>>Anything in your email that is not solicited is SPAM.
> That's your private definition. In the real world, e-mail spam is
> defined as UBE.
>>Just ask the boys over in nanae
> Who will tell the OP that you're a well known kook, and that the
> definition of spa, has been argued here for a long time, with a rough
> consensus that it is UBE.
I'm pretty sure kensi already knows that Burnore is a kook. ;)
>>>>>>>>>> That's your private definition. In the real world, e-mail
>>>>>>>>>> spam is defined as UBE.
>>>>>>>>> Words are defined by the community of speakers who wish to
>>>>>>>>> communicate, not books or web pages.
>>>>>>>> You snipped out what Shmuel said next:
>>>>>>>>>> Just ask the boys over in nanae
>>>>>>>>> Who will tell the OP that you're a well known kook, and that
>>>>>>>> the | definition of spa, has been argued here for a long time,
>>>>>>>> with a | rough consensus that it is UBE.
>>>>>>>> Looks like the relevant "community of speakers" agrees with
>>>>>>>> Shmuel.
>>>>>>> Do you really think you know about sociolinguistics?
>>>>>> Apparently I know enough...
>>>>> Are you cunnilingual?
>>>> Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to
>>>> put that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the
>>>> ballot, so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to
>>>> rustle up a couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just
>>>> to make absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!
>>> LOL! He shoots... HE SCORES!
>>> Thanks for the new sig trophy, "Andy". Was it as good for you as
>>> it was for me? Best see a doctor about that twitchy hand... you're
>>> likely to jerk yourself off every time you take a leak if you don't
>>> do something about it. Although... something tells me you wouldn't
>>> consider that a problem.
>>> So bring those socks, Andy. Vote early, vote often. Again, thanks
>>> for the frothy meltdown... LOL!
>> Causing you to have a frothy meltdown is all part of the job for us
>> FNVWs. ;)
> Cool you have such an easy job! LOL
> MK
i warned you where that checkgate was goin but , noooo
>>>>>>>>>>> That's your private definition. In the real world, e-mail
>>>>>>>>>>> spam is defined as UBE.
>>>>>>>>>> Words are defined by the community of speakers who wish to
>>>>>>>>>> communicate, not books or web pages.
>>>>>>>>> You snipped out what Shmuel said next:
>>>>>>>>>>> Just ask the boys over in nanae
>>>>>>>>>> Who will tell the OP that you're a well known kook, and that
>>>>>>>>> the | definition of spa, has been argued here for a long time,
>>>>>>>>> with a | rough consensus that it is UBE.
>>>>>>>>> Looks like the relevant "community of speakers" agrees with
>>>>>>>>> Shmuel.
>>>>>>>> Do you really think you know about sociolinguistics?
>>>>>>> Apparently I know enough...
>>>>>> Are you cunnilingual?
>>>>> Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to
>>>>> put that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the
>>>>> ballot, so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to
>>>>> rustle up a couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just
>>>>> to make absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!
>>>> LOL! He shoots... HE SCORES!
>>>> Thanks for the new sig trophy, "Andy". Was it as good for you as
>>>> it was for me? Best see a doctor about that twitchy hand... you're
>>>> likely to jerk yourself off every time you take a leak if you don't
>>>> do something about it. Although... something tells me you wouldn't
>>>> consider that a problem.
>>>> So bring those socks, Andy. Vote early, vote often. Again, thanks
>>>> for the frothy meltdown... LOL!
>>> Causing you to have a frothy meltdown is all part of the job for us
>>> FNVWs. ;)
>> Cool you have such an easy job! LOL
>> MK
> i warned you where that checkgate was goin but , noooo
Discussion subject changed to "Of Ballot Fixing and Socky's Skullfucked Socks" by This account has been banned because it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use
This account has been banned because it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use
AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA Andrew Wilson
<awils984...@gmail.com> wrote:
> And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
> couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
> absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!
You stupid cunt.
-- "Sweetness Seal Of Approval" #4 Co-winning trainer, Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog-Whistle - August 2012
Winner of multiple fake awards from serial Usenet kook, Paul G. Derbyshire
If you want to see something lamer than John Edward Kook's frogeries of Aratzio, check out Scatboi's forgeries.
>>>>>>>>>>>> That's your private definition. In the real world, e-mail
>>>>>>>>>>>> spam is defined as UBE.
>>>>>>>>>>> Words are defined by the community of speakers who wish to
>>>>>>>>>>> communicate, not books or web pages.
>>>>>>>>>> You snipped out what Shmuel said next:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Just ask the boys over in nanae
>>>>>>>>>>> Who will tell the OP that you're a well known kook, and that
>>>>>>>>>> the | definition of spa, has been argued here for a long
>>>>>>>>>> time, with a | rough consensus that it is UBE.
>>>>>>>>>> Looks like the relevant "community of speakers" agrees with
>>>>>>>>>> Shmuel.
>>>>>>>>> Do you really think you know about sociolinguistics?
>>>>>>>> Apparently I know enough...
>>>>>>> Are you cunnilingual?
>>>>>> Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to
>>>>>> put that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the
>>>>>> ballot, so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to
>>>>>> rustle up a couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box
>>>>>> just to make absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!
>>>>> LOL! He shoots... HE SCORES!
>>>>> Thanks for the new sig trophy, "Andy". Was it as good for you as
>>>>> it was for me? Best see a doctor about that twitchy hand...
>>>>> you're likely to jerk yourself off every time you take a leak if
>>>>> you don't do something about it. Although... something tells me
>>>>> you wouldn't consider that a problem.
>>>>> So bring those socks, Andy. Vote early, vote often. Again,
>>>>> thanks for the frothy meltdown... LOL!
>>>> Causing you to have a frothy meltdown is all part of the job for us
>>>> FNVWs. ;)
>>> Cool you have such an easy job! LOL
>>> MK
>> i warned you where that checkgate was goin but , noooo
> Thanks for the advice, persent.
> MK
i just wish you hadn't of dissed me at the start we could've been friends
> >> >> > > >> >> That's your private definition. In the real world, e-mail
> >> >> > > >> >> spam is defined as UBE.
> >> >> > > >> > Words are defined by the community of speakers who wish to
> >> >> > > >> > communicate, not books or web pages.
> >> >> > > >> You snipped out what Shmuel said next:
> >> >> > > >> |> Just ask the boys over in nanae
> >> >> > > >> |
> >> >> > > >> | Who will tell the OP that you're a well known kook, and
> >> >> > > >> that the | definition of spa, has been argued here for a long
> >> >> > > >> time, with a | rough consensus that it is UBE.
> >> >> > > >> Looks like the relevant "community of speakers" agrees with
> >> >> > > >> Shmuel.
> >> >> > > > Do you really think you know about sociolinguistics?
> >> >> > > Apparently I know enough...
> >> >> > Are you cunnilingual?
> >> >> Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to
> >> >> put that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the
> >> >> ballot, so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to
> >> >> rustle up a couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just
> >> >> to make absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!
> >> > Thanks for confirming what we already knew... your fake awards are
> >> > all rigged, meaning they're bogus.
> >> He said he's "tempted", not that he actually did it or will do it, you
> >> moron. Oh, and YHBT. :)
> > Implying that he could. Since there's traditionally been a parade of
> > unknown socks
> Proof?
I listed half a dozen of those socks last month. Socks who appeared for the first time to cast their "votes". Go look it up yourself... every one came from the same server.
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
> Subject: In Which Socky Channels Spamtard
> From: This account has been banned because it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use <laugh...@u.kook>
> Newsgroups: alt.usenet.kooks, news.admin.net-abuse.email, alt.paul-derbyshire.fix.it.now
> AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA Nadegda > <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> > Shaddup, kook. And get a shorter sig that starts with a pooper separator > > while you're at it.
> Yer hear that, Checkmate? A sig longer than 4 lines will not be TOLLERATED!!
> "Sweetness Seal Of Approval" #4 > Co-winning trainer, Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog-Whistle - August 2012
> Winner of multiple fake awards from serial Usenet kook, Paul G. Derbyshire
> If you want to see something lamer than John Edward Kook's frogeries of > Aratzio, check out Scatboi's forgeries.
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
>> >> >> > > >> >> That's your private definition. In the real world,
>> >> >> > > >> >> e-mail spam is defined as UBE.
>> >> >> > > >> > Words are defined by the community of speakers who wish
>> >> >> > > >> > to communicate, not books or web pages.
>> >> >> > > >> You snipped out what Shmuel said next:
>> >> >> > > >> |> Just ask the boys over in nanae
>> >> >> > > >> |
>> >> >> > > >> | Who will tell the OP that you're a well known kook, and
>> >> >> > > >> that the | definition of spa, has been argued here for a
>> >> >> > > >> long time, with a | rough consensus that it is UBE.
>> >> >> > > >> Looks like the relevant "community of speakers" agrees
>> >> >> > > >> with Shmuel.
>> >> >> > > > Do you really think you know about sociolinguistics?
>> >> >> > > Apparently I know enough...
>> >> >> > Are you cunnilingual?
>> >> >> Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to
>> >> >> put that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the
>> >> >> ballot, so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to
>> >> >> rustle up a couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box
>> >> >> just to make absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!
>> >> > Thanks for confirming what we already knew... your fake awards are
>> >> > all rigged, meaning they're bogus.
>> >> He said he's "tempted", not that he actually did it or will do it,
>> >> you moron. Oh, and YHBT. :)
>> > Implying that he could. Since there's traditionally been a parade of
>> > unknown socks
>> Proof?
> I listed half a dozen of those socks last month.
But failed to actually prove they were socks.
> Socks who appeared for the first time to cast their "votes".
Actually, there were older posts in this NG by them, including votes on previous ballots.
> Go look it up yourself... every one came from the same server.
A free server that anyone in the world can get an account on.
Don't tell me you're developing Account Banned's particular peculiar form of kookery where you think that servers, ISPs, and suchlike only have 1 user each?
>> > attending your past bogus
>> Proof?
>> > elections,
>> Awards.
>> > it w<MUSHROOM CLOUD>
>> Address the above first, kooky.
> Done.
Nope. Try again, kooky.
> Now F<SLAP!>
Shaddup, kook, until you actually *prove* they're socks.
> >> >> >> > > >> >> That's your private definition. In the real world,
> >> >> >> > > >> >> e-mail spam is defined as UBE.
> >> >> >> > > >> > Words are defined by the community of speakers who wish
> >> >> >> > > >> > to communicate, not books or web pages.
> >> >> >> > > >> You snipped out what Shmuel said next:
> >> >> >> > > >> |> Just ask the boys over in nanae
> >> >> >> > > >> |
> >> >> >> > > >> | Who will tell the OP that you're a well known kook, and
> >> >> >> > > >> that the | definition of spa, has been argued here for a
> >> >> >> > > >> long time, with a | rough consensus that it is UBE.
> >> >> >> > > >> Looks like the relevant "community of speakers" agrees
> >> >> >> > > >> with Shmuel.
> >> >> >> > > > Do you really think you know about sociolinguistics?
> >> >> >> > > Apparently I know enough...
> >> >> >> > Are you cunnilingual?
> >> >> >> Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to
> >> >> >> put that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the
> >> >> >> ballot, so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to
> >> >> >> rustle up a couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box
> >> >> >> just to make absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!
> >> >> > Thanks for confirming what we already knew... your fake awards are
> >> >> > all rigged, meaning they're bogus.
> >> >> He said he's "tempted", not that he actually did it or will do it,
> >> >> you moron. Oh, and YHBT. :)
> >> > Implying that he could. Since there's traditionally been a parade of
> >> > unknown socks
> >> Proof?
> > I listed half a dozen of those socks last month.
> But failed to actually prove they were socks.
And yet they showed up, cast their "votes," then ran away... never to be heard from again.
> > Socks who appeared for the first time to cast their "votes".
> Actually, there were older posts in this NG by them, including votes on > previous ballots.
Thanks for further proving my point for me.
> > Go look it up yourself... every one came from the same server.
> A free server that anyone in the world can get an account on.
> Don't tell me you're developing Account Banned's particular peculiar form > of kookery where you think that servers, ISPs, and suchlike only have 1 > user each?
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
>> >> >> >> > > >> >> That's your private definition. In the real world,
>> >> >> >> > > >> >> e-mail spam is defined as UBE.
>> >> >> >> > > >> > Words are defined by the community of speakers who
>> >> >> >> > > >> > wish to communicate, not books or web pages.
>> >> >> >> > > >> You snipped out what Shmuel said next:
>> >> >> >> > > >> |> Just ask the boys over in nanae
>> >> >> >> > > >> |
>> >> >> >> > > >> | Who will tell the OP that you're a well known kook,
>> >> >> >> > > >> and that the | definition of spa, has been argued here
>> >> >> >> > > >> for a long time, with a | rough consensus that it is
>> >> >> >> > > >> UBE.
>> >> >> >> > > >> Looks like the relevant "community of speakers" agrees
>> >> >> >> > > >> with Shmuel.
>> >> >> >> > > > Do you really think you know about sociolinguistics?
>> >> >> >> > > Apparently I know enough...
>> >> >> >> > Are you cunnilingual?
>> >> >> >> Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want
>> >> >> >> to put that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating
>> >> >> >> on the ballot, so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely
>> >> >> >> tempted to rustle up a couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the
>> >> >> >> ballot box just to make absolutely sure you "win" it, you
>> >> >> >> fucking lech!
>> >> >> > Thanks for confirming what we already knew... your fake awards
>> >> >> > are all rigged, meaning they're bogus.
>> >> >> He said he's "tempted", not that he actually did it or will do
>> >> >> it, you moron. Oh, and YHBT. :)
>> >> > Implying that he could. Since there's traditionally been a parade
>> >> > of unknown socks
>> >> Proof?
>> > I listed half a dozen of those socks last month.
>> But failed to actually prove they were socks.
> And yet they showed up, cast their "votes," then ran away... never to be
> heard from again. [1]
>> > Socks who appeared for the first time to cast their "votes".
>> Actually, there were older posts in this NG by them, including votes on
>> previous ballots.
> Thanks for further proving my point for me. [2]
Note, student kookologists, how this example kook's statements [1] and [2] contradict each other. If you guessed that Stalemate was nominated for a Loony Maroon Award in the same month in which he posted those statements, then you're right!
<snicker>
>> > Now F<SLAP!>
>> Shaddup, kook, until you actually *prove* they're socks.
> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> That's your private definition. In the real world,
> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> e-mail spam is defined as UBE.
> >> >> >> >> > > >> > Words are defined by the community of speakers who
> >> >> >> >> > > >> > wish to communicate, not books or web pages.
> >> >> >> >> > > >> You snipped out what Shmuel said next:
> >> >> >> >> > > >> |> Just ask the boys over in nanae
> >> >> >> >> > > >> |
> >> >> >> >> > > >> | Who will tell the OP that you're a well known kook,
> >> >> >> >> > > >> and that the | definition of spa, has been argued here
> >> >> >> >> > > >> for a long time, with a | rough consensus that it is
> >> >> >> >> > > >> UBE.
> >> >> >> >> > > >> Looks like the relevant "community of speakers" agrees
> >> >> >> >> > > >> with Shmuel.
> >> >> >> >> > > > Do you really think you know about sociolinguistics?
> >> >> >> >> > > Apparently I know enough...
> >> >> >> >> > Are you cunnilingual?
> >> >> >> >> Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want
> >> >> >> >> to put that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating
> >> >> >> >> on the ballot, so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely
> >> >> >> >> tempted to rustle up a couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the
> >> >> >> >> ballot box just to make absolutely sure you "win" it, you
> >> >> >> >> fucking lech!
> >> >> >> > Thanks for confirming what we already knew... your fake awards
> >> >> >> > are all rigged, meaning they're bogus.
> >> >> >> He said he's "tempted", not that he actually did it or will do
> >> >> >> it, you moron. Oh, and YHBT. :)
> >> >> > Implying that he could. Since there's traditionally been a parade
> >> >> > of unknown socks
> >> >> Proof?
> >> > I listed half a dozen of those socks last month.
> >> But failed to actually prove they were socks.
> > And yet they showed up, cast their "votes," then ran away... never to be
> > heard from again. [1]
> >> > Socks who appeared for the first time to cast their "votes".
> >> Actually, there were older posts in this NG by them, including votes on
> >> previous ballots.
> > Thanks for further proving my point for me. [2]
> Note, student kookologists, how this example kook's statements [1] and > [2] contradict each other. If you guessed that Stalemate was nominated > for a Loony Maroon Award in the same month in which he posted those > statements, then you're right!
How do OLDER sock posts in previous "ballots" contradict my statement that after the last fake "ballot," they were never heard from again, Kooky One?
> <snicker>
> >> > Now F<SLAP!>
> >> Shaddup, kook, until you actually *prove* they're socks.
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
> > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> That's your private definition. In the real world,
> > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> e-mail spam is defined as UBE.
> > >> >> >> >> > > >> > Words are defined by the community of speakers who
> > >> >> >> >> > > >> > wish to communicate, not books or web pages.
> > >> >> >> >> > > >> You snipped out what Shmuel said next:
> > >> >> >> >> > > >> |> Just ask the boys over in nanae
> > >> >> >> >> > > >> |
> > >> >> >> >> > > >> | Who will tell the OP that you're a well known kook,
> > >> >> >> >> > > >> and that the | definition of spa, has been argued here
> > >> >> >> >> > > >> for a long time, with a | rough consensus that it is
> > >> >> >> >> > > >> UBE.
> > >> >> >> >> > > >> Looks like the relevant "community of speakers" agrees
> > >> >> >> >> > > >> with Shmuel.
> > >> >> >> >> > > > Do you really think you know about sociolinguistics?
> > >> >> >> >> > > Apparently I know enough...
> > >> >> >> >> > Are you cunnilingual?
> > >> >> >> >> Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want
> > >> >> >> >> to put that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating
> > >> >> >> >> on the ballot, so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely
> > >> >> >> >> tempted to rustle up a couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the
> > >> >> >> >> ballot box just to make absolutely sure you "win" it, you
> > >> >> >> >> fucking lech!
> > >> >> >> > Thanks for confirming what we already knew... your fake awards
> > >> >> >> > are all rigged, meaning they're bogus.
> > >> >> >> He said he's "tempted", not that he actually did it or will do
> > >> >> >> it, you moron. Oh, and YHBT. :)
> > >> >> > Implying that he could. Since there's traditionally been a parade
> > >> >> > of unknown socks
> > >> >> Proof?
> > >> > I listed half a dozen of those socks last month.
> > >> But failed to actually prove they were socks.
> > > And yet they showed up, cast their "votes," then ran away... never to be
> > > heard from again. [1]
> > >> > Socks who appeared for the first time to cast their "votes".
> > >> Actually, there were older posts in this NG by them, including votes on
> > >> previous ballots.
> > > Thanks for further proving my point for me. [2]
> > Note, student kookologists, how this example kook's statements [1] and
> > [2] contradict each other. If you guessed that Stalemate was nominated
> > for a Loony Maroon Award in the same month in which he posted those
> > statements, then you're right!
> How do OLDER sock posts in previous "ballots" contradict my statement
> that after the last fake "ballot," they were never heard from again,
> K<SPANK>
Why do you think they won't be heard from again, kook?
> > <snicker>
> > >> > Now F<SLAP!>
> > >> Shaddup, kook, until you actually *prove* they're socks.
> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> That's your private definition. In the real world,
> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> e-mail spam is defined as UBE.
> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> > Words are defined by the community of speakers who
> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> > wish to communicate, not books or web pages.
> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> You snipped out what Shmuel said next:
> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> |> Just ask the boys over in nanae
> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> |
> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> | Who will tell the OP that you're a well known kook,
> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> and that the | definition of spa, has been argued here
> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> for a long time, with a | rough consensus that it is
> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> UBE.
> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> Looks like the relevant "community of speakers" agrees
> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> with Shmuel.
> > > >> >> >> >> > > > Do you really think you know about sociolinguistics?
> > > >> >> >> >> > > Apparently I know enough...
> > > >> >> >> >> > Are you cunnilingual?
> > > >> >> >> >> Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want
> > > >> >> >> >> to put that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating
> > > >> >> >> >> on the ballot, so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely
> > > >> >> >> >> tempted to rustle up a couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the
> > > >> >> >> >> ballot box just to make absolutely sure you "win" it, you
> > > >> >> >> >> fucking lech!
> > > >> >> >> > Thanks for confirming what we already knew... your fake awards
> > > >> >> >> > are all rigged, meaning they're bogus.
> > > >> >> >> He said he's "tempted", not that he actually did it or will do
> > > >> >> >> it, you moron. Oh, and YHBT. :)
> > > >> >> > Implying that he could. Since there's traditionally been a parade
> > > >> >> > of unknown socks
> > > >> >> Proof?
> > > >> > I listed half a dozen of those socks last month.
> > > >> But failed to actually prove they were socks.
> > > > And yet they showed up, cast their "votes," then ran away... never to be
> > > > heard from again. [1]
> > > >> > Socks who appeared for the first time to cast their "votes".
> > > >> Actually, there were older posts in this NG by them, including votes on
> > > >> previous ballots.
> > > > Thanks for further proving my point for me. [2]
> > > Note, student kookologists, how this example kook's statements [1] and
> > > [2] contradict each other. If you guessed that Stalemate was nominated
> > > for a Loony Maroon Award in the same month in which he posted those
> > > statements, then you're right!
> > How do OLDER sock posts in previous "ballots" contradict my statement
> > that after the last fake "ballot," they were never heard from again,
> > K<SPANK>
> Why do you think they won't be heard from again, kook?
"They," Paul? (TINT)
> > > <snicker>
> > > >> > Now F<SLAP!>
> > > >> Shaddup, kook, until you actually *prove* they're socks.
> > > > S<SLAP!>
> > > Still waiting for that proof, kooky.
> > Prove they're not.
> The burden of proof is on you, kook.
I just put it on you, KoOk. We do things MY way here.
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
>> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
>> Checkmate!
>> First, check out what This account has been banned because it violated >> the Google Groups Terms Of Use said:
>>> Subject: In Which Socky Channels Spamtard
>>> From: This account has been banned because it violated the Google
>>> Groups Terms Of Use <laugh...@u.kook> Newsgroups: alt.usenet.kooks,
>>> news.admin.net-abuse.email, alt.paul-derbyshire.fix.it.now
>>> AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA Nadegda >>> <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>> > Shaddup, kook. And get a shorter sig that starts with a pooper >> separator >>> > while you're at it.
>>> Yer hear that, Checkmate? A sig longer than 4 lines will not be
>>> TOLLERATED!!
>>> "Sweetness Seal Of Approval" #4 >>> Co-winning trainer, Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog-Whistle - August
>>> 2012 Winner of multiple fake awards from serial Usenet kook, Paul G.
>>> Derbyshire
>>> If you want to see something lamer than John Edward Kook's frogeries of
>>> Aratzio, check out Scatboi's forgeries.
>> "Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
>> that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
>> so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
>> couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
>> absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
"I'm more of a Usenet force than you'll ever imagine in your wildest dreams." -
Nellie Hall
KotAGoR XXXXI COOSN-075-07-81342
Brainwashed Follower of Art Deco #1 Old Gringo's Poopy Lits #1 Nellies invalid AUK Sociopath lits #10 @'s Lits of cyberterrorists and cyber bullies #1 eMutT lits o' hate #4 Lits Slut#10 Usenet Ruiner #3 Top Asshole On The Net #2 Most Hated Usenetizen of all time #2. Sweetness Seal Of Approval #2 Hammer of Thor - August 2005 Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle,Trainer of Rasta Khan, March 2006 Pierre Salinger HL&S January & February 2012
>>> Shaddup, kook. And get a shorter sig that starts with a proper >>> separator while you're at it.
>> Yer hear that, Checkmate? A sig longer than 4 lines will not be TOLLERATED!!
> Can I buy a pooper separator online?
Why? That 4 foot long, giant black dildo you've got doubled over and
crammed sideways up what you call yer "piehole" not enough of a
"pooper separator" for you, Chimpy McQueerbait?
<snicker>
--
/\ Properly known as Bill
\ /\ The Monster You Kooks Can't Handle
\ / \ THERE IS NO CABAL - LONG LIVE THE NEW CABAL
\/ The AUK coup is complete. The Old Cabal is no more.
>> On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 06:24:09 +0000 (UTC), This account has been banned
>> because it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use <laugh...@u.kook>
>> wrote:
>>>> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts
>>>> by Checkmate!
>>>> First, check out what This account has been banned because it
>>>> violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use said:
>>>>> Subject: In Which Socky Channels Spamtard From: This account has
>>>>> been banned because it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use
>>>>> <laugh...@u.kook> Newsgroups: alt.usenet.kooks,
>>>>> news.admin.net-abuse.email, alt.paul-derbyshire.fix.it.now
>>>>> AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA Nadegda
>>>>> <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> > Shaddup, kook. And get a shorter sig that starts with a pooper
>>>> separator
>>>>> > while you're at it.
>>>>> Yer hear that, Checkmate? A sig longer than 4 lines will not be
>>>>> TOLLERATED!!
>>>>> "Sweetness Seal Of Approval" #4
>>>>> Co-winning trainer, Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog-Whistle - August
>>>>> 2012 Winner of multiple fake awards from serial Usenet kook, Paul G.
>>>>> Derbyshire
>>>>> If you want to see something lamer than John Edward Kook's frogeries
>>>>> of
>>>>> Aratzio, check out Scatboi's forgeries.
In article <chine.bleu-8887C7.08200029102...@news.eternal-september.org>,
Where's all the China Blue food? <chine.b...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>In article <508ddb85$12$fuzhry+tra$mr2...@news.patriot.net>,
> "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <spamt...@library.lspace.org.invalid> wrote:
>> In <chine.bleu-F7FDF4.05294828102...@news.eternal-september.org>, on
>> 10/28/2012
>> at 05:29 AM, "Where's all the China Blue food?"
>> <chine.b...@yahoo.com> said:
>> >Words are defined by the community of speakers who wish to
>> >communicate,
>> And that community has spoken, long since.
>Different communities, bright stuff.
You came here to ours[tino] for definitive statements.
Spam requires bulkiness, by definition.
There are many forms of abuse that aren't spam. They're still abuse.
In article <k6jmsg$m2...@posting2.glorb.com>, WindsorFox <SS> wrote:
> Or, Unsolicited Commercial Email. UCE. Many, maybe more are of the >opinion it does not have to be bulk. If you send me an unsolicited email >wanting me to patronize your business, it is spam even though you only >sent it to me.
It's not spam in that case; but how often does that happen? Why would
you be the single lucky person who ever received unsolicited email
promoting that business?
> In article <k6jmsg$m2...@posting2.glorb.com>, WindsorFox <SS> wrote:
>> Or, Unsolicited Commercial Email. UCE. Many, maybe more are of the
>> opinion it does not have to be bulk. If you send me an unsolicited email
>> wanting me to patronize your business, it is spam even though you only
>> sent it to me.
> It's not spam in that case; but how often does that happen? Why would
> you be the single lucky person who ever received unsolicited email
> promoting that business?
> Seth
Well I have gotten unsolicited commercial emails that were not necessarily bulk, at least not to the extent most people think of. I've gotten emails that were likely one of several but possibly sent one or a couple at a time to my Amsoil email address from retired little old men who apparently bought into some lead generator MLM junk. So if Delbert buys into a 100% profit lead generator and send me an email that is one of 12 or one of 3 or one of 1000 advertising how he can generate tons of leads for only $50, that is still spam IMO.
Gary Burnore wrote:
> In alt.usenet.kooks Seth <se...@panix.com> wrote:
>> In article <k6jmsg$m2...@posting2.glorb.com>, WindsorFox <SS> wrote:
>>> Or, Unsolicited Commercial Email. UCE. Many, maybe more are of the
>>> opinion it does not have to be bulk. If you send me an unsolicited email
>>> wanting me to patronize your business, it is spam even though you only
>>> sent it to me.
>> It's not spam in that case; but how often does that happen? Why would
>> you be the single lucky person who ever received unsolicited email
>> promoting that business?
> This is it in a nutshell. I don't need to get more than one to know that it's likely to have gone to many others.
However, from a recipient (non-administrator) point of view, which accounts for the near entire majority of email recipients, the bulkness of sending doesn't really matter because the fact of it being received by many others, or no others, doesn't make any difference to them. What matters is that their inboxes are flooded with large quantities of emails. Whether they get thousands of emails from a few sources, or one email each from a thousand sources, it's still bulk to them and still spam.
Maybe you might not want to allow that under the official definition of "spam", but i'm certainly going to accept my users defining it that way.
-- The lurkers deride me in email.
TOASTEDspam.com
> In alt.usenet.kooks Seth <se...@panix.com> wrote:
>> In article <k6jmsg$m2...@posting2.glorb.com>, WindsorFox <SS> wrote:
>>> Or, Unsolicited Commercial Email. UCE. Many, maybe more are of the
>>> opinion it does not have to be bulk. If you send me an unsolicited email
>>> wanting me to patronize your business, it is spam even though you only
>>> sent it to me.
>> It's not spam in that case; but how often does that happen? Why would
>> you be the single lucky person who ever received unsolicited email
>> promoting that business?
> This is it in a nutshell. I don't need to get more than one to know that it's likely to have gone to many others.
I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive
E-mail. Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact
me. Do not reply to spamt...@library.lspace.org
In article <k7s475$s7...@posting2.glorb.com>, WindsorFox <SS> wrote:
> Well I have gotten unsolicited commercial emails that were not >necessarily bulk, at least not to the extent most people think of. I've >gotten emails that were likely one of several but possibly sent one or a >couple at a time to my Amsoil email address from retired little old men >who apparently bought into some lead generator MLM junk. So if Delbert >buys into a 100% profit lead generator and send me an email that is one >of 12 or one of 3 or one of 1000 advertising how he can generate tons of >leads for only $50, that is still spam IMO.
I agree; I'd say that everybody who buys into that "lead generator"
MMF scam is acting in concert, so each such email is spam even if
Delbert only sent one before Thor struck him down with a lightning
bolt.
