Flaming about eomtional illness: Re: Hannigan is pro-abuse....where is jet's outrage at this?!?
jet
"spo...@petitmorte.net" <spo...@petitmorte.net> wrote:
>morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet) wrote in
>news:a6k8p2$rbr$1...@paradoxa.ogoense.net:
[...]
>Jet, you lied, I stuffed it in your face. Deal with it kooky. You read a
>little angry, Jet. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Take another pill, m'kay?
>
[...]
>Sorry, Refresh. When you lie like a bad Persion Rug, I'll be there to
>remind you. If you don't like it, find someplace else to flush your
>delusional, brain damaged dreck. You are fucking nuts, "lady".
>
Okay, spunky, you've been using my agoraphobia as flame fodder for quite
some time and urging me to commit suicide for nearly a year. I think it's
time other people with similar emotional and psychological problems should
hear about you.
From now on, I'm going to crosspost all your insulting remarks, about
losers who have to take meds to go outside and being "loony" because
I take meds for SAD and panic disorder, to the appropriate groups and,
maybe, other people will be moved to tell you what they think of someone
like you.
I know you natter on about never trolling support or recovery groups but,
you have no problem harassing people for being in recovery, so I'm sure
you won't avoid the crossposts.
--
jet mhm 32x30 | Academy Award Nominee
wee saul disciple #32 | for
ich bin ein meower | A Beautiful Troll
Steve Leyland
"jet" <morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net> wrote in message
news:a6mvcj$5h3$0...@dosa.alt.net...
> In article <Xns91CFC482322...@207.14.113.17>,
> "spo...@petitmorte.net" <spo...@petitmorte.net> wrote:
> >morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet) wrote in
> >news:a6k8p2$rbr$1...@paradoxa.ogoense.net:
> [...]
> >Jet, you lied, I stuffed it in your face. Deal with it kooky. You read
a
> >little angry, Jet. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Take another pill, m'kay?
> >
> [...]
> >Sorry, Refresh. When you lie like a bad Persion Rug, I'll be there to
> >remind you. If you don't like it, find someplace else to flush your
> >delusional, brain damaged dreck. You are fucking nuts, "lady".
> >
> Okay, spunky, you've been using my agoraphobia as flame fodder for quite
> some time and urging me to commit suicide for nearly a year.
if this is true, it sux0rs big-time. that's a well fucking dangerous thing
to suggest to anyone :-(
I'm glad you didn't do it, jet.
I think it's
> time other people with similar emotional and psychological problems should
> hear about you.
>
> From now on, I'm going to crosspost all your insulting remarks, about
> losers who have to take meds to go outside and being "loony" because
> I take meds for SAD and panic disorder, to the appropriate groups and,
> maybe, other people will be moved to tell you what they think of someone
> like you.
>
> I know you natter on about never trolling support or recovery groups but,
> you have no problem harassing people for being in recovery, so I'm sure
> you won't avoid the crossposts.
bad move IMHO. alt.support.* contains many vulnerable people who could
suffer actual RL harm from trolling.
--
Steve
mhm32x16 Smeeter#35
flower: three 6 four 9 five 8 eight 9
Doobie Doobie Doo
"What are you doing out of my killfile, you trolling c*nt?
*plonk*"
=^MEOW^=
Self-denial is the shining sore on the leprous body of Christianity. - Oscar
Wilde
http://dailymotivator.com/memberflash/rightnow.html
jet
<steveleyland...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
[alt.flame removed, sorry I left it in before]
>"jet" <morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net> wrote in message
>news:a6mvcj$5h3$0...@dosa.alt.net...
>> In article <Xns91CFC482322...@207.14.113.17>,
>> "spo...@petitmorte.net" <spo...@petitmorte.net> wrote:
>> >morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet) wrote in
>> >news:a6k8p2$rbr$1...@paradoxa.ogoense.net:
>> [...]
>> >Jet, you lied, I stuffed it in your face. Deal with it kooky. You read
>a
>> >little angry, Jet. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Take another pill, m'kay?
>> >
>> [...]
>> >Sorry, Refresh. When you lie like a bad Persion Rug, I'll be there to
>> >remind you. If you don't like it, find someplace else to flush your
>> >delusional, brain damaged dreck. You are fucking nuts, "lady".
>> >
>> Okay, spunky, you've been using my agoraphobia as flame fodder for quite
>> some time and urging me to commit suicide for nearly a year.
>
>if this is true, it sux0rs big-time. that's a well fucking dangerous thing
>to suggest to anyone :-(
>I'm glad you didn't do it, jet.
>
emotionally fragile people who spooge has dragged into alt.usenet.kooks
with the sole intention of trying to break them. I personally think that
kind of behavior is an illness in itself.
> I think it's
>> time other people with similar emotional and psychological problems should
>> hear about you.
>>
>> From now on, I'm going to crosspost all your insulting remarks, about
>> losers who have to take meds to go outside and being "loony" because
>> I take meds for SAD and panic disorder, to the appropriate groups and,
>> maybe, other people will be moved to tell you what they think of someone
>> like you.
>>
>> I know you natter on about never trolling support or recovery groups but,
>> you have no problem harassing people for being in recovery, so I'm sure
>> you won't avoid the crossposts.
>
>bad move IMHO. alt.support.* contains many vulnerable people who could
>suffer actual RL harm from trolling.
>
I agree but they suffer just as much for hearing things like spooge says
-outside- of the recovery groups. I think they should know that there are
people out on usenet who will pay lip-service to their problems, as long
as they stay in support groups "where they belong" but will use their
problems to attack them, just for entertainment.
I don't intend to 'troll' there, at all, because I know first hand what
they're going through. There's a very easy way for spooge to avoid having
his bigotry and abusive nature exposed.
Yeah, I know this isn't funny and "flonkish" enough. I don't find it
particularly amusing, either.
Steve Leyland
subscribed!
and I like to think I'm pretty stable *most* of teh time ;-/
>
> > I think it's
> >> time other people with similar emotional and psychological problems
should
> >> hear about you.
> >>
> >> From now on, I'm going to crosspost all your insulting remarks, about
> >> losers who have to take meds to go outside and being "loony" because
> >> I take meds for SAD and panic disorder, to the appropriate groups and,
> >> maybe, other people will be moved to tell you what they think of
someone
> >> like you.
