Another Mac hater... right?
Snit
eat_UI_refinements_under_the_hood>
-----
One thing missing in Snow Leopard: support for pre-Intel
Macs. Come on, you knew it was going to happen sometime, and
it's been more than three and a half years since Apple made
the CPU switch. Still, I'm sad that the perfectly capable
Power Mac G5 I've used for years won't be joining this
bright, shining future. And I know there are many such
workhorses in graphic design studios, video production houses
and other businesses still happily chugging along. That's
progress, I guess.
-----
How dare he!
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
I'm not sure why you label him a Mac hater, he just seems to think
it's sad that Apple isn't supporting PPC with Snow Leopard. I kind of
agree with that. How you go from that to "Mac hater" is beyond me.
--
Sandman[.net]
MuahMan
> In article <C6B98221.43D18%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> > eat_UI_refinements_under_the_hood>
> > -----
> > One thing missing in Snow Leopard: support for pre-Intel
> > Macs. Come on, you knew it was going to happen sometime, and
> > it's been more than three and a half years since Apple made
> > the CPU switch. Still, I'm sad that the perfectly capable
> > Power Mac G5 I've used for years won't be joining this
> > bright, shining future. And I know there are many such
> > workhorses in graphic design studios, video production houses
> > and other businesses still happily chugging along. That's
> > progress, I guess.
> > -----
>
> > How dare he!
>
> I'm not sure why you label him a Mac hater, he just seems to think
> it's sad that Apple isn't supporting PPC with Snow Leopard. I kind of
> agree with that. How you go from that to "Mac hater" is beyond me.
>
> --
> Sandman[.net]
Anytime someone says something slightly anti-Apple is considered
heresy and said person is to be immediately banished from the Church
Of Mac. They don't fuck around in that cult!
Jimmyjohn
"Sandman" <m...@sandman.net> wrote in message
news:mr-6458B6.21...@News.Individual.NET...
Got dictionary, Norseman? Look up, "facetious". You were being facetious,
right?
Snit
8/25/09 12:48 PM:
I do not disagree that it is beyond you. OK.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
PM:
Hey, such an obvious thing really might be beyond him. :)
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
ea1cf9c7-ed4a-46a7...@w6g2000yqw.googlegroups.com on 8/25/09
1:11 PM:
Specifically, look at the comments and attacks directed at JohnQ for saying
very much the same thing. Got to the point where people were demanding he
even owns the machine, were telling him he had to somehow prove the
salesperson who sold him the machine existed, etc. Completely absurd.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Sandman
"Jimmyjohn" <ig...@verizon.com> wrote:
Uhm...
"treating serious issues with deliberately inappropriate
humor; flippant."
I fail to see both the serious issue and the humor, really :)
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
It sure was! :)
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
8/25/09 1:43 PM:
<http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/facetious>
-----
Playfully jocular; humorous
-----
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Chance Furlong
"Jimmyjohn" <ig...@verizon.com> wrote:
> "Sandman" <m...@sandman.net> wrote in message
> news:mr-6458B6.21...@News.Individual.NET...
> >
> > I'm not sure why you label him a Mac hater, he just seems to think
> > it's sad that Apple isn't supporting PPC with Snow Leopard. I kind of
> > agree with that. How you go from that to "Mac hater" is beyond me.
>
> Got dictionary, Norseman? Look up, "facetious." You were being facetious,
> right?
Jealous of the Norse?
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
Thanks for the alternate definition, but I still fail to see both the
serious matter and my humorous treatment of it.
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
8/25/09 10:08 PM:
I think you just have to accept you are rather lost on this one... on
multiple levels by now. :)
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
Oh, I have totally accepted that, given my continuing insistence that
I don't understand and can't see what you are seeing. I can't help to
also notice that you haven't really stepped up and explained neither
the serious issue nor the humor coming from me. As I'm sure this was
just a slight oversight on your part, I'm confident that your followup
to this will be an explanation to what I am missing, further
humiliating me (or rather, humiliating me, I don't fell all that
humiliated right now since I can't see what you claim to be seeing).
Because I know for a fact that there is no chance you WON'T explain
this and expose yourself as having no idea what the serious issue was
and having no idea what the supposed humor was.
So, consider me fully prepared to be publicly humiliated about this
issue, where I was "lost" and you were not, which you will show me
now. Right? :-D
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
8/25/09 11:21 PM:
Once you need to joke explained, it sorta loses the humor. In any case,
your misunderstanding has been explained elsewhere in this thread - and the
fact you do not get it, well, that is a bit funny... how anyone who has been
a regular to CSMA for any length of time could not get it is beyond me.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> I'm not sure why you label him a Mac hater, he just seems to think
> >>>>>>> it's
> >>>>>>> sad that Apple isn't supporting PPC with Snow Leopard. I kind of
> >>>>>>> agree
> >>>>>>> with that. How you go from that to "Mac hater" is beyond me.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> Got dictionary, Norseman? Look up, "facetious". You were being
> >>>>>> facetious, right?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for the alternate definition, but I still fail to see both the
> >>> serious matter and my humorous treatment of it.
> >>
> >> I think you just have to accept you are rather lost on this one... on
> >> multiple levels by now. :)
> >
> > Oh, I have totally accepted that, given my continuing insistence that
> > I don't understand and can't see what you are seeing. I can't help to
> > also notice that you haven't really stepped up and explained neither
> > the serious issue nor the humor coming from me. As I'm sure this was
> > just a slight oversight on your part, I'm confident that your followup
> > to this will be an explanation to what I am missing, further
> > humiliating me (or rather, humiliating me, I don't fell all that
> > humiliated right now since I can't see what you claim to be seeing).
> >
> > Because I know for a fact that there is no chance you WON'T explain
> > this and expose yourself as having no idea what the serious issue was
> > and having no idea what the supposed humor was.
> >
> > So, consider me fully prepared to be publicly humiliated about this
> > issue, where I was "lost" and you were not, which you will show me
> > now. Right? :-D
>
> Once you need to joke explained, it sorta loses the humor.
What joke are you in reference to? See, that's were I need help, I had
immense problems locating this supposed joke, or humor. I realized
that this was a shortcoming on my part, and you two had a good laugh
at my expense. When you were done laughing, I inquired as to what the
joke was, so knew just in what manner I had been humiliated, so I
could be educated and successfully stay away from such an occasion in
the future. So far you have been reluctant to divulge that information
for reasons unknown by only referencing it vaguely and without the
specificity that I requested.
Since I have now asked politely several times and you still refuse to
explain further to me I am beginning to suspect that you are in fact
not unwilling to explain, you are in fact unable to explain how the
word "facetious" applied to my question to you.
> In any case, your misunderstanding has been explained elsewhere in
> this thread
What "misunderstanding" are you in reference to now, when the topic at
hand is clearly the supposed humorous or "playfully jocular" behaviour
on my part I supposedly displayed. I say "supposed" now because the
understanding that you were correct and I had just missed it is being
gradually replaced by an understanding that there was no such
behaviour on my part and your reluctance to explain your position and
your personal insults ("you are rather lost") are just more displays
of your dishonest behaviour. But please, thee is still time for you to
rectify that position and answer the questions posed to you.
> and the fact you do not get it, well, that is a bit
> funny...
Get what? You keep repeating that something is funny while forgetting
that you have been asked on several occasions what that "it" entails.
> how anyone who has been a regular to CSMA for any length
> of time could not get it is beyond me.
--
Sandman[.net]
Jimmyjohn
"Chance Furlong" <T-B...@megakatcity.com> wrote in message
news:T-Bone-F4B816....@news.giganews.com...
Why would you think that?
Steve Carroll
> MuahMan stated in post
> ea1cf9c7-ed4a-46a7-97c9-03c6e2d37...@w6g2000yqw.googlegroups.com on 8/25/09
Only for people that can't comprehend what they read.
Dan Turner: "Come on, you knew it was going to happen sometime, and
it's been more than three and a half years since Apple made the CPU
switch."
JohnQ: "The PPC was touted by the Apple salesman as the latest
technology and would be for many years to come."
-
Dan Turner: "it's been more than three and a half years since Apple
made the CPU switch. Still, I'm sad that the perfectly capable Power
Mac G5 I've used for years won't be joining this bright, shining
future."
JohnQ: ". The word many is subjective but to me many is not three
years but much longer."
-
Dan Turner: "That's progress, I guess."
JohnQ: "Total BS."
Steve Carroll
> Sandman stated in post mr-CE67B5.08215226082...@News.Individual.NET on
The only "joke" here by you was your "facetious" remark (read:bogus
claim) about JohnQ "saying very much the same thing" as Turner.
--
facetious
1. not meant to be taken seriously or literally: a facetious
remark.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/facetious
--
JohnQ
Very good a snip from here a snip from there add them together and you
have a new thread with a whole different context. I would say it's time
to stop lying and beating that old dead horse. You didn't like when I
was disappointed with my PPC you didn't like that I am considering a
Macbook. This is what you deserve for being stupid and a common liar
*plonk*
Snit
That is Carroll for you. As I said before:
You explain things to Steve repeatedly, and, of course, at
some point you will *assume* that he has figured out the
basics of the debate and not rehash everything. You might
even word something truly poorly. Steve gloms onto this and
insists his overly-literal or often outright dishonest
"reading" of your comments *must* show you are lying, grossly
wrong, whatever. When you point out his wording, though, he
freaks out.
This is just what Steve does.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
8/26/09 5:30 AM:
How about this, Sandman: remove all of the lies and derogatory comments
about me from your trolling website and agree to no longer lie about me, and
then I will do you the favor you ask.
Or, you can continue to pretend that if I do not do you favors and explain
things which are not only obvious but have, for the most part, already been
explained, that this is somehow a sign of my sharing your ignorance.
Your choice.
>> In any case, your misunderstanding has been explained elsewhere in
>> this thread
>
> What "misunderstanding" are you in reference to now, when the topic at
> hand is clearly the supposed humorous or "playfully jocular" behaviour
> on my part I supposedly displayed. I say "supposed" now because the
> understanding that you were correct and I had just missed it is being
> gradually replaced by an understanding that there was no such
> behaviour on my part and your reluctance to explain your position and
> your personal insults ("you are rather lost") are just more displays
> of your dishonest behaviour. But please, thee is still time for you to
> rectify that position and answer the questions posed to you.
Ah, it is somehow "dishonest" for me to not help you - someone who openly
lies about me and even has multiple web pages dedicated to belittling me and
spewing insults about me.
For that matter, when I have helped educate you in the past, you not only
denied it, you lied about my offering you assistance and about your
learning!
Now you are begging me to educate you some more.
But if I do not comply, of course, it shows that I must be "dishonest".
Do not worry, Sandman, Carroll will be jumping in any moment to defend your
claims... he always does, eh?
>> and the fact you do not get it, well, that is a bit
>> funny...
>
> Get what? You keep repeating that something is funny while forgetting
> that you have been asked on several occasions what that "it" entails.
Read the thread.
>> how anyone who has been a regular to CSMA for any length
>> of time could not get it is beyond me.
>
>
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Steve Carroll
> JohnQ stated in post mIclm.182784$ZN.136...@newsfe23.iad on 8/26/09 8:41 AM:
For every key idea that Turner broached in the paragraph you quoted to
start this thread with... JohnQ had an opposing statement that
addressed it... and I just proved it. If you feel JohnQ was
misrepresented by what I've quoted why don't one of you two idiots
point out how I munged context, you know, like you (Snit) are seen
doing every day.
My prediction: You two will only continue to accuse people of taking
things out of context the way you both do... but neither of you will
show *how*.
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> > What joke are you in reference to? See, that's were I need help, I had
> > immense problems locating this supposed joke, or humor. I realized
> > that this was a shortcoming on my part, and you two had a good laugh
> > at my expense. When you were done laughing, I inquired as to what the
> > joke was, so knew just in what manner I had been humiliated, so I
> > could be educated and successfully stay away from such an occasion in
> > the future. So far you have been reluctant to divulge that information
> > for reasons unknown by only referencing it vaguely and without the
> > specificity that I requested.
> >
> > Since I have now asked politely several times and you still refuse to
> > explain further to me I am beginning to suspect that you are in fact
> > not unwilling to explain, you are in fact unable to explain how the
> > word "facetious" applied to my question to you.
