewed all sorts of hate filled BS against me. Why? I noted
elsewhere the reason is almost certainly your sense of guilt for your own
actions... and that is something you should think about.
> p.s. By the way... the reason I ask Snit for "PROOF" so often is because he
> does it constantly to almost everyone... so I hand it back to him, (actually,
> several of us do this). It's not just Snit we do this to... but he's the worst
> of the worst.
When you make bogus accusations against me, Steve, I do note you have no
proof... and now, based on your recent focus on the importance of
retractions, I ask you to do the honest and honorable thing to retract your
accusations and to apologize for your poor behavior. Please note you are
very, very hesitant to do so. You simply will not act in an honest and
honorable way. As even you noted, I have been pointing that out "all day".
MuahMan
get back to me. There's a reason Mac users are stereo-typed Kool-Aid
Guzzlers by the entire world....
Jesus
> "Jesus" <rustybucket...@gmail.com> stated in post
...and your point is?
> and they were in response
> to someone else talking about an inappropriate accusation or threat... I was
> noting that such things are not wise to do in a public forum. And they are
> not.
Great. Those threats weren't happening in this thread. That's the
point. Instead of addressing MuahMan's and Zara's offensive comments,
you started talking about something else.
> Threatening violence against another person, accusing someone of rape,
> claiming others use illegal drugs, stating someone has tracked your spouse
> down and sent them emails... none of that should be seen in a public forum
> and those that do such actions should know that they are opening themselves
> up to legal liability.
You never actually answered my original question: which bothers you
more, stuff that wasn't happening now about idle threats or MuahMan
and Zara saying you're going to shoot people because you own a Mac?
Jesus
> "Steve Carroll" <n...@nowhere.net> stated in post
> noone-8634C3.22183317042...@newsgroups.comcast.net on 4/17/07 9:18 PM:
>
>
>
> >>>> People in CSMA often have no idea what liability their online threats and
> >>>> accusations can lead to... dishonest accusations of rape and inappropriate
> >>>> sexual advances, claims of illegal drug use, or even of just accusations of
> >>>> making calls and emails to someone's home based on Usenet debates have been
> >>>> thrown around in CSMA, for example.
>
> >>>> Those who toss around such things in a public forum are putting themselves
> >>>> in a position to be held legally liable... something they clearly are too
> >>>> ignorant to understand.
>
> >>> Go tell your lawyer that in the forum you posted under an alias while
> >>> trolling a newsgroup people said things you didn't like. Come back and talk
> >>> about that experience. You'll get a really expensive lesson in reality...
> >>> and I'll get another laugh at your expense. You can't be this stupid... you
> >>> just CAN'T be...
>
> >> FACT: When Steve went away for a week 95% of BS off-topic trolling went
> >> away!
>
> > Sorry, John... as I see it... you, Snit, Zara and Pratt picked the wrong kind
> > of thread topic to pull your BS in. Snit shouldn't have been so stupid to try
> > using his tired old legal threat trolling again...
>
> Finally! Steve shows he does feel some guilt over his actions. What other
> explanation is there for why you, Steve, would see my comments as any kind
> of "threat"?
So if I start screaming that I'm going to fire you, that's not a
"threat" on my part because I can't actually fire you?
> How you react to your feelings on this will say something
> about you, Steve. Will you do the honest and honorable thing and apologize
> for your actions? I hope so, but I seriously doubt it.
>
> > not in this particular thread.
>
> Are you responding to some other comment of mine from another thread... in
> this thread? What? That is odd. What comment by the way? You accuse me
> of posting some threat... something I did not do.
What? He's saying this thread is an inappropriate place to have
bullshit. Surely you agree, given the severity of the subject
material. Or does a thread about Mac users being unstable enough to
kill on large scales not grave enough in your opinion?
> Will you do the honest and honorable thing and retract your accusations and
> apologize?