> >>
> >> I know you natter on about never trolling support or recovery groups
but,
> >> you have no problem harassing people for being in recovery, so I'm sure
> >> you won't avoid the crossposts.
> >
> >bad move IMHO. alt.support.* contains many vulnerable people who could
> >suffer actual RL harm from trolling.
> >
> I agree but they suffer just as much for hearing things like spooge says
> -outside- of the recovery groups. I think they should know that there are
> people out on usenet who will pay lip-service to their problems, as long
> as they stay in support groups "where they belong" but will use their
> problems to attack them, just for entertainment.
IMHO that's just not entertainment.
true usenet entertainment/UPA comes from tongue-in-cheek humour, not
personal attacks. but then as you know, I'm just an old hippy....
(I snecked alt.support.* from my reply btw.)
>
> I don't intend to 'troll' there, at all, because I know first hand what
> they're going through. There's a very easy way for spooge to avoid having
> his bigotry and abusive nature exposed.
>
> Yeah, I know this isn't funny and "flonkish" enough. I don't find it
> particularly amusing, either.
hmmm..now who flamed me for x-posting to teh flonk a while back.... mheh
<wink>
--
Steve
mhm32x16 Smeeter#35
flower: three 6 four 9 five 8 eight 9
Doobie Doobie Doo
"What are you doing out of my killfile, you trolling c*nt?
*plonk*"
=^MEOW^=
Honest politician: One who, when bought, stays bought.
http://dailymotivator.com/memberflash/rightnow.html
bubbles
> In article <Xns91CFC482322...@207.14.113.17>,
> "spo...@petitmorte.net" <spo...@petitmorte.net> wrote:
> >morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet) wrote in
> >news:a6k8p2$rbr$1...@paradoxa.ogoense.net:
> [...]
> >Jet, you lied, I stuffed it in your face. Deal with it kooky. You read a
> >little angry, Jet. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Take another pill, m'kay?
> >
> [...]
> >Sorry, Refresh. When you lie like a bad Persion Rug, I'll be there to
> >remind you. If you don't like it, find someplace else to flush your
> >delusional, brain damaged dreck. You are fucking nuts, "lady".
> >
(Fear of sweaters.)
--bubbles
jet
>
>"jet" <morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net> wrote in message
>news:a6n2tk$g99$0...@dosa.alt.net...
>> In article <101600706...@iapetus.uk.clara.net>, "Steve Leyland"
>> <steveleyland...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >bad move IMHO. alt.support.* contains many vulnerable people who could
>> >suffer actual RL harm from trolling.
>> >
>> I agree but they suffer just as much for hearing things like spooge says
>> -outside- of the recovery groups. I think they should know that there are
>> people out on usenet who will pay lip-service to their problems, as long
>> as they stay in support groups "where they belong" but will use their
>> problems to attack them, just for entertainment.
>
>IMHO that's just not entertainment.
>true usenet entertainment/UPA comes from tongue-in-cheek humour, not
>personal attacks. but then as you know, I'm just an old hippy....
>
of those 'I know it when I see it' things. Most people know when they've
said something that's completely out of line and ugly, and it's naive to
believe that people with problems are confined to and insulated by
alt.support ghettos or that they should be.
One of the only times I've been seriously angry about something on usenet,
was when TomSQ was being attacked by people making jokes about him having
a terminal illness. In alt.flame, it's open season and, if you play there,
you take what you get but, even there, I don't see people being hammered
because they're dying.
> (I snecked alt.support.* from my reply btw.)
>
Is cool. It's not my intention to make a habit of crossposting there.
>> I don't intend to 'troll' there, at all, because I know first hand what
>> they're going through. There's a very easy way for spooge to avoid having
>> his bigotry and abusive nature exposed.
>>
>> Yeah, I know this isn't funny and "flonkish" enough. I don't find it
>> particularly amusing, either.
>
>hmmm..now who flamed me for x-posting to teh flonk a while back.... mheh
><wink>
>
Ummmm...I'm crossposting -from- the flonk. :) I have no doubt that someone
will say I'm taking things too seriously and that usenet has nothing to do
with RL. It's not that important, anyway. I dunno. Maybe it's true that
nobody -really- cares about anyone but themselves.
jet
WeeSaul
>In article <b38a981b.02031...@posting.google.com>, bubbl...@hotmail.com (bubbles) wrote:
>>morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet) wrote in message
>> news:<a6mvcj$5h3$0...@dosa.alt.net>...
>>> In article <Xns91CFC482322...@207.14.113.17>,
>>> "spo...@petitmorte.net" <spo...@petitmorte.net> wrote:
>>> >morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet) wrote in
>>> >news:a6k8p2$rbr$1...@paradoxa.ogoense.net:
>>> [...]
>>> >Jet, you lied, I stuffed it in your face. Deal with it kooky. You read a
>>> >little angry, Jet. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Take another pill, m'kay?
>>> >
>>> [...]
>>> >Sorry, Refresh. When you lie like a bad Persion Rug, I'll be there to
>>> >remind you. If you don't like it, find someplace else to flush your
>>> >delusional, brain damaged dreck. You are fucking nuts, "lady".
>>> >
>>> Okay, spunky, you've been using my angoraphobia...
>>
>>(Fear of sweaters.)
>>
>(Fear of bunnies with big, sharp, pointy teeth.}
(Fear of people who rap class rings in yarn.)
--
-Dulce et decorum est Pro patria mori-
WeeSaul mhm15x5
http://www.angelfire.com/pa/anticrust/
http://www.usaor.net/users/weesaul/
http://www.angelfire.com/pa/anticrust/icecream.html
-Simple ideas from simple folk(TM)-
-Idle thoughts from idle minds(TM)-
-Quia ursus pusilli ingenii sum verba difficilia fastidio-
paint it black
@morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet) had a seizure and out popped:
@
@>In article <b38a981b.02031...@posting.google.com>, bubbl...@hotmail.com (bubbles)
wrote:
@>>morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet) wrote in message
@>> news:<a6mvcj$5h3$0...@dosa.alt.net>...
@>>> In article <Xns91CFC482322...@207.14.113.17>,
@>>> "spo...@petitmorte.net" <spo...@petitmorte.net> wrote:
@>>> >morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet) wrote in
@>>> >news:a6k8p2$rbr$1...@paradoxa.ogoense.net:
@>>> [...]