>
> How about this, Sandman: remove all of the lies and derogatory comments
> about me from your trolling website and agree to no longer lie about me, and
> then I will do you the favor you ask.
Oh, I see the confusion here. You think I was asking you a favor, that
explains. I'm sorry to inform you that this is not the case. It is
true that I apparently needed help understanding this issue and at
first I thought that that help could be obtained from you. It has
become clear now that this is not the case and as such, I have
relinquished the idea that you are able to point to the humorous
content of my post and as such cannot assist me in understanding this
matter.
That means, of course, that the explanation which doesn't seem to be
forthcoming was for you to display that your comment was NOT baseless
as it seems now. Needless to say, the current situation gives more
support to the idea that the comments were indeed baseless which of
course puts you in a pretty poor light.
> Or, you can continue to pretend that if I do not do you favors and explain
> things which are not only obvious but have, for the most part, already been
> explained, that this is somehow a sign of my sharing your ignorance.
Oh, I am not claiming that you "share my ignorance", I am correctly
claiming that it appears that you are not unwilling, but unable to
point to the humorous or "playfully jocular" part of my question that
you claimed was contained within it. A claim that to this date remains
unsupported, no less
> >> In any case, your misunderstanding has been explained elsewhere in
> >> this thread
> >
> > What "misunderstanding" are you in reference to now, when the topic at
> > hand is clearly the supposed humorous or "playfully jocular" behaviour
> > on my part I supposedly displayed. I say "supposed" now because the
> > understanding that you were correct and I had just missed it is being
> > gradually replaced by an understanding that there was no such
> > behaviour on my part and your reluctance to explain your position and
> > your personal insults ("you are rather lost") are just more displays
> > of your dishonest behaviour. But please, thee is still time for you to
> > rectify that position and answer the questions posed to you.
>
> Ah, it is somehow "dishonest" for me to not help you - someone who openly
> lies about me and even has multiple web pages dedicated to belittling me and
> spewing insults about me.
>
> For that matter, when I have helped educate you in the past, you not only
> denied it, you lied about my offering you assistance and about your
> learning!
>
> Now you are begging me to educate you some more.
As any cursory reader can see, the topic has moved from me asking you
to explain your comment to me noting that without such an explanation,
the comment remains pretty thin and you are doing yourself a
disservice when you post several times but still being unable to
provide a specification on the topic.
> But if I do not comply, of course, it shows that I must be "dishonest".
Your dishonesty is displayed by you providing personal insults in
place of the explanation you were asked for.
> Do not worry, Sandman, Carroll will be jumping in any moment to defend your
> claims... he always does, eh?
I wouldn't know.
> >> and the fact you do not get it, well, that is a bit
> >> funny...
> >
> > Get what? You keep repeating that something is funny while forgetting
> > that you have been asked on several occasions what that "it" entails.
>
> Read the thread.
I'd rather read your explanation about this supposed humorous comment
that was contained in my question to you. You don't seem to be able
to. You had a great opportunity to humiliate me by showcasing my
ignorance by pointing to the obvious in my post, but you seem to have
passed on that opportunity (which is good, of course, such behaviour
is not very honorable) but in doing so you have also failed to explain
your behaviour and personal insults. This is not a recommended
behaviour.
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> > Get what? You keep repeating that something is funny while forgetting
> > that you have been asked on several occasions what that "it" entails.
>
> Read the thread.
I took your advice here and looked at this thread now. As it is, it
contains 22 posts. 6 are from me and 9 are from you. 1 contains the
claim that got my perplexed to start with. That rules out 17 that
could contain the answer to my question.
The other 6 posts are these:
<5090dbcc-2f19-451e...@p36g2000prn.googlegroups.com>
From Steve to you, didn't point out what part of my question
was "facetious", of course.
<T-Bone-F4B816....@news.giganews.com>
And neither did this.
<pxalm.181948$ZN.2...@newsfe23.iad>
Or this.
<420e232d-aa4d-4ba5...@12g2000pri.googlegroups.com>
Or this...
<mIclm.182784$ZN.1...@newsfe23.iad>
This failed too
<e3c02838-4672-4371...@l35g2000pra.googlegroups.com>
As this one.
It seems that your advice didn't aid me in finding an answer to this
question. Care to point out where I went wrong in my search?
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
8/26/09 12:09 PM:
> In article <C6BAB9C5.44097%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>>> What joke are you in reference to? See, that's were I need help, I had
>>> immense problems locating this supposed joke, or humor. I realized
>>> that this was a shortcoming on my part, and you two had a good laugh
>>> at my expense. When you were done laughing, I inquired as to what the
>>> joke was, so knew just in what manner I had been humiliated, so I
>>> could be educated and successfully stay away from such an occasion in
>>> the future. So far you have been reluctant to divulge that information
>>> for reasons unknown by only referencing it vaguely and without the
>>> specificity that I requested.
>>>
>>> Since I have now asked politely several times and you still refuse to
>>> explain further to me I am beginning to suspect that you are in fact
>>> not unwilling to explain, you are in fact unable to explain how the
>>> word "facetious" applied to my question to you.
>>
>> How about this, Sandman: remove all of the lies and derogatory comments
>> about me from your trolling website and agree to no longer lie about me, and
>> then I will do you the favor you ask.
As shown below, you are not willing to "remove all of the lies and
derogatory comments about me from your trolling website and agree to no
longer lie about me", even as you ask me the favor of explaining the obvious
to you.
Instead of admitting to this, of course, you spew such nonsense as how I
*could* not explain the obvious to you. You, of course, made that up.
And, of course, you pretend to not know that Carroll will jump in to defend
you in your BS. Of course he will. Now that it has been called out, he
might just lash out more in other threads (accusing me of drug use, forging
his posts, using sock puppets, whatever)... but more likely he will jump
into this thread and claim your fabrications are correct.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
8/26/09 12:23 PM:
Even though you have *not* agreed to do as I ask and "remove all of the lies
and derogatory comments about me from your trolling website and agree to no
longer lie about me", I will take pity on you and give you a hint. See, I
am a very giving person, even to folks such as yourself who not only lie
about me, but keep those lies on the web.
Read my post... the first one where I started this thread.
Then read your reply.
Then think about why your reply shows your ignorance.
If you cannot see it, read the explanation that MuahMan gave you. If that
does not help, then read my comments to MuahMan.
By then, even you should be able to see why your original reply was
laughable... assumed to be facetious.
See: I give even folks like you chance after chance after chance... even
though you have your trolling website designed largely to spew absurd
accusations and open lies about me.
Now you can go back to whining that I did not help you more. Then I can
point to your reaction in response to my giving you advice in the past -
advice you took to better your web skills. I will be careful, however, to
avoid the specific topic-which-is-not-to-be-named. You made a wise choice
in calling that one off limits. :)
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Steve Carroll
> Sandman stated in post mr-7DF66A.21093526082...@News.Individual.NET on
LOL! If you're not simply taking another ridiculous stab at using your
"psych degree" to get me not to post here... you sound like you're
completely petrified if I comment on some of your trolling BS!
Hilarious;)
I know I'm pretty good at pointing out your dishonesty as I've had a
*lot* of practice at it... but this shows you also believe I'm good at
it and can hardly bear the thought of my doing so. I'm "actually" glad
to see I have that much of an impact of on your trolling. In any
event, despite your delusions to the contrary... Sandman, Tim, Wally, -
hh, HPT, myself and several others that bother to confront your BS do
so independently. There's no coordination here... just people calling
you on your BS.
Steve Carroll
> Sandman stated in post mr-2FFA5E.21231226082...@News.Individual.NET on
> 8/26/09 12:23 PM:
(snip)
> > It seems that your advice didn't aid me in finding an answer to this
> > question. Care to point out where I went wrong in my search?
>
> Even though you have *not* agreed to do as I ask and "remove all of the lies
> and derogatory comments about me from your trolling website and agree to no
> longer lie about me", I will take pity on you and give you a hint. See, I
> am a very giving person, even to folks such as yourself who not only lie
> about me, but keep those lies on the web.
>
> Read my post... the first one where I started this thread.
>
> Then read your reply.
You read his reply, but, if possible, try to comprehend what you read
this time:
"I'm not sure why you label him a Mac hater, he just seems to think
it's sad that Apple isn't supporting PPC with Snow Leopard. I kind of
agree with that. How you go from that to "Mac hater" is beyond me." -
Sandman
> Then think about why your reply shows your ignorance.
Why do you "insist" that he "think" about your delusion?
> If you cannot see it, read the explanation that MuahMan gave you.
Here's what Pratt wrote:
"Anytime someone says something slightly anti-Apple is considered
heresy and said person is to be immediately banished from the Church
Of Mac. They don't fuck around in that cult! " - Muahman
No explanation for your delusion there. It's *your* delusion, Snit...
you're the one who should explain it!
> If that does not help, then read my comments to MuahMan.
You read your "comments" (lies):
"Specifically, look at the comments and attacks directed at JohnQ for
saying
very much the same thing. Got to the point where people were
demanding he
even owns the machine, were telling him he had to somehow prove the
salesperson who sold him the machine existed, etc. Completely
absurd." - Snit
You said that JohnQ was "saying very much the same thing" as Dan
Turner in the paragraph you quoted. How does this lie you told explain
your delusion? This makes sense to you?
> By then, even you should be able to see why your original reply was
> laughable...
His reply made sense. The other stuff was a bunch of BS based on your
lie that JohnQ was "saying very much the same thing" as Dan Turner.
(snip more crap where Snit fails to prove his parents money wasn't
wasted on his "psych degree")
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> As shown below, you are not willing to "remove all of the lies and
> derogatory comments about me from your trolling website and agree to no
> longer lie about me", even as you ask me the favor of explaining the obvious
> to you.
>
> Instead of admitting to this, of course, you spew such nonsense as how I
> *could* not explain the obvious to you. You, of course, made that up.
>
> And, of course, you pretend to not know that Carroll will jump in to defend
> you in your BS. Of course he will. Now that it has been called out, he
> might just lash out more in other threads (accusing me of drug use, forging
> his posts, using sock puppets, whatever)... but more likely he will jump
> into this thread and claim your fabrications are correct.
I thank you for making it abundantly clear that you can not answer my
question and that your comment was in fact in error. I accept your
implied apology and have hopes that you will have learned from this
for the future.
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Read my post... the first one where I started this thread.
Where you claimed someone was a Mac hater.
> Then read your reply.
Where I asked why you thought this
> Then think about why your reply shows your ignorance.
I can't think of anything. And you can't tell me, it seems.
> If you cannot see it, read the explanation that MuahMan gave you. If that
> does not help, then read my comments to MuahMan.
I have Muahman killfiled. Why are your references to posts not linked
as mine were? Very disrespectful of you
> By then, even you should be able to see why your original reply was
> laughable... assumed to be facetious.
Nopes, that didn't help at all. When will this explanation be
forthcoming. So far, all you have done is claimed that one should
understand why you made your comment, not actually explained why one
would understand it.
But don't worry, I have stopped waiting for this explanation. You had
your chance and you blew it again.
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
8/27/09 12:36 AM:
LOL! Do you ever stop lying? I opt to not assist you with a question you
are having unless you agree to stop lying about me and to remove the lies
and derogatory comments you have about me on your trolling website, and you
jump to the idiotic conclusion that I "can not answer" your question and go
so far as to say having an adult-level reading comprehension is an "error"
and that my not helping you as you troll me is an implied apology from me.
My goodness, Sandman, there was a time you denied your dishonesty... now you
wear it as a badge of honor. Repulsive.
But do not worry - we both know your buddy Steve Carroll will jump in to say
he agrees with your absurd claims. Care to pretend, again, that you do not
know that?
LOL!
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
8/27/09 12:40 AM:
> In article <C6BADE01.440F7%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> Read my post... the first one where I started this thread.
>
> Where you claimed someone was a Mac hater.
Ah, you missed the sarcasm... and did not figure it out even based on
MuahMan's comments and my reply to him.
OK.
>> Then read your reply.
>
> Where I asked why you thought this
Right: where you missed the completely obvious sarcasm - so obvious it was
assumed you were likely being facetious in your claim to miss it.
>> Then think about why your reply shows your ignorance.
>
> I can't think of anything. And you can't tell me, it seems.
LOL! My goodness - MuahMan clearly got the sarcasm I was using. MuahMan!
>> If you cannot see it, read the explanation that MuahMan gave you. If that
>> does not help, then read my comments to MuahMan.
>
> I have Muahman killfiled. Why are your references to posts not linked
> as mine were? Very disrespectful of you
I expect you can follow the first few posts of a thread.
>> By then, even you should be able to see why your original reply was
>> laughable... assumed to be facetious.
>
> Nopes, that didn't help at all.
How about now? Have you figured it out yet?
> When will this explanation be forthcoming. So far, all you have done is
> claimed that one should understand why you made your comment, not actually
> explained why one would understand it.
The why is easy: one would understand it if they were a regular of CSMA and
were literate. Maybe there is a cultural difference in understanding
sarcasm... and that explains your illiteracy in this area. If so, having
such cultural illiteracy is nothing to be ashamed of. As much as you are a
dishonest troll who spews lies about me and maintains multiple web pages
filled with dishonest and derogatory BS about me, you generally do not come
across as stupid.
> But don't worry, I have stopped waiting for this explanation. You had your
> chance and you blew it again.
*My chance!* LOL! Yeah, I had my chance to explain something to a person
who lies about me repeatedly and spews absurd accusations, insults and lies
about me on their website. I opted not to (well, in detail - really I have
given you the answer... )... and somehow you try to make it sound like this
is my failing.
Sandman - a stronger argument could be made that it is my failure to help
you as much as I have... considering how you have reacted to assistance from
me in the past and considering the above facts I note about you and your
dishonesty.
Geez... you think I "blew it" by not assisting *you*, as if I owe you
something.
Hint: I do not. What I have given you is a gift, and a darn nice one at
that.
But, hey, do not worry: your buddy Steve Carroll will jump in and support
your absurd claim that I owe you an education. Care to deny you know he
will?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Chance Furlong
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Sandman stated in post mr-62DDA8.09...@News.Individual.NET on
> 8/27/09 12:36 AM:
> >
> > I thank you for making it abundantly clear that you can not answer my
> > question and that your comment was in fact in error. I accept your
> > implied apology and have hopes that you will have learned from this
> > for the future.
> Do you ever stop lying? I opt to not assist you with a question you
> are having unless you agree to stop lying about me and to remove the lies
> and derogatory comments you have about me on your trolling website, and you
> jump to the idiotic conclusion that I "can not answer" your question and go
> so far as to say having an adult-level reading comprehension is an "error"
> and that my not helping you as you troll me is an implied apology from me.
>
> My goodness, Sandman, there was a time you denied your dishonesty, now you
> wear it as a badge of honor. Repulsive.
>
> But do not worry, we both know your buddy Steve Carroll will jump in to say
> he agrees with your absurd claims. Care to pretend, again, that you do not
> know that?
>
> LOL!
Do you ever stop obsessing over Steve Carroll, Sandman, or Wally? Don't
be repulsive.
Snit
on 8/27/09 1:17 AM:
Seriously, do you doubt, for a second, that Steve Carroll will jump in on
this and - even though Sandman is being clearly absurd - say derogatory
things about me as he defends Sandman?
Seriously?
Come on... you have to have seen the pattern by now.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
High Plains Thumper
> Snit wrote:
>
>> As shown below, you are not willing to "remove all of the
>> lies and derogatory comments about me from your trolling
>> website and agree to no longer lie about me", even as you
>> ask me the favor of explaining the obvious to you.
>>
>> Instead of admitting to this, of course, you spew such
>> nonsense as how I *could* not explain the obvious to you.
>> You, of course, made that up.
>>
>> And, of course, you pretend to not know that Carroll will
>> jump in to defend you in your BS. Of course he will. Now
>> that it has been called out, he might just lash out more in
>> other threads (accusing me of drug use, forging his posts,
>> using sock puppets, whatever)... but more likely he will
>> jump into this thread and claim your fabrications are
>> correct.
>
> I thank you for making it abundantly clear that you can not
> answer my question and that your comment was in fact in error.
> I accept your implied apology and have hopes that you will
> have learned from this for the future.
I thought Snit was taking a sabbatical from CSMA, because of
school. I knew it wouldn't last for long. What was it, less
than 24 hours?
The 130 poster quotes on the Snit Circus of Pathological Lies:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/2a068045006e2e2f
--
HPT
High Plains Thumper
> Snit wrote:
>> Sandman stated:
>>
>>> I thank you for making it abundantly clear that you can
>>> not answer my question and that your comment was in fact
>>> in error. I accept your implied apology and have hopes
>>> that you will have learned from this for the future.
>>
>> Do you ever stop lying? I opt to not assist you with a
>> question you are having unless you agree to stop lying about
>> me and to remove the lies and derogatory comments you have
>> about me on your trolling website, and you jump to the
>> idiotic conclusion that I "can not answer" your question and
>> go so far as to say having an adult-level reading
>> comprehension is an "error" and that my not helping you as
>> you troll me is an implied apology from me.
>>
>> My goodness, Sandman, there was a time you denied your
>> dishonesty, now you wear it as a badge of honor. Repulsive.
>>
>> But do not worry, we both know your buddy Steve Carroll will
>> jump in to say he agrees with your absurd claims. Care to
>> pretend, again, that you do not know that?
>>
>> LOL!
>
> Do you ever stop obsessing over Steve Carroll, Sandman, or
> Wally? Don't be repulsive.
I thought Snit was taking a sabbatical from posting in CSMA,
because of school. That was a short recess, looks just like
another Snit lie.
Snit begs for Steve's, Sandman's and Wally's attention.
--
HPT
Sandman
High Plains Thumper <highplai...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> > I thank you for making it abundantly clear that you can not
> > answer my question and that your comment was in fact in error.
> > I accept your implied apology and have hopes that you will
> > have learned from this for the future.
>
> I thought Snit was taking a sabbatical from CSMA, because of
> school. I knew it wouldn't last for long. What was it, less
> than 24 hours?
He refused to tell us when this should start. I also wanted to know,
because I thought that was glorious news. I'm assuming that school
hasn't started yet.
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> Read my post... the first one where I started this thread.
> >
> > Where you claimed someone was a Mac hater.
>
> Ah, you missed the sarcasm... and did not figure it out even based on
> MuahMan's comments and my reply to him.
>
> OK.
I indeed missed that, and I have Muahman killfiled.
> >> Then read your reply.
> >
> > Where I asked why you thought this
>
> Right: where you missed the completely obvious sarcasm - so obvious it was
> assumed you were likely being facetious in your claim to miss it.
The sarcasm was not obvious to me, and I can't be held liable to any
assumptions others make about my motives.
> >> Then think about why your reply shows your ignorance.
> >
> > I can't think of anything. And you can't tell me, it seems.
>
> LOL! My goodness - MuahMan clearly got the sarcasm I was using. MuahMan!
I fail to see the relevance of this?
> >> If you cannot see it, read the explanation that MuahMan gave you. If that
> >> does not help, then read my comments to MuahMan.
> >
> > I have Muahman killfiled. Why are your references to posts not linked
> > as mine were? Very disrespectful of you
>
> I expect you can follow the first few posts of a thread.
I don't keep posts I've read or killfiled.
> >> By then, even you should be able to see why your original reply was
> >> laughable... assumed to be facetious.
> >
> > Nopes, that didn't help at all.
>
> How about now? Have you figured it out yet?
You were sarcastic and misunderstood my reply, you made a comment
about my reply that was incorrect, insisted that that property of my
remark was "obvious" and that I was lost because I didn't understand
something that wasn't even true about my post.
So yes, I think I have it figured out now.
> > When will this explanation be forthcoming. So far, all you have done is
> > claimed that one should understand why you made your comment, not actually
> > explained why one would understand it.
>
> The why is easy: one would understand it if they were a regular of CSMA and
> were literate.
I see you are back to personal insults again. This does not signify a
progression on your character.
> Maybe there is a cultural difference in understanding
> sarcasm...
I know that if I was to be sarcastic and someone didn't understand the
sarcasm, I wouldn't spend 10 posts NOT explaining that and instead
spending it on trying to belittle the person not understanding the
sarcasm.
> > But don't worry, I have stopped waiting for this explanation. You had your
> > chance and you blew it again.
>
> *My chance!*
Exactly.
> Sandman - a stronger argument could be made that it is my failure to help
> you as much as I have... considering how you have reacted to assistance from
> me in the past and considering the above facts I note about you and your
> dishonesty.
I have no idea what supposed past "assistance" you might be referring
to here.
> Geez... you think I "blew it" by not assisting *you*, as if I owe you
> something.
Ah, now I see where you are confused (interestingly, again). I don't
think you blew anything in relation to any supposed assistance for me.
I think you blew it when you failed to explain what the humorous
content of my question was. As it is, you have still failed to explain
that, even though you did attempt to explain that you were not being
serious with your post and as such assumed (for reasons unknown) that
neither was I.
--
Sandman[.net]
Chance Furlong
High Plains Thumper <highplai...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Snit even begs for MuahMan's attention, and everyone else's.
Chance Furlong
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Chance Furlong stated in post T-Bone-A09841....@news.giganews.com
> on 8/27/09 1:17 AM:
> >
> > Do you ever stop obsessing over Steve Carroll, Sandman, or Wally? Don't
> > be repulsive.
>
> Seriously, do you doubt, for a second, that Steve Carroll will jump in on
> this and, even though Sandman is being clearly absurd, say derogatory
> things about me as he defends Sandman?
>
> Seriously?
Why are you so worried about what Sandman and Steve Carroll think and
say? Don't be an ignoramus, and they will not "jump in."
> Come on, you have to have seen the pattern by now.
No, I have not. Sorry.
HPT, Wally, Sandman, C Lund, Steve Carroll and Tim Adams are not trolls
and do not troll.
You, on the other hand, are a troll.
Sandman
High Plains Thumper <highplai...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
2009-08-04: 07 | ++++
2009-08-05: 08 | +++++
2009-08-06: 05 | +++
2009-08-07: 06 | ++++
2009-08-08: 07 | ++++
2009-08-09: 11 | +++++++
2009-08-10: 08 | +++++
2009-08-11: 05 | +++
2009-08-12: 04 | ++
2009-08-13: 10 | ++++++
2009-08-14: 32 | ++++++++++++++++++++
2009-08-15: 46 | ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2009-08-16: 33 | ++++++++++++++++++++
2009-08-17: 38 | +++++++++++++++++++++++
2009-08-18: 47 | +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2009-08-19: 42 | ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2009-08-20: 61 | +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2009-08-21: 75 | ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2009-08-22: 48 | +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2009-08-23: 43 | ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2009-08-24: 82 | ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This was his peek, August 24. It was also the day he claimed:
"Soon my semester starts again and I will not be responding to Steve
Carroll, Sandman, HPT, Wally, or Tim Adams.."
The following days, his volume went down to this. It is still higher
than before Aug 14, but still lower, since he started to ignore most
of the threads he had been in.
2009-08-25: 30 | ++++++++++++++++++
2009-08-26: 11 | +++++++
2009-08-27: 10 | ++++++
But it is very clear that this "soon" has yet to occur, since 6pm Aug
24 (9am his time, but the above dates are all GMT+1) he has posted to
and about all these posters:
C S W T
001. [X|X|X|X] 2009-08-24 OT: Anyone want to take bets
<C6B8087B.439CD%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
002. [X| | | ] 2009-08-24 Re: Snow Leoprad Pre-Order ...
<C6B834BE.43A37%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
003. [ |X| | ] 2009-08-24 Re: My PPC is almost unsell...
<C6B84119.43A66%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
004. [X| | | ] 2009-08-24 Re: OT: Favorite sport
<C6B84CF9.43A7A%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
005. [X| | | ] 2009-08-24 Re: OT: Anyone want to take...
<C6B84FAE.43A85%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
006. [X|X| |X] 2009-08-24 Re: OT: Another question Sa...
<C6B857DD.43A9C%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
007. [ |X| | ] 2009-08-24 Re: My PPC is almost unsell...
<C6B85A60.43AA1%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
008. [ |X| |X] 2009-08-24 Re: OT: Anyone want to take...
<C6B85AED.43AA2%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
009. [X| | |X] 2009-08-24 Re: OT: HPT cannot support ...
<C6B85B68.43AA3%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
010. [ |X| |X] 2009-08-25 Re: OT: Anyone want to take...
<C6B86EE9.43B23%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
011. [X| | | ] 2009-08-25 Re: OT: Anyone want to take...
<C6B873B1.43B42%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
012. [X| | | ] 2009-08-25 Re: OT: Anyone want to take...
<C6B8803C.43B72%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
013. [ |X| |X] 2009-08-25 Re: OT: Another question Sa...
<C6B880DC.43B74%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
014. [X| | | ] 2009-08-25 Re: OT: Anyone want to take...
<C6B8882E.43B9A%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
015. [X|X| |X] 2009-08-25 Re: OT: Anyone want to take...
<C6B9690F.43CDD%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
016. [X|X| | ] 2009-08-25 Re: My PPC is almost unsell...
<C6B9888D.43D25%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
017. [X|X|X|X] 2009-08-25 Re: My PPC is almost unsell...
<C6B99494.43D39%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
018. [ |X| | ] 2009-08-25 Re: Another Mac hater... ri...
<C6B994AC.43D3A%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
019. [ |X| | ] 2009-08-25 Re: My PPC is almost unsell...
<C6B99520.43D42%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
020. [ |X| | ] 2009-08-25 Re: Another Mac hater... ri...
<C6B99DD4.43D57%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
021. [ |X| | ] 2009-08-26 Re: Another Mac hater... ri...
<C6BA13AC.43F87%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
022. [ |X| | ] 2009-08-26 Re: Another Mac hater... ri...
<C6BA294B.43F91%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
023. [X| | | ] 2009-08-26 Re: Another Mac hater... ri...
<C6BAB862.44095%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
024. [ |X| | ] 2009-08-26 Re: Another Mac hater... ri...
<C6BAB9C5.44097%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
025. [ |X| | ] 2009-08-26 Re: Another Mac hater... ri...
<C6BADC4B.440EA%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
026. [ |X| | ] 2009-08-26 Re: Another Mac hater... ri...
<C6BADE01.440F7%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
027. [X| | | ] 2009-08-26 Re: OT: Anyone want to take...
<C6BAEABB.44120%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
028. [X|X|X|X] 2009-08-26 Re: definition of a troll o...
<C6BAEF66.44132%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
029. [X|X|X|X] 2009-08-27 Re: OT: Anyone want to take...
<C6BB0150.44181%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
030. [X| | | ] 2009-08-27 Re: OT: Does Steve Carroll ...
<C6BB170C.441F3%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
031. [X| | | ] 2009-08-27 Re: OT:Would you send your ...
<C6BB4FCF.4426A%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
032. [X| | | ] 2009-08-27 Re: OT: Anyone want to take...
<C6BB56E5.44275%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
033. [X|X| | ] 2009-08-27 Re: Another Mac hater... ri...
<C6BB896E.4429F%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
034. [X|X| | ] 2009-08-27 Re: Another Mac hater... ri...
<C6BB8B89.442A5%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
035. [ |X| | ] 2009-08-27 Re: Snow Leopard Problems A...
<C6BB8C4B.442A7%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
036. [ |X| | ] 2009-08-27 Re: Apple just a stinking c...
<C6BB8C70.442A8%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
037. [X|X| | ] 2009-08-27 Re: Another Mac hater... ri...
<C6BB8FE1.442B5%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
22 threads mentioning steve
25 threads mentioning sandman
4 threads mentioning wally
10 threads mentioning Adams
Either way, I'm waiting anxiously for this "soon" to be "now".
--
Sandman[.net]
Wally
"Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
Why do you consider yourself immune from derogatory comments whilst you
freely hand them out Snit?
"My goodness - MuahMan clearly got the sarcasm I was using. MuahMan!"-Snit
Your exclamation "MuahMan!" was unwarranted as there was no reason to
suppose that sarcasm has ever been beyond MuahMan's understanding! In fact
some of his posts show a very good understanding of sarcasm!
You should retract your derogatory comment Snit ..... before your reputation
gets tarnished!
Wally
T-Bone-E85E4E....@news.giganews.com, "Chance Furlong"
<T-B...@megakatcity.com> wrote:
Thank you! I may be biased but I do tend to agree with you! :-)
In this thread for example I have simply pointed out the fact that Snit is
quite able ... and willing to make derogatory comments and yet he complains
that derogatory comments *may* be forthcoming toward him!
> You, on the other hand, are a troll.
Unless stating facts is a trait peculiar to trolls.. Then of course Snit
would be one of only a handful that are not trolls! ;-)
Steve Carroll
> Chance Furlong stated in post T-Bone-A09841.03172127082...@news.giganews.com
> on 8/27/09 1:17 AM:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article <C6BB896E.4429F%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> > Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
> >> 8/27/09 12:36 AM:
>
> >>> I thank you for making it abundantly clear that you can not answer my
> >>> question and that your comment was in fact in error. I accept your
> >>> implied apology and have hopes that you will have learned from this
> >>> for the future.
>
> >> Do you ever stop lying? I opt to not assist you with a question you
> >> are having unless you agree to stop lying about me and to remove the lies
> >> and derogatory comments you have about me on your trolling website, and you
> >> jump to the idiotic conclusion that I "can not answer" your question and go
> >> so far as to say having an adult-level reading comprehension is an "error"
> >> and that my not helping you as you troll me is an implied apology from me.
>
> >> My goodness, Sandman, there was a time you denied your dishonesty, now you
> >> wear it as a badge of honor. Repulsive.
>
> >> But do not worry, we both know your buddy Steve Carroll will jump in to say
> >> he agrees with your absurd claims. Care to pretend, again, that you do not
> >> know that?
>
> >> LOL!
>
> > Do you ever stop obsessing over Steve Carroll, Sandman, or Wally? Don't
> > be repulsive.
>
> Seriously, do you doubt, for a second, that Steve Carroll will jump in on
> this and - even though Sandman is being clearly absurd - say derogatory
> things about me as he defends Sandman?
>
> Seriously?
>
> Come on... you have to have seen the pattern by now.
Poor Snit... terrified of the big bad troll hunter named Steve
Carroll, he is seen here trying to use his "psych degree" to stave off
the inevitable challenge reality will hand him. LOL!
Steve Carroll
> Sandman stated in post mr-F539D4.09400827082...@News.Individual.NET on
> 8/27/09 12:40 AM:
>
> > In article <C6BADE01.440F7%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> > Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
> >> Read my post... the first one where I started this thread.
>
> > Where you claimed someone was a Mac hater.
>
> Ah, you missed the sarcasm... and did not figure it out even based on
> MuahMan's comments and my reply to him.
LOL! The only real irony here is that you tried to sell JOhnQ's BS as
being similar to Dan Turner's.
(snip more of Snit's crap)
Snit
8/27/09 2:49 AM:
You keep begging to help you *and* lying about me.
Poor strategy on your part.
You showed you did not understand something that was obvious *and* has been
explained to you repeatedly (at least in part).
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
on 8/27/09 3:07 AM:
> In article <C6BB8FE1.442B5%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> Chance Furlong stated in post T-Bone-A09841....@news.giganews.com
>> on 8/27/09 1:17 AM:
>>>
>>> Do you ever stop obsessing over Steve Carroll, Sandman, or Wally? Don't
>>> be repulsive.
>>
>> Seriously, do you doubt, for a second, that Steve Carroll will jump in on
>> this and, even though Sandman is being clearly absurd, say derogatory
>> things about me as he defends Sandman?
>>
>> Seriously?
>
> Why are you so worried about what Sandman and Steve Carroll think and
> say?
Worried? Huh? Nothing to worry about - I *know* they will lie and spew
derogatory comments. I know I am correct... if I thought I might be wrong
then maybe I would worry. :)
> Don't be an ignoramus, and they will not "jump in."
Do not blame me for their lying and trolling.
>> Come on, you have to have seen the pattern by now.
>
> No, I have not. Sorry.
Well, part of IQ is the ability to see patterns.
> HPT, Wally, Sandman, C Lund, Steve Carroll and Tim Adams are not trolls
> and do not troll.
>
> You, on the other hand, are a troll.
I would love to see by what criteria you come to that conclusion.
But you have none... none that is defensible. 100% predictable. If it was
not, well, maybe I would worry. :)
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> You keep begging to help you
You have now repeated this misinformation several times, and have been
corrected several times. That means that when you repeat it, you are
stating something you know is incorrect, i.e. lying. I just wanted to
make sure that you are fully aware of this.
> Poor strategy on your part.
As it turns out, any strategic suggestions from you doesn't seem to be
credible enough to take into consideration given your insistence to
repeat claims you have been told are incorrect.
> You showed you did not understand something that was obvious *and* has been
> explained to you repeatedly (at least in part).
You have yet to answer my original question; what in my post was
humorous? All you have done is to claim that since you were being
sarcastic, you incorrectly assumed that so was I. Not what part of my
post that was sarcastic, let alone humorous.
Note, however, that I no longer expect you to answer such a simple
question. I am just noting that it remains unanswered.
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> > HPT, Wally, Sandman, C Lund, Steve Carroll and Tim Adams are not trolls
> > and do not troll.
> >
> > You, on the other hand, are a troll.
>
> I would love to see by what criteria you come to that conclusion.
>
> But you have none... none that is defensible. 100% predictable. If it was
> not, well, maybe I would worry. :)
Are all of these also "non-defensible" and not something to worry
about?
Chance Furlong, 2009-08-27:
HPT, Wally, Sandman, C Lund, Steve Carroll and Tim
Adams are not trolls and do not troll. You, on the
other hand, are a troll.
Fa-groon, 2009-08-20:
I've done that (killfiled snit). It's not the that
I'm bugged by the Snit posts and responses to Snit
per se, its that they make up such a huge
percentage of the posts in this group - all out of
proportion to their importance or meaning. Nothing
except to appeal to saner heads to cease and
desist in getting into pissing contests with this
guy. They ought to know by now that engaging him
is fruitless, more than fruitless, it's utterly
futile.
hophead, 2009-08-20:
It's best to killfile snit, and if you can, set up
a filter to kill any responses to snit Of course,
snit also uses sockpuppets. They are pretty easy
to identify fortunately and are easily killed as
well
Sermo Malifer, 2009-08-09:
Your response to what I wrote leads to one to
believe either you're mentally ill, or your goal
is to tarnish the reputation of Mac users, or
both.
ZnU, 2008-04-20:
The Snit Circus has gotten particularly bad as of
late. When I set up my filters to kill all of
Snit's posts, plus direct replies to them (which
is how I'm keeping things from now on), nearly 40%
of the most recent 1000 articles in CSMA go out
the window. Many posts further removed from Snit's
are about him as well -- Steve and Wally
discussing Snit between themselves or whatever. In
all, something like 50% of the traffic in this
group is now related to Snit insanity. I killfile
Edwin because I don't have a patience to have
discussions with someone who deliberately tries to
waste my time. But watching *other people* tie him
knots can be entertaining. The Snit-related posts
are not like this. They are endless repetitions of
the exact same material and/or arguments dating
back *years* about who said what. They are utterly
uninteresting. And they are now half of the
traffic in this group! Stop. Just stop. If Snit
repeats a claim you've already responded to, don't
post the same material again. Just don't reply. If
Snit starts some new thread to troll on an old
issue, ignore him. If four or five key people in
this group simply killfiled Snit, this entire
problem would be gone in a week. Everyone will
thank you.
Mayor of R'lyeh, 2008-04-18:
There's really no rock bottom in this for Snit.
He's just an immature twit who gets his rocks off
by being the center of attention.
Who Me?, 2008-04-18:
IF michael IS a teacher, it's no wonder he's home
more than he's anywhere near a classroom.
PeterBP, 2008-03-30:
Oh will you stfu.
CozmicDebris, 2007-11-23:
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.
CozmicDebris, 2007-11-23:
plonk
chrisv, 2007-06-26:
It's people like you, Carroll, who are to blame
for the success of asshole trolls like Shit.
AZ Nomad, 2007-06-24:
Entry #4 into the killfile. You really are an
asshole.
John Slade, 2007-05-30:
Snit is not a virus, he/she is a loon.
Brian, 2007-05-29:
Has anyone ever been more universally hated on the
USENET than Snit?
Mike Dee, 2007-05-28:
Hasn't snit "effed up and died", yet? Thankfully
his virus hasn't broadened it's horizons and
killed usenet altogether.
Edwin, 2007-05-18:
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.
Muahman, 2007-05-13:
Hey I'm certainly not the most popular poster in
CSMA but you are UNIVERSALLY hated.
Jason McNorton, 2007-05-09:
Snit, I've reinstalled my OS and see my name
coming up. Here's your proof in one case. You are
a damn nasty troll/psycho and Sandman is not.
nospamatall, 2007-05-08:
Yet another thread ruined. Could you at least keep
this stuff in your own threads?
-hh, 2007-04-30:
A troll has to have some material to work with, in
order to prompt someone to talk to them. This is
what you do. Time and time again. While some of
the individuals that you exchange with are trolls,
your error is in your belief that you are somehow
different. You're not different: you too are a
troll and no better than they are. Bye bye, Snit.
New Bee, 2007-04-29:
Snit just leave me alone. I'm not biased and my
mind is not closed. Don't bother to try to waste
more of my time. I have to ignore you.
Jesus, 2007-04-26:
Really, Snit. It's annoying. What are you
accomplishing besides being annoying? Is that your
goal?
Lefty Bigfoot, 2007-03-06:
Okay, you can't control yourself. Into the
killfile you go, adios.
Mr. Blonde, 2007-01-20:
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.
Dan Johnson, 2006-12-31:
Always happy to help a fellow troll.
Lefty Bigfoot, 2006-12-16:
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*
spi...@freenet.co.uk, 2006-12-03:
The thought is probably to show everyone here just
how bad a troll snit is.
K E, 2006-10-23:
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.
John Slade, 2006-08-24:
I have since plonked Snot in my killfile and he's
been there every since. I suggest you guys do the
same.
Elijah Baley, 2006-08-24:
Seriously, Snit, you need psychiatric help. Go see
a doctor.
Stuart Krivis, 2006-08-15:
You might as well just give up and plonk him then.
A snit is a snit is a snit and always will be.
Patrick Nihill, 2006-08-13:
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?
Donald McDaniel, 2006-08-10:
Snit, you're such a dunderhead. You just have no
understanding at all. I almost feel sorry
criticizing you. It's much like criticizing a poor
malformed "elephant boy".
Carlo Coggi, 2006-08-07:
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. :-)
bobinnv, 2006-08-05:
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..
Carlo Coggi, 2006-08-03:
Things have suddenly gotten very peaceful.
Killfile: From: snit
John Slade, 2006-07-30:
This is the reason I plonked Snot, I mean Snit. He
hasn't a clue. I've made a fool of Snit so many
times it's a shame.
Josh McKee, 2006-07-27:
What is obnoxious are your posts.
ed, 2006-07-20:
in that post, you claimed to "have been flawlessly
honest in all the time I have been posting to
CSMA", which is an out and out lie.
Sandman, 2006-07-20:
I'll top that by killfiling Snit, effective as of
now. All his posts and all threads he participate
in.
-hh, 2006-07-20:
I am, however, quite obviously very, very tired of
[Snits] extremely lame attempts to try to garner
some attention.
Jim Polaski, 2006-07-18:
He's out of alignment and getting worse...
Edwin, 2006-07-17:
You're disgusting.
Mayor of R'lyeh, 2006-07-12:
That was nonsensical even by your standards.
Stuart Krivis, 2006-07-12:
Snit's world is very tiny
Mike, 2006-07-09:
This implies that there was ever a time when
[Snit] wasn't in full-blown troll mode.
Dave Fritzinger, 2006-07-07:
Snit, please shut the hell up.
Tom Elam, 2006-07-07:
Killfile Steve C. and Snit
Jim Polaski, 2006-07-07:
(about Snit being a bigger troll than Tom Elam)
Tommie uses a rubber band and paper ball while
snit uses a shotgun.
Chris Clement, 2006-07-05:
ugh....geez man.....let it go
Wally, 2006-07-05:
Sandman was able to conduct himself in an honest
manner by stating an honest opinion and so you
tried to ridicule that opinion by dishonestly
misrepresenting it!...........yup business as
usual for you Snit!
Tim Adams, 2006-07-05:
the troll snit started yet another thread, running
away from the previous one where his lies were
exposed many times over. So typical of a troll.
Once again I snip michael glassers lies and
distortions of the truth, as confirmed by the
google record, should anybody want to read them.
Pawe Wojciak, 2006-06-27:
Jesus Christ, snit... <plonk>
Edwin, 2006-06-27:
He's not the liar, you are. That's in addition to
you being one of the sickest, most twisted trolls
this group has ever seen.
Mike, 2006-06-22:
Why is it trolls like you keep asking the same
stupid questions when they've already been
answered?
RichardK, 2006-06-20:
Just killfile him already
Lefty Bigfoot, 2006-06-19:
I would hope that Snit decides to use this group
for something other than trolling, but that's not
worth wasting time on.
Dave Fritzinger, 2006-06-02:
Snit, please go away. Get a life, meet a woman, do
something, but please, please, please, GO AWAY!!!!
GreyCloud, 2006-05-15:
I see you are starting to see what the rest have
seen. You too will plonk snit.
Alan Baker, 2006-05-09:
Lost my kill filters... Rebuild. Plonk
George Graves, 2006-05-05:
What is interesting is how Glasser seems to think
that being a Mac user somehow compensates for his
trolling.
George Graves, 2006-05-04:
And get rid of them. I propose that NOBODY answer
any posts from Homley, Stew, Elam, zara, Snit, any
of their sockpuppets or other trolls who stop by
to try the fishing here ever again. Just ignore
them. I know it will be hard, but if we don't
answer these maggots they'll go looking for
another host. Let's JUST DO IT! We have nothing to
lose but our trolls.
Jim Polaski, 2006-04-25:
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?
Timberwoof, 2006-04-24:
Plonk, Snit.
GreyCloud, 2006-04-21:
I only get to read some of the snit droppings
occasionaly. What a sad sack troll he is. I don't
know of anybody that have kill-filed you tho. I do
know that a lot of people, almost unanimously,
kill filed snit.
Henry Flam, 2006-04-04:
Better still, Snit why don't you just disappear,
please. It will make the newsgroup a place worth
visiting. Now it's a Snit Circus. You're much
worse than the Wintrolls.
-hh, 2006-04-04:
See, you answer your own rhetorical question: you
know that you're guilty. Drop it already, move on
and grow up...you're being the nit picker that you
go on to complain about, which perpetuation only
makes you a: HYPOCRITE. Do so, and I'll report you
to your ISP, complete with this posting where
you've publically announced your explicit intent
to further disrupt the group with OT posts. Even
I'm sick and tired of your flogging of this dead
horse.
Alan Baker, 2006-02-27:
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.
Andrew J. Brehm, 2006-02-27:
You are not flamed because you speak the truth,
you are flamed because you are a hideous troll and
keep disrupting the newsgroup.
GreyCloud, 2006-02-07:
Guffaw!! You are still a dysfunctional troll,
snerd. You are squirming now and doing the
sock-puppet shuffle... or is that the embarrassed
troll shuffle.
fibercut, 2006-01-12:
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.
fibercut, 2006-01-12:
<plonk> and good riddance. i urge all that read
this stop the circus and ignore this sad
individual.
Lars Tr�ger, 2006-01-07:
Yes, you are stupid
Jeff B, 2005-12-23:
Yo, Snit. We're not pals. I think you're a git.
Mayor of R'lyeh, 2005-12-04:
Unable to counter my argument with facts Steve
Snit...er Snit Carroll...er Steve Carroll resorts
to personal attacks; just like Snit would.
John C. Randolph, 2005-12-01:
You're nothing but a troll yourself. What are you
bitching about?
GreyCloud, 2005-09-11:
I'm beginning to see what you people mean. Are we
sure he's a school teacher?? After all, school has
started, so where does he get the time to blow?
Edwin, 2005-09-04:
*plonk*
zara, 2005-09-02:
ya know Snit, I am one of your fans. I also admit
to being a Troll- why don't you admit to being a
Troll also??
Mike Dee, 2005-09-02:
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.
ed, 2005-07-01:
sure, snit is a lying troll
Rick G, 2005-06-26:
I don't find Snit's trolling technique especially
good, but it seems to be extremely effective...
Elizabot, 2005-05-24:
I see you were unable to respond to the points in
my post and you are back to your repetitious
regurgitation mode. This is a sure sign that you
have back yourself into a corner.
ed, 2005-04-29:
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).
Sandman, 2005-03-18:
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.
TravelinMan, 2005-03-17:
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.
Rick, 2005-03-15:
And this little paragraph proves you to be the
dishonest little schmuck you are.
B.B., 2005-03-13:
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.
Andrew J. Brehm, 2005-02-27:
It's not "a number of trolls", it's _one_ troll.
It's you.
Nasht0n, 2005-01-14:
Oh, and *PLONK*. Nicolas
Jim Lee Jr., 2005-01-13:
Troll
Nasht0n, 2005-01-13:
Snit, get a life fast. You're pathetic.
John Slade, 2004-12-28:
Snit is full of shit and knows little about
computers. However I don't think anyone should
leave based on how stupid they are. Everyone has a
right to say whatever they want. If Snit wants to
display his ignorance and lack of knowledge, he
should have that right.
Bob B., 2004-12-27:
I feel your pain. 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.
ZnU, 2004-12-27:
In particular, my filters to kill off Snit and
direct responses to his posts *alone* account for
half the traffic in this group over the last
several days.
Dawg Tail, 2004-11-30:
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.
Jeff Hoppe, 2004-11-18:
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.
buzz off, 2004-11-17:
Snit is obviously mentally ill
Edwin, 2004-11-17:
The worst troll this NG has ever seen is playing
the part of the victim... you can almost hear the
violins playing in the background as he whines...
hilarious...
Elijah Baley, 2004-11-17:
If there's ever been a better example of a
sociopath than this Snit character I haven't seen
one.
Dawg Tail, 2004-11-14:
The fact that you're incapable of understanding
what is written due to your unreasonable hatred of
Microsoft doesn't mean that I haven't made such
posts. 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.
George Graves, 2004-11-06:
Plonk!
Tim Adams, 2004-11-06:
With the election over - lets get the garbage, you
included, out of CSMA
Jason McNorton, 2004-11-01:
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.
George Graves, 2004-11-01:
You don't get it, do you? NEVER!
George Graves, 2004-10-27:
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!
Steve Mackay, 2004-09-17:
Changing you name *AGAIN* to avoid kill filters.
Will your bullshit never end? You really are a
pathetic piece of shit, to require *THAT MUCH*
attention from people who just want to ignore the
likes of you. *PLONK*
H, 2004-09-12:
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
Zaren Ankleweed, 2004-09-11:
And with that, Snit goes in the global killfile.
No subject, no author, no nothing. Buh-bye.
Sandman, 2004-09-11:
Is Michael the official record holder of number of
killfiles in csma? I may just think he is.
Mike Dee, 2004-08-30:
Just making it official: *plonk* I have joined
that growing number from this NG to add you to
their bozo bin.
Heywood Mogroot, 2004-08-19:
*plonk*
Nashton, 2004-06-28:
PLONK! End of story. Get some form of help.
Elizabot, 2004-06-13:
I've decided to plonk you. Bye! *plonk*
Edwin, 2004-06-06:
Geez, enough of this oddball. *plonk*
Steve Mackay, 2004-06-03:
The best troll award would have to go to Snit.
Andrew J. Brehm, 2004-05-31:
Snit, plonk. I should have done this some time ago
when everybody said people should simply killfile
you.
Mayor of R'lyeh, 2004-05-18:
Fuck off, Snit. *plonk*
Sandman, 2004-05-17:
Tired of the Snit Circus? I am, so I killfiled
him. I strongly urge the Steves and Elizabot to do
the same.
John Q. Public, 2004-01-07:
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.
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
AM:
>> HPT, Wally, Sandman, C Lund, Steve Carroll and Tim Adams are not trolls
>> and do not troll.
>
> Thank you! I may be biased but I do tend to agree with you! :-)
>
> In this thread for example I have simply pointed out the fact that Snit is
> quite able ... and willing to make derogatory comments and yet he complains
> that derogatory comments *may* be forthcoming toward him!
Please point to these "derogatory" comments of mine. How many are not in
response to direct lies about me? And, for that matter, are *any* of these
"derogatory" comments from me not 100% verifiable in your view?
Be aware, though, I do understand that even true comments can be derogatory
and inappropriate... just because something is true does not mean it is
appropriate to say. You might be able to find some examples from me where I
have acted poorly... but, clearly, it would be trivial to find examples from
you:
Wally: just spewing insults:
Yup! Reality can be a real bitch for people like you Snit!
You just lashed out:
Wally:
> Do you really think a school is so desperate that they would
> hire michael glasser?
If they wanted to make their compliment of bad teachers look
outstanding...... Then yes!
Obviously you are just spewing derogatory comments... you have *never* been
in one of my classes and know very, very little about them.
On and on, Wally... you spew insults and lies on a regular basis... though,
I will grant, not as often as some of your trolling buddies.
You also make comment that are clearly not true, but your learning
disability or mental handicap might lead to you actually believing your own
words, no matter how clearly false they are:
Wally: posted *after* Snit quoted Wally doing as Snit said:
Assumptions are fine Snit, but in this case given what I had
actually stated there is no possibility that you believed
that I "thought" what you stated that I did think, therefore
you clearly lied!
The only way you could have believed your own words is if you are unable to
understand what you read.
Wally: posted *after* I pointed him to MuahMan's death threats:
But when I try and rule out any possible misunderstanding by
asking you to post an example of these specific threats ...
You lace up and run a mile! ...why?
The only way you could have believed your own words is if you are unable to
understand what you read.
Wally: dishonestly misrepresenting my comments
"If he's still teaching where he claimed to teach..."-Steve
Carroll
As you deliberately dropped the "claimed to teach" from what
Steve actually said it is clear that what you find *funny* is
actually *your version* of what Steve said, so I guess it is
funny in a pathetic sort of way that you should find it
necessary to distort what was actually written by Steve!
The only way you could have believed your own words is if you are unable to
understand what you read. The fact is the phrase "If he's still
teaching..." makes it clear that Steve knew I at least used to teach. The
phrase "claimed to teach" shows he is claiming (dishonestly, by the way) to
believe I claimed to teach at a specific place (did I, when?) and that he
thinks maybe I was really teaching elsewhere. And that is not related to
the point that he clearly knows I at least used to teach.
>> You, on the other hand, are a troll.
>
> Unless stating facts is a trait peculiar to trolls.. Then of course Snit
> would be one of only a handful that are not trolls! ;-)
Many people in CSMA often troll. No doubt. Hey, even your buddy Carroll
has said similar things, though he called everyone in CSMA "assholes".
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
8/27/09 11:00 AM:
You call it "misinformation" for me to note you have repeatedly asked (and
clearly begged) for my assistance - even as you lie about me and refuse to
remove the lies about me you have on your trolling web site... yet the proof
you you doing so is in this very thread:
I can't help to also notice that you haven't really stepped
up and explained neither the serious issue nor the humor
coming from me. As I'm sure this was just a slight oversight
on your part, I'm confident that your followup to this will
be an explanation to what I am missing
What joke are you in reference to? See, that's were I need
help...
I inquired as to what the joke was, so knew just in what
manner I had been humiliated, so I could be educated and
successfully stay away from such an occasion in the future.
So far you have been reluctant to divulge that information
for reasons unknown by only referencing it vaguely and
without the specificity that I requested.
Since I have now asked politely several times and you still
refuse to explain further to me...
On and on... you keep begging and trying to shame me into helping you.
Then denying you are doing so.
The accusing me of lying for noting the facts... and spewing other lies
about me.
Gee, Sandman, not exactly a good showing from you, eh?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Steve Carroll
> Sandman stated in post mr-6FBF5F.20003727082...@News.Individual.NET on
> 8/27/09 11:00 AM:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article <C6BC1408.4436E%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> > Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
> >> You keep begging to help you
>
> > You have now repeated this misinformation several times, and have been
> > corrected several times. That means that when you repeat it, you are
> > stating something you know is incorrect, i.e. lying. I just wanted to
> > make sure that you are fully aware of this.
>
> >> Poor strategy on your part.
>
> > As it turns out, any strategic suggestions from you doesn't seem to be
> > credible enough to take into consideration given your insistence to
> > repeat claims you have been told are incorrect.
>
> >> You showed you did not understand something that was obvious *and* has been
> >> explained to you repeatedly (at least in part).
>
> > You have yet to answer my original question; what in my post was
> > humorous? All you have done is to claim that since you were being
> > sarcastic, you incorrectly assumed that so was I. Not what part of my
> > post that was sarcastic, let alone humorous.
>
> > Note, however, that I no longer expect you to answer such a simple
> > question. I am just noting that it remains unanswered.
>
> You call it "misinformation" for me to note you have repeatedly asked (and
> clearly begged) for my assistance
Can you imagine if Snit was a real "teacher"? Every time a student
"asked" a question her was forced to ask "repeatedly" because Snit
couldn't/wouldn't answer it, Snit would probably claim that the
student " clearly begged" for his "assistance". LOL!
Steve Carroll's Dog
Snit is pulling you on a leash hoping to get more attention from you without
telling you a thing. He has no idea what he is talking about and just will
not admit to it.
100% predictable. :)
Steve Carroll's Dog
Steve also cleans up my shit. Why shouldn't he clean up yours?
Steve Carroll's Dog
You are barking mad.
Steve Carroll's Dog
You lie. I call you on your crap. You whine.
The pattern is simple.
Steve Carroll's Dog
Snit will never leave. He is a little puppy following people around and
pissing on their shoes.
Steve Carroll's Dog
Snit begs for food. He has to because he has no job.
Chance Furlong
<639066f1-15bf-4e00...@v37g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
Steve Carroll <fret...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Can you imagine if Snit was a real "teacher?" Every time a student
> "asked" a question he was forced to ask "repeatedly" because Snit
> couldn't/wouldn't answer it, Snit would probably claim that the
> student "clearly begged" for his "assistance." LOL!
God forbid that a student should beg for Snit's attention.
Snit
on 8/27/09 2:56 PM:
I predicted:
But, hey, do not worry: your buddy Steve Carroll will jump in
and support your absurd claim that I owe you an education.
Care to deny you know he will?
And Steve has a whole thread, now, on how if I do not give Sandman an
education, even as he lies about me in a public forum, that this somehow
*must* mean I discourage questions in my classes.
Amazing how predictable Steve is. I also noted he would sink to sock
puppetry again... and, admittedly sooner than I expected, his "dog" is now
taking turns with him at his computer.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Wally
"Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Wally stated in post C6BCA429.1975F%Wa...@wally.world.net on 8/27/09 5:59
> AM:
>
>>> HPT, Wally, Sandman, C Lund, Steve Carroll and Tim Adams are not trolls
>>> and do not troll.
>>
>> Thank you! I may be biased but I do tend to agree with you! :-)
>>
>> In this thread for example I have simply pointed out the fact that Snit is
>> quite able ... and willing to make derogatory comments and yet he complains
>> that derogatory comments *may* be forthcoming toward him!
>
> Please point to these "derogatory" comments of mine.
Already done!
> How many are not in response to direct lies about me?
The example that I mention above "In this thread for example ......" was not
in response to any comment about you whatsoever Snit!
You simply attempted to make a point and to do that you used the deliberate
tactic of making a derogatory comment about a poster.
When you make the choice to behave in that manner and then complain that you
*may* receive the same treatment Snit ... You are being a hypocrite!
High Plains Thumper
> High Plains Thumper wrote:
>
>> I thought Snit was taking a sabbatical from CSMA, because of
>> school. I knew it wouldn't last for long. What was it,
>> less than 24 hours?
>
> He refused to tell us when this should start. I also wanted to
> know, because I thought that was glorious news. I'm assuming
> that school hasn't started yet.
.... or in reality, the Snit posting here is an imposter and not
really a teacher like he claims.
--
HPT
Snit
on 8/27/09 5:27 PM:
And maybe you are a rhino living in Argentina. Could be, right?
Heck, if Carroll wants people to believe his dog posts, why not?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
PM:
> On 28/8/09 2:07 AM, in article C6BC1985.4437B%use...@gallopinginsanity.com,
> "Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> Wally stated in post C6BCA429.1975F%Wa...@wally.world.net on 8/27/09 5:59
>> AM:
>>
>>>> HPT, Wally, Sandman, C Lund, Steve Carroll and Tim Adams are not trolls
>>>> and do not troll.
>>>
>>> Thank you! I may be biased but I do tend to agree with you! :-)
>>>
>>> In this thread for example I have simply pointed out the fact that Snit is
>>> quite able ... and willing to make derogatory comments and yet he complains
>>> that derogatory comments *may* be forthcoming toward him!
>>
>> Please point to these "derogatory" comments of mine.
>
> Already done!
Ah, and now we start the famous circle of deceit you and your buddies
enjoy... you make an accusation, I ask for support, you say that you already
have supported it, I ask you to point to it, you say you already have...
... and you never get around to even trying to support your claims.
The funny thing is this accusation of yours is something you could support
if you were not incompetent.
>> How many are not in response to direct lies about me?
>
> The example that I mention above "In this thread for example ......" was not
> in response to any comment about you whatsoever Snit!
>
> You simply attempted to make a point and to do that you used the deliberate
> tactic of making a derogatory comment about a poster.
>
> When you make the choice to behave in that manner and then complain that you
> *may* receive the same treatment Snit ... You are being a hypocrite!
In what way do you think I am being a hypocrite? Post a link to the alleged
derogatory comment from me... and remember, it cannot be in response to a
clear lie about me.
Good running... um... hunting. :)
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
High Plains Thumper
> High Plains Thumper wrote:
>
>> because of school. That was a short recess, looks just
>> like another Snit lie.
>>
>> Snit begs for Steve's, Sandman's and Wally's attention.
[snip]
> 22 threads mentioning steve
> 25 threads mentioning sandman
> 4 threads mentioning wally
> 10 threads mentioning Adams
>
> Either way, I'm waiting anxiously for this "soon" to be "now".
IOW, Snit lied. Again.
--
HPT
Snit
on 8/27/09 6:01 PM:
When did I say I was taking a "sabbatical"? Please quote this.
Oh. I never said that.
I did say I would be busy enough to not bother responding to Carroll or
Sandman... but, even then, I knew they would try to come up with some
"clever" way to get my attention. Carroll sank to focusing on my personal
life and "helping" his dog post (using a sock puppet). Not exciting enough
or clever enough.
Sandman started begging for my assistance and lying about me when I opted to
not help him unless he agreed to stop lying about me and remove his lies
about me online.
So, yup, Sandman's trolling was clever enough to get me to reply. Kudos to
him.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Chance Furlong
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Chance Furlong stated in post T-Bone-9D2086....@news.giganews.com
> on 8/27/09 2:56 PM:
>
> > In article
> > <639066f1-15bf-4e00...@v37g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
> > Steve Carroll <fret...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Can you imagine if Snit was a real "teacher?" Every time a student
> >> "asked" a question he was forced to ask "repeatedly" because Snit
> >> couldn't/wouldn't answer it, Snit would probably claim that the
> >> student "clearly begged" for his "assistance." LOL!
> >
> > God forbid that a student should beg for Snit's attention.
>
> I predicted:
>
> But, hey, do not worry, your buddy Steve Carroll will jump in
> and support your absurd claim that I owe you an education.
> Care to deny you know he will?
What makes you think Steve Carroll is my buddy? I am not the one
replying to him all the time. It is obvious I do not beg for his
attention.
> And Steve has a whole thread now, on how if I do not give Sandman an
> education, even as he lies about me in a public forum, that this somehow
> must mean I discourage questions in my classes.
Sandman does not need an education from you.
> Amazing how predictable Steve is. I also noted he would sink to sock
> puppetry again, and, admittedly sooner than I expected, his "dog" is now
> taking turns with him at his computer.
So Steve uses sock puppets, whoop dee doo.
Snit
on 8/27/09 6:23 PM:
> In article <C6BC51E4.4444F%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> Chance Furlong stated in post T-Bone-9D2086....@news.giganews.com
>> on 8/27/09 2:56 PM:
>>
>>> In article
>>> <639066f1-15bf-4e00...@v37g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
>>> Steve Carroll <fret...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Can you imagine if Snit was a real "teacher?" Every time a student
>>>> "asked" a question he was forced to ask "repeatedly" because Snit
>>>> couldn't/wouldn't answer it, Snit would probably claim that the
>>>> student "clearly begged" for his "assistance." LOL!
>>>
>>> God forbid that a student should beg for Snit's attention.
>>
>> I predicted:
>>
>> But, hey, do not worry, your buddy Steve Carroll will jump in
>> and support your absurd claim that I owe you an education.
>> Care to deny you know he will?
>
> What makes you think Steve Carroll is my buddy?
I did not know you were a Sandman sock, but I will accept your word on it.
> I am not the one replying to him all the time.
Who does? In the last day or so I have seen some of his BS lies and attacks
against me, but the only response I gave to him was to help him with an
issue he reported... knowing full well he will respond with lies and
trolling.
> It is obvious I do not beg for his attention.
Just mine... OK.
>> And Steve has a whole thread now, on how if I do not give Sandman an
>> education, even as he lies about me in a public forum, that this somehow
>> must mean I discourage questions in my classes.
>
> Sandman does not need an education from you.
"Need" is a strong word, but he sure begged a lot for me to help him!
>> Amazing how predictable Steve is. I also noted he would sink to sock
>> puppetry again, and, admittedly sooner than I expected, his "dog" is now
>> taking turns with him at his computer.
>
> So Steve uses sock puppets, whoop dee doo.
No... no... it is his dog. Really, I believe Steve. Not his fault for
forging quotes... his dog! :)
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> You keep begging to help you
> >
> > You have now repeated this misinformation several times, and have been
> > corrected several times. That means that when you repeat it, you are
> > stating something you know is incorrect, i.e. lying. I just wanted to
> > make sure that you are fully aware of this.
> >
> >> Poor strategy on your part.
> >
> > As it turns out, any strategic suggestions from you doesn't seem to be
> > credible enough to take into consideration given your insistence to
> > repeat claims you have been told are incorrect.
> >
> >> You showed you did not understand something that was obvious *and* has been
> >> explained to you repeatedly (at least in part).
> >
> > You have yet to answer my original question; what in my post was
> > humorous? All you have done is to claim that since you were being
> > sarcastic, you incorrectly assumed that so was I. Not what part of my
> > post that was sarcastic, let alone humorous.
> >
> > Note, however, that I no longer expect you to answer such a simple
> > question. I am just noting that it remains unanswered.
>
> You call it "misinformation" for me to note you have repeatedly asked (and
> clearly begged) for my assistance
Actually, if you pay close attention to what I just wrote, I have
clearly labeled it as lies now, since you have been corrected but
failed to change your description since.
Thank you for your interest in this matter.
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
Oh, I wouldn't say that. It has been only a few days so far and it is
obvious that this "soon" has yet to occur and school has yet to begin.
But soon it will.
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
I, for one, would like to know when school begins so I know when you
will stop posting to and about me. I am looking forward to it with
great anticipation.
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
8/27/09 10:58 PM:
>> You call it "misinformation" for me to note you have repeatedly asked (and
>> clearly begged) for my assistance - even as you lie about me and refuse to
>> remove the lies about me you have on your trolling web site... yet the proof
>> you you doing so is in this very thread:
>>
>> I can't help to also notice that you haven't really stepped
>> up and explained neither the serious issue nor the humor
>> coming from me. As I'm sure this was just a slight oversight
>> on your part, I'm confident that your followup to this will
>> be an explanation to what I am missing
>>
>> What joke are you in reference to? See, that's were I need
>> help...
>>
>> I inquired as to what the joke was, so knew just in what
>> manner I had been humiliated, so I could be educated and
>> successfully stay away from such an occasion in the future.
>> So far you have been reluctant to divulge that information
>> for reasons unknown by only referencing it vaguely and
>> without the specificity that I requested.
>>
>> Since I have now asked politely several times and you still
>> refuse to explain further to me...
>>
>> On and on... you keep begging and trying to shame me into helping you.
>>
>> Then denying you are doing so.
>>
>> The accusing me of lying for noting the facts... and spewing other lies about
>> me.
>>
>> Gee, Sandman, not exactly a good showing from you, eh?
>
> Actually, if you pay close attention to what I just wrote, I have
> clearly labeled it as lies now, since you have been corrected but
> failed to change your description since.
>
> Thank you for your interest in this matter.
The fact you have denied your own comments and labeled my noting them as
"lies" is not in contention. The fact is, Sandman, contrary to your
denials, and contrary to your accusations, you repeatedly asked for my help
and even tried to "shame" me into helping you.
I opted not to - unless you met the simple standard of ceasing your lying
about me and removing your lies about me from your web site.
You opted to not do so. OK. No harm, I guess - lying, to you, is more
important than being educated.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
8/27/09 11:01 PM:
Keep in mind, if you can - and if you can be honest about it - that I never
said what was attributed to me.
But that is, to you, irrelevant, eh?
Yes... clearly it is. Do not worry, though, your trolling buddies will back
you up - evidence be damned.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
8/27/09 11:03 PM:
LOL! Yeah, you and Carroll have proved you are just *begging* for my
attention. To your credit you got it... Carroll did not, other than one
post where I helped him with a computer error he reported.
You, on the other hand, were able to suck me in with some clever trolling.
Kudos to you... in your own way, where you are desperate for attention at
all costs, you "won".
But now you are just growing more and more boring. Better step it up if you
want to keep getting replies from me. Oh, the anticipation... what trolling
BS will Sandman think of next? Carroll already took targeting my
professional life - that did not work out too well for him... failed so
badly, in fact, he had to get his "dog" to jump in to take turns posting
with him.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Chance Furlong
> you up, evidence be damned.
Since when did Sandman have trolling buddies?
Snit
on 8/27/09 11:13 PM:
Hint: find an example of Sandman calling out Steve Carroll, Tim Adams, or
Wally on their obvious lying. Or vice-versa: find one of them calling
Sandman out on his.
I predict you will fail... I know I cannot think of a time when any of then
four of them were willing to be honest about any of the other three. Good
luck hunting!
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> > I, for one, would like to know when school begins so I know when you
> > will stop posting to and about me. I am looking forward to it with
> > great anticipation.
>
> LOL! Yeah, you and Carroll have proved you are just *begging* for my
> attention.
Even if that were true, when school begins, you will be "too busy" to
respond to me. I'm unsure what you mean here, if one asks you a
question (what you call "begging for attention"), you're no longer too
busy? Or do you mean that school has yet to begin? I'm hoping for the
latter because that means you can still keep your word to me.
> You, on the other hand, were able to suck me in with some clever trolling.
I'm assuming that this "clever trolling" is your way to describe the
question I asked you here:
<mr-6458B6.21...@News.Individual.NET>
Which you described as "facetious" at the time, not "clever trolling".
It seems the descriptions for "a question" is rather arbitrary for you.
> But now you are just growing more and more boring. Better step it up if you
> want to keep getting replies from me.
I thought I had made it clear that I was looking forward to the moment
where you were "too busy" to respond to me.
"Once someone clarifies their views it should be accepted"
- Snit
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> > Oh, I wouldn't say that. It has been only a few days so far and it is
> > obvious that this "soon" has yet to occur and school has yet to begin.
> > But soon it will.
> >
> Keep in mind, if you can - and if you can be honest about it - that I never
> said what was attributed to me.
What you said was this:
Snit
08/24/2009 18:06:03
<C6B8087B.439CD%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
> Soon my semester starts again and I will not be responding
> to Steve Carroll, Sandman, HPT, Wally, or Tim Adams
I am awaiting this "soon".
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
8/27/09 11:34 PM:
> "Once someone clarifies their views it should be accepted"
> - Snit
You try to use that quote from me to excuse your lying a *lot*. In the
current example, I quote you repeatedly asking for my help and trying to
shame me into helping you... and you deny it. Your denial is not a
"clarification", it is a lie. Clarifications should be accepted - and if
you were to admit you worded something poorly or otherwise did not mean what
you said, and your explanation was not clearly dishonest, then I would
accept it. But that is not the case here. Not at all.
You were busted lying. Again. No "clarification" from you changes that.
But feel free to deny the quotes, below:
Sandman, showing he did not understand the sarcasm he responded to:
I'm not sure why you label him a Mac hater, he just seems to
think it's sad that Apple isn't supporting PPC with Snow
Leopard. I kind of agree with that. How you go from that to
"Mac hater" is beyond me.
And below, a bunch of quotes where Sandman clearly is trying to get my help
or references his desire for my help... which he now denies:
I can't help to also notice that you haven't really stepped
up and explained neither the serious issue nor the humor
coming from me. As I'm sure this was just a slight oversight
on your part, I'm confident that your followup to this will
be an explanation to what I am missing
Because I know for a fact that there is no chance you WON'T
explain this and expose yourself as having no idea what the
serious issue was and having no idea what the supposed humor
was.
So, consider me fully prepared to be publicly humiliated
about this issue, where I was "lost" and you were not, which
you will show me now. Right? :-D
What joke are you in reference to? See, that's were I need
help...
I realized that this was a shortcoming on my part, and you
two had a good laugh at my expense. When you were done
laughing, I inquired as to what the joke was, so knew just in
what manner I had been humiliated, so I could be educated and
successfully stay away from such an occasion in the future.
So far you have been reluctant to divulge that information
for reasons unknown by only referencing it vaguely and
without the specificity that I requested.
I inquired as to what the joke was, so knew just in what
manner I had been humiliated, so I could be educated and
successfully stay away from such an occasion in the future.
So far you have been reluctant to divulge that information
for reasons unknown by only referencing it vaguely and
without the specificity that I requested.
Since I have now asked politely several times and you still
refuse to explain further to me...
[After spewing absurd accusations] But please, thee is still
time for you to rectify that position and answer the
questions posed to you.
It is true that I apparently needed help understanding this
issue and at first I thought that that help could be obtained
from you.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Chance Furlong
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Chance Furlong stated in post T-Bone-899539....@news.giganews.com
> on 8/27/09 11:13 PM:
>
> > In article <C6BCC293.44555%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> > Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> But that is, to you, irrelevant, eh?
> >>
> >> Yes, clearly it is. Do not worry, though, your trolling buddies will back
> >> you up, evidence be damned.
> >
> > Since when did Sandman have trolling buddies?
>
> Hint: find an example of Sandman calling out Steve Carroll, Tim Adams, or
> Wally on their obvious lying. Or vice versa: find one of them calling
> Sandman out on his.
>
> I predict you will fail, I know I cannot think of a time when any of then
> four of them were willing to be honest about any of the other three. Good
> luck hunting!
You seem to have a thing with lying. Go see a psychiatrist.
Snit
on 8/28/09 12:03 AM:
I am very much against it... though I realize I cannot prevent it in others.
But please note, you knew better than to even try to take me up on my
challenge... you know it would be a losing proposition for you. You would
fail to find a single example.
My point is proved.
> Go see a psychiatrist.
Any good recommendations? :)
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
8/27/09 11:56 PM:
While you beg for my attention and, when you fear that you shall lose it,
you join Carroll in targeting my professional life.
Hardly what I call "awaiting" on your part. In fact, you are begging for my
attention.
But you do grow oh so boring... I bet Steve's dog does no beg as much as you
do. :)
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Chance Furlong
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
> attention. To your credit you got it, Carroll did not, other than one
> post where I helped him with a computer error he reported.
Steve has not proved a thing about me, but has proven that you are
messed in the head.
> You, on the other hand, were able to suck me in with some clever trolling.
> Kudos to you, in your own way, where you are desperate for attention at
> all costs, you "won."
If you think I am a troll, you are on LSD.
> But now you are just growing more and more boring.
You can come up with better insults than "boring."
> Better step it up if you want to keep getting replies from me.
All I have to do is reply to you to get you to reply back to me. You
bite every time I throw out the line.
> Oh, the anticipation, what trolling bullshit will Sandman think of next?
I know not.
> Carroll already took to targeting my professional life, that did not work out too well for him, failed so
> badly, in fact, he had to get his "dog" to jump in to take turns posting with him.
Poor Snit, Carroll took a swipe at you, will you pack up your toys and
go home for good?
Chance Furlong
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Chance Furlong stated in post T-Bone-370302....@news.giganews.com
> on 8/28/09 12:03 AM:
>
> > In article <C6BCC487.44563%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> > Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Chance Furlong stated in post
> >> T-Bone-899539....@news.giganews.com
> >> on 8/27/09 11:13 PM:
> >>
> >>> In article <C6BCC293.44555%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> >>> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> But that is, to you, irrelevant, eh?
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes, clearly it is. Do not worry, though, your trolling buddies will
> >>>> back
> >>>> you up, evidence be damned.
> >>>
> >>> Since when did Sandman have trolling buddies?
> >>
> >> Hint: find an example of Sandman calling out Steve Carroll, Tim Adams, or
> >> Wally on their obvious lying. Or vice versa: find one of them calling
> >> Sandman out on his.
> >>
> >> I predict you will fail, I know I cannot think of a time when any of then
> >> four of them were willing to be honest about any of the other three. Good
> >> luck hunting!
> >
> > You seem to have a thing with lying.
>
> I am very much against it, though I realize I cannot prevent it in others.
> But please note, you knew better than to even try to take me up on my
> challenge, you know it would be a losing proposition for you. You would
> fail to find a single example.
In your fantasies.
> > Go see a psychiatrist.
>
> Any good recommendations? :)
Dr. James Dobson.
Chance Furlong
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Sandman stated in post mr-62979D.08...@News.Individual.NET on
> 8/27/09 11:56 PM:
>
> > In article <C6BCC293.44555%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> > Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >
> >>> Oh, I wouldn't say that. It has been only a few days so far and it is
> >>> obvious that this "soon" has yet to occur and school has yet to begin.
> >>> But soon it will.
> >>>
> >> Keep in mind, if you can - and if you can be honest about it - that I never
> >> said what was attributed to me.
> >
> > What you said was this:
> >
> > Snit
> > 08/24/2009 18:06:03
> > <C6B8087B.439CD%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
> >
> >> Soon my semester starts again and I will not be responding
> >> to Steve Carroll, Sandman, HPT, Wally, or Tim Adams
> >
> >
> > I am awaiting this "soon."
>
> While you beg for my attention and, when you fear that you shall lose it,
> you join Carroll in targeting my professional life.
Role reversal is not appropriate here.
> Hardly what I call "awaiting" on your part. In fact, you are begging for my attention.
Why would Sandman want your attention?
Snit
on 8/28/09 12:24 AM:
What else do you think trolls such as Sandman want?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
on 8/28/09 12:21 AM:
If you think you can find an example, go fish.
But you *will* fail.
100% predictable.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> > "Once someone clarifies their views it should be accepted"
> > - Snit
>
> You try to use that quote from me to excuse your lying a *lot*.
Your lie above disqualified the rest of your post from being read. If
you want me to read your posts, you have to stop lying and trolling.
Thanks.
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
So when does your semester start?
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
8/28/09 1:26 AM:
> In article <C6BCCEBA.4456F%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>>> "Once someone clarifies their views it should be accepted"
>>> - Snit
>>
> Your lie above disqualified the rest of your post from being read. If
> you want me to read your posts, you have to stop lying and trolling.
>
> Thanks.
Face it, Sandman, what you snipped, and I returned is solid, irrefutable
proof for what you deny.
But you *know* Carroll will come along later and defend your lie. You know
it, don't you. Maybe his dog will help a bit, too. LOL!
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> > Your lie above disqualified the rest of your post from being read. If
> > you want me to read your posts, you have to stop lying and trolling.
> >
> > Thanks.
>
> Face it, Sandman, what you snipped, and I returned is solid, irrefutable
> proof for what you deny.
I wouldn't know since I didn't read it given the fact that you started
your post with a lie.
If you want me to read what you write (as you apparently do since you
re-paste it so many times), you have to ensure that you have no lies
in your post. That way, I will be more inclined to read what you have
to say about something. I would prefer if you posted something
on-topic as well, i.e. something mac-related. That would be more
interesting indeed (and probably less likely to contain lies from you).
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
8/28/09 2:13 AM:
Sandman, realizing his original lie has been shoved down his throat, tries
to start a meta-debate... where he ends up lying again.
Sandman - your lies are piling. And with that get the last word in... you
were proved to be wrong and dishonest, and now you are just crying.
Boring.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Sandman
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> Face it, Sandman, what you snipped, and I returned is solid, irrefutable
> >> proof for what you deny.
> >
> > I wouldn't know since I didn't read it given the fact that you started
> > your post with a lie.
> >
> > If you want me to read what you write (as you apparently do since you
> > re-paste it so many times), you have to ensure that you have no lies
> > in your post. That way, I will be more inclined to read what you have
> > to say about something. I would prefer if you posted something
> > on-topic as well, i.e. something mac-related. That would be more
> > interesting indeed (and probably less likely to contain lies from you).
>
> Sandman, realizing his original lie
Your lie above disqualified the rest of your post from being read. If
you want me to read your posts, you have to stop lying and trolling.
Thanks.
--
Sandman[.net]
Wally
"Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Wally stated in post C6BD43FE.1981B%Wa...@wally.world.net on 8/27/09 5:21
> PM:
>
>> On 28/8/09 2:07 AM, in article C6BC1985.4437B%use...@gallopinginsanity.com,
>> "Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Wally stated in post C6BCA429.1975F%Wa...@wally.world.net on 8/27/09 5:59
>>> AM:
>>>
>>>>> HPT, Wally, Sandman, C Lund, Steve Carroll and Tim Adams are not trolls
>>>>> and do not troll.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you! I may be biased but I do tend to agree with you! :-)
>>>>
>>>> In this thread for example I have simply pointed out the fact that Snit is
>>>> quite able ... and willing to make derogatory comments and yet he complains
>>>> that derogatory comments *may* be forthcoming toward him!
>>>
>>> Please point to these "derogatory" comments of mine.
>>
>> Already done!
>
> Ah, and now we start the famous circle of deceit
No deceit Snit! I have only posted a few posts lately if you are incapable
of searching through them to find the only one that contains the info that
you seek then ... your problem!
Snit
AM:
> On 28/8/09 8:39 AM, in article C6BC754A.444B2%use...@gallopinginsanity.com,
> "Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> Wally stated in post C6BD43FE.1981B%Wa...@wally.world.net on 8/27/09 5:21
>> PM:
>>
>>> On 28/8/09 2:07 AM, in article C6BC1985.4437B%use...@gallopinginsanity.com,
>>> "Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Wally stated in post C6BCA429.1975F%Wa...@wally.world.net on 8/27/09 5:59
>>>> AM:
>>>>
>>>>>> HPT, Wally, Sandman, C Lund, Steve Carroll and Tim Adams are not trolls
>>>>>> and do not troll.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you! I may be biased but I do tend to agree with you! :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> In this thread for example I have simply pointed out the fact that Snit is
>>>>> quite able ... and willing to make derogatory comments and yet he
>>>>> complains
>>>>> that derogatory comments *may* be forthcoming toward him!
>>>>
>>>> Please point to these "derogatory" comments of mine.
>>>
>>> Already done!
>>
>> Ah, and now we start the famous circle of deceit you and your buddies
>> enjoy... you make an accusation, I ask for support, you say that you already
>> have supported it, I ask you to point to it, you say you already have...
>>
>> ... and you never get around to even trying to support your claims.
>>
>> The funny thing is this accusation of yours is something you could support if
>> you were not incompetent.
>
> No deceit Snit! I have only posted a few posts lately if you are incapable
> of searching through them to find the only one that contains the info that
> you seek then ... your problem!
You just, again, proved me correct.
So get the last word in. You are boring.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
High Plains Thumper
> Snit wrote:
>
>>> Your lie above disqualified the rest of your post from
>>> being read. If you want me to read your posts, you have to
>>> stop lying and trolling. Thanks.
>>
>> Face it, Sandman, what you snipped, and I returned is solid,
>> irrefutable proof for what you deny.
>
> I wouldn't know since I didn't read it given the fact that you
> started your post with a lie.
>
> If you want me to read what you write (as you apparently do
> since you re-paste it so many times), you have to ensure that
> you have no lies in your post. That way, I will be more
> inclined to read what you have to say about something. I would
> prefer if you posted something on-topic as well, i.e.
> something mac-related. That would be more interesting indeed
> (and probably less likely to contain lies from you).
Snit wants irrefutable evidence? Here it is:
The Snit Circus of Pathological Myths continue. Now in its
second printing, alphabetised except for newest additions, here
is what these 130 posters have to say about Snit:
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
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- 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
27- 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
28- 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
29- 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
30- 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
31- 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
32- 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
33- 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
34- 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
35- Heywood Mogroot: "*plonk*"
36- -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
37- 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
38- 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
39- 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
40- 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
41- JEDIDIAH (cola): "You're simply full of shit."
42- 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
43- 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
44- 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
45- 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."
46- 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
47- 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
48- 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
49- John C. Randolph: "You're nothing but a troll yourself. What
are you bitching about?"
50- 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
51- 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
52- 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
53- Josh McKee: "Snit, I assume there was some point to this
posting? Because I certainly cannot find it."
54- 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
55- 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
56- 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
57- 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
58- Lars Trager: "Yes, you are stupid." 7 Jan 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/a9bedf6689f9a54f
59- 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
60- 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
61-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
62- 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
63- 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
64- 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
65- 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
66- 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
67- 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
68- 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
69- 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
70- 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
71- 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
72- 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
73- 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
74- 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
75- 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
76- 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
77- 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
78- 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
79- 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
80- 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
81- 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
82- Pawel Wojciak: "Jesus Christ, snit... <plonk> "
83- 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
84- 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
85- 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
86- Peter Hayes: "True, but that removes Snit completely, and
someti... err..... occasiona.... errrrr..... once in a blue moon
he has something useful to say."
87- 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."
88- 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
89- PeterBP: "Oh will you stfu".
90- 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
91- 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
92- RichardK: "Just killfile him already."
93- 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
94- 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
95- 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
96- 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
97- 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
98- 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
99- 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
100- 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
101- 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
102- 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
103- spike1: "The thought is probably to show everyone here just
how bad a troll snit is".
104- 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
105- 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."
106- 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
107- 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
108- 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
109- 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
110- 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
111- 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
112- 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
113-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
114- 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
115- 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
116- Timberwoof: "*Plonk!*"
117- 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
118- 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
119- 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
120- 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
121- WhoMe: "F michael IS a teacher, it's no wonder he's home
more than he's anywhere near a classroom".
122- 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
123- 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
124- Woofbert: "*Plonk*"
125- 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
126- 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
127- 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."
128- 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
129- 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
130- 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
--
HPT
Snit
on 8/28/09 5:37 PM:
> Sandman wrote:
>> Snit wrote:
>>
>>>> Your lie above disqualified the rest of your post from
>>>> being read. If you want me to read your posts, you have to
>>>> stop lying and trolling. Thanks.
>>>
>>> Face it, Sandman, what you snipped, and I returned is solid,
>>> irrefutable proof for what you deny.
>>
>> I wouldn't know since I didn't read it given the fact that you
>> started your post with a lie.
>>
>> If you want me to read what you write (as you apparently do
>> since you re-paste it so many times), you have to ensure that
>> you have no lies in your post. That way, I will be more
>> inclined to read what you have to say about something. I would
>> prefer if you posted something on-topic as well, i.e.
>> something mac-related. That would be more interesting indeed
>> (and probably less likely to contain lies from you).
>
> Snit wants irrefutable evidence? Here it is:
You failed to quote *me*. No evidence at all... not even weak evidence.
You failed. Again.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
High Plains Thumper
> Snit wrote:
>> Sandman stated:
>>
>>> What you said was this:
>>>
>>> Snit 08/24/2009 18:06:03
>>> <C6B8087B.439CD%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
>>>
>>>> Soon my semester starts again and I will not be
>>>> responding to Steve Carroll, Sandman, HPT, Wally, or Tim
>>>> Adams
>>>
>>> I am awaiting this "soon".
>>
>> While you beg for my attention and, when you fear that you
>> shall lose it, you join Carroll in targeting my professional
>> life.
>>
>> Hardly what I call "awaiting" on your part. In fact, you
>> are begging for my attention.
>>
>> But you do grow oh so boring... I bet Steve's dog does no
>> beg as much as you do. :)
>
> So when does your semester start?
Yavapai College already started. Obviously, Snit lied. Again.
--
HPT
Snit
11:57 PM:
I never said when my classes start, nor if the first day of classes is when
I would be too busy.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]