>
> > You shouldn't have used the Pratt-like tactic you used regarding Vista. Zara
> > and Pratt shouldn't be spouting the ridiculous crap they're spouting. IMO all
> > of you guys need to step back away from your narcissism and gain a bit of
> > perspective.
>
> What does Vista have to do with your response to my above comments?
You realize that was a reply to John, right? That's not you, right?
> What do Zara and Pratt?
They did the same crap as John...
> Are you pulling in yet other threads?'
No, he wasn't.
>You sure are having a hard time staying focused! Does that have anything to do with your
> repeated comments about drugs?
You're having a hard time remembering you're not John. Or so it would
appear...
Steve Carroll
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
Put your delusions away with your trolling, Snit.
> What other
> explanation is there for why you, Steve, would see my comments as any kind
> of "threat"?
Because you have flatly 'threatened' me (and Elizabot) with this exact
BS in the past. Or have you forgotten? Trust me on this... it's the
wrong kind of thread for your crap. Do you really think people didn't
spot you were trolling me here? Geez, you really are out of it.
John
Fuck off loser!
John
Fuck off technically incompetent loser!
Steve Carroll
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
You're a liar, Snit... and we both know I can prove that you were tying
to troll me but it's not worth it... there really is no one left to
prove it to that I feel is worth proving it to. Wise up... wrong thread.
Snit
>>> That's great. That's not the point of my post. Steve righfully
>>> condemned Zara's and MuahMan's posts, while John took the same tactic
>>> by blaming Vista for pepole getting shot.
>>
>> If John did that it was not right.
>
> He sure did.
>
> "Actually it has been established that the guy had a new computer with
> Windows Vista. Probably all the bugs drove him crazy."
I find that to be in very poor taste and to be completely inappropriate. I
do not find it, however, to be as bad as to directly accuse someone of
something like rape or to threaten someone with violence.
>> Above, however, it looks like John was
>> responding to the comments I quoted and merely noted:
>>
>> FACT: When Steve went away for a week 95% of BS off-topic
>> trolling went away!
>>
>> The full post of Steve's that John replied to can be seen here:
>> <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/a18f3409ffa7...>
>
> In that post... the point was that John was once again adding nothing,
> except he ALSO blamed Vista for innocent people getting shot in an
> earlier post in this same thread.
That quote, however, does not even appear in the post of Steve's John was
replying to. Steve was responding to me. Here is the context, including
the full text of the four posts before Steve's!:
----------
Dave Fritzinger:
To be fair, I am very pleased that the majority of the
Windows advocates here have, rightly, slammed Muahman, as he
deserves. This shows that, though we disagree with them
about computer choice (and, in some cases, much else), they
are reasonable people. I certainly wouldn't put Windows
advocates such as Tom Elam, Edwin and the Mayor in the same
catagory as Zara and Muahman.
-hh:
Agreed.
Dr. Zara:
Remember when you expressed the desire to shoot and kill me?
If you forgot - I didn't.
Snit:
People in CSMA often have no idea what liability their
online threats and accusations can lead to... dishonest
accusations of rape and inappropriate sexual advances,
claims of illegal drug use, or even of just accusations of
making calls and emails to someone's home based on Usenet
debates have been thrown around in CSMA, for example. Those
who toss around such things in a public forum are putting
themselves in a position to be held legally liable...
something they clearly are too ignorant to understand.
Steve Carroll:
Go tell your lawyer that in the forum you posted under an
alias while trolling a newsgroup people said things you
didn't like. Come back and talk about that experience.
You'll get a really expensive lesson in reality... and I'll
get another laugh at your expense. You can't be this
stupid... you just CAN'T be...
----------
Steve jumped in and made all sorts of accusations against me and spewed his
normal insulting BS into CMSA. He also quoted me out of context and
attributed a quote to me that I did not write. There really is no good
defense for Steve's little fit there.
>> Steve was not condemning Zara or Muahman with those comments,
>
> Earlier he did.