@>>> >Jet, you lied, I stuffed it in your face. Deal with it kooky. You read a
@>>> >little angry, Jet. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Take another pill, m'kay?
@>>> >
@>>> [...]
@>>> >Sorry, Refresh. When you lie like a bad Persion Rug, I'll be there to
@>>> >remind you. If you don't like it, find someplace else to flush your
@>>> >delusional, brain damaged dreck. You are fucking nuts, "lady".
@>>> >
@>>> Okay, spunky, you've been using my angoraphobia...
@>>
@>>(Fear of sweaters.)
@>>
@>(Fear of bunnies with big, sharp, pointy teeth.}
@
@(Fear of people who rap class rings in yarn.)
(Fear of cascades that don't last very long)
--
rocky
mhm x v i x i i i
woof
Russell B
wrote:
>I agree but they suffer just as much for hearing things like spooge says
>-outside- of the recovery groups. I think they should know that there are
>people out on usenet who will pay lip-service to their problems, as long
>as they stay in support groups "where they belong" but will use their
>problems to attack them, just for entertainment.
>
>I don't intend to 'troll' there, at all, because I know first hand what
>they're going through. There's a very easy way for spooge to avoid having
>his bigotry and abusive nature exposed.
>
>Yeah, I know this isn't funny and "flonkish" enough.
You can say that again.
Neither you nor Boyd has produced an entertaining article since you began
this dead-horse-beating contest, and you're not trolling anybody but
yourselves. What possessed you to crosspost this miserable autoflame here
is beyond me.
>I don't find it particularly amusing, either.
Shouldn't that tell you something?
By the way--and you heard it here first--don't be too surprised when the
people using support groups for support don't fall all over themselves
thanking you for using them as human shields.
Take a vacation. You really, really need one.
jet
>On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 08:32:05 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet)
>wrote:
>
>>I agree but they suffer just as much for hearing things like spooge says
>>-outside- of the recovery groups. I think they should know that there are
>>people out on usenet who will pay lip-service to their problems, as long
>>as they stay in support groups "where they belong" but will use their
>>problems to attack them, just for entertainment.
>>
>>I don't intend to 'troll' there, at all, because I know first hand what
>>they're going through. There's a very easy way for spooge to avoid having
>>his bigotry and abusive nature exposed.
>>
>>Yeah, I know this isn't funny and "flonkish" enough.
>
>You can say that again.
>
>Neither you nor Boyd has produced an entertaining article since you began
>
it's a bit late for you to start bitching now. Not that it will stop
you.
>this dead-horse-beating contest, and you're not trolling anybody but
>yourselves. What possessed you to crosspost this miserable autoflame here
>is beyond me.
>
I was getting bored with the other 3 threads (Dr. Who, an Important Food
Question and your trolling of wildearth) and decide to write what I chose.
>>I don't find it particularly amusing, either.
>
>Shouldn't that tell you something?
>
That it isn't meant to amuse anyone? That I'm tired and fed up with
everything? That there are some things that bother me, whether others
approve or not?
>By the way--and you heard it here first--don't be too surprised when the
>people using support groups for support don't fall all over themselves
>thanking you for using them as human shields.
>
>Take a vacation. You really, really need one.
>
No doubt. That's why I've been avoiding posting to the flonk, for the
most part. When you can't find a single interesting thread, it's time for
a break.
Optional Identity
calendar. The troll paint it black <spo...@moew.org> attempted to push
back the boundaries of post-contemporary UPA, by poasting this, their
latest creation, in alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk
(fear of being the last person to psot in a cascade)
<affinity>
jet wrote:
Oh woe, and fucking wah. Using support groups to take the heat off a personal flame war is a pretty good indication
that some people only care about themselves, yes.
miscreant
alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
[support froups removed]
> There have been -many-
> emotionally fragile people who spooge has dragged into alt.usenet.kooks
> with the sole intention of trying to break them.
Please post proof of these allegations. With headers. TIA
--
miscreant
mhm 31x15 ICQ:31337003
http://www.geocities.com/msnemesis01
"We have wasted too much time on answering abuse
emails for your account. Your childish games are
costing us time and money." -Teranews Support in
<3198.208.137.8.130....@www.nibble.net>
jet
>karma police arrest jet for posting this in
>alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
>
>[support froups removed]
>
>> There have been -many-
>> emotionally fragile people who spooge has dragged into alt.usenet.kooks
>> with the sole intention of trying to break them.
>
>Please post proof of these allegations. With headers. TIA
>
Dowap
<morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net> wrote:
So, it is only bad if you say so. Okie dokey. Don't you think it is
kind of hypocritical to be complaining about something in a "flame"
group? What did you say about AHM. You don't want people to post about
it then don't give out the information or post in a group that will use
it to flame you. Sound familiar??
Run along Jet, you try to take a moral stand *only* when it betters
your position.
To those that read this in the 'support' groups, my apologies. As I
normally wouldn't cross-post to you, our friend Jet would try and
accuse me of doing something under handed if I snipped out your group.
If you will notice she has in the groups, alt.flame and
alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk, known troll/flame groups. In fact
Jet claims to be a troll. Any future response to this thread (should it
occur) from myself will include the appropriate group removal.
--
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This has made a lot of people
very angry, and is generally considered to have been a bad move." -Douglas
Adams, 1952-2001
jimboATpetitmorte.n3t
http://www.petitmorte.net
mhm30x27
jet
>
>
>jet wrote:
[...]
>> Ummmm...I'm crossposting -from- the flonk. :) I have no doubt that someone
>> will say I'm taking things too seriously and that usenet has nothing to do
>> with RL. It's not that important, anyway. I dunno. Maybe it's true that
>> nobody -really- cares about anyone but themselves.
>
>Oh woe, and fucking wah. Using support groups to take the heat off a personal
> flame war is a pretty good indication
>that some people only care about themselves, yes.
>
what you're talking about. Oops, I forgot; Russell flamed so little fnord
must following right behind.
It rather surprises me that you, the flag bearer for exposing hypocrites,
doesn't think there's anything amiss with someone who has made a mega-
issue about not trolling in recovery groups having no problem with trying
to damage someone's recovery.
