how to tell if your father ever loved you
$Zero
if and when he punished you...
did he do so for your benefit?
or his?
...
manhood.
it ain't a compicated thing.
it's about taking personal responsibility.
(for that which you are personally responsible for).
...
-$Zero...
R Chives
"$Zero" <ze...@whooooooosh.com> wrote in message
news:1182114653.4...@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> manhood.
>
> it ain't a compicated thing.
>
> it's about taking personal responsibility.
"you really don't understand the basic dynamics of life, do you? you would
rather see a creative genius spending 16 hours a week flipping burgers at
McDonald's to meet some silly unfair judgment [of 25 per week in child
support] which, BTW, his kids DO NOT need than spend his time creating the
cure for cancer, or the solution to poverty, or some other grandiose thing
that he is very capable of accomplishing."
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/9147026721a87d40?dmode=source
Alas, 37 million US citizens living in poverty and the other one dead and
buried: the best laid plans.
> (for that which you are personally responsible for).
"unfortunately, entrepreneurs are prohibitted from collecting welfare. you
can't be president of a corporation (even a currently profitless one) and
collect welfare or food stamps or get money to help pay your heat bill . . .
i certainly could have used regular welfare checks but the government, in
it's infinite wisdom, will only assist those who have absolutely nothing."
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/4e70cf230c6c91b0?dmode=source
Skipper
$Zero <ze...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
> how to tell if your father ever loved you
>
> if and when he punished you...
>
> did he do so for your benefit?
>
> or his?
He like to hear me scream and watch the glass break.
$Zero
wrote:
> "$Zero" <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote in message
>
> > manhood.
>
> > it ain't a compicated thing.
>
> > it's about taking personal responsibility.
>
> "you really don't understand the basic dynamics of life, do you? you would
> rather see a creative genius spending 16 hours a week flipping burgers at
> McDonald's to meet some silly unfair judgment [of 25 per week in child
> support]
wrong.
it was 25 per month.
fundoc, i presume?
i mean, if you're going to be so utterly obsessed with me and my life,
and lash out out me whenever i mock you and your evil sell-out ilk
(like your scumbag child-molesting clients), at least get your facts
straight, you who is so slimey and cowardly depraved that you post
with a differnet email address every day -- somehow believing that
doing so protects you from your evil attempts to cross over into RL.
so what is $25 divided by 4.333?
not even $6 a week.
oh my.
think what the kids could have done with their almost $3 per week
each.
that judgement was real meaningful, wasn't it.
yep.
it was a leverage tool.
duh.
> which, BTW, his kids DO NOT need than spend his time creating the
> cure for cancer, or the solution to poverty, or some other grandiose thing
> that he is very capable of accomplishing.
"http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/9147026721a87d40?
dmod...
none of which you could possibly ever dream of accomplishing.
hence your desperate and jealous lashing out at moi.
duh.
> Alas, 37 million US citizens living in poverty and the other one dead and
> buried: the best laid plans.
no thanks to you, huh?
> > (for that which you are personally responsible for).
>
> "unfortunately, entrepreneurs are prohibitted from collecting welfare. you
> can't be president of a corporation (even a currently profitless one) and
> collect welfare or food stamps or get money to help pay your heat bill . . .
> i certainly could have used regular welfare checks but the government, in
> it's infinite wisdom, will only assist those who have absolutely nothing.
"http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/4e70cf230c6c91b0?
dmod...
my, you are sooo bitterly obsessed with moi, aren't ya?
what could that possibly mean?
cluetime: it doesn't take a creative genius to figure it out.
HTH
-$Zero...
$Zero
> In article <1182114653.471561.107...@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
>
> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
>
> > how to tell if your father ever loved you
>
> > if and when he punished you...
>
> > did he do so for your benefit?
>
> > or his?
>
> He like to hear me scream and watch the glass break.
but was it half full or half empty?
-$Zero...
Skipper
$Zero <ze...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
> On Jun 17, 7:53?pm, Skipper <skipspaml...@charter.invalid> wrote:
> > In article <1182114653.471561.107...@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
> >
> > > how to tell if your father ever loved you
> >
> > > if and when he punished you...
> >
> > > did he do so for your benefit?
> >
> > > or his?
> >
> > He like to hear me scream and watch the glass break.
>
> but was it half full or half empty?
Windows, dummy.
$Zero
> In article <1182127939.750189.80...@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 17, 7:53?pm, Skipper <skipspaml...@charter.invalid> wrote:
> > > $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
>
> > > > how to tell if your father ever loved you
>
> > > > if and when he punished you...
>
> > > > did he do so for your benefit?
>
> > > > or his?
>
> > > He like to hear me scream and watch the glass break.
>
> > but was it half full or half empty?
>
> Windows, dummy.
which version, genius?
-$Zero...
Dead Chef (the dead one)
> my, you are sooo bitterly obsessed with moi, aren't ya?
>
> what could that possibly mean?
I'll field this one.
You said: "manhood . . . it's about taking personal responsibility."
Then this Mr Chive fellow, I assume it's a fellow, quoted passages in which
you bemoan your inability to take personal responsibility for paying 5
dolars a week in child support because you were too busy eliminating poverty
and how it was the government's fault that you couldn't take personal
responsibility for paying your rent because they refused to give you
welfare. I think that's what that could have possibly meant.
And then me of course I'm bitter that spent your nights jerking off to those
Spanish television dance shows rather than "creating the cure for cancer,"
as promised. I was so counting on you.
$Zero
<b...@heavensgate.com> wrote:
> "$Zero" <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote in message
>
> > my, you are sooo bitterly obsessed with moi, aren't ya?
>
> > what could that possibly mean?
>
> I'll field this one.
that's beyond your abilities, due to the nature of it.
note that the first explanation i gave for your obsession had nothing
to do with the second i mentioned above.
anyway...
> You said: "manhood . . . it's about taking personal responsibility."
yes.
i did.
> Then this Mr Chive fellow, I assume it's a fellow, quoted passages in which
> you bemoan your inability to take personal responsibility for paying 5
> dolars a week in child support because
because it was a bullshit judgement, for one thing.
and as you may have heard somewhere, money isn't everything.
there's quite a few mothers in the world who don't make a single
dollar per year, yet they take "personal responsibility" for their
children, you fucking mindless bigot.
do you condemn them too?
i'll bet you do.
anyway, i was flat broke, working my ass off on a VERY innovative
business that was sadly way ahead of its time (and thus difficult to
calm the chickenshit investors about -- thus they cut off their noses
to spite their faces and lost all of their investment -- not giving a
damn about stranding me in poverty -- being so well cushed up and
comfy themselves -- surely they're today probably wishing they had a
bit more patience and wisdom and foresight).
i was working day and night, going without what you would surely
consider necessities.
not that a parasitic ambulance chaser like yourself has a clue what
that's like.
you're a spoiled brat know-nothing who is so well versed in "manhood"
and "personal responsibility" that you post with a different email
address every hour while maliciously trying to drag other people's
personal life (from many many years ago) into the mix to try to make
some "hypocrite" point (is that rich, or what), while not giving a
damn about what kind of damage you could do to innocent people --
while posturing otherwise.
IOW: you're a complete scumbag.
not that this is any kind of Newsflash.
what's your band name again?
starts with a W innit.
quite fitting.
at least you're somewhat self-aware, if not enough.
> you were too busy eliminating poverty
> and how it was the government's fault that you couldn't take personal
> responsibility for paying your rent because they refused to give you
> welfare.
that's not anywhere near what i said, braindead-boy.
but i suppose it's no surprise that you can't translate basic economic
ideas -- not having earned an honest buck in your misery-causing
misery-enabling life.
but to translate the text for you:
i didn't blame the government for my poverty, i called them utterly
stupid ("infinite wisdom") for giving away all sorts of welfare money
to lazy jobless idiots while not providing any kind of minimal (not
even one penny) or reasonable "life support" for creative genius
energetic people like myself who could have been creating a zillion
jobs so they wouldn't have to give away ANY money to jobless idiots.
duh.
but you snip and form for your agenda, nitwit.
it's what you do, afterall.
twisting in favor of scumbags.
no matter what the consequences.
"But this goes to the difference between
your world and mine - as a lawyer you look
for evidence that supports your [client's]
position, as a scientist I look for evidence
that demolishes mine."
-- John Ashby
and you don't even do your twisting too well.
which is why your email name changes daily.
you're a cowardly hit and run asshole.
deluded, besides.
> I think that's what that could have possibly meant.
you don't think at all. you just hate.
> And then me of course I'm bitter that spent your nights jerking off to those
> Spanish television dance shows rather than "creating the cure for cancer,"
> as promised. I was so counting on you.
whatever.
go defend some more child molestors, asshole.
they've got the cash you crave, not moi.
so stop wasting your energy being jealous of someone who is flat broke
due to hateful brainwashed assholes like yourself -- who spend their
energies defending and enabling despicable dishonest greedy nitwits
like Ray Haddad.
HTH
(not really)
-$Zero...
Ray Haddad
and $Zero <ze...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
>anyway, i was flat broke, working my ass off on a VERY innovative
>business that was sadly way ahead of its time (and thus difficult to
>calm the chickenshit investors about -- thus they cut off their noses
>to spite their faces and lost all of their investment -- not giving a
>damn about stranding me in poverty -- being so well cushed up and
>comfy themselves -- surely they're today probably wishing they had a
>bit more patience and wisdom and foresight).
Yes. MicroHard was just a concept before its time, Xero.
--
Ray
Skipper
<ze...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
{sigh}
O-K I w-i-l-l s-p-e-a-k s-l-o-w-l-y f-o-r y-o-u.
Glass windows. Maybe you'll get some in your hut some time.
>
> -$Zero...
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/megablog/topics
>
$Zero
> In article <1182133358.822960.78...@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, $Zero
> <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 17, 9:53?pm, Skipper <skipspaml...@charter.invalid> wrote:
> > > In article <1182127939.750189.80...@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
> > > $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
> > > > On Jun 17, 7:53?pm, Skipper <skipspaml...@charter.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > how to tell if your father ever loved you
>
> > > > > > if and when he punished you...
>
> > > > > > did he do so for your benefit?
>
> > > > > > or his?
>
> > > > > He like to hear me scream and watch the glass break.
>
> > > > but was it half full or half empty?
>
> > > Windows, dummy.
>
> > which version, genius?
>
> {sigh}
>
> O-K I w-i-l-l s-p-e-a-k s-l-o-w-l-y f-o-r y-o-u.
>
> Glass windows. Maybe you'll get some in your hut some time.
could you do me a big favor and please speak just a bit slower this
time?
i think i'm almost getting it.
-$Zero...
$Zero
> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
>
> >anyway, i was flat broke, working my ass off on a VERY innovative
> >business that was sadly way ahead of its time (and thus difficult to
> >calm the chickenshit investors about -- thus they cut off their noses
> >to spite their faces and lost all of their investment -- not giving a
> >damn about stranding me in poverty -- being so well cushed up and
> >comfy themselves -- surely they're today probably wishing they had a
> >bit more patience and wisdom and foresight).
>
> Yes. MicroHard was just a concept before its time, Xero.
yeah, like you know the first thing about developing cutting-edge
innovation.
now scram -- don't you have some Amway quotas to meet or something?
-$Zero...
Beethoven wrote the ninth deaf
http://groups.google.com/group/megablog/topics
Ray Haddad
and $Zero <ze...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
>On Jun 18, 4:06?pm, Ray Haddad <rhad...@iexpress.net.au> wrote:
>
>> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
>>
>> >anyway, i was flat broke, working my ass off on a VERY innovative
>> >business that was sadly way ahead of its time (and thus difficult to
>> >calm the chickenshit investors about -- thus they cut off their noses
>> >to spite their faces and lost all of their investment -- not giving a
>> >damn about stranding me in poverty -- being so well cushed up and
>> >comfy themselves -- surely they're today probably wishing they had a
>> >bit more patience and wisdom and foresight).
>>
>> Yes. MicroHard was just a concept before its time, Xero.
>
>yeah, like you know the first thing about developing cutting-edge
>innovation.
Why not describe this innovative business of yours, Xero?
--
Ray
Yet another screen name
> On Jun 18, 10:54?am, "Dead Chef \(the dead one\)"
> <b...@heavensgate.com> wrote:
>
>> "$Zero" <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote in message
>>
>> > my, you are sooo bitterly obsessed with moi, aren't ya?
>>
>> > what could that possibly mean?
>>
>> I'll field this one.
>
> that's beyond your abilities, due to the nature of it.
>
> note that the first explanation i gave for your obsession had nothing
> to do with the second i mentioned above.
>
> anyway...
>
>> You said: "manhood . . . it's about taking personal responsibility."
>
> yes.
>
> i did.
>
>> Then this Mr Chive fellow, I assume it's a fellow, quoted passages in
>> which
>> you bemoan your inability to take personal responsibility for paying 5
>> dolars a week in child support because
>
> because it was a bullshit judgement, for one thing.
>
> and as you may have heard somewhere, money isn't everything.
It's not everything, but it's very nice to have.
>
> there's quite a few mothers in the world who don't make a single
> dollar per year, yet they take "personal responsibility" for their
> children, you fucking mindless bigot.
>
> do you condemn them too?
What exactly do the experiences of quite a few mothers have to do with your
manly refusal to pay child support, numbskull?
>
> i'll bet you do.
>
> anyway, i was flat broke, working my ass off on a VERY innovative
> business that was sadly way ahead of its time (and thus difficult to
> calm the chickenshit investors about -- thus they cut off their noses
> to spite their faces and lost all of their investment -- not giving a
> damn about stranding me in poverty -- being so well cushed up and
> comfy themselves -- surely they're today probably wishing they had a
> bit more patience and wisdom and foresight).
>
> i was working day and night, going without what you would surely
> consider necessities.
That's a very funny er I mean sad story. Do you need a tissue you big
personal responsibility accepting girl's blouse?
>
> not that a parasitic ambulance chaser like yourself has a clue what
> that's like.
>
> you're a spoiled brat know-nothing who is so well versed in "manhood"
> and "personal responsibility" that you post with a different email
> address every hour while maliciously trying to drag other people's
> personal life (from many many years ago) into the mix to try to make
> some "hypocrite" point (is that rich, or what), while not giving a
> damn about what kind of damage you could do to innocent people --
> while posturing otherwise.
I'm not posturing noodlehead. I think you should have been imprisoned for
refusing to support your childen and wish you had been assfucked to death in
the shower so that at least your kids would have inherited the change
beneath your sofa cushions.
>
> IOW: you're a complete scumbag.
>
> not that this is any kind of Newsflash.
>
> what's your band name again?
>
> starts with a W innit.
>
> quite fitting.
>
> at least you're somewhat self-aware, if not enough.
>
>> you were too busy eliminating poverty
>> and how it was the government's fault that you couldn't take personal
>> responsibility for paying your rent because they refused to give you
>> welfare.
>
> that's not anywhere near what i said, braindead-boy.
That's exactly what you said fuckhead.
"i certainly could have used regular welfare checks but the government . . .
will only assist those who have absolutely nothing."
>
> but i suppose it's no surprise that you can't translate basic economic
> ideas -- not having earned an honest buck in your misery-causing
> misery-enabling life.
>
> but to translate the text for you:
>
> i didn't blame the government for my poverty, i called them utterly
> stupid ("infinite wisdom") for giving away all sorts of welfare money
> to lazy jobless idiots while not providing any kind of minimal (not
> even one penny) or reasonable "life support" for creative genius
> energetic people like myself who could have been creating a zillion
> jobs so they wouldn't have to give away ANY money to jobless idiots.
To recap: your idea of "taking personal responsibility" is to go on the
dole, but being a super geenious you couldn't even manage that, waa.
$Zero
<peek...@myemailaddresss.org> wrote:
> "$Zero" <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote in message
> > On Jun 18, 10:54?am, "Dead Chef \(the dead one\)"
> > <b...@heavensgate.com> wrote:
> >> "$Zero" <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote in message
>
> >> > my, you are sooo bitterly obsessed with moi, aren't ya?
>
> >> > what could that possibly mean?
>
> >> I'll field this one.
>
> > that's beyond your abilities, due to the nature of it.
>
> > note that the first explanation i gave for your obsession had nothing
> > to do with the second i mentioned above.
>
> > anyway...
>
> >> You said: "manhood . . . it's about taking personal responsibility."
>
> > yes.
>
> > i did.
>
> >> Then this Mr Chive fellow, I assume it's a fellow, quoted passages in
> >> which
> >> you bemoan your inability to take personal responsibility for paying 5
> >> dolars a week in child support because
>
> > because it was a bullshit judgement, for one thing.
>
> > and as you may have heard somewhere, money isn't everything.
>
> It's not everything, but it's very nice to have.
i can certainly vouch for that.
> > there's quite a few mothers in the world who don't make a single
> > dollar per year, yet they take "personal responsibility" for their
> > children, you fucking mindless bigot.
>
> > do you condemn them too?
>
> What exactly do the experiences of quite a few mothers have to do with your
> manly refusal to pay child support, numbskull?
how many of those "quite a few mothers who don't make a single dollar
per year" have been ordered to pay $25 a month child support,
counseler?
duh.
no wonder you "work from home and don't do trial work".
"that's for ametuers!"
uh huh.
> > i'll bet you do.
>
> > anyway, i was flat broke, working my ass off on a VERY innovative
> > business that was sadly way ahead of its time (and thus difficult to
> > calm the chickenshit investors about -- thus they cut off their noses
> > to spite their faces and lost all of their investment -- not giving a
> > damn about stranding me in poverty -- being so well cushed up and
> > comfy themselves -- surely they're today probably wishing they had a
> > bit more patience and wisdom and foresight).
>
> > i was working day and night, going without what you would surely
> > consider necessities.
>
> That's a very funny er I mean sad story. Do you need a tissue you big
> personal responsibility accepting girl's blouse?
reread for context (with the prior stuff above), put some pants on,
get off the couch, and try to imagine the real world.
> > not that a parasitic ambulance chaser like yourself has a clue what
> > that's like.
>
> > you're a spoiled brat know-nothing who is so well versed in "manhood"
> > and "personal responsibility" that you post with a different email
> > address every hour while maliciously trying to drag other people's
> > personal life (from many many years ago) into the mix to try to make
> > some "hypocrite" point (is that rich, or what), while not giving a
> > damn about what kind of damage you could do to innocent people --
> > while posturing otherwise.
>
> I'm not posturing noodlehead. I think you should have been imprisoned for
> refusing to support your childen and wish you had been assfucked to death in
> the shower so that at least your kids would have inherited the change
> beneath your sofa cushions.
have you considered running for a judgeship somewhere in the south
instead of jerking off in your underwear on the couch while doing
Lexis Nexis all day long?
> > IOW: you're a complete scumbag.
>
> > not that this is any kind of Newsflash.
>
> > what's your band name again?
>
> > starts with a W innit.
>
> > quite fitting.
>
> > at least you're somewhat self-aware, if not enough.
>
> >> you were too busy eliminating poverty
> >> and how it was the government's fault that you couldn't take personal
> >> responsibility for paying your rent because they refused to give you
> >> welfare.
>
> > that's not anywhere near what i said, braindead-boy.
>
> That's exactly what you said fuckhead.
remove your pants and get back on the couch, there's no hope for you.
> "i certainly could have used regular welfare checks but the government . . .
> will only assist those who have absolutely nothing."
quote me the part of that where i'm "blaming the government", idiot.
i said they would have been a great help.
"i certainly could have used"
duh.
no blame.
calling them idiotic for not spending taxpayer money more wisely:
"but the government . . .will only assist
those who have absolutely nothing."
they'll help lazy jobless idiots but NOT those like myself who are NOT
jobless lazy idiots but rather enthusiastically and energetic and
creative and inventive job CREATORS.
if you have a business that's struggling towards a certain succes,
they won't even give you as much money as they'll throw down a rathole
every month on some lazy jobless idiot.
duh, again.
> > but i suppose it's no surprise that you can't translate basic economic
> > ideas -- not having earned an honest buck in your misery-causing
> > misery-enabling life.
>
> > but to translate the text for you:
>
> > i didn't blame the government for my poverty, i called them utterly
> > stupid ("infinite wisdom") for giving away all sorts of welfare money
> > to lazy jobless idiots while not providing any kind of minimal (not
> > even one penny) or reasonable "life support" for creative genius
> > energetic people like myself who could have been creating a zillion
> > jobs so they wouldn't have to give away ANY money to jobless idiots.
>
> To recap: your idea of "taking personal responsibility" is to go on the
> dole,
oy.
the dole.
Gawd.
> but being a super geenious you couldn't even manage that, waa
you have NO idea what i went through.
be grateful.
(as if you could possibly do such a thing).
$Zero
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:31:37 -0700, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
well, for one thing, despite advances in technology which would now
make it even MORE efficient and profitable than the test marketing
already proved it to be, it's _still_ quite a bit ahead of its time --
due to the creative genius way i designed and developed it.
trade secrets innit.
real ones, not Master Circus Troll wetdream trade secrets.
Ray Haddad
and $Zero <ze...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
>On Jun 18, 7:22?pm, Ray Haddad <rhad...@iexpress.net.au> wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:31:37 -0700, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
>> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
>> >On Jun 18, 4:06?pm, Ray Haddad <rhad...@iexpress.net.au> wrote:
>>
>> >> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
>>
>> >> >anyway, i was flat broke, working my ass off on a VERY innovative
>> >> >business that was sadly way ahead of its time (and thus difficult to
>> >> >calm the chickenshit investors about -- thus they cut off their noses
>> >> >to spite their faces and lost all of their investment -- not giving a
>> >> >damn about stranding me in poverty -- being so well cushed up and
>> >> >comfy themselves -- surely they're today probably wishing they had a
>> >> >bit more patience and wisdom and foresight).
>>
>> >> Yes. MicroHard was just a concept before its time, Xero.
>>
>> >yeah, like you know the first thing about developing cutting-edge
>> >innovation.
>>
>> Why not describe this innovative business of yours, Xero?
>
>well, for one thing, despite advances in technology which would now
>make it even MORE efficient and profitable than the test marketing
>already proved it to be, it's _still_ quite a bit ahead of its time --
>due to the creative genius way i designed and developed it.
Describe this business that was innovative and ahead of its time,
Xero. Your claim. Your turn.
>trade secrets innit.
Nonsense. By now it's got to be way behind the times. Even so,
you're not trading in that business.
>real ones, not Master Circus Troll wetdream trade secrets.
What was the nature of this innovative business, Xero?
--
Ray
Yet another screen name
> you have NO idea what i went through.
Pretty good idea actually. Lets see how close I can get.
For the first 23 years of your pathetic life you lived at home with Mama
Madliardodo who spoiled the fuck out of you as only an eyetie can and
afterwards you married a rich broad with nice funbags and had some kids but
your wife was a sell out capitalist drunken whore who was blind to your
super geniious and stomped on your dreams merely because she didn't want to
live with you in a warehouse so you got a divorce but after a protracted
legal battle that made Jarndyce and Jarndyce look like a cute little puppy
dog with a waggy tail and gumdrop eyes several old money lawyers and judges
who belonged to the same country club conspired to give your ex got custody
of the kids and not only that but you were saddled with an onerous and
unfair child support payment of 75 cents per day that you could not afford
to pay because you were too busy curing cancer not to mention that your
business failed due to a vast far reaching conspiracy between your
shortsighted investors and the phone company and when you attempted to get
food stamps you discovered that for some reason the government had decided
that giving tax dollars to able bodied white males who didn't feel like
getting a job was not sound fiscal policy because of which vicious perfidy
you were unable to manage the 75 cents a day but no matter because you had
no intention of paying it anyway as that would entail getting a job working
for the man and working for the man is slavery and you're no nigger besides
which your ex in laws are rich so they can afford to buy your children food
and shoes which is as it should be because if manhood and personal
responsibility mean anything they mean making sure you marry a rich broad
and then after several years of writing poetry on usenet for data sets where
poetry is defined as unpunctuated sentences despite being a Wiley coyote
super genious you were outsmarted by hateful republican hacker Wendy
Chowderhead Green who stole your sure fire business idea after which you
started 76 blogs and watched the Sopranos, which was a really good show.
$Zero
<peek...@myemailaddresss.org> wrote:
> "$Zero" <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote in message
hey, if you're gonna use so much of your time and energies (and your
obsessively twisted mind and tortured soul) to attempt to smear me how
can you possibly leave out all of the easily twist-prone details of my
breach birth?
or my precocious grade school beanbag years?
or the day i finally got to destroy my leg brace with a cinder block?
or the sublime way i dropped out of high school with a couple of my
"genius" buddies?
or how we all partied at my first apartment where i frequently spent
twelve hours a day watching Twighlight Zone and Star Trek episodes?
or my trip across the USA with the boys (with only two of us left
trying to get back home armed only with our empty pockets and my over-
the-limit credit card and a single jar of of sugar food)?
or my jukebox decade?
or my twenty thousand warehouse evictions?
or my massive but highly classy class action failure?
or all of the other numerous things you begged me in email to expand
upon like a saliviating little groupie girl.
> > you have NO idea what i went through.
>
> Pretty good idea actually. Lets see how close I can get.
not very.
i mean, you hardly touched the surface of my vast array of obviously
memorable and exciting experiences.
(though, to your credit, you've clearly put a lot of work into it over
the years).
but what a total slacker of a Kitty Kelly biographer you are, albeit
obviously paying great attention to moi.
sorry i can't say the same about you.
blowing your money on the ponies is about all that comes to mind.
well that, and the amusing image of a disgusting asshole-infatuated
"musician" whose daytime attorney job is spent on his couch reading
all of my posts.
but i can understand your efforts above.
i mean, given the scope of your vast "knowledge" of me, it was surely
a hell of a lot easier for you to expand on your Kitty Kellyesque
bigography of moi than try to explain how poorly your underwear-
licking on-the-couch Lexus Nexus jerk-off search session went when you
tried to somehow desperately recover from all of the stupidity of
yours that i yet again artfully exposed in the post you snipped
behind, aye?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/2e513b5a15dedb49
it must be awful hard to be made to look so utterly ridiculous (and
obviously idiotic) about your own profession, aye?
particularly when it's done by a penniless high-school drop-out usenet
loser like myself.
read 'em and weep:
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/2e513b5a15dedb49
besides, you forgot to mention my ground-breaking Peace-Prize winning
Unicornian Math:
"unrivaled usenet hilarity, to say the least.
i mean, beyond the details of the record,
there's also the big picture here, to whit:
look how long us nutcases can argue about
something as simple as 2 + 2 = 5.
there's not even politics or religion or guns involved.
yikes. it's been two+ months by now, hasn't it?"
-- [FOUITN] (Unicornian Ironies) "don't have time for this today"
IF 1 + 2 = 3
AND 2 > 1
AND 2 < 3
AND 1 > 0
AND 0 > -1
AND 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = 10
AND 4 - 1 = 3
AND 4 + 1 = 5
AND 4 + 3 = 7
AND 7 - 2 = 5
AND 2 + 3 = 5
AND 2 < 3
AND 1 + 2 + 2 + 1 = 6
AND 6 - 3 = 3
AND 6 + 1 = 7
AND 6 - 1 = 5
AND 6 + 3 = 9
AND 9 - 4 = 5
AND 10 - 9 = 1
AND 10 - 5 = 5
AND 10 - 3 = 7
AND 8 + 1 = 9
AND 8 - 1 = 7
AND 7 > 5
AND 4 < 5
AND 5 < 6
AND 6 < 7
AND 7 < 8
AND 8 < 9
AND 9 > 7
AND 9 - 2 = 7
AND 2 + 2 = 5
AND 3 + 3 = 2 + 2
AND 3 > 2
THEN 3 + 3 = 5 is:
a] True
b] False
c] Unable to Determine
d] Logical Cognitive Dissonance/y?
$Zero
> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
> >On Jun 18, 7:22?pm, Ray Haddad <rhad...@iexpress.net.au> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:31:37 -0700, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
> >> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
> >> >On Jun 18, 4:06?pm, Ray Haddad <rhad...@iexpress.net.au> wrote:
>
> >> >> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
>
> >> >> >anyway, i was flat broke, working my ass off on a VERY innovative
> >> >> >business that was sadly way ahead of its time (and thus difficult to
> >> >> >calm the chickenshit investors about -- thus they cut off their noses
> >> >> >to spite their faces and lost all of their investment -- not giving a
> >> >> >damn about stranding me in poverty -- being so well cushed up and
> >> >> >comfy themselves -- surely they're today probably wishing they had a
> >> >> >bit more patience and wisdom and foresight).
>
> >> >> Yes. MicroHard was just a concept before its time, Xero.
>
> >> >yeah, like you know the first thing about developing cutting-edge
> >> >innovation.
>
> >> Why not describe this innovative business of yours, Xero?
>
> >well, for one thing, despite advances in technology which would now
> >make it even MORE efficient and profitable than the test marketing
> >already proved it to be, it's _still_ quite a bit ahead of its time --
> >due to the creative genius way i designed and developed it.
>
> Describe this business that was innovative and ahead of its time,
> Xero. Your claim. Your turn.
we specialized in helping people better their lives.
> >trade secrets innit.
>
> Nonsense. By now it's got to be way behind the times.
nope.
not that i've seen.
not even close.
> Even so, you're not trading in that business.
Ray, i've told you many times that i wouldn't accept any investment
money from a war-mongering idiot like yourself.
so what makes you think i'd ever even remotely consider donating any
of my creative genius trade secrets to you?
i'm not in the Ray Haddad Enablers Club, remember?
> >real ones, not Master Circus Troll wetdream trade secrets.
>
> What was the nature of this innovative business, Xero?
sense of humor lessons.
which both you and all of your miserable uncreative timewasting ilk
could surely benefit greatly from.
Ray Haddad
and $Zero <ze...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
>On Jun 19, 12:20?am, Ray Haddad <rhad...@iexpress.net.au> wrote:
What was the nature of your innovative, ahead of its time business?
--
Ray
Mary, Queen of Socks
$Zero
ah, i see you've been keeping busy.
is that your body that you so "cleverly" pasted my face onto?
(do you keep a full collection of my images from so long ago?)
yikes.
and is that THE couch where you do all your Nexus Lexus searches?
anyway, the votes are in:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/32suet
http://groups.google.com/group/megablog/msg/b937b7339c8062ed
Mary, Queen of Socks
> ah, i see you've been keeping busy.
>
> is that your body that you so "cleverly" pasted my face onto?
> and is that THE couch where you do all your Nexus Lexus searches?
Camera pans slowly as a vast herd of IKYAWBAI sweeps majestically across the
arid plain.
And cut. That's a wrap people.
$Zero
> "$Zero" <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1182351040.3...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> > ah, i see you've been keeping busy.
>
> > is that your body that you so "cleverly" pasted my face onto?
note the quite vivid lack of an IKYABWAI demonstrated above.
um...
now do you see what separates the real geniuses from the Zappa copy-
catters?
> > and is that THE couch where you do all your Nexus Lexus searches?
um... ditto.
(as per my original mention of your "legendary" couch upthread)
pre-"masterpiece"-fundoc-photoshopping.
um...
you can pull yourself up off the mat now, the referee has long left
building,
> Camera pans slowly as a vast herd of IKYAWBAI sweeps majestically
> across the arid plain.
you mean that "spoiled brat" IKYABWAI thinger you pulled a few posts
back?
whoa.
see how that works?
> And cut.
obviously.
what other choice did you have?
> That's a wrap people.
bye bye, now.
coffee donuts provided near the crew trailers.
and please be sure to punch your timecard before you leave the lot.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Grok0EXtX5k
$Zero
> On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 20:09:28 -0700, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
mostly wasting time coddling the egos and fears of impatient crybaby
investors
-$Zero...
Beethoven wrote the ninth deaf
http://tinypic.com/627vnmt.jpg
fifteen finger snaps (the music video)
http://groups.google.com/group/megablog/msg/0aa60efd5055a07b
Ray Haddad
and $Zero <ze...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
>On Jun 20, 3:09?am, Ray Haddad <rhad...@iexpress.net.au> wrote:
Not much of a businessman if you can't even describe what your
business was supposed to be. Must not have been very innovative
either.
--
Ray
$Zero
it was problem-solving for hire, swift-boy.
duh.
> Must not have been very innovative either.
it was and still is.
unlike you.
-$Zero...
Ray Haddad
and $Zero <ze...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
>On Jun 21, 3:35?am, Ray Haddad <rhad...@iexpress.net.au> wrote:
Still can't or won't describe your business. Oh, well. Another Xero
waste of time. Move along. Nothing to see here.
--
Ray
$Zero
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:43:13 -0700, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
what more would you like to know, our fricken' prices?
we charged a flat hourly rate or one could buy our problem-solving
abilities in bulk.
you describe your goal (or confusion), we'd help you resolve it.
EOFS.
utter simplicity.
-$Zero...
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/topics
"From a scientific point of view, the products
of creative thought (sometimes referred to as
divergent thought) are usually considered to
have both originality and appropriateness."
Ray Haddad
and $Zero <ze...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
Except for the part about needing investors. Looks like there'd be
nearly no startup costs and certainly no need for the government to
shut you down. Didn't you claim that to be the case? You had no
investors or investors who backed out and the government pounded in
the final nail?
--
Ray
$Zero
"Ray Haddad" <rha...@iexpress.net.au> wrote in message
news:d5ol73pubiogube5s...@4ax.com...
look CHIPCOG boy, it's quite simple.
i used my creative genius to create a business model that allowed me to
offer my unique problem solving capabilities to businesses that were faced
with problems that needed solving.
unfortunately, the problem solving business i created was itself fraught
with many problems that were impossible to solve.
because i was CEO of a problem solving company, I could not get welfare.
catch 22 innit. meaning that i could not afford to hire myself to solve the
problems that were facing the problem solving company. and since i was
alreay devoting 18 hours a day to running the problem solving business, i
had no spare time that i could have used to solve the problems that were
facing the problem solving business in my spare time.
so finally, faced with insurmountable problems that were incapable of being
solved, the problem solving business went out of business.
problem solved and EOFS.
-$Zero...
Beethoven wrote the ninth deaf
http://groups.google.com/group/megablog/shitbrain
Ray Haddad
and "$Zero" <$Ze...@whoooooosh.com> instead replied:
>look CHIPCOG boy, it's quite simple.
>
>i used my creative genius to create a business model that allowed me to
>offer my unique problem solving capabilities to businesses that were faced
>with problems that needed solving.
>
>unfortunately, the problem solving business i created was itself fraught
>with many problems that were impossible to solve.
Oh.
>because i was CEO of a problem solving company, I could not get welfare.
>catch 22 innit. meaning that i could not afford to hire myself to solve the
>problems that were facing the problem solving company. and since i was
>alreay devoting 18 hours a day to running the problem solving business, i
>had no spare time that i could have used to solve the problems that were
>facing the problem solving business in my spare time.
Oh.
>so finally, faced with insurmountable problems that were incapable of being
>solved, the problem solving business went out of business.
>
>problem solved and EOFS.
Oh.
Your genius failed you. How utterly ironic. What a surprise.
--
Ray
Josh Hill
wrote:
>because i was CEO of a problem solving company, I could not get welfare.
The mind boggles.
--
Josh
"Vista is at best mildly annoying and at worst makes you want
to rush to Redmond, Washington and rip somebody's liver out."
- Stephen Manes
$Zero
post this]
On Jun 21, 4:36?pm, Ray Haddad <rhad...@iexpress.net.au> wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 05:08:05 -0700, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
bingo!
> Looks like there'd be nearly no startup costs
"looks like"
trade secrets, duh.
but sure, theoretically i could hire always myself out as an
individual consultant, except for the reasons that i cannot.
duh.
> and certainly no need for the government to shut you down.
> Didn't you claim that to be the case?
no.
not in reference to that original business (which i started more than
a decade ago -- the one where i had investors).
OTOH, the government DID shut me down a few years ago when i applied
my creative genius consulting abilities to a third (or was it the
fourth or fitfth or whatever) project that i had started long AFTER
the first one failed due to the crybaby impatient investors pulling
out.
> You had no investors or investors who backed out
do try to keep up, twist-boy.
> and the government pounded in the final nail?
only clearly did that happen in regards to my most recently funded
project, which was progressing along VERY nicely until the government
shut it down temporarily (for a bureaucratic technicality that they
openly ignored for over a year) -- thus demoralizing my latest
unsophisticated investor into giving up totally and choosing
bankruptsy instead of success.
success would have only cost another $100 or so dollars a month in
loan payments -- but the demoralized investor chose instead to lose
ther entire $40,000+ that was already invested.
this amazingly stupid decision on the investor's part ending up
costing much more than $100 per month in the form of bankruptsy
payments.
brilliant, huh?
such is my life.
it's a "comedy" of (other people's) errors.
-$Zero...
things idiots like moi notice -- M, E, W, 3
http://groups.google.com/group/megablog/msg/4b1043928c4f8afb
Ray Haddad
and $Zero <ze...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
>[this one didn't even pretend to send, so this is second attempt to
That you're a genius? That's definitely well hidden and secret.
>but sure, theoretically i could hire always myself out as an
>individual consultant, except for the reasons that i cannot.
That's certainly very circular logic.
>duh.
Agreed. That's a "duh" kind of statement you made.
>> and certainly no need for the government to shut you down.
>> Didn't you claim that to be the case?
>
>no.
>
>not in reference to that original business (which i started more than
>a decade ago -- the one where i had investors).
Then you've had more than one attempt to sell your genius and they
all failed miserably.
>OTOH, the government DID shut me down a few years ago when i applied
>my creative genius consulting abilities to a third (or was it the
>fourth or fitfth or whatever) project that i had started long AFTER
>the first one failed due to the crybaby impatient investors pulling
>out.
By not paying you welfare payments?
>> You had no investors or investors who backed out
>
>do try to keep up, twist-boy.
That's what you suggested yourself. You either had nobody you could
interest in investing or investors who pulled out.
>> and the government pounded in the final nail?
>
>only clearly did that happen in regards to my most recently funded
>project, which was progressing along VERY nicely until the government
>shut it down temporarily (for a bureaucratic technicality that they
>openly ignored for over a year) -- thus demoralizing my latest
>unsophisticated investor into giving up totally and choosing
>bankruptsy instead of success.
You drove an investor into bankruptcy? How creative and clever your
genius truly is. And now you want more investors?
>success would have only cost another $100 or so dollars a month in
>loan payments -- but the demoralized investor chose instead to lose
>ther entire $40,000+ that was already invested.
You swindled $40k from an investor and still needed welfare? Why
didn't you offer to pay his loan payment from your profits? An
investor might believe that was due him.
>this amazingly stupid decision on the investor's part ending up
>costing much more than $100 per month in the form of bankruptsy
>payments.
>
>brilliant, huh?
With you as an advisor . . .
>such is my life.
>
>it's a "comedy" of (other people's) errors.
And missing welfare payments. Don't forget those.
--
Ray
$Zero
> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
> >[this one didn't even pretend to send, so this is
> > second attempt to post this]
hmm...
the posts are finally starting to dribble in.
and it's only about a two hour delay.
remarkable technology, as always.
> >On Jun 21, 4:36?pm, Ray Haddad <rhad...@iexpress.net.au> wrote:
> >> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
> >> >On Jun 21, 7:09?am, Ray Haddad <rhad...@iexpress.net.au> wrote:
> >> >> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
[...]
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/879e9cadc0c96186
> >> >> >it was problem-solving for hire, swift-boy.
>
> >> >> >duh.
>
> >> >> >> Must not have been very innovative either.
>
> >> >> >it was and still is.
>
> >> >> >unlike you.
>
> >> >> Still can't or won't describe your business. Oh, well. Another Xero
> >> >> waste of time. Move along. Nothing to see here.
>
> >> >what more would you like to know, our fricken' prices?
>
> >> >we charged a flat hourly rate or one could buy our problem-solving
> >> >abilities in bulk.
>
> >> >you describe your goal (or confusion), we'd help you resolve it.
>
> >> >EOFS.
>
> >> >utter simplicity.
>
> >> Except for the part about needing investors.
>
> >bingo!
>
> >> Looks like there'd be nearly no startup costs
>
> >"looks like"
>
> >trade secrets, duh.
>
> That you're a genius?
obviously, that's no secret. duh.
> That's definitely well hidden and secret.
apparently my genius is only "hidden" from those who are obsessively
jealous of moi, like your pathetic, despicable, maliciously lashing-
out always-blowing-your-top self.
QED
> >but sure, theoretically i could always hire myself out as an
> >individual consultant, except for the reasons that i cannot.
>
> That's certainly very circular logic.
no it isn't, swift-boy.
aka: quick-boat-boy
anyway, some of those many reasons followed in this post, yet, not
surpisingly, you missed them.
> >duh.
>
> Agreed. That's a "duh" kind of statement you made.
tell us again why you got the "Hadduh" nickname, won't you?
> >> and certainly no need for the government to shut you down.
> >> Didn't you claim that to be the case?
>
> >no.
>
> >not in reference to that original business (which i started more than
> >a decade ago -- the one where i had investors).
>
> Then you've had more than one attempt to sell your genius and they
> all failed miserably.
no. they all succeeded fabulously.
i always inevitably produce flawless profitable innovations with my
creative genius.
it wasn't my genius abilities that failed, it was the people involved
in the businesses who ended up failing miserably -- including myself,
unfortunately.
> >OTOH, the government DID shut me down a few years ago when i applied
> >my creative genius consulting abilities to a third (or was it the
> >fourth or fitfth or whatever) project that i had started long AFTER
> >the first one failed due to the crybaby impatient investors pulling
> >out.
>
> By not paying you welfare payments?
no, by impatiently and fearfully throwing their money down the toilet.
> >> You had no investors or investors who backed out
>
> >do try to keep up, twist-boy.
>
> That's what you suggested yourself.
you're confusing two or more different projects.
> You either had nobody you could
> interest in investing
bzzzt.
i raised almost half a million dollars of investment for the one
project, the problem-solving thinger.
> or investors who pulled out.
bingo!
> >> and the government pounded in the final nail?
>
> >only clearly did that happen in regards to my most recently funded
> >project,
actually, there was another one after that one as well.
i never give up.
i just take much-needed vacations.
> >which was progressing along VERY nicely until the government
> >shut it down temporarily (for a bureaucratic technicality that they
> >openly ignored for over a year) -- thus demoralizing my latest
> >unsophisticated investor into giving up totally and choosing
> >bankruptsy instead of success.
>
> You drove an investor into bankruptcy?
no. the government did that.
and the investor's inability to do basic math.
> How creative and clever your genius truly is.
as creative as i am, i'm not that good at coddling the severely
emotionally damaged illogic of impatient fearful clueless crybaby
adults.
my tolerance has run seriously thin in that area.
> And now you want more investors?
yep.
> >success would have only cost another $100 or so dollars a month in
> >loan payments -- but the demoralized investor chose instead to lose
> >ther entire $40,000+ that was already invested.
>
> You swindled $40k from an investor and still needed welfare?
i swindled nothing.
i put it all to creative genius use for the sake of the business.
and the business was doing fantastic precisely because of the way i
spent all of that money.
nad it was only gonna better and better.
but when the government shut us down temporarily, our monthly bills
didn't suddenly stop.
just the income flow stopped.
the income flow that was already covering the nut quite nicely.
so, with the income stream from creating and selling our products
turned off completely, we needed another $10,000 loan to bridge the
timespan between when we got shutdown and when we could feasibly could
re-open.
meanwhile our phone was ringing off the hook from all of our customers
who wanted yet more and more of our product.
but we couldn't make any of it any more do to selective bureaucratic
harassment, Mr. swift-boy.
> Why didn't you offer to pay his loan payment from your profits?
see if you can figure that out.
duh.
some businessman you are, huh?
> An investor might believe that was due him.
only a severely financially and emotionally crippled investor would
believe that.
> >this amazingly stupid decision on the investor's part ending up
> >costing much more than $100 per month in the form of bankruptsy
> >payments.
>
> >brilliant, huh?
>
> With you as an advisor . . .
had the investor heeded my advice, the investor could have been a
millionaire on this very day -- as could i have been -- only three-
plus years after we had started from scratch.
instead, there are bankrupsty payments to make for another couple of
years.
utterly brilliant move on their part.
that's what happens when people ignore my creative genius advice.
> >such is my life.
>
> >it's a "comedy" of (other people's) errors.
>
> And missing welfare payments. Don't forget those.
how could i?
anyway, the very first business i developed was very successful and
continues to this day to provide comfortable livings for several
people -- although, right after i left, its inevitable and enormous
growth potential suddenly leveled off and never progressed beyond
where i left it.
actually, it went down quite a bit. but although the income stream was
lowered, it remained at a level where it was still good enough to
provide a far better living for someone who would have otherwise been
sweeping floors for a little more than minimum wage had i not created
the business i donated to him -- irresponsible numbskull that he is.
and ever since then, i've been seriously blackballed by that idiotic
ungrateful person for whom i generously gave a comfortable living to
-- in order to avoid having to deal with his daily ungrateful idiocy
and constant clueless ranting.
-$Zero...
things idiots like moi notice -- M, E, W, 3
http://groups.google.com/group/megablog/msg/4b1043928c4f8afb
"Divergent production is the creative generation of
multiple answers to a set problem. For example, find
uses for 1 metre lengths of black cotton."
$Zero
> how to tell if your father ever loved you
>
> if and when he punished you...
>
> did he do so for your benefit?
>
> or his?
IOW: child-abusers don't love their children.
at all.
how do you know if your father is a child abuser?
you just know.
for instance, the evil grins he makes after unjustifiably punishing
you.
big clue there.
-$Zero...
$Zero
(was: Re: how to tell if your father ever loved you)
[2nd attempt to send]
google "error" note:
although a few of the posts that i had sent BEFORE and AFTER this one
have since showed up on google groups, this one has not posted there
yet, so i am now resending it for a second time.
isn't that so wonderful?
aren't you so glad?
i know i am.
desperately obsessed fundoc forgeries, inc. WROTE:
On Jun 21, 5:14 pm, "$Zero" <$...@whoooooosh.com> wrote:
> "Ray Haddad" <rhad...@iexpress.net.au> wrote in message
> > On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 05:08:05 -0700, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
desperately obsessed fundoc forgeries, inc. WROTE:
> look CHIPCOG boy, it's quite simple.
fundoc uses yet another of my many many memorable creations.
CHIPCOG delight!
> i used my creative genius to create a business model that allowed me to
> offer my unique problem solving capabilities to businesses that were faced
> with problems that needed solving.
hey, you're almost demonstrating an ability to understand "complex"
truths.
of course, it won't last long...
> unfortunately, the problem solving business i created was itself fraught
> with many problems that were impossible to solve.
none of them were "impossible to solve".
in fact, i solved ALL of them, one by one, every single day.
sometimes, multi-tasking dozens at a time.
what ended up being was "impossible to solve" was the feeling i had
when the impatient investors went prematurely running away like
crybabies.
but i solved that, too.
i got the phone company to put our $15,000 bill on hold (we were
getting over a hundred calls a day from all over the country) and i
convinced them to reconnect our phone lines at a new location -- one
with electricity and heat! -- BONUS!
so, although we had no money whatsoever, we had all of our literature
printed up (over $5,000 worth) with our handy dandy email address and
everything!
but then, guess what happened?
CONSTANT busy signals over at our email provider!
which led to classy class actions.
presto!
> because i was CEO of a problem solving company, I could not get welfare.
> catch 22 innit.
yep.
> meaning that i could not afford to hire myself to solve the
> problems that were facing the problem solving company.
sorta.
> and since i was
> alreay devoting 18 hours a day to running the problem solving business, i
> had no spare time that i could have used to solve the problems that were
> facing the problem solving business in my spare time.
we decided to focus on the classy class action until our phone lines
were reconnected.
once they were reconnected, we decided to keep going on the classy
class action for a few weeks because the classy class action thing was
going so well itself, because of, guess what?
my creative genius!
besides, we had just moved about 50 filing cabinets and all sorts of
office furniture, all crammed into an area 1/10 the size of what we
needed, so a bit of a distraction was welcome before we were gonna
dive back in and get back up to speed with where we had left off --
especially since the classy class action thinger (which had originally
stifled our regrouping efforts) had become a bit "personal".
> so finally, faced with insurmountable problems that were incapable of being
> solved, the problem solving business went out of business.
well, let's just say that a bunch of sleazy weaselly lawyers like
yourself had a lot to do with it.
not to metion the exhaustion that comes with same.
plus, a roast beef sandwich:
> problem solved and EOFS.
but that didn't stop me.
nope.
i later convinced one of the previous crybaby investors to fund a
brand new project!
(to manufacture and market one of my zillions of other innovative
inventions).
my former working partner, after having finally losing his temper,
shoved a roast beef sandwich into my face one day because i made a
sarcastic remark about him having taken the weekend off while we were
trying to get back going with salvaging our five years worth of
creative genius work (and suffering) -- this was just after the classy
class action effort fell down into the attorney-fest blackhole -- so
his frustration was certainly understandable.
anyway, my former partner walked out as i stood there stunned, and a
bit angry.
i then licked the roast beef gravy off my face and i didn't see him
again for years (except for a drunken apology he came over to make one
day).
so when our former investor, now his boss, decided to invest in
ANOTHER project of mine, my former working partner was in awe of my
persuasion abilities in that regard -- especially having been privy to
how his boss had felt about me -- during frequent lunch break chats at
the office, and whatnot.
recap:
i later convinced one of the previous crybaby investors to fund a
brand new project!
to manufacture and market one of my zillions of other innovative
inventions.
guess how that went?
> "-$Zero..."
>
> Beethoven wrote the ninth deaf
> http://tinyurl.com/2aok4w
"Beethoven" composes the ninth while at the mercy of screaming morons.
quite the loss innit.
> http://groups.google.com/group/megablog/shitbrain
S-H-I-T-B-R-A-I-N
now get back to work, fundoc.
your Kitty Kellyesque $Zero biography has more material for you to
twist away.
enjoy.
it's such Unicornian fun innit.
-$Zero...
things idiots like moi notice -- M, E, W, 3
http://groups.google.com/group/megablog/msg/4b1043928c4f8afb
"Creativity is typically used to refer to the
act of producing new ideas, approaches or actions,
while innovation is the process of both generating
and applying such creative ideas in some specific context."
$Zero
google "error" note:
although a few of the posts that i had sent BEFORE and long AFTER this
one have since finally showed up on google groups, this one has not
posted there yet, so i am now resending it for a second time.
isn't that so wonderful?
aren't you so glad?
i know i am.
On Jun 21, 5:24 pm, Ray Haddad <rhad...@iexpress.net.au> wrote:
> desperately obsessed fundoc forgeries, inc. WROTE:
> "NOT-------$Zero-------" <$...@whoooooosh.com> instead replied:
with malicious and desperate braindead swift-boy twits
like you and forgery-fundoc around, it's no surprise at all.
innit.
-$Zero...
not enough readers? top ten questions to ask yourself
http://groups.google.com/group/megablog/msg/f004ecba32215eab
========== fundoc's answer to the Unicornian Paradox
> > [IF] 2 + 2 = 5
> > AND 3 + 3 = 2 + 2
> > AND 3 > 2
>
> > THEN 3 + 3 = 5 is:
>
> > a] True
> > b] False
> > c] Unable to Determine
> > d] Logical Cognitive Dissonance/y?
fundoc's answer:
ah, i see you've been keeping busy.
is that your body that you so "cleverly" pasted my face onto?
(do you keep a full collection of my images from so long ago?)
yikes.
and is that THE couch where you do all your Nexus Lexus searches?
anyway, the votes are in:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/32suet
http://groups.google.com/group/megablog/msg/b937b7339c8062ed
not to mention this gem:
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/ec47efed0772deb0
==========
$Zero
posts]
google "error" note:
although a few of the posts that i had sent BEFORE and long AFTER
this
one have since finally showed up on google groups, this one has not
posted there yet, so i am now resending it for a second time.
isn't that so wonderful?
aren't you so glad?
i know i am.
On Jun 21, 5:32 pm, Josh Hill <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> desperately obsessed fundoc forgeries, inc. WROTE:
> "NOT---------$Zero-------" <$...@whoooooosh.com> wrote:
>
> >because i was CEO of a problem solving company, I could not get welfare.
>
> The mind boggles.
not enough, obviously.
-$Zero...
things idiots like moi notice -- M, E, W, 3
http://groups.google.com/group/megablog/msg/4b1043928c4f8afb
[irrefutable proof that Josh is a liar]
">Josh, are you claiming that you don't know what that means?
What what means? You have me totally confused."
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/5587eda95cc95415
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?&q=irrefutable
Josh Hill
wrote:
>"Beethoven" composes the ninth while at the mercy of screaming morons.
Beethoven couldn't hear screaming morons.
Josh Hill
wrote:
> [irrefutable proof that Josh is a liar]
>
> ">Josh, are you claiming that you don't know what that means?
>
> What what means? You have me totally confused."
>
>http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/5587eda95cc95415
>
>http://dictionary.reference.com/search?&q=irrefutable
And here they are! Yet more irrefutable proofs that Josh is a liar!
Josh: "So what's for dinner?"
Josh: "' 'Scuse me, do you have the time?"
Josh: "How are you?"
Josh: "Wonder if it's going to rain."
Coincidence? I think not.
Josh Hill
wrote:
>it wasn't my genius abilities that failed, it was the people involved
>in the businesses who ended up failing miserably -- including myself,
>unfortunately.
[ . . .]
>as creative as i am, i'm not that good at coddling the severely
>emotionally damaged illogic of impatient fearful clueless crybaby
>adults.
>
>my tolerance has run seriously thin in that area.
One of the hallmarks of creative problem-solving genius is its ability
to recognize that throwing roast beef sandwiches in the face of
investors isn't exactly a groove move, Zero.
Or, as the world's first successful creative genius professional put
it: Cock. Tongue. Use it.
$Zero
> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
>
> >"Beethoven" composes the ninth while at the mercy of screaming morons.
>
> Beethoven couldn't hear screaming morons.
no shit, Sherlock.
fundoc forgeries, inc., wrote:
> Beethoven wrote the ninth deaf
> http://tinyurl.com/2aok4w
duh.
-$Zero...
Beethoven wrote the ninth deaf
$Zero
-- currently starring BJ Josh
(was: Re: how to tell if your father ever loved you)
On Jun 22, 10:29?am, Josh Hill <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
>
> > [irrefutable proof that Josh is a liar]
>
> > ">Josh, are you claiming that you don't know what that means?
>
> > What what means? You have me totally confused."
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/5587eda95cc95415
>
> >http://dictionary.reference.com/search?&q=irrefutable
>
> And here they are! Yet more irrefutable proofs that Josh is a liar!
>
> Josh: "So what's for dinner?"
>
> Josh: "' 'Scuse me, do you have the time?"
>
> Josh: "How are you?"
>
> Josh: "Wonder if it's going to rain."
>
> Coincidence? I think not.
translation: "yet again, Josh has been shown to be a weaselly cowardly
liar, so instead of addressing it directly where it occured, it's time
for his usual bullshit non sequitur back-pedaling diversions -- think
anyone will notice?"
only Ray, surely.
-$Zero...
it's not the idle hands those liars fear
http://groups.google.com/group/megablog/msg/d5c0b507d2feb1df
Josh Hill
wrote:
>On Jun 22, 9:55?am, Josh Hill <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
>>
>> >"Beethoven" composes the ninth while at the mercy of screaming morons.
>>
>> Beethoven couldn't hear screaming morons.
>
>no shit, Sherlock.
>
>fundoc forgeries, inc., wrote:
>
>> Beethoven wrote the ninth deaf
>> http://tinyurl.com/2aok4w
>
>duh.
I done been whooshed.
Josh Hill
wrote:
>Ray's Weaselly Blackhole of Stupidity, Inc.
> -- currently starring BJ Josh
>
>(was: Re: how to tell if your father ever loved you)
>
>On Jun 22, 10:29?am, Josh Hill <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
>>
>> > [irrefutable proof that Josh is a liar]
>>
>> > ">Josh, are you claiming that you don't know what that means?
>>
>> > What what means? You have me totally confused."
>>
>> >http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/5587eda95cc95415
>>
>> >http://dictionary.reference.com/search?&q=irrefutable
>>
>> And here they are! Yet more irrefutable proofs that Josh is a liar!
>>
>> Josh: "So what's for dinner?"
>>
>> Josh: "' 'Scuse me, do you have the time?"
>>
>> Josh: "How are you?"
>>
>> Josh: "Wonder if it's going to rain."
>>
>> Coincidence? I think not.
>
>translation: "yet again, Josh has been shown to be a weaselly cowardly
>liar, so instead of addressing it directly where it occured, it's time
>for his usual bullshit non sequitur back-pedaling diversions -- think
>anyone will notice?"
Sandwich. Face. Investor.
You never do learn, do you, Zero.
$Zero
> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
>
> >it wasn't my genius abilities that failed, it was the people involved
> >in the businesses who ended up failing miserably -- including myself,
> >unfortunately.
>
> [ . . .]
>
> >as creative as i am, i'm not that good at coddling the severely
> >emotionally damaged illogic of impatient fearful clueless crybaby
> >adults.
>
> >my tolerance has run seriously thin in that area.
>
> One of the hallmarks of creative problem-solving genius is its ability
> to recognize that throwing roast beef sandwiches in the face of
> investors isn't exactly a groove move, Zero.
that was my partner whom did that to moi, idiot.
which, BTW, given the situation and circumstances, i fully understood
his frustrations and forgave him for it -- and later tried to rescue
him from the horror of working for the twat investor who wimpily
pulled out of our project (by later offering him yet another
partnership in a new vventure -- which he then quit his job working
for the coward to become a part of).
do try to pay attention to what you read.
> Or, as the world's first successful creative genius professional put
> it: Cock. Tongue. Use it.
translation: "give the idiots a blowjob, no matter how diseased they
are."
some people have self-respect and common sense, Josh.
duh.
"creative genius professional"
Gawd.
NEWSFLASH: not everybody is a desperate brainwashed prostitute.
-$Zero...
it's not the idle hands those liars fear
http://groups.google.com/group/megablog/msg/d5c0b507d2feb1df
fifteen finger snaps (the music video)
http://groups.google.com/group/megablog/msg/0aa60efd5055a07b
$Zero
> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
> > Josh Hill <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
>
> >> >"Beethoven" composes the ninth while at the mercy of screaming morons.
>
> >> Beethoven couldn't hear screaming morons.
>
> >no shit, Sherlock.
>
> >fundoc forgeries, inc., wrote:
>
> >> Beethoven wrote the ninth deaf
> >>http://tinyurl.com/2aok4w
>
> >duh.
>
> I done been whooshed.
Beethoven 9th Symphony 1/2
-- Leonard Bernstein conductor, 1970
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HylGjhRF3WI
-$Zero...
megablog jukebox -- Beethoven
http://groups.google.com/group/megablog/msg/735352ee02b84daf
Josh Hill
wrote:
>On Jun 22, 10:37?am, Josh Hill <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
>>
>> >it wasn't my genius abilities that failed, it was the people involved
>> >in the businesses who ended up failing miserably -- including myself,
>> >unfortunately.
>>
>> [ . . .]
>>
>> >as creative as i am, i'm not that good at coddling the severely
>> >emotionally damaged illogic of impatient fearful clueless crybaby
>> >adults.
>>
>> >my tolerance has run seriously thin in that area.
>>
>> One of the hallmarks of creative problem-solving genius is its ability
>> to recognize that throwing roast beef sandwiches in the face of
>> investors isn't exactly a groove move, Zero.
>
>that was my partner whom did that to moi, idiot.
>
>which, BTW, given the situation and circumstances, i fully understood
>his frustrations and forgave him for it -- and later tried to rescue
>him from the horror of working for the twat investor who wimpily
>pulled out of our project (by later offering him yet another
>partnership in a new vventure -- which he then quit his job working
>for the coward to become a part of).
>
>do try to pay attention to what you read.
And Mama Cass didn't choke on a chicken sandwich. But, of course, in a
truer sense, she did.
>> Or, as the world's first successful creative genius professional put
>> it: Cock. Tongue. Use it.
>
>translation: "give the idiots a blowjob, no matter how diseased they
>are."
>
>some people have self-respect and common sense, Josh.
>
>duh.
>
>"creative genius professional"
>
>Gawd.
>
>NEWSFLASH: not everybody is a desperate brainwashed prostitute.
Yeah, some people have estates.
Josh Hill
wrote:
>On Jun 22, 11:26?am, Josh Hill <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
>> > Josh Hill <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> >"Beethoven" composes the ninth while at the mercy of screaming morons.
>>
>> >> Beethoven couldn't hear screaming morons.
>>
>> >no shit, Sherlock.
>>
>> >fundoc forgeries, inc., wrote:
>>
>> >> Beethoven wrote the ninth deaf
>> >>http://tinyurl.com/2aok4w
>>
>> >duh.
>>
>> I done been whooshed.
>
> Beethoven 9th Symphony 1/2
> -- Leonard Bernstein conductor, 1970
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HylGjhRF3WI
It went black at the end.
$Zero
> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
>
> >Ray's Weaselly Blackhole of Stupidity, Inc.
> > -- currently starring BJ Josh
>
> >(was: Re: how to tell if your father ever loved you)
>
> >On Jun 22, 10:29?am, Josh Hill <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
>
> >> > [irrefutable proof that Josh is a liar]
>
> >> > ">Josh, are you claiming that you don't know what that means?
>
> >> > What what means? You have me totally confused."
>
> >> >http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/5587eda95cc95415
>
> >> >http://dictionary.reference.com/search?&q=irrefutable
>
> >> And here they are! Yet more irrefutable proofs that Josh is a liar!
>
> >> Josh: "So what's for dinner?"
>
> >> Josh: "' 'Scuse me, do you have the time?"
>
> >> Josh: "How are you?"
>
> >> Josh: "Wonder if it's going to rain."
>
> >> Coincidence? I think not.
>
> >translation: "yet again, Josh has been shown to be a weaselly cowardly
> >liar, so instead of addressing it directly where it occured, it's time
> >for his usual bullshit non sequitur back-pedaling diversions -- think
> >anyone will notice?"
>
> Sandwich. Face. Investor.
>
> You never do learn, do you, Zero.
to give diseased and dishonest investors blow jobs?
you're right, i never have learned that trick.
poor me.
Josh Hill
$Zero
true.
but no applicable to moi.
> >> Or, as the world's first successful creative genius professional put
> >> it: Cock. Tongue. Use it.
>
> >translation: "give the idiots a blowjob, no matter how diseased they
> >are."
>
> >some people have self-respect and common sense, Josh.
>
> >duh.
>
> >"creative genius professional"
>
> >Gawd.
>
> >NEWSFLASH: not everybody is a desperate brainwashed prostitute.
>
> Yeah, some people have estates.
"And Mama Cass didn't choke on a chicken sandwich.
But, of course, in a truer sense, she did."
-- Josh (the goldfish)
anyway, in case this whooshed you...
very very few of those estate dwellers aren't diseaesd prostitues.
duh.
HTH
-$Zero...
it's not the idle hands those liars fear
http://groups.google.com/group/megablog/msg/d5c0b507d2feb1df
$Zero
my name's not $Zero for nothing.
duh.
"Ain't no money in poetry.
That's what set the poet free."
-- Guy Clark
-$Zero...
Beethoven wrote the ninth deaf
http://tinypic.com/627vnmt.jpg
Josh Hill
$Zero
> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
> > Josh Hill <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
> >> > Josh Hill <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> >"Beethoven" composes the ninth while at the mercy of screaming morons.
>
> >> >> Beethoven couldn't hear screaming morons.
>
> >> >no shit, Sherlock.
>
> >> >fundoc forgeries, inc., wrote:
>
> >> >> Beethoven wrote the ninth deaf
> >> >>http://tinyurl.com/2aok4w
>
> >> >duh.
>
> >> I done been whooshed.
>
> > Beethoven 9th Symphony 1/2
> > -- Leonard Bernstein conductor, 1970
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HylGjhRF3WI
>
> It went black at the end.
that's certainly no good reason to give dishonest and diseased
investors blow jobs.
obviously, YMMV.
"It's just the way I see things."
-- Noodles
http://imdb.com/title/tt0087843
-$Zero...
Beethoven wrote the ninth deaf
$Zero
and we live with the consequences.
-$Zero...
fifteen finger snaps (the music video)
http://groups.google.com/group/megablog/msg/0aa60efd5055a07b
http://groups.google.com/group/megablog/topics
[Josh explains death (and his behavior)]
"> It went black at the end.
that's certainly no good reason
to give dishonest and diseased
investors blow jobs.
obviously, YMMV."
-- $Zero...
Re: desperately obsessed fundoc forgeries, inc. WROTE
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/899fc116e1583047
Josh Hill
wrote:
>On Jun 22, 11:48?am, Josh Hill <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
>> > Josh Hill <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
>> >> > Josh Hill <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >"Beethoven" composes the ninth while at the mercy of screaming morons.
>>
>> >> >> Beethoven couldn't hear screaming morons.
>>
>> >> >no shit, Sherlock.
>>
>> >> >fundoc forgeries, inc., wrote:
>>
>> >> >> Beethoven wrote the ninth deaf
>> >> >>http://tinyurl.com/2aok4w
>>
>> >> >duh.
>>
>> >> I done been whooshed.
>>
>> > Beethoven 9th Symphony 1/2
>> > -- Leonard Bernstein conductor, 1970
>> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HylGjhRF3WI
>>
>> It went black at the end.
>
>that's certainly no good reason to give dishonest and diseased
>investors blow jobs.
>
>obviously, YMMV.
>
> "It's just the way I see things."
> -- Noodles
> http://imdb.com/title/tt0087843
In all seriousness, Zero, there's a difference between giving someone
a blow job and being considerate or not making paranoid accusations
against those who are supportive or friendly. I don't know what went
down between you and your investors, but I have seen you make false
accusations here against those who have been friendly and supportive
towards you, most recently when you accused me of being a liar because
I said I didn't get something that I didn't get.
Plus, let's say that Miss Blorch, your investor, is a shrewish
harridan who harangues you day and night with your mostly imaginary
failings, as if she were, oh, say, Stan. Shouldn't your creative
genius problem solving mind tell you that Miss Blorch isn't just
buying a piece of your company's prospects, but the illusion that
others don't consider her a shrewish harridan? That your real enemy
here is your ego? That the creative genius solution to dealing with
your ego is the recognition that she's the shrewish harridan who needs
coddling, not you, and that in smiling and charming and yes ma'ming
her you're demonstrating not subservience, but superiority?
Think Max Bialystock. Think Chaplin and the landlady in "Limelight."
Think Figaro.
Course, I was never much good at taking this advice myself, but what
the hey.
-$one
$Zero
is there?
gee, i never thought of that.
> I don't know what went
> down between you and your investors,
well, at least THAT's not a lie.
> but I have seen you make false
> accusations here against those who have been friendly and supportive
> towards you,
well, i'm not perfect, but then again, i'm rarely wrong about those
things.
Goalpost, for instance, used to be an almost "supportive" sort, but
she ended up losing her cool and blowing her top lashing-out at moi
over nothing -- just because i was able to read her foolish weasely
mind far more than she wanted me to.
duh.
> most recently when you accused me of being a liar because
> I said I didn't get something that I didn't get.
you lied about that.
you can deny it all you want, but your avoiding the thread where it
happened is even more proof of your inability to own up and confess --
something that even that weaselly cop Stan can manage when it's clear
that he's wrong.
you could learn from his lack of foolish pride in that regard.
not that he doesn't maintain it about other things -- but i think most
of those things have more to do with his fears and his sense of self-
preservation far more than idiotic foolish pride.
> Plus, let's say that Miss Blorch, your investor, is a shrewish
> harridan who harangues you day and night with your mostly imaginary
> failings, as if she were, oh, say, Stan. Shouldn't your creative
> genius problem solving mind tell you that Miss Blorch isn't just
> buying a piece of your company's prospects, but the illusion that
> others don't consider her a shrewish harridan?
yes, but one can only go so far in that regard.
> That your real enemy here is your ego?
my "real enemy" is not *my* ego, it's theirs.
duh.
i don't have an ego about such things.
but i do have a limit to how much i'll suffer over someone else's
stupidity and fears.
it's not the nagging, it's their weasely cowardly _actions_ (like
refusing to see that 1 + 1 = 2 and then deciding that since 1 + 1 does
not equal 2, they will not be writing a check for something we
definitely need) -- and that action ends up wasting my precious time
doing utterly stupid unnecssary wasteful backwards coungter-productive
things that we cannot afford to do -- which i know that i definitely
shouldn't be doing because i know that 1 + 1 = 2.
when you're as smart as i am, it's very difficult to tolerate the real
life consequences of other people's utter stupidity for more than a
year at a time.
i only have so much patience in that regard.
> That the creative genius solution to dealing with
> your ego is the recognition that she's the shrewish harridan who needs
> coddling, not you, and that in smiling and charming and yes ma'ming
> her you're demonstrating not subservience, but superiority?
as long as doing so doesn't waste 90% percent of my time and energy
because the shrewish harridan has insisted and demanded that we can't
do something that we need to do because the shrewish harridan stuoidly
insists that 1 + 1 does not equal 2.
i can't just say "yes mam" to stuff that mam wants done when said
stuff is utterly counter-productive -- well, i can say it, but when
mam finds out that i was just stroking her idiotic ego, mam has a shit
fit and starts plowing thru the china shop like a blind bull.
get it?
> Think Max Bialystock.
i'm not a swindler.
but anyway, i'm certainly smart enough to know how to smooth people
over, but that's moot when the numbskulls start throwing their idiotic
weight around -- unscrewing the stagelights and snipping the wires of
the microphones and speakers because they insist that the play should
be produced in the dark -- for dramatic effect.
duh.
> Think Chaplin and the landlady in "Limelight." Think Figaro.
reference impairment.
> Course, I was never much good at taking this advice myself, but what
> the hey.
i left most of the bullshit schmoozing to my working partner -- he was
far better at it and enjoyed it -- and i had much more necessary
things to do -- like make the business actually function effectively
-- which it always did.
too well, sometimes.
hence the huge phone bills with all of the salivating customers
waiting in line to give us their cash.
as to the other business where the government shut it down, that's a
different thing altogether -- though the difference between my
intelligence and the intelligence of the investor who chose to make
much higher bankruptsy payments than the loan payments would have ever
cost to get us over the small hump, well, the difference between our
intelligences played a very similar part once again.
you can't convince a madman to not jump over the falls when they've
already taken the leap.
> -$one
-$Zero...
Josh Hill
wrote:
Read her mind? That's dangerous territory. Not even Freud could do
that.
And, well, suppose Gekko had just called you a liar when she had no
cause to and otherwise making like she was taking Stan's side, and
then she called you "boi" for the second time. And you couldn't see
any possibility that she wasn't trolling and flaming you, so you got
pissed at her.
Only then you discovered that she hadn't known what "boi" actually
meant.
See what I mean? It was like learning after the invasion that Saddam
had leaked the rumor that he had WMD's to scare other countries and
dissuade them from invading. Big fucking oops.
>duh.
>
>> most recently when you accused me of being a liar because
>> I said I didn't get something that I didn't get.
>
>you lied about that.
>
>you can deny it all you want, but your avoiding the thread where it
>happened is even more proof of your inability to own up and confess --
Problem is, there's no evidence of anything. No evidence that I
actually got it, no /motive/ for me not to get it, no history of my
playing the sort of manipulative tricks that the trolls do. I don't
even know what thread it's in and I haven't been ignoring any thread
here: I just look at posts as they come in and skim or read and
respond or not as it suits me.
If it was in the thread where you were having long arguments with Ray,
I didn't read very far into either your accusations or his responses,
because it didn't interested me very much. I not infrequently even
skim posts that are full of accusations about me for the same reason,
and me is generally an interesting topic.
A hunch isn't proof, and when you make a mistake about someone's
motives on the basis of a hunch, they tend to get pissed or shake
their heads and walk away. At least, that's what I usually do.
Yeah, we've all been there. It's a fact of life when dealing with
clients or bosses or, I suppose, backers.
>when you're as smart as i am, it's very difficult to tolerate the real
>life consequences of other people's utter stupidity for more than a
>year at a time.
>
>i only have so much patience in that regard.
>> That the creative genius solution to dealing with
>> your ego is the recognition that she's the shrewish harridan who needs
>> coddling, not you, and that in smiling and charming and yes ma'ming
>> her you're demonstrating not subservience, but superiority?
>
>as long as doing so doesn't waste 90% percent of my time and energy
>because the shrewish harridan has insisted and demanded that we can't
>do something that we need to do because the shrewish harridan stuoidly
>insists that 1 + 1 does not equal 2.
>
>i can't just say "yes mam" to stuff that mam wants done when said
>stuff is utterly counter-productive -- well, i can say it, but when
>mam finds out that i was just stroking her idiotic ego, mam has a shit
>fit and starts plowing thru the china shop like a blind bull.
>
>get it?
Funny story: I was at a meeting once with a client and an HVAC
engineer. Client says "OK, and I want this air handler to go to the
equipment racks, and also feed my office."
I said "Are you /sure/ you want to do that? That equipment consumes
tens of thousands of Watts and needs constant air conditioning even in
the middle of winter. In my experience, if you try to divert the air
with a people area, it will be too cold."
Client got hysterical and had a screaming fit: "/You/ are not doing
this /you/ are doing the video engineering."
So anyway, it got built the way he wanted to. And so it's the day the
facility comes on line, and I come in, and walk into his office. And
he's sitting at his desk and the A/C vent in his office is covered
with cardboard and tape and it's like a walk-in refrigerator in there.
I didn't have to say anything.
One thing I'll give that client, he used to say that he used me even
though I was more expensive than the competition because the stuff I
did actually worked. Kind of rare for a businessman to get that far,
alas. Too bad he wasn't good at the paying part . . .
>> Think Max Bialystock.
>
>i'm not a swindler.
>
>but anyway, i'm certainly smart enough to know how to smooth people
>over, but that's moot when the numbskulls start throwing their idiotic
>weight around -- unscrewing the stagelights and snipping the wires of
>the microphones and speakers because they insist that the play should
>be produced in the dark -- for dramatic effect.
>
>duh.
>
>> Think Chaplin and the landlady in "Limelight." Think Figaro.
>
>reference impairment.
Limelight: Chaplin smooths temper of his shrewish landlady through
charm and flattery.
Figaro: Canny servant in two plays by Beaumarchais and the famous
operas that were based on them. In the Marriage of Figaro, he outwits
his not very swift boss Count Almaviva, who is planning to resurrect
the droit de seigneur and and screw Figaro's bride-to-be on their
wedding night.
$Zero
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 11:06:51 -0700, $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 22, 1:09?pm, Josh Hill <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
> >> most recently when you accused me of being a liar because
> >> I said I didn't get something that I didn't get.
>
> >you lied about that.
>
> >you can deny it all you want, but your avoiding the thread where it
> >happened is even more proof of your inability to own up and confess --
>
> Problem is, there's no evidence of anything.
yes there is.
you're deluding yourself in believing the evidence isn't there.
> No evidence that I actually got it,
wrong.
> no /motive/ for me not to get it,
wrong.
> no history of my playing the sort of manipulative tricks
> that the trolls do.
wrong.
> I don't even know what thread it's in
another lie -- the link has been provided to you several times.
> and I haven't been ignoring any thread here:
another lie.
> I just look at posts as they come in and skim or read and
> respond or not as it suits me.
perhaps, but you have stayed away from the thread and your lie on
purpose.
> If it was in the thread where you were having long arguments with Ray,
irrelevant, but i was responding directly to you -- and you replied.
> I didn't read very far into either your accusations or his responses,
> because it didn't interested me very much.
i was responding directly to you -- and you replied.
> I not infrequently even
> skim posts that are full of accusations about me for the same reason,
> and me is generally an interesting topic.
indeed, it shows.
> A hunch isn't proof,
this isn't a hunch. the proof is all there.
> and when you make a mistake about someone's
> motives on the basis of a hunch, they tend to get pissed or shake
> their heads and walk away. At least, that's what I usually do.
walk away? nope.
"run away" is what you did.
if you don't respond in the place where your lie occured, which is
easy enough for you to find, your credibility will be shattered beyond
repair -- just like Ray's.
"Who the fuck cares."
-- Josh Hill
Josh Hill
wrote:
>On Jun 22, 4:04?pm, Josh Hill <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
I'll thank you to stick to the fruits of your own brain, Zero, because
you've amply demonstrated that you haven't the foggiest notion of
what's going on in mine.
>> If it was in the thread where you were having long arguments with Ray,
>
>irrelevant, but i was responding directly to you -- and you replied.
>
>> I didn't read very far into either your accusations or his responses,
>> because it didn't interested me very much.
>
>i was responding directly to you -- and you replied.
>
>> I not infrequently even
>> skim posts that are full of accusations about me for the same reason,
>> and me is generally an interesting topic.
>
>indeed, it shows.
>
>> A hunch isn't proof,
>
>this isn't a hunch. the proof is all there.
Rubbish.
>> and when you make a mistake about someone's
>> motives on the basis of a hunch, they tend to get pissed or shake
>> their heads and walk away. At least, that's what I usually do.
>
>walk away? nope.
>
>"run away" is what you did.
Rubbish.
>if you don't respond in the place where your lie occured, which is
>easy enough for you to find, your credibility will be shattered beyond
>repair -- just like Ray's.
>
>
> "Who the fuck cares."
> -- Josh Hill
You're right, Zero -- or rather, I'm right: who the fuck cares.
Accusations grow on this group like maggots on shit: anyone who
believes them merely because someone happens to make them them is a
fucking idiot. And anyone who thinks I'm going to go all the way
through your posts or Sylvia's posts debunking every random accusation
is his brother. Proof of an assertion is the responsibility of the man
who makes it, and your "proof" of your claims is laughable, nothing
more than "You said you didn't get my joke and, worse, you didn't hang
out in a thread so tedious it would have bored a squeak toy."
$Zero
> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
> > Josh Hill <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> $Zero <z...@whooooooosh.com> wrote:
liar.
> >> If it was in the thread where you were having long arguments with Ray,
>
> >irrelevant, but i was responding directly to you -- and you replied.
>
> >> I didn't read very far into either your accusations or his responses,
> >> because it didn't interested me very much.
>
> >i was responding directly to you -- and you replied.
>
> >> I not infrequently even
> >> skim posts that are full of accusations about me for the same reason,
> >> and me is generally an interesting topic.
>
> >indeed, it shows.
>
> >> A hunch isn't proof,
>
> >this isn't a hunch. the proof is all there.
>
> Rubbish.
>
> >> and when you make a mistake about someone's
> >> motives on the basis of a hunch, they tend to get pissed or shake
> >> their heads and walk away. At least, that's what I usually do.
>
> >walk away? nope.
>
> >"run away" is what you did.
>
> Rubbish.
>
> >if you don't respond in the place where your lie occured, which is
> >easy enough for you to find, your credibility will be shattered beyond
> >repair -- just like Ray's.
>
> > "Who the fuck cares."
> > -- Josh Hill
>
> You're right, Zero -- or rather, I'm right: who the fuck cares.
you do.
> Accusations grow on this group like maggots on shit: anyone who
> believes them merely because someone happens to make them them is a
> fucking idiot. And anyone who thinks I'm going to go all the way
> through your posts or Sylvia's posts debunking every random accusation
> is his brother.
all you need to do is google "irrefutable proof Josh lie" in mw and
sort by date and you'll get to the thread without cracking a sweat.
> Proof of an assertion is the responsibility of the man
> who makes it,
the more you deny it, the more lies you make.
for instance, all of your responses in this post alone add to the list
of evidence of your lying.
read them one by one above and see if you can figure out why.
like i said, if you don't respond in the place where your lie occured,
which is easy enough for you to find, your credibility will be
shattered beyond repair -- just like Ray's.
far more than if you simply admitted that you were lying.
it's the mistake far too many bpeople make
you'll notice that nobody ever calls me a liar.
you know why? because i don't lie much.
what most people do is make fun of what i say, because it often seems
implausible.
or irrational.
but once i clarify it, they go away.
> and your "proof" of your claims is laughable,
then why are you continue to avoid answering in the original thread?
BTW: your further testimony is not needed to prove your lie, but it
certainly makes matters much worse for you.
because every single post of denial you make, you make new lies.
> nothing
> more than "You said you didn't get my joke and, worse, you didn't hang
> out in a thread so tedious it would have bored a squeak toy."
hardly.
the proof is there, clear as day.
and every denial you make makes you lie more and more.
no wonder you sympathise so much with Ray.
i'm not providing the link here because of your Ray Haddad blackholish
behavior.
again, as you well know, all you need to do is google "irrefutable
proof Josh lie" in mw and sort by date and you'll get to the thread
without cracking a sweat.
read the subject lines and weep.
-$Zero...
$Zero
[...]
> i'm not providing the link here because of your Ray Haddad blackholish
> behavior.
>
> again, as you well know, all you need to do is google "irrefutable
> proof Josh lie" in mw and sort by date and you'll get to the thread
> without cracking a sweat.
but don't include the quotation marks,
just go to:
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/topics
and google:
irrefutable proof Josh lie
clicking on "search this group" from there.
then...
> read the subject lines and weep.
again.
HTH
Ray Haddad
and Josh Hill <usere...@gmail.com> instead replied:
>It went black at the end.
Half black or all black?
--
Ray
Ray Haddad
and $Zero <ze...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
>i'm not a swindler.
You accepted money from investors, gave them nothing in return,
asked for more and when they refused, forced them into bankruptcy.
You qualify.
--
Ray
Ray Haddad
and $Zero <ze...@whooooooosh.com> instead replied:
>all you need to do is google "irrefutable proof Josh lie" in mw and
>sort by date and you'll get to the thread without cracking a sweat.
That's proof to you? Lies about Josh are truth because they're in
Google results? Are you nuts?
Never mind. Don't bother to answer that.
--
Ray
Josh Hill
wrote:
I didn't lie, and I'm no more going to waste my time looking at a
thread that claims I did than I would sit down next to a muttering
nutter who curses me under his breath.
How's that?
Josh Hill
Black and a half.
Ray Haddad
and Josh Hill <usere...@gmail.com> instead replied:
>I didn't lie, and I'm no more going to waste my time looking at a
>thread that claims I did than I would sit down next to a muttering
>nutter who curses me under his breath.
Guess what? He quotes himself calling you a liar then refers to it
as proof. Don't waste your time looking.
>How's that?
Xero has escaped from the ward. Jack Nicholson helped him.
--
Ray
Josh Hill
<rha...@iexpress.net.au> wrote:
>On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 20:39:36 -0400, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
>and Josh Hill <usere...@gmail.com> instead replied:
>
>>I didn't lie, and I'm no more going to waste my time looking at a
>>thread that claims I did than I would sit down next to a muttering
>>nutter who curses me under his breath.
>
>Guess what? He quotes himself calling you a liar then refers to it
>as proof.
Heh. I wish I could say that that was lame by the standards of this
group.
Ray Haddad
and Josh Hill <usere...@gmail.com> instead replied:
>On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 09:43:02 +0800, Ray Haddad
><rha...@iexpress.net.au> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 20:39:36 -0400, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
>>and Josh Hill <usere...@gmail.com> instead replied:
>>
>>>I didn't lie, and I'm no more going to waste my time looking at a
>>>thread that claims I did than I would sit down next to a muttering
>>>nutter who curses me under his breath.
>>
>>Guess what? He quotes himself calling you a liar then refers to it
>>as proof.
>
>Heh. I wish I could say that that was lame by the standards of this
>group.
I take great pleasure in being the one to tell you that this SETS
the standards of this group. Nothing more. Nothing less.
--
Ray
Josh Hill
<rha...@iexpress.net.au> wrote:
>On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 22:18:10 -0400, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
>and Josh Hill <usere...@gmail.com> instead replied:
>
>>On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 09:43:02 +0800, Ray Haddad
>><rha...@iexpress.net.au> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 20:39:36 -0400, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
>>>and Josh Hill <usere...@gmail.com> instead replied:
>>>
>>>>I didn't lie, and I'm no more going to waste my time looking at a
>>>>thread that claims I did than I would sit down next to a muttering
>>>>nutter who curses me under his breath.
>>>
>>>Guess what? He quotes himself calling you a liar then refers to it
>>>as proof.
>>
>>Heh. I wish I could say that that was lame by the standards of this
>>group.
>
>I take great pleasure in being the one to tell you that this SETS
>the standards of this group. Nothing more. Nothing less.
At least there's a certain amusing honesty to it. It doesn't come
burdened with reams of meaningless quotes from Google, claims of
infallibility, nonsensical criteria. It's proud of its baselessness.