>
> "Yeah... it's even worse than linking Maccies to people who issue death
> threats. My take: Mass murdering can be linked to people committing mass
> murder. Issuing death threats can be linked to people who issue death threats.
> A person's choice of computer has nothing to do with the kind of instability
> that is required to undertake either activity."
How is that relevant to Steve's little rant, above?
>
>> he was responding to my stating that people should be careful of the
>> accusations they toss around CSMA. I did not even mention Steve though, as
>> any long time reader of CSMA knows, he is likely the worst example of people
>> who do such things. Heck, he seems to take pride in his inappropriate
>> actions.
>>
>>> Does that not bother you, Snit? How much of an insensitive dick does John
>>> have to be to think that is at all appropriate? John owes ALL Windows users
>>> and ALL the people affected by that shooting an apology. Why are you more
>>> interested in Steve accusing you of posting under a different alias than
>>> getting John to apologize? Even worse, why are you replying on behalf of
>>> John again?
>>>
>> If John did as you said I do not approve... but I responded to John's
>> comments about Steve's comments because Steve was responding to my
>> comments... there is nothing wrong with that.
>
> I was complaining that you replied to my post slamming John for his outrageous
> post by seemingly excusing John and once again complaining about Steve. You
> had made not one mention of John's crap, nor had you addressed the main point
> of my original post in this series.
Perhaps you have become confused as to what part of the sub-thread I was
responding to? Your comments are completely incorrect - and it is not your
norm to lie. Here is the Google page which points to the sub-thread:
<http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/browse_frm/thread/91a5
3578ce4d80b1/a18f3409ffa7708e>. And here is a screen shot...
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/thread.gif>
Note that neither you nor John had posted in that sub-thread before Steve
threw his public fit about my comments. His post is #12 in the image.
Shall I be receiving a retraction and an apology from you now? :)
--
€ If A = B then B = A (known as the "symmetric property of equality")
€ Incest and sex are not identical (only a pervert would disagree)
€ One can be actually guilty of a crime but neither tried nor convicted
Snit
There simply was no reason for your little tantrum, above, Steve. At least
you have finally shown some signs of guilt over your actions; I do hope you
will be honest and honorable and retract those accusations and insults and
offer apologies.
Snit
>>>> I support neither... but I think it is worse to point to specific people
>>>> and accuse them of rape and the like. To say, for example, that all
>>>> Windows users are likely to kill people (clearly not true) is not as bad as
>>>> me claiming *you* had killed someone (no reason to think that is true!)
>>> ...except that didn't happen in this thread, so where is that coming
>>> from?
>>
>> My comments most certainly were in this thread...
>
> ...and your point is?
>
>
>> and they were in response
>> to someone else talking about an inappropriate accusation or threat... I was
>> noting that such things are not wise to do in a public forum. And they are
>> not.
>
> Great. Those threats weren't happening in this thread. That's the
> point. Instead of addressing MuahMan's and Zara's offensive comments,
> you started talking about something else.
I was responding the post I responded to... not ones five or so "levels"
back in the thread. I had not even read Zara's other posts! Zara talked
about public threats... my comments were appropriate and in response to that
comments.
>> Threatening violence against another person, accusing someone of rape,
>> claiming others use illegal drugs, stating someone has tracked your spouse
>> down and sent them emails... none of that should be seen in a public forum
>> and those that do such actions should know that they are opening themselves
>> up to legal liability.
>
> You never actually answered my original question: which bothers you
> more, stuff that wasn't happening now about idle threats
How do you know the threats were idle? People at Virginia Tech who were in
classes with the murderer noted that he wrote in ways where, in retrospect,
they may have been able to see this coming. Those students believed his
writing was harmless ... even if not something they approved of. They will
be living with the guilt of not having done something before it was too
late. I feel bad for them as well... there are many victims at VT right
now.
> or MuahMan and Zara saying you're going to shoot people because you own a Mac?
From above:
I support neither... but I think it is worse to point to
specific people and accuse them of rape and the like. To
say, for example, that all Windows users are likely to kill
people (clearly not true) is not as bad as me claiming *you*
had killed someone (no reason to think that is true!)
So which bothers me more: statements against Mac users which do not imply a
threat of violence nor point to direct accusations of specific actions
against any one person *or* making direct attacks and specific accusations
against someone... well, for me the answer is easy: the direct accusations
and threats are worse.
Really, though, why would we debate over which is worse? *Both* are
despicable and inappropriate... if you disagree with my assessment and think
the order is reversed I have no problem with that. I do find it sad,
however, if you excuse either.
--
€ OS X is partially based on BSD (esp. FreeBSD)
€ OS X users are at far less risk of malware then are XP users
€ Photoshop is an image editing application
George Graves
(in article <1176842984....@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>):
> On Apr 17, 10:21 am, -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>> Timberwoof <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The little shit is perfectly capable of quibbling his way out of this
>>> one: he did say "(maybe, maybe not)" in the thread title.
>>
>> Actually, I added that in my response to show that there is
>> uncertainty.
>>
>>> So he had absolutely no intention of doing anything other
>>> than stirring up some shit.
>>
>> That's been blatantly obvious from the start; this is merely one more
>> inane troll from Muahman that reenforces the fact that he has *zero*
>> credibility.
>>
>> And that doesn't even begin to address how utterly shameful it all
>> is. If anyone had had any doubts as to just how low "Wintrolls" will
>> stoop, Muahman has provided a stellar example.
>
> To be fair, I am very pleased that the majority of the Windows
> advocates here have, rightly, slammed Muahman, as he deserves. This
> shows that, though we disagree with them about computer choice (and,
> in some cases, much else), they are reasonable people. I certainly
> wouldn't put Windows advocates such as Tom Elam, Edwin and the Mayor
> in the same catagory as Zara and Muahman.
> --
> Dave Fritzinger
> Honolulu, HI
>
No one in their right minds would. MooMan and zara are the very dregs of
trolldom, and that's cutting them both a great deal of slack.
George Graves
(in article <jDbVh.5845$Zm3....@bignews1.bellsouth.net>):
>
> "-hh" <recscub...@huntzinger.com> wrote in message
> news:1176843977.1...@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>> On Apr 17, 4:49 pm, Dave Fritzinger <dfrit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> To be fair, I am very pleased that the majority of the Windows
>>> advocates here have, rightly, slammed Muahman, as he deserves. This
>>> shows that, though we disagree with them about computer choice (and,
>>> in some cases, much else), they are reasonable people. I certainly
>>> wouldn't put Windows advocates such as Tom Elam, Edwin and the Mayor
>>> in the same catagory as Zara and Muahman.
>
> Remember when you expressed the desire to shoot and kill me? If you
> forgot - I didn't.
>
>
Give us a break, zara-thing. You accuse everybody of that. Truth is, nobody
gives you enough of a thought to actually have any real animosity toward you.
You're like the buzzing of flies in people's ears. Annoying, but not enough
to even remember ten minutes later.
George Graves
(in article <Z_2dncCwl-ckvrjb...@adelphia.com>):
>
> "Mayor of R'lyeh" <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:i68a23llgf0du9qd6...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:00:25 -0400, "MuahMan" <mua...@yahoo.com>
>> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>>
>>>
>>> "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1176834692.3...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>> Don't you have any common human decency?
>>>>
>>> I'm not kidding and yes I do. Read the link. It's fucking sad.
>>
>> So what if he did own a Mac? His killing didn't have anything to do
>> with that.
>>
>
> Some people make it clear they don't want to fit in. They make it clear they
> will be different and punish the world. They are "thinking different". This
> anti-social behavior that goes hand-in-hand with the use of a Mac is
> dangerous and bears watching. That's all I'm saying.
>
Stone fucking crazy!
George Graves
(in article <5baa2316csh0r8cig...@4ax.com>):
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:54:29 -0400, "MuahMan" <mua...@yahoo.com>
> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>
>>
>> "Mayor of R'lyeh" <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:5f9a23tvt59qh2rim...@4ax.com...
>>> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:43:41 -0400, "MuahMan" <mua...@yahoo.com>
>>> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Mayor of R'lyeh" <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:i68a23llgf0du9qd6...@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:00:25 -0400, "MuahMan" <mua...@yahoo.com>
>>>>> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:1176834692.3...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Don't you have any common human decency?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not kidding and yes I do. Read the link. It's fucking sad.
>>>>>
>>>>> So what if he did own a Mac? His killing didn't have anything to do
>>>>> with that.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Some people make it clear they don't want to fit in. They make it clear
>>>> they
>>>> will be different and punish the world. They are "thinking different".
>>>> This
>>>> anti-social behavior that goes hand-in-hand with the use of a Mac is
>>>> dangerous and bears watching. That's all I'm saying.
>>>
>>> Tryng to link Maccies and mass killers is really beyond the pale.
>>>
>>
>> I bet not. I bet most pyschos are Mac users. They use Macs simply to not
>> fit
>> in. There is no other reason to use one.
>
> Please cut it out. You have to know how stupid this is. All you're
> doing is giving non-Maccies a blackeye with this kind of shrill
> nonsense.
> And if you actually believe this tripe then get some help.
Lord knows, this fucker needs it!
Snit
>>>>>> People in CSMA often have no idea what liability their online threats and
>>>>>> accusations can lead to... dishonest accusations of rape and
>>>>>> inappropriate sexual advances, claims of illegal drug use, or even of
>>>>>> just accusations of making calls and emails to someone's home based on
>>>>>> Usenet debates have been thrown around in CSMA, for example.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Those who toss around such things in a public forum are putting
>>>>>> themselves in a position to be held legally liable... something they
>>>>>> clearly are too ignorant to understand.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Go tell your lawyer that in the forum you posted under an alias while
>>>>> trolling a newsgroup people said things you didn't like. Come back and
>>>>> talk about that experience. You'll get a really expensive lesson in
>>>>> reality... and I'll get another laugh at your expense. You can't be this
>>>>> stupid... you just CAN'T be...
>>>>>
>>>> FACT: When Steve went away for a week 95% of BS off-topic trolling went
>>>> away!
>>>>
>>> Sorry, John... as I see it... you, Snit, Zara and Pratt picked the wrong
>>> kind of thread topic to pull your BS in. Snit shouldn't have been so stupid
>>> to try using his tired old legal threat trolling again...
>>>
>> Finally! Steve shows he does feel some guilt over his actions. What other
>> explanation is there for why you, Steve, would see my comments as any kind of
>> "threat"?
>
> So if I start screaming that I'm going to fire you, that's not a
> "threat" on my part because I can't actually fire you?
What does that have to do with anything? I noted that *in general* it is
not wise to spew accusations or threats against others where you cross a
line and open yourself up for potential legal liability. Zara commented on
someone threatening personal harm... I included accusations of rape and the
like. Such things have no place in a public forum. Steve took that
personal and felt it was a threat against him. I stated no threat against
*anyone*.
>> How you react to your feelings on this will say something
>> about you, Steve. Will you do the honest and honorable thing and apologize
>> for your actions? I hope so, but I seriously doubt it.
>>
>>> not in this particular thread.
>>
>> Are you responding to some other comment of mine from another thread... in
>> this thread? What? That is odd. What comment by the way? You accuse me
>> of posting some threat... something I did not do.
>
> What? He's saying this thread is an inappropriate place to have
> bullshit. Surely you agree, given the severity of the subject
> material. Or does a thread about Mac users being unstable enough to
> kill on large scales not grave enough in your opinion?
See my other post where I talk about how you seem to be thinking of another
sub-thread.
>> Will you do the honest and honorable thing and retract your accusations and
>> apologize?
>>
>>> You shouldn't have used the Pratt-like tactic you used regarding Vista. Zara
>>> and Pratt shouldn't be spouting the ridiculous crap they're spouting. IMO
>>> all of you guys need to step back away from your narcissism and gain a bit
>>> of perspective.
>>
>> What does Vista have to do with your response to my above comments?
>
> You realize that was a reply to John, right? That's not you, right?
Sure. Still, you have clearly become confused as to what sub-thread you are
responding to. Again, from Google:
----------
Dave Fritzinger:
To be fair, I am very pleased that the majority of the
Windows advocates here have, rightly, slammed Muahman, as he
deserves. This shows that, though we disagree with them
about computer choice (and, in some cases, much else), they
are reasonable people. I certainly wouldn't put Windows
advocates such as Tom Elam, Edwin and the Mayor in the same
catagory as Zara and Muahman.
-hh:
Agreed.
Dr. Zara:
Remember when you expressed the desire to shoot and kill me?
If you forgot - I didn't.
Snit:
People in CSMA often have no idea what liability their
online threats and accusations can lead to... dishonest
accusations of rape and inappropriate sexual advances,
claims of illegal drug use, or even of just accusations of
making calls and emails to someone's home based on Usenet
debates have been thrown around in CSMA, for example. Those
who toss around such things in a public forum are putting
themselves in a position to be held legally liable...
something they clearly are too ignorant to understand.
Steve Carroll:
Go tell your lawyer that in the forum you posted under an
alias while trolling a newsgroup people said things you
didn't like. Come back and talk about that experience.
You'll get a really expensive lesson in reality... and I'll
get another laugh at your expense. You can't be this
stupid... you just CAN'T be...
John:
FACT: When Steve went away for a week 95% of BS off-topic
trolling went away!
Jesus:
Steve showed senitivity and actually condemned MuahMan's
post. You responded by making equally obnoxious and
disgusting comments. I think you just won this contest for
being a fucking dick. Steve, I apologize for anything I may
have said about you that was untrue. John, you can go to
hell.
----------
Note that in the comments of Steve's that John is referencing Steve did not
do as you say he did.
>> What do Zara and Pratt?
>
> They did the same crap as John...
>
>> Are you pulling in yet other threads?'
>
> No, he wasn't.
>
>> You sure are having a hard time staying focused! Does that have anything to
>> do with your repeated comments about drugs?
>>
> You're having a hard time remembering you're not John. Or so it would
> appear...
I commented about Steve's inappropriate comments... and have noted how you
are confused as to what sub-thread things were stated in.
--
€ Different viruses are still different even if in the same "family"
€ Dreamweaver and GoLive are professional web development applications
€ Dreamweaver, being the #1 pro web design tool, is used by many pros
Snit
> That's great. That's not the point of my post. Steve righfully
> condemned Zara's and MuahMan's posts, while John took the same tactic
> by blaming Vista for pepole getting shot. Does that not bother you,
> Snit? How much of an insensitive dick does John have to be to think
> that is at all appropriate? John owes ALL Windows users and ALL the
> people affected by that shooting an apology. Why are you more
> interested in Steve accusing you of posting under a different alias
> than getting John to apologize? Even worse, why are you replying on
> behalf of John again?
>
>
> Fuck off loser!
If what Jesus quoted about you was correct, John, I would agree your
comments were in poor taste and were inappropriate... but they also are
irrelevant to the fact that you pointed out that Steve's little fit was not
appropriate. I am not sure why Jesus is confusing the issues, other than
that he may be getting his sub-threads confused.
Snit
Steve: the fact you feel guilty is clear. Why not just act in an honest and
honorable way and offer the retractions and apologies even you clearly know
you should?
There was no threat against you in my comments, nor anything that a
reasonable person would disagree with - threats of violence, accusations of
rape and other sex crimes, and even accusations of taking debates out of
CSMA and bringing them to unwanted emails to loved ones and making unwanted
phone calls - *none* of these things are appropriate. Do you disagree?
Maybe I should use other examples if those offend you... it is also wrong to
suggest or insinuate that you will contact someone's employer and do things
that could effect someone's livelihood... *those* type things are just
wrong... as bad as making grossly tasteless and inappropriate comments about
how all users of any computer system might end up being killers.
There is nothing a reasonable person would be offended by in those comments,
Steve... but your guilty conscience is ripping you apart. Frankly I am
happy to see signs that you actually such a conscience... it is a rare sign
of decency hiding somewhere within you... even if you cannot admit it in a
straight forward way.
-hh
> "-hh" <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> stated:
> > Troll " zara" <d...@darkspeed.net> wrote:
>
> >> Remember when you expressed the desire to shoot and kill me? If you
> >> forgot - I didn't.
>
>
> > Post your home address and I'll prove it.
>
> > -hh
>
> That is the type comment I was in reference to when I talked about people
> crossing a line...
Hardly: the 'threat' that Zara claims to be terrified of was a squirt
from a garden hose.
-hh
Wally
"Snit" <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
<snip>
> What does that have to do with anything? I noted that *in general* it is
> not wise to spew accusations or threats against others where you cross a
> line and open yourself up for potential legal liability. Zara commented on
> someone threatening personal harm... I included accusations of rape and the
> like. Such things have no place in a public forum.
Look up 'Metaphor" Snit!
"We're all your victims... you rape csma on a regular basis."
"You have raped this NG" -Steve Carroll
Outside of using the term thus you have *not* been accused of being a rapist
or of raping anyone in particular!
And you know that only too well Snit!
http://tinyurl.com/2m8zk6
"In the past, Steve has stated such things as:
"See, I'm not the guy who keeps continually raping the NG with new
threads that are nothing but BS, you are.....
.....So not only is Steve lying, but - based on *his* criteria, he is
"raping" the news group (I do not agree with the use of the word rape in
this context, but that is what Steve calls his activity)."-Snit
But the worst of it is how you *chose* to interpret comments made by
Elizabot...
http://tinyurl.com/2snxj4
"She will continue to share her fantasizes about me, like when she
insinuated I was calling her and outright blamed me for raping her (and
others)."-Snit
"... raping her (and others)." good grief what could she have said?
Yup!...."Therefore, Snit is "raping" the newsgroup."-Elizabot
Elizabot even explained that it was a metaphor...
http://tinyurl.com/yqcv33
"Notice the quotation marks? It was a metaphor."-Elizabot
Your victim mentality is fooling nobody Snit! (I hope!)
<snip>
John
"Steve Carroll" <no...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:noone-F98E98....@newsgroups.comcast.net...
with his sick obsession and pathological need to troll Snit.
Dr. zara
"Dave Fritzinger" <dfri...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1176857335....@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 17, 2:44 pm, "John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>> "MuahMan" <muah...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:Yc2dnVSdCqfNmbjb...@adelphia.com...
>>
>> > Ugh. They really need to start monitoring people that buy Macs. Such
>> > a
>> > sad story, wtf has happened to this country.
>>
>> >http://blog.oregonlive.com/breakingnews/2007/04/newspaper_report_shoo...
>>
>> > --
>> > "Mac OS X still remains safer than Windows because its relatively
>>
>> Actually it has been established that the guy had a new computer with
>> Windows Vista. Probably all the bugs drove him crazy.
>
> kind...
Golly, Dave - you sound so--understanding. Fucking hypocrite.
Dr. zara
> On Apr 17, 8:44 pm, "John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>> "MuahMan" <muah...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:Yc2dnVSdCqfNmbjb...@adelphia.com...
>>
>> > Ugh. They really need to start monitoring people that buy Macs. Such
>> > a
>> > sad story, wtf has happened to this country.
>>
>> >http://blog.oregonlive.com/breakingnews/2007/04/newspaper_report_shoo...
>>
>> > --
>> > "Mac OS X still remains safer than Windows because its relatively
>>
>> Actually it has been established that the guy had a new computer with
>> Windows Vista. Probably all the bugs drove him crazy.
>
> human being, don't you DARE blame the shooting on ANY FREAKING
> OPERATING SYSTEM OR ANY COMPUTER. The callous insensitivity it
> must've taken to write that shit astounds me. Get the fuck away from
> your computer and have yourself committed.
Yeah!! Tell him.
Steve Carroll
Wally <wa...@wally.world.net> wrote:
For some reason, Snit is so delusional he appears to believe his old
game isn't being spotted. He's obviously narcissistic enough that he'll
drag his crap into a thread like this; I'm surprised to see John follow.
Snit
1176893259....@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com on 4/18/07 3:47 AM:
A threat of violence made in a public forum is simply not appropriate.
Snit
> In article <C24C1EAC.32AC7%wa...@wally.world.net>,
> Wally <wa...@wally.world.net> wrote:
>
>> On 18/4/07 1:44 PM, in article C24AFE3D.7DB4F%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com,
>> "Snit" <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> What does that have to do with anything? I noted that *in general* it is
>>> not wise to spew accusations or threats against others where you cross a
>>> line and open yourself up for potential legal liability. Zara commented on
>>> someone threatening personal harm... I included accusations of rape and the
>>> like. Such things have no place in a public forum.
...
> For some reason, Snit is so delusional he appears to believe his old
> game isn't being spotted. He's obviously narcissistic enough that he'll
> drag his crap into a thread like this; I'm surprised to see John follow.
I asked you a question, Steve, and you ran. Will you answer it now:
threats of violence, accusations of rape and other sex
crimes, and even accusations of taking debates out of CSMA
and bringing them to unwanted emails to loved ones and
making unwanted phone calls - *none* of these things are
appropriate. Do you disagree?
Since those examples bothered you I offered others:
Maybe I should use other examples if those offend you... it
is also wrong to suggest or insinuate that you will contact
someone's employer and do things that could effect someone's
livelihood... *those* type things are just wrong... as bad
as making grossly tasteless and inappropriate comments about
how all users of any computer system might end up being
killers.
If you do not like that example of bad behavior we can look at others: how
about tracking someone down to their home address and posting the names of
their neighbors... would you say that was inappropriate? As bad as the
grotesque comments about all users of a computer system?
In the end, of course, it does not matter how you rank each of those things
exactly... a reasoned person could disagree on how bad each is, but only a
person of no morals would excuse any of those actions.
Again, there is no threat - no accusation against anyone - I am just noting
how there are things that do not belong in a public forum and that people
who do many of those things are all opening themselves up to the risk of
being held accountable by the law. There are lines that should not be
crossed in a pubic forum.
Do you disagree? Do you think any of those listed things are acceptable?
Excusable? If so, Steve, that says a lot about your sense of morality... or
lack thereof. No reasonable person would say any of the actions I listed
are reasonable.
--
€ The tilde in an OS X path does *not* mean "the hard drive only"
€ Things which are not the same are not "identical"
€ The word "ouch" is not a sure sign of agreement.
Dave Fritzinger
> "Dave Fritzinger" <dfrit...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
zero, in case you haven't realized, this is not a subject that is
appropriate for Mac vs. PC advocacy. I realize that you are
exceedingly stupid, and have the maturity of a 2 year old, but one
would think that by this time, even someone with the sensitivity of a
rock (that would be you) would understand this. Now, why don't you
just shut up. Perhaps if you contemplate what a low-life piece of
trash you are, you can turn this into a learning experience. However,
I'm not holding my breath.
-hh
>
> A threat of violence made in a public forum is simply not appropriate.
I agree. Unfortunately, you're assumption that it applies here is
false.
Bye-bye Snit.
-hh