Or are you one of those people who believe that, if you reveal anything
about yourself on usenet, you're fair game for any psychotic who wanders
by. No, that can't be true. IIRC, you and your friends were very upset
about someone flaming you because a relationship broke up.
Nevermind. I'm sure you'll find some justification. Maybe a broken
relationship is the most important thing in the world, when it happens
to (generic) you, and it's okay to wah wah about it. Or maybe you're
just a shallow bitch who can't deal with other people having emotions,
unless they're wrapped up in a pretentious bundle of "creativity" and
"flonking". Trust me, girlfriend, you ain't no Dorothy Parker.
Whatever. Affinity obviously has no connection to empathy.
<affinity>
jet wrote:
Fair enough.
Russell B
wrote:
>In article <gv8v8us7i8i29vpnf...@4ax.com>, Russell B
><mai...@here.not> wrote:
>>On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 08:32:05 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet)
>>wrote:
>>>I don't find it particularly amusing, either.
>>
>>Shouldn't that tell you something?
>>
>That it isn't meant to amuse anyone? That I'm tired and fed up with
>everything? That there are some things that bother me, whether others
>approve or not?
Mmhmm. Those are things that you seem to want to tell me. But the question
was, "Shouldn't that tell *you* something?"
To wit: when it *actually* *starts* *to* *seem* *like* *a* *good* *idea* to
subject a bunch of emotionally fragile noncombatants to flaming because
somebody flamed you in alt.flame, that should tip you off that you're
allowing UseNet flaming to hurt you in a big way.
It's also a good time to sit down and think about perspective. Which of the
following is more important: the desire of hundreds of support-group users
to use their fora for support, or your anger at Spooge for calling you
names? No, really; which is more important? What do you think a person
with a healthy sense of proportion would say?
Now, what do you think a person with a healthy sense of proportion would do?
"Tired and fed up," you say. "Isn't meant to amuse anyone." "There are
some things that bother me." No shit.
Yes, Jet, you are taking this way too seriously. And you--seriously--should
think about turning the machine off for a while, and taking that vacation.
Hobbies shouldn't make you angry, and hanging around with people who don't
want you to recover is no way to go through recovery. Let it go.
jet
Rule and I'm not the only one who does.
Don't you think it is
>kind of hypocritical to be complaining about something in a "flame"
>
alt.flame was already in the group line and I didn't notice it. I took
it out in all followups, except this one, where I removed the support
groups.
>group? What did you say about AHM. You don't want people to post about
>it then don't give out the information or post in a group that will use
>it to flame you. Sound familiar??
>
Uh huh. Do you consider the flonk to be a group where people flame each
other for disabilities or problems? Oops, scratch that. There are newbies
there, now, that do just that.
>Run along Jet, you try to take a moral stand *only* when it betters
>your position.
>
That's such nonsense, dowap. When have I -ever- supported bashing the
mentally ill for entertainment? I've actually taken some very unpopular
public stands against it. (fex Wollmann)
>To those that read this in the 'support' groups, my apologies. As I
>normally wouldn't cross-post to you, our friend Jet would try and
>accuse me of doing something under handed if I snipped out your group.
>
I've -never- accused someone of that. Quite the opposite.
>If you will notice she has in the groups, alt.flame and
>alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk, known troll/flame groups. In fact
>
The flonk is not a troll/flame group and the majority of regs there have
dealt with just the problems that spooge is ridiculing. That's why I
brought this up, in the first place. Duh.
See above about alt.flame.
>Jet claims to be a troll. Any future response to this thread (should it
>occur) from myself will include the appropriate group removal.
>
Ah, here it comes. If one is a troll, everything they do is trolling. I
didn't think your were -that- much of an ignorant jackass.
jet
>On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 20:47:48 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet)
>wrote:
>
>>In article <gv8v8us7i8i29vpnf...@4ax.com>, Russell B
>><mai...@here.not> wrote:
>>>On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 08:32:05 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet)
>>>wrote:
>
>>>>I don't find it particularly amusing, either.
>>>
>>>Shouldn't that tell you something?
>>>
>>That it isn't meant to amuse anyone? That I'm tired and fed up with
>>everything? That there are some things that bother me, whether others
>>approve or not?
>
>Mmhmm. Those are things that you seem to want to tell me. But the question
>was, "Shouldn't that tell *you* something?"
>
to be but, I do know I don't need permission to be upset, even on usenet.
>To wit: when it *actually* *starts* *to* *seem* *like* *a* *good* *idea* to
>subject a bunch of emotionally fragile noncombatants to flaming because
>somebody flamed you in alt.flame, that should tip you off that you're
>allowing UseNet flaming to hurt you in a big way.
>
No, I'm recognizing that people in recovery from anything aren't confined
in segregated newsgroups and fair game if they ever decide to leave. The
awareness of that is disturbing me. I'd rather expect better from people.
<shrug>
>It's also a good time to sit down and think about perspective. Which of the
>following is more important: the desire of hundreds of support-group users
>to use their fora for support, or your anger at Spooge for calling you
>names? No, really; which is more important? What do you think a person
>with a healthy sense of proportion would say?
>
I'm not angry at spooge for calling me names. If you were acquainted with
me (which you obviously choose to not be), you'd know that I'm angry that
someone would be so wrapped up in flaming an individual, that they don't
care about all the friends that they're insulting with those flames.
>Now, what do you think a person with a healthy sense of proportion would do?
>
Retaliate. It's perfectly healthy and good progress for someone with an
over-inflated sense of self-sacrifice. <g>
>"Tired and fed up," you say. "Isn't meant to amuse anyone." "There are
>some things that bother me." No shit.
>
So? It's me here at the keyboard. I don't pretend to be some tower of
non-emotional rationality. I don't want to be you or anyone else.
>Yes, Jet, you are taking this way too seriously.
>
I always take other people's feelings seriously, even if I hurt them.
Why are you so bothered about human beings expressing their feelings,
anyway?
And you--seriously--should
>think about turning the machine off for a while, and taking that vacation.
>
>Hobbies shouldn't make you angry, and hanging around with people who don't
>want you to recover is no way to go through recovery. Let it go.
>
Sorry, Russell. I'm not someone who compartmentalizes their life and never
the twain shall meet. Usenet isn't a hobby, it's a way to communicate with
people who are too physically distant to meet face to face. If I chose to
believe there are real people behind the computers, it's not something
that should disturb you in the least.
Strength is achieved through adversity.
Russell B
wrote:
>In article <3C8FDF60...@bigpond.com>, "<affinity>" <lu...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>jet wrote:
>[...]
>>> Ummmm...I'm crossposting -from- the flonk. :) I have no doubt that someone
>>> will say I'm taking things too seriously and that usenet has nothing to do
>>> with RL. It's not that important, anyway. I dunno. Maybe it's true that
>>> nobody -really- cares about anyone but themselves.
>>
>>Oh woe, and fucking wah. Using support groups to take the heat off a personal
>> flame war is a pretty good indication
>>that some people only care about themselves, yes.
>>
>That would make lots of sense if there was any heat or if you had any idea
>what you're talking about. Oops, I forgot; Russell flamed so little fnord
>must following right behind.
>
>It rather surprises me that you, the flag bearer for exposing hypocrites,
>doesn't think there's anything amiss with someone who has made a mega-
>issue about not trolling in recovery groups having no problem with trying
>to damage someone's recovery.
You could put a stop to that right now if you truly valued your recovery
over this UseNet rumble you're involved in. I suspect that the lack of
applause for your crusade has something to do with everybody knowing that.
trippy
<a6oqlr$8um$1...@paradoxa.ogoense.net>, said the following tripped out
things....
It's not? Sorry, but I'm not seeing a lot of posts about alien vampires
in there.
LET TEH NETKKKOPPING BEIGN !!!!!
--
Trippy
tri...@XspamblockXthetrippy.com
You're different, and that's bad.
Doobie Doobie Doo
jet
jet
That doesn't, however, prevent me from disliking someone who'd announce,
in the flonk of all places, that anyone who has to take meds to go outside
is a "loony". You -do- realize that there are many people trying to deal
with emotional or psychological problems in the flonk, don't you?
You're welcome to all the applause I'm not getting, Russell. Some people
care about others, some care about prestige and admiration in a newsgroup.
Everyone has their own crusade. After posting here for quite some time, I
don't think anyone with any sense would accuse me of seeking applause. :)
<affinity>
jet wrote:
> Or are you one of those people who believe that, if you reveal anything
> about yourself on usenet, you're fair game for any psychotic who wanders
> by. No, that can't be true. IIRC, you and your friends were very upset
> about someone flaming you because a relationship broke up.
For your information, my partner attempted suicide.
Now, as someone who has also suffered from anxiety disorders, and as someone who has
frequented those support groups in the past, I can tell you that what you are doing is
painfully unconstructive. Actually, I just posted an update to the SAD group, if you
wanted to check it out.
I don't think you're acting rationally, and usually you can approximate varying
degrees of rationality with some success. Whatever is driving you to this amount of
stress, I can tell you from first hand experience, that it's not WORTH the effort.
It's inconsequential in the face of REAL things, like recovery and emotional well
being. Whatever you were looking for with your "emotional illness" thread: support,
validation, retribution, you wont find, unless you are prepared to look at yourself
FIRST (with a critical eye). Good luck.
Jelliebun
(fear of being made to look like a sheep by following the crowd)
Jelliebun
mhm20x20
baa
--
__
/ /\
.---/ /\ |
/ /o 0\ \|
/ /\ ^ / - meow
/ / / \_
\ |/\\ //\}
\|\ v_v /
"" ""
miscreant
alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
> In article <Xns91D0B3F5FDA5Bm...@64.154.60.171>,
> miscreant <as...@right.here> wrote:
>>karma police arrest jet for posting this in
>>alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
>>
>>[support froups removed]
>>
>>> There have been -many-
>>> emotionally fragile people who spooge has dragged into
>>> alt.usenet.kooks with the sole intention of trying to break them.
>>
>>Please post proof of these allegations. With headers. TIA
>>
> Do it yourself. For a start, go look up what kookologists do.
>
>
why should i do it myself? you're the one with the burden of proof, since
you stated he did it.
Dowap
<morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net> wrote:
That is *not* what I am accusing you of.
> I've actually taken some very unpopular
> public stands against it. (fex Wollmann)
>
> >To those that read this in the 'support' groups, my apologies. As I
> >normally wouldn't cross-post to you, our friend Jet would try and
> >accuse me of doing something under handed if I snipped out your group.
> >
> I've -never- accused someone of that. Quite the opposite.
Didn't want to deal with the question "Why did you snekk the groups?"
>
> >If you will notice she has in the groups, alt.flame and
> >alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk, known troll/flame groups. In fact
> >
> The flonk is not a troll/flame group and the majority of regs there have
> dealt with just the problems that spooge is ridiculing. That's why I
> brought this up, in the first place. Duh.
By bringing it over to a "support" group /is/ trolling. If someone is
busting on you about your mental problem (whether right or wrong) but
is not cross-posting it to the "support" group then except for you what
harm is being done to the "other" people? Maybe I'm seeing it from a
different angle, but the impression I have gotten from these posts is
that he is directing it at you and only you. I do see your argument
that it is a "slap" to all those that suffer but "those" people haven't
brought it up in alt.flame. I mean let's use what you said but just
change a couple of words, "What did you expect when you posted that in
alt.flame?"
Now, if we want to discuss the concept of whether anyone should be
flamed for that we could. However you seem to change using an existing
situation for an example into someone whining about what happend.
>
> See above about alt.flame.
>
> >Jet claims to be a troll. Any future response to this thread (should it
> >occur) from myself will include the appropriate group removal.
> >
> Ah, here it comes. If one is a troll, everything they do is trolling. I
> didn't think your were -that- much of an ignorant jackass.
It's in your sig. You added groups and the groups you added would most
likely respond. Sort of like posting a pro smoking article to a smokers
group and adding a lung cancer group. What you did /is/ the text book
definition of a troll.
You know if there was a group alt.hypocrisy I would of cross-posted to
it. :->
--
There is no *Gravity* , the Earth just *Sucks*
jimboATpetitmort.n3t
http://www.petitmorte.net
mhm30x27
jet
>
>
>jet wrote:
>
>> Or are you one of those people who believe that, if you reveal anything
>> about yourself on usenet, you're fair game for any psychotic who wanders
>> by. No, that can't be true. IIRC, you and your friends were very upset
>> about someone flaming you because a relationship broke up.
>
>For your information, my partner attempted suicide.
>
that you're recovering from the trauma. I hope the emotional support
you received from friends in the flonk was in some way beneficial.
There are loving, caring people here.
>Now, as someone who has also suffered from anxiety disorders, and as someone
> who has
>frequented those support groups in the past, I can tell you that what you are
> doing is
>painfully unconstructive. Actually, I just posted an update to the SAD group,
> if you
>wanted to check it out.
>
It's gloriously constructive to refuse to be boxed into someone elses
perceptions.
>I don't think you're acting rationally, and usually you can approximate varying
>degrees of rationality with some success. Whatever is driving you to this
> amount of
>stress, I can tell you from first hand experience, that it's not WORTH the
> effort.
>It's inconsequential in the face of REAL things, like recovery and emotional
> well
>being. Whatever you were looking for with your "emotional illness" thread:
> support,
>validation, retribution, you wont find, unless you are prepared to look at
> yourself
>FIRST (with a critical eye). Good luck.
>
What makes you think that I haven't done so? Because I don't conform
to your standards and disagree with you? Affinity, you seem to have a
very odd perception of my sanity. You constantly imply I have some sort
of psychotic breaks, as your comment about approximating rationality
proves. I assure you, nothing could be farther from the truth. I can
just as easily approximate any other behavior pattern. It's a tool for
achieving that self-awareness you keep touting.
I enjoy writing. I enjoy the freedom to express myself without being
confined to convention. I hope you realize that being unconventional or
even eccentric is not a sign of someone losing control or lacking
self-awareness and I hope that, someday, you learn that cherishing and
experiencing -all- facets of your mind is a wonderful thing to be able
to do.
<affinity>
jet wrote:
> >I don't think you're acting rationally, and usually you can approximate varying
> >degrees of rationality with some success. Whatever is driving you to this
> > amount of
> >stress, I can tell you from first hand experience, that it's not WORTH the
> > effort.
> >It's inconsequential in the face of REAL things, like recovery and emotional
> > well
> >being. Whatever you were looking for with your "emotional illness" thread:
> > support,
> >validation, retribution, you wont find, unless you are prepared to look at
> > yourself
> >FIRST (with a critical eye). Good luck.
> >
> What makes you think that I haven't done so? Because I don't conform
> to your standards and disagree with you?
No, because you are willing to take your pissy little lame fest with spooge to an
anxiety support group, just because you are sick of him using your mental illness as a
weapon. This is what makes me think you've lost the plot, on this occasion.
> Affinity, you seem to have a
> very odd perception of my sanity. You constantly imply I have some sort
> of psychotic breaks, as your comment about approximating rationality
> proves.
How does one comment, in the context of talking about emotional illness, prove that I
"constantly imply [that you] have some sort of psychotic breaks"?
> I assure you, nothing could be farther from the truth. I can
> just as easily approximate any other behavior pattern. It's a tool for
> achieving that self-awareness you keep touting.
>
> I enjoy writing. I enjoy the freedom to express myself without being
> confined to convention. I hope you realize that being unconventional or
> even eccentric is not a sign of someone losing control or lacking
> self-awareness and I hope that, someday, you learn that cherishing and
> experiencing -all- facets of your mind is a wonderful thing to be able
> to do.
I think you are lacking self awareness (in this instance), and whatever the fallout,
it will be on your "unconventional" head.
jet
you're so concerned about what I do but, do what you must.
>> I've actually taken some very unpopular
>> public stands against it. (fex Wollmann)
>>
>> >To those that read this in the 'support' groups, my apologies. As I
>> >normally wouldn't cross-post to you, our friend Jet would try and
>> >accuse me of doing something under handed if I snipped out your group.
>> >
>> I've -never- accused someone of that. Quite the opposite.
>
>Didn't want to deal with the question "Why did you snekk the groups?"
>
So, instead, you lied about what I would do. You see, I've never asked
that, either.
>> >If you will notice she has in the groups, alt.flame and
>> >alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk, known troll/flame groups. In fact
>> >
>> The flonk is not a troll/flame group and the majority of regs there have
>> dealt with just the problems that spooge is ridiculing. That's why I
>> brought this up, in the first place. Duh.
>
>By bringing it over to a "support" group /is/ trolling. If someone is
>
Maybe, maybe not. I think the bigotry towards people with emotional
problems is on topic.
>busting on you about your mental problem (whether right or wrong) but
>is not cross-posting it to the "support" group then except for you what
>harm is being done to the "other" people? Maybe I'm seeing it from a
>different angle, but the impression I have gotten from these posts is
>that he is directing it at you and only you. I do see your argument
>that it is a "slap" to all those that suffer but "those" people haven't
>brought it up in alt.flame. I mean let's use what you said but just
>change a couple of words, "What did you expect when you posted that in
>alt.flame?"
>
I didn't put it in alt.flame and, at times, the flonk is one of the best
support groups anyone could wish for.
>Now, if we want to discuss the concept of whether anyone should be
>flamed for that we could. However you seem to change using an existing
>situation for an example into someone whining about what happend.
>>
>> See above about alt.flame.
>>
>> >Jet claims to be a troll. Any future response to this thread (should it
>> >occur) from myself will include the appropriate group removal.
>> >
>> Ah, here it comes. If one is a troll, everything they do is trolling. I
>> didn't think your were -that- much of an ignorant jackass.
>
>It's in your sig.
>
What's in my sig? That everything I say is a troll?
You added groups and the groups you added would most
>likely respond. Sort of like posting a pro smoking article to a smokers
>group and adding a lung cancer group. What you did /is/ the text book
>definition of a troll.
>
I sincerely wanted their opinion of someone who feels a flame war is
justification for saying -anything- rather than admit he's mistaken.
I believe that stable people have mental brakes that keep them from
crossing certain lines.
>You know if there was a group alt.hypocrisy I would of cross-posted to
>it. :->
>
If you weren't so hell-bent on convincing yourself that I think and write
things that I don't, you'd realize that I'm generally consistant about the
beliefs I express.
jet
>Jelliebun
>mhm20x20
>baa
jet
>karma police arrest jet for posting this in
>alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
>
>> In article <Xns91D0B3F5FDA5Bm...@64.154.60.171>,
>> miscreant <as...@right.here> wrote:
>>>karma police arrest jet for posting this in
>>>alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
>>>
>>>[support froups removed]
>>>
>>>> There have been -many-
>>>> emotionally fragile people who spooge has dragged into
>>>> alt.usenet.kooks with the sole intention of trying to break them.
>>>
>>>Please post proof of these allegations. With headers. TIA
>>>
>> Do it yourself. For a start, go look up what kookologists do.
>>
>>
>
>why should i do it myself? you're the one with the burden of proof, since
>you stated he did it.
>
job to update you. If you have evidence he didn't do so, present it and
I'll provide proof to the contrary. Your ignorance doesn't impose a burden
of proof on me.
Dowap
<morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net> wrote:
OK Jet here is what I am going to do to try and help you out. When I
say "twist" it is my opinion (however I believe others will concur)
that yo have just taken something that is staightforward and twisted it
around to make it look like someone is trying to berrate you.
twist
>
> >> I've actually taken some very unpopular
> >> public stands against it. (fex Wollmann)
> >>
> >> >To those that read this in the 'support' groups, my apologies. As I
> >> >normally wouldn't cross-post to you, our friend Jet would try and
> >> >accuse me of doing something under handed if I snipped out your group.
> >> >
> >> I've -never- accused someone of that. Quite the opposite.
> >
> >Didn't want to deal with the question "Why did you snekk the groups?"
> >
> So, instead, you lied about what I would do. You see, I've never asked
> that, either.
twist
>
> >> >If you will notice she has in the groups, alt.flame and
> >> >alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk, known troll/flame groups. In fact
> >> >
> >> The flonk is not a troll/flame group and the majority of regs there have
> >> dealt with just the problems that spooge is ridiculing. That's why I
> >> brought this up, in the first place. Duh.
> >
> >By bringing it over to a "support" group /is/ trolling. If someone is
> >
> Maybe, maybe not. I think the bigotry towards people with emotional
> problems is on topic.
>
> >busting on you about your mental problem (whether right or wrong) but
> >is not cross-posting it to the "support" group then except for you what
> >harm is being done to the "other" people? Maybe I'm seeing it from a
> >different angle, but the impression I have gotten from these posts is
> >that he is directing it at you and only you. I do see your argument
> >that it is a "slap" to all those that suffer but "those" people haven't
> >brought it up in alt.flame. I mean let's use what you said but just
> >change a couple of words, "What did you expect when you posted that in
> >alt.flame?"
> >
> I didn't put it in alt.flame and,
How am I supposed to know this?
> at times, the flonk is one of the best
> support groups anyone could wish for.
>
> >Now, if we want to discuss the concept of whether anyone should be
> >flamed for that we could. However you seem to change using an existing
> >situation for an example into someone whining about what happend.
> >>
> >> See above about alt.flame.
> >>
> >> >Jet claims to be a troll. Any future response to this thread (should it
> >> >occur) from myself will include the appropriate group removal.
> >> >
> >> Ah, here it comes. If one is a troll, everything they do is trolling. I
> >> didn't think your were -that- much of an ignorant jackass.
> >
> >It's in your sig.
> >
> What's in my sig? That everything I say is a troll?
Twist
>
> You added groups and the groups you added would most
> >likely respond. Sort of like posting a pro smoking article to a smokers
> >group and adding a lung cancer group. What you did /is/ the text book
> >definition of a troll.
> >
> I sincerely wanted their opinion of someone who feels a flame war is
> justification for saying -anything- rather than admit he's mistaken.
Sorta of like two wrongs don't make a right or just because you post
doesn't mean you should be targeted for outing?
> I believe that stable people have mental brakes that keep them from
> crossing certain lines.
I could zing you on that one Jet, it would have been funny.
>
> >You know if there was a group alt.hypocrisy I would of cross-posted to
> >it. :->
> >
> If you weren't so hell-bent on convincing yourself that I think and write
> things that I don't, you'd realize that I'm generally consistant about the
> beliefs I express.
Twist
Did anyone else see the colondashgreaterthansign besides me?
<affinity>
jet wrote:
> In article <3C8FFF7C...@bigpond.com>, "<affinity>" <lu...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> >
> >jet wrote:
> >
> >> >I don't think you're acting rationally, and usually you can approximate
> > varying
> >> >degrees of rationality with some success. Whatever is driving you to this
> >> > amount of
> >> >stress, I can tell you from first hand experience, that it's not WORTH the
> >> > effort.
> >> >It's inconsequential in the face of REAL things, like recovery and emotional
> >> > well
> >> >being. Whatever you were looking for with your "emotional illness" thread:
> >> > support,
> >> >validation, retribution, you wont find, unless you are prepared to look at
> >> > yourself
> >> >FIRST (with a critical eye). Good luck.
> >> >
> >> What makes you think that I haven't done so? Because I don't conform
> >> to your standards and disagree with you?
> >
> >No, because you are willing to take your pissy little lame fest with spooge to
> > an
> >anxiety support group, just because you are sick of him using your mental
> > illness as a
> >weapon. This is what makes me think you've lost the plot, on this occasion.
> >
> Let me ask you this: do you think that people in support groups should
> have to fear being psychologically abused if they venture out, or do
> you support Formosa's rule that the truly disturbed are off limits,
> because they have enough on their plate, already.
If you think Spooge is truly unable to be tolerant of people with mental illness, WHY
THE FUCK WOULD YOU THINK THEY WOULD WANT YOU TO BRING HIM INTO THEIR SUPPORT GROUP IN
THE FIRST INSTANCE, DING-DONG?
[snipped unrelated crap]
jet
>
>> >I don't think you're acting rationally, and usually you can approximate
> varying
>> >degrees of rationality with some success. Whatever is driving you to this
>> > amount of
>> >stress, I can tell you from first hand experience, that it's not WORTH the
>> > effort.
>> >It's inconsequential in the face of REAL things, like recovery and emotional
>> > well
>> >being. Whatever you were looking for with your "emotional illness" thread:
>> > support,
>> >validation, retribution, you wont find, unless you are prepared to look at
>> > yourself
>> >FIRST (with a critical eye). Good luck.
>> >
>> What makes you think that I haven't done so? Because I don't conform
>> to your standards and disagree with you?
>
>No, because you are willing to take your pissy little lame fest with spooge to
> an
>anxiety support group, just because you are sick of him using your mental
> illness as a
>weapon. This is what makes me think you've lost the plot, on this occasion.
>
have to fear being psychologically abused if they venture out, or do
you support Formosa's rule that the truly disturbed are off limits,
because they have enough on their plate, already.
Now this: if you -truly- believe I'm mentally ill, why would you challenge
my behavior in doing something foolish and over-reactive, rather than sane
spooges behavior? Hmm? Personal animosity? Determination to find fault?
>> Affinity, you seem to have a
>> very odd perception of my sanity. You constantly imply I have some sort
>> of psychotic breaks, as your comment about approximating rationality
>> proves.
>
>How does one comment, in the context of talking about emotional illness, prove
> that I
>"constantly imply [that you] have some sort of psychotic breaks"?
>
Because you've said similar things in every discussion we've had.
>> I assure you, nothing could be farther from the truth. I can
>> just as easily approximate any other behavior pattern. It's a tool for
>> achieving that self-awareness you keep touting.
>>
>> I enjoy writing. I enjoy the freedom to express myself without being
>> confined to convention. I hope you realize that being unconventional or
>> even eccentric is not a sign of someone losing control or lacking
>> self-awareness and I hope that, someday, you learn that cherishing and
>> experiencing -all- facets of your mind is a wonderful thing to be able
>> to do.
>
>I think you are lacking self awareness (in this instance), and whatever the
> fallout,
>it will be on your "unconventional" head.
>
You're absolutely wrong. I'm -totally- aware of when I over-react in anger
and, unlike some, am perfectly able to admit it when I've done so. As now.
I -don't- believe, however, that anger, disappointment, hostility,
affection, exasperation or any other emotions are net.crimes, to be
vigorously punished. That's a little too controlling and manipulative
for my taste.
miscreant
alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
> In article <Xns91D0CD216BA05m...@64.154.60.171>,
> miscreant <as...@right.here> wrote:
>>karma police arrest jet for posting this in
>>alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
>>
>>> In article <Xns91D0B3F5FDA5Bm...@64.154.60.171>,
>>> miscreant <as...@right.here> wrote:
>>>>karma police arrest jet for posting this in
>>>>alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
>>>>
>>>>[support froups removed]
>>>>
>>>>> There have been -many-
>>>>> emotionally fragile people who spooge has dragged into
>>>>> alt.usenet.kooks with the sole intention of trying to break them.
>>>>
>>>>Please post proof of these allegations. With headers. TIA
>>>>
>>> Do it yourself. For a start, go look up what kookologists do.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>why should i do it myself? you're the one with the burden of proof,
>>since you stated he did it.
>>
> If you're unaware of several years of AUK reality, it isn't really my
> job to update you. If you have evidence he didn't do so, present it
> and I'll provide proof to the contrary. Your ignorance doesn't impose
> a burden of proof on me.
>
>
If you have evidence that he *did* do it, please do present it to me. Since
you made the initial statement that he "dragged emotionally fragile people
to auk with the sole intention of breaking them down". Why should I provide
evidence that he *didn't* do it when you are the one making claims that he
did?
And why did you originally have this thread Xposted to support groups? It
has nothing to do with them.
jet
>
>twist
>
Berating:
"So, it is only bad if you say so. Okie dokey."
"Don't you think it is kind of hypocritical to be complaining about
something in a "flame" group?"
"Run along Jet, you try to take a moral stand *only* when it betters
your position."
>> >> I've actually taken some very unpopular
>> >> public stands against it. (fex Wollmann)
>> >>
>> >> >To those that read this in the 'support' groups, my apologies. As I
>> >> >normally wouldn't cross-post to you, our friend Jet would try and
>> >> >accuse me of doing something under handed if I snipped out your group.
>> >> >
>> >> I've -never- accused someone of that. Quite the opposite.
>> >
>> >Didn't want to deal with the question "Why did you snekk the groups?"
>> >
>> So, instead, you lied about what I would do. You see, I've never asked
>> that, either.
>
>
>twist
>
Lie: "our friend Jet would try and accuse me of doing something under
handed if I snipped out your group."
I've never accuse anyone of doing anything underhanded by snipping a
group or complained about them snekking a group. You "Didn't want to deal
with the question "Why did you snekk the groups?"", so you told a lie
about what I'd do if you snipped them.
>> >> >If you will notice she has in the groups, alt.flame and
>> >> >alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk, known troll/flame groups. In fact
>> >> >
>> >> The flonk is not a troll/flame group and the majority of regs there have
>> >> dealt with just the problems that spooge is ridiculing. That's why I
>> >> brought this up, in the first place. Duh.
>> >
>> >By bringing it over to a "support" group /is/ trolling. If someone is
>> >
>> Maybe, maybe not. I think the bigotry towards people with emotional
>> problems is on topic.
>>
>> >busting on you about your mental problem (whether right or wrong) but
>> >is not cross-posting it to the "support" group then except for you what
>> >harm is being done to the "other" people? Maybe I'm seeing it from a
>> >different angle, but the impression I have gotten from these posts is
>> >that he is directing it at you and only you. I do see your argument
>> >that it is a "slap" to all those that suffer but "those" people haven't
>> >brought it up in alt.flame. I mean let's use what you said but just
>> >change a couple of words, "What did you expect when you posted that in
>> >alt.flame?"
>> >
>> I didn't put it in alt.flame and,
>
>How am I supposed to know this?
>
If you didn't know, why did you say it?
>> at times, the flonk is one of the best
>> support groups anyone could wish for.
>>
>> >Now, if we want to discuss the concept of whether anyone should be
>> >flamed for that we could. However you seem to change using an existing
>> >situation for an example into someone whining about what happend.
>> >>
>> >> See above about alt.flame.
>> >>
>> >> >Jet claims to be a troll. Any future response to this thread (should it
>> >> >occur) from myself will include the appropriate group removal.
>> >> >
>> >> Ah, here it comes. If one is a troll, everything they do is trolling. I
>> >> didn't think your were -that- much of an ignorant jackass.
>> >
>> >It's in your sig.
>> >
>> What's in my sig? That everything I say is a troll?
>
>Twist
>
What. is. in. my. sig? A play on the name of the Academy Award nