Quotes! 16-JUL-05
CSMA_Moderator
Fact is most csma posters have noticed that Snit is different. Some cola
posters have noticed too. Here is what over 50 different posters have to
say about him.
----- NEW CSMA_MODERATOR'S FAVORITES! -----
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)."
Henry Flam: "Hey Snit, you keep saying that you are a teacher, help me out!
If you do, I won't be pissed off at you, like most almost everyone in this
group."
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."
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."
Ralph (cola): "I am saying that that Linux is ready for the desktop because
it is being used as a desktop. It is you that is interpreting that as to
saying something different. AFIC, you are now only engaging in trolling,
ignoring content and context to twist words. As I knew all along you are
nothing but a troll."
zara: "you must be a very good liar."
-------------------------------------------
--------- (DIS)HONORABLE MENTIONS ---------
ed: "they're quoting you, totally in context, and saying you're probably
more psychotic than they are, contradicting your own statements to the
contrary. nothing wrong with that in general; it's only in poor taste
because it has to do with the fact that you're pycho. =D"
ed: "see snit, this is why many people don't like discussing things with you
in a rational manner- you make a clearly false statement, get called on it,
and rather than being a man and simply saying you're wrong and letting
things lie, you attempt to make your own mistake seem irrelevant."
Edwin: "Geeze, how do you stand being around yourself, Snit? I've seen a
lot of crappy posters in my time here, but you're by far the worst."
Steve Carroll: "Yeah... the big bad Snit has me all backed into a little
corner:) Now back to reality... do you have a better explanation for your
obvious reading comprehension problems? I'm actually being kind by making
the drug references... I could simply state the more obvious choice that
you are probably retarded to some degree or other. This is a widely known
side effect of your fetal alcohol syndrome you've worried over. But when I
pointed out the relationship between things like your poor reading
comprehension and your admitted health problems, you called me a 'health
bigot'. What kind of kid gloves are required to deal with you and your
problems today, Snit?"
Tim Adams: "So typical of snit. He gets beaten badly in a thread/discussion
so he distorts what others have written by taking a line or two totally
out of context and adding his twist to it."
Wally: "Your word against Steve's is all that most people need to form an
opinion that it is unlikely that Steve is forging anything!"
------------------------------------------------------------
----------- CSMA_MODERATOR'S ALL TIME FAVORITES! -----------
1- 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."
2- 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."
3- 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."
4- 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.
The solution is to NOT REPLY TO SNIT. But for some reason, some people just
can't stop feeding him."
5- °b° unny: "snit makes me sad."
6- buzz off: "Snit is obviously mentally ill..."
7- 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."
8- 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?"
9- 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."
10- Dave Fritzinger: "Snit, please shut up!
Thank you."
11- 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)."
12- Edwin: "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..."
13- Elijah Baley: "If there's ever been a better example of a sociopath than
this Snit character I haven't seen one."
14- 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. "
15- 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!"
16- Henry Flam: "Hey Snit, you keep saying that you are a teacher, help me
out! If you do, I won't be pissed off at you, like most almost everyone in
this group."
17- Heywood Mogroot: "*plonk*"
18- 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."
19- 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."
20- Jim Lee Jr.: "Troll."
21- 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...'"
22- 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??"
23- 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."
24- John Slade: "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."
25- 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."
26- Linønut (cola): "Snit is a Tholenoid."
27- Lloyd Parsons: "Well, I don't know if Oxford is the most cretinous, I
would think that would be reserved for Snit! ;-) "
28- Mark Kent (cola): "Please don't troll any more - it's very tedious."
29- Mayor of R'lyeh: "Here's a hint. Whenever Snit is involved double check
everything. He's a major jackass and loves to do things like this."
30- Mike: "The evidence is overwhelming, and self-explanatory. You're not
smart enough to get someone *already there* to press the floppy eject
button - assuming, of course, that this Carefully Contrived Scenario
actually happened. Which we can only assume that it did not. All we
have is your word - hardly compelling."
31- Mike Dee: "Y'now, I don't think I've ever come across anyone before such
as youself in any other NG, who could single-handedly unify troll and
advocate alike into a such coagulant mass of resistance against him or
herself."
32- 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."
33- Muahman: "Ummm, dude you post 1000 posts a day. 999 of them are trolls,
if anyone here has issues it's not me."
34- Nashton: "This issue was beaten to death. I cannot imagine why Snit is
bringing it up and why anybody would bother to engage in conversation with
him on this topic."
35- 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?"
36- news/Andy: "Snit you obviously need to be more precise when you argue
with some people, or are you doing it deliberately?"
37- 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!!!!!"
38- 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."
39- 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."
40- Peter Köhlmann (cola): "His extremely dishonest way of taking posts out
of context is nothing new, wintrolls have tried this since ages (and failed
miserably) I don't think that there is a single regular poster in cola
thinking that Snit is *not* a troll"
41- Phil Earnhardt: "You're only interested in trying to get superficial
snipes and extrapolate inappropriate conclusions."
42- Ralph (cola): I am saying that that Linux is ready for the desktop
because it is being used as a desktop. It is you that is interpreting that
as to saying something different. AFIC, you are now only engaging in
trolling, ignoring content and context to twist words. As I knew all along
you are nothing but a troll.
43- rapskat (cola):
"You're not even pretending to even be slightly on topic anymore, are you?
You're done, bye."
44- Rick (cola): "Yeah, you might develop some honesty... I'm not holding my
breath."
45- 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."
46- 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."
47- 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."
48- 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."
49- 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."
50- Steve Carroll: "It's really bizarre... Snit appears to have a certain
level of intelligence... then, he'll lie with the most foolish lies, that
are so easily shown as lies... and you wonder where that intelligence
went."
51- 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.
It's much better now that he's in my kill file. :)"
52- 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)."
54- 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."
54- Tim Smith: "Another troll attempt using a random redirector."
55- Timberwoof: "*Plonk!*"
56- Tommy: "LIAR!!!"
57- 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."
58- 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."
59- 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! :-) "
60- Woofbert: "*Plonk*"
61- zara: "you must be a very good liar. "
62- 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."
Snit
do you know... he posts again.
Clap little monkey... clap!
[does responding to you sock puppets count as responding to you?]
Liam Slider
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.
Snit
pan.2005.07.16....@nospam.liamslider.com on 7/16/05 1:48
PM:
> On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 13:39:27 -0700, Snit wrote:
>
>> Gee, I comment about how Steve Carroll has not been posting... and what do
>> you know... he posts again.
>>
>> Clap little monkey... clap!
>>
>> [does responding to you sock puppets count as responding to you?]
>
> Maybe he's responding to the fact you've been an annoying little fuckwit
> lately.
I am quite sure Steve can speak for himself... even if not coherently.
> 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.
Do you have an example of a quote where you think I am doing so?
--
God made me an atheist - who are you to question his authority?
Peter Köhlmann
Take any of your posts here.
Troll droppings. All of them
--
For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat,
and wrong. -- H. L. Mencken
Snit
dbc16u$vva$05$1...@news.t-online.com on 7/16/05 3:20 PM:
Wow! I suspected that you would be 100% unable to come up with a
single quote to support the claim... and I was right.
For you, on the other hand, it would be easy to find examples of you
sinking to name calling and making accusations that you can not
support.
Need me to quote you and prove it?
Steve Carroll
Liam Slider <li...@nospam.liamslider.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 13:39:27 -0700, Snit wrote:
>
> > Gee, I comment about how Steve Carroll has not been posting... and what do
> > you know... he posts again.
> >
> > Clap little monkey... clap!
> >
> > [does responding to you sock puppets count as responding to you?]
>
> Maybe he's responding to the fact you've been an annoying little fuckwit
> lately.
Contrary to yet another of Snit's many unsubstantiated assertions, I'm
not the person creating these threads. You've probably noticed that
Snit's big on asking others for support... if you want another laugh at
his expense, ask him to provide his support that I'm the csma moderator.
--
"Why is proof needed?". The answer is simple: To support your claim." - Snit
Steve
Liam Slider
> Contrary to yet another of Snit's many unsubstantiated assertions, I'm not
> the person creating these threads. You've probably noticed that Snit's big
> on asking others for support... if you want another laugh at his expense,
> ask him to provide his support that I'm the csma moderator.
What I have noticed is his tendency to bring up the same issues again and
again, which are shot down again and again. But he does it in a cyclic
fashion, he rotates out different issues each post until he comes back
around to where he started.
Snit
AM:
I welcome examples but suspect you have none.
Snit
HbOdnQKj9cN...@comcast.com on 7/18/05 8:21 AM:
> Snit poked his little head through the XP firewall and said:
>
>> "Linønut" <lin?n...@bone.com> stated in post
>> ML2dna4x3aJ...@comcast.com on 7/18/05 4:14 AM:
>>
>>> Snit poked his little head through the XP firewall and said:
>>>
>>>> No argument here...
>>>
>>> Thank God!
>>
>> Which one? :)
>
> Priapus
Good God!
--
"If a million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish
thing."
- Anatole France
Liam Slider
You want me to go through months of your posts and frustrating argument
after argument just to provide "evidence" of something pretty much
everyone already knows?
God
> "Linųnut" <lin?n...@bone.com> stated in post
> HbOdnQKj9cN...@comcast.com on 7/18/05 8:21 AM:
>
>> Snit poked his little head through the XP firewall and said:
>>
>>> "Linųnut" <lin?n...@bone.com> stated in post
>>> ML2dna4x3aJ...@comcast.com on 7/18/05 4:14 AM:
>>>
>>>> Snit poked his little head through the XP firewall and said:
>>>>
>>>>> No argument here...
>>>>
>>>> Thank God!
>>>
>>> Which one? :)
>>
>> Priapus
>
> Good God!
Yes, good Me. he (little aitch for him, big H for Me) was referring to the
priapism I gave him; on his forehead.
--
I Am The Great I Am.
Snit
AM:
> On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 09:47:00 -0700, Snit wrote:
>
>> "Liam Slider" <li...@nospam.liamslider.com> stated in post
>> pan.2005.07.18....@nospam.liamslider.com on 7/18/05 8:40 AM:
>>
>>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 08:44:15 -0600, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>
>>>> Contrary to yet another of Snit's many unsubstantiated assertions, I'm
>>>> not the person creating these threads. You've probably noticed that
>>>> Snit's big on asking others for support... if you want another laugh
>>>> at his expense, ask him to provide his support that I'm the csma
>>>> moderator.
>>>
>>> What I have noticed is his tendency to bring up the same issues again
>>> and again, which are shot down again and again. But he does it in a
>>> cyclic fashion, he rotates out different issues each post until he comes
>>> back around to where he started.
>>>
>> I welcome examples but suspect you have none.
>
>
> You want me to go through months of your posts and frustrating argument
> after argument just to provide "evidence" of something pretty much
> everyone already knows?
>
I want you to support your accusations.
We both know you will not. Geeeee.... wonder why. :)
--
BU__SH__
Liam Slider
> "Liam Slider" <li...@nospam.liamslider.com> stated in post
> pan.2005.07.18....@nospam.liamslider.com on 7/18/05 9:56 AM:
>
>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 09:47:00 -0700, Snit wrote:
>>
>>> "Liam Slider" <li...@nospam.liamslider.com> stated in post
>>> pan.2005.07.18....@nospam.liamslider.com on 7/18/05 8:40
>>> AM:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 08:44:15 -0600, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Contrary to yet another of Snit's many unsubstantiated assertions,
>>>>> I'm not the person creating these threads. You've probably noticed
>>>>> that Snit's big on asking others for support... if you want another
>>>>> laugh at his expense, ask him to provide his support that I'm the
>>>>> csma moderator.
>>>>
>>>> What I have noticed is his tendency to bring up the same issues again
>>>> and again, which are shot down again and again. But he does it in a
>>>> cyclic fashion, he rotates out different issues each post until he
>>>> comes back around to where he started.
>>>>
>>> I welcome examples but suspect you have none.
>>
>>
>> You want me to go through months of your posts and frustrating argument
>> after argument just to provide "evidence" of something pretty much
>> everyone already knows?
>>
> I want you to support your accusations.
>
> We both know you will not. Geeeee.... wonder why. :)
Snit, I have been the one here that has probably given you the most
benefit of the doubt, let alone patience. If you have me complaining about
your behavior, what does that tell you?
Snit
AM:
>>>>> What I have noticed is his tendency to bring up the same issues again
>>>>> and again, which are shot down again and again. But he does it in a
>>>>> cyclic fashion, he rotates out different issues each post until he
>>>>> comes back around to where he started.
>>>>>
>>>> I welcome examples but suspect you have none.
>>>
>>>
>>> You want me to go through months of your posts and frustrating argument
>>> after argument just to provide "evidence" of something pretty much
>>> everyone already knows?
>>>
>> I want you to support your accusations.
>>
>> We both know you will not. Geeeee.... wonder why. :)
>
> Snit, I have been the one here that has probably given you the most
> benefit of the doubt, let alone patience. If you have me complaining about
> your behavior, what does that tell you?
>
What it tells me is that you are looking for excuses to not support
your accusations against me.
It comes down to this: if you do try to find a topic where you think it
has been " shot down again and again" I can almost certainly provide
proof (or at least strong support) for my claims. This differentiates
me from most in CSMA, certainly, and, perhaps, COLA.
If you just want to say I often do not let things go and am happy to
defend myself against absurd accusations - well, then, we are in
agreement.
--
"If you have integrity, nothing else matters." - Alan Simpson
Liam Slider
> It comes down to this: if you do try to find a topic where you think it
> has been " shot down again and again" I can almost certainly provide proof
> (or at least strong support) for my claims. This differentiates me from
> most in CSMA, certainly, and, perhaps, COLA.
Ease of use. Integration. Consistency. How ready Linux is for the desktop.
Ease of installation. Etc...
Snit
AM:
Great topics! Some of those are, well, sorta my favorites, really. Do
you have an example where you think I have been "shot down again and
again"? You know, some actual quotes or something.
What I have done is:
Ease of use: provided many examples to support my claims
Integration: provided many examples to support my claims
Consistency: provided many examples to support my claims
How ready Linux is for the desktop: asked those who
are making this claim to define their terms.
They refuse.
I welcome contrary examples... do you have *any*? It is becoming
tedious almost begging you to find a single example of wrong doing on
my part. How many others have the integrity to try to pull from
someone, as I am, *any* example of where they have been "shot down
again and again"? Not many. I am giving you every chance to support
your accusations - and you are shooting yourself down again and again.
Rick
Your best course of action is to ignore him.
--
Rick
Snit
pan.2005.07.18...@nomail.com on 7/18/05 12:16 PM:
Nah, I do not see the need to ignore Liam. Why would you suggest
someone do so?
--
Look, this is silly. It's not an argument, it's an armor plated walrus
with
walnut paneling and an all leather interior.
Tim Adams
"Snit" <kra...@cableone.net> wrote:
> "Liam Slider" <li...@nospam.liamslider.com> stated in post
> pan.2005.07.18....@nospam.liamslider.com on 7/18/05 9:56
> AM:
>
> > On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 09:47:00 -0700, Snit wrote:
> >
> >> "Liam Slider" <li...@nospam.liamslider.com> stated in post
> >> pan.2005.07.18....@nospam.liamslider.com on 7/18/05 8:40 AM:
> >>
> >>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 08:44:15 -0600, Steve Carroll wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Contrary to yet another of Snit's many unsubstantiated assertions, I'm
> >>>> not the person creating these threads. You've probably noticed that
> >>>> Snit's big on asking others for support... if you want another laugh
> >>>> at his expense, ask him to provide his support that I'm the csma
> >>>> moderator.
> >>>
> >>> What I have noticed is his tendency to bring up the same issues again
> >>> and again, which are shot down again and again. But he does it in a
> >>> cyclic fashion, he rotates out different issues each post until he comes
> >>> back around to where he started.
> >>>
> >> I welcome examples but suspect you have none.
> >
> >
> > You want me to go through months of your posts and frustrating argument
> > after argument just to provide "evidence" of something pretty much
> > everyone already knows?
> >
> I want you to support your accusations.
>
> We both know you will not. Geeeee.... wonder why. :)
Have somebody read you the thread 'Bush is Guilty'. Have them explain all those
big words you didn't read/understand the first time around.
--
Tim
Steve Carroll
"Snit" <kra...@cableone.net> wrote:
> "Liam Slider" <li...@nospam.liamslider.com> stated in post
> pan.2005.07.18....@nospam.liamslider.com on 7/18/05 10:16
> AM:
>
> >>>>> What I have noticed is his tendency to bring up the same issues again
> >>>>> and again, which are shot down again and again. But he does it in a
> >>>>> cyclic fashion, he rotates out different issues each post until he
> >>>>> comes back around to where he started.
> >>>>>
> >>>> I welcome examples but suspect you have none.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> You want me to go through months of your posts and frustrating argument
> >>> after argument just to provide "evidence" of something pretty much
> >>> everyone already knows?
> >>>
> >> I want you to support your accusations.
> >>
> >> We both know you will not. Geeeee.... wonder why. :)
> >
> > Snit, I have been the one here that has probably given you the most
> > benefit of the doubt, let alone patience. If you have me complaining about
> > your behavior, what does that tell you?
> >
> What it tells me is that you are looking for excuses to not support
> your accusations against me.
>
> It comes down to this: if you do try to find a topic where you think it
> has been " shot down again and again" I can almost certainly provide
> proof (or at least strong support) for my claims.
Yawn... sorry, Snit... it's too easy to prove you are a liar... no sport
left in it at all. Take this thread for instance... you can provide no
proof (and never have) that I've posted as the csma moderator, yet, you
continually bring this 'topic' up again and again (as you've done here).
Steve Carroll
Liam Slider <li...@nospam.liamslider.com> wrote:
Pretty much, yes. Reality shows there is as much proof that I am the
moderator as Snit is... in fact, this is exactly the sort of thing I
believe he'd do to garner sympathy (in his mind, at least). He's done
strange things in the past for this very reason. Snit has one of the
worst victim mentalities I've seen on usenet.
Steve Carroll
> "Liam Slider" <li...@nospam.liamslider.com> stated in post
> pan.2005.07.18....@nospam.liamslider.com on 7/18/05 10:16
> AM:
>
> >>>>> What I have noticed is his tendency to bring up the same issues again
> >>>>> and again, which are shot down again and again. But he does it in a
> >>>>> cyclic fashion, he rotates out different issues each post until he
> >>>>> comes back around to where he started.
> >>>>>
> >>>> I welcome examples but suspect you have none.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> You want me to go through months of your posts and frustrating argument
> >>> after argument just to provide "evidence" of something pretty much
> >>> everyone already knows?
> >>>
> >> I want you to support your accusations.
> >>
> >> We both know you will not. Geeeee.... wonder why. :)
> >
> > Snit, I have been the one here that has probably given you the most
> > benefit of the doubt, let alone patience. If you have me complaining about
> > your behavior, what does that tell you?
> >
> What it tells me is that you are looking for excuses to not support
> your accusations against me.
Says the hypocrite who won't support the accusation he is making against
someone else. In this very thread, Snit responded to the csma moderator
with the following text:
"Gee, I comment about how Steve Carroll has not been posting... and what
do you know... he posts again."
So, where is your proof I am posting as the csma moderator? No where to
be found.
Steve
> I've posted as the csma moderator
No shit. Did you think this would shock anyone? And look, you came
back right after your sock puppet did. You have been repeatedly caught
using this sock puppet and now you want to whine about how you are a
victim because your glue induced actions have been pointed out. People
are not as stupid as you need them to be.
--
Steve
Alan Baker
"Steve" <sigmond...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Shut up, Snit.
I can killfile you as many times as is necessary.
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect
if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
Steve
> In article <1121756990....@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "Steve" <sigmond...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Steve Carroll wrote:
>>
>>>I've posted as the csma moderator
>>
>>No shit. Did you think this would shock anyone? And look, you came
>>back right after your sock puppet did. You have been repeatedly caught
>>using this sock puppet and now you want to whine about how you are a
>>victim because your glue induced actions have been pointed out. People
>>are not as stupid as you need them to be.
>
>
> Shut up, Snit.
>
> I can killfile you as many times as is necessary.
>
Snit
Alan Baker
"Steve" <sigmond...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Thanks for admitting that you're now posting as
"sigmondCarroll.hotmail.com".
And if you shut up, I wouldn't have to, but you might as well, because I
will. <g>
Buzz
to complete the set?
Snit
alangbaker-D1203...@news.telus.net on 7/19/05 12:40 PM:
> In article <1121801361....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
> "Steve" <sigmond...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Alan Baker wrote:
>>> In article <1121756990....@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>>> "Steve" <sigmond...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I've posted as the csma moderator
>>>>
>>>> No shit. Did you think this would shock anyone? And look, you came
>>>> back right after your sock puppet did. You have been repeatedly caught
>>>> using this sock puppet and now you want to whine about how you are a
>>>> victim because your glue induced actions have been pointed out. People
>>>> are not as stupid as you need them to be.
>>>
>>>
>>> Shut up, Snit.
>>>
>>> I can killfile you as many times as is necessary.
>>>
>> If I shut up why would you have to killfile me?
>>
>> Snit
>
> Thanks for admitting that you're now posting as
> "sigmondCarroll.hotmail.com".
>
> And if you shut up, I wouldn't have to, but you might as well, because I
> will. <g>
Oh, damn. Steve signed my name... it must be me. :)
Snit
7/19/05 1:09 PM:
LOL!
--
Picture of a tuna milkshake: http://snipurl.com/f34z
Feel free to ask for the recipe.
Snit
1121756990....@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com on 7/19/05 12:09 AM:
LOL... and now you are talking to yourself, Steve... how desperately lonely
can you be.
Oh, and this sock puppet of yours will be getting no more responses from me,
either - at least for a while.
I can only wonder what your desperation for attention will lead you to
next...
Snit
Gee, Hi Steve.
Amazing how desperate you are to have me read your messages. Poor, poor
Stevie troll...
Goodbye Steve.
--
"So just killfile me and no one else. It'll cut down on the noise factor"
-- Steve Carroll
_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 120,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account
Steve Carroll
Snit <SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> wrote:
> "Steve" <sigmond...@hotmail.com> stated in post
> 1121801361....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com on 7/19/05 12:29 PM:
>
> > Alan Baker wrote:
> >> In article <1121756990....@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> >> "Steve" <sigmond...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Steve Carroll wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I've posted as the csma moderator
> >>>
> >>> No shit. Did you think this would shock anyone? And look, you came
> >>> back right after your sock puppet did. You have been repeatedly caught
> >>> using this sock puppet and now you want to whine about how you are a
> >>> victim because your glue induced actions have been pointed out. People
> >>> are not as stupid as you need them to be.
> >>
> >>
> >> Shut up, Snit.
> >>
> >> I can killfile you as many times as is necessary.
> >>
> > If I shut up why would you have to killfile me?
> >
> > Snit
> >
> Gee, Hi Steve.
>
> Amazing how desperate you are to have me read your messages. Poor, poor
> Stevie troll...
>
You're calling me desperate after having just replied to one of your
sock puppets in a post that's a month old?
> Goodbye Steve.
Sure, Snit... sure;)
--
"I do not focus on personalities over content." - Snit
Steve
Snit
noone-270913....@comcast.dca.giganews.com on 8/17/05 9:05 AM:
>> Gee, Hi Steve.
>>
>> Amazing how desperate you are to have me read your messages. Poor, poor
>> Stevie troll...
>>
>
> You're calling me desperate after having just replied to one of your
> sock puppets in a post that's a month old?
Well, Steve, let's humor you for a bit:
You just made an accusation that the post I replied to was a sock puppet of
mine.
Please support your "absolute statement".
Oh, you never will.
>
>> Goodbye Steve.
>
> Sure, Snit... sure;)
And back to ignoring you... unless you support your accusation. See, I give
you chances.
Of course - you blow them *every* time. :)
--
"So just killfile me and no one else. It'll cut down on the noise factor"
-- Steve Carroll
_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Steve Carroll
Snit <SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> wrote:
> "Steve Carroll" <no...@nowhere.com> stated in post
> noone-270913....@comcast.dca.giganews.com on 8/17/05 9:05 AM:
>
> >> Gee, Hi Steve.
> >>
> >> Amazing how desperate you are to have me read your messages. Poor, poor
> >> Stevie troll...
> >>
> >
> > You're calling me desperate after having just replied to one of your
> > sock puppets in a post that's a month old?
>
> Well...
...what else would we expect you to do? Exactly.
Snit
>> Well...
>
> ...what else would we expect you to do? Exactly.
>
And, as expected, you snipped and ran and threw up your white flag.
I will check back with you in... oh, who knows... a week... a month...
more... less... maybe never... knowing the whole time you will be begging
for my attention.
If you grow a back bone and can actually support your accusations against me
let me know - since I am going back to not reading your post you will have
to have one of your... um... "friends" tell me. :)
Here, again, is the challenge that you repeatedly are running from:
-----
You just made an accusation that the post I replied to was a sock puppet of
mine.
Please support your "absolute statement".
Oh, you never will.
-----
And, of course, you won't. Ever. Poor, poor Steve - likes to point to
others "absolute statements" but cannot support his own.
What a hypocrite you are, Steve... though you have made at least one
intelligent comment in your life:
"So just killfile me and no one else. It'll cut down on the noise factor"
-- Steve Carroll
--
'Waaaa', cried the victim (who made the bed he lies in). - Steve Carroll
Steve Carroll
Snit <SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> wrote:
> "Steve Carroll" <no...@nowhere.com> stated in post
> noone-C8F432....@comcast.dca.giganews.com on 8/17/05 9:55 AM:
>
> >> Well...
> >
> > ...what else would we expect you to do? Exactly.
> >
> And, as expected
... I, like everyone else that has read enough of your circus material,
assumed you used sock puppets because you have been caught so many times
doing so? Of course.
Jim Lee Jr.
<SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> wrote:
> "Steve" <sigmond...@hotmail.com> stated in post
> 1121801361....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com on 7/19/05 12:29 PM:
>
> > Alan Baker wrote:
> >> In article <1121756990....@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> >> "Steve" <sigmond...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Steve Carroll wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I've posted as the csma moderator
> >>>
> >>> No shit. Did you think this would shock anyone? And look, you came
> >>> back right after your sock puppet did. You have been repeatedly caught
> >>> using this sock puppet and now you want to whine about how you are a
> >>> victim because your glue induced actions have been pointed out. People
> >>> are not as stupid as you need them to be.
> >>
> >>
> >> Shut up, Snit.
> >>
> >> I can killfile you as many times as is necessary.
> >>
> > If I shut up why would you have to killfile me?
> >
> > Snit
> >
> Gee, Hi Steve.
>
> Amazing how desperate you are to have me read your messages. Poor, poor
> Stevie troll.
>
> Goodbye, Steve.
Girls, girls, take the catfighting outside. :D
Snit
180820050239081115%peejs...@insightbb.com on 8/18/05 12:38 AM:
Steve already resorted to his cowardly white flag waving of snipping all
content and running - so I am back to ignoring him.
Don't worry - he will create another sock puppet to try to get my attention
soon. He always does.
--
"Innovation is not about saying yes to everything. It's about saying NO to
all but the most crucial features." -- Steve Jobs
_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Steve Carroll
Snit <SN...@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> wrote:
Translation: Steve wouldn't listen to my inane drivel so I'm running
while calling him a coward. That's OK, I still have Edwin...
> Don't worry - he will create another sock puppet to try to get my attention
> soon. He always does.
Why do I need sock puppets to get your attention? You spend more time
now focusing on talking about me than when you were still talking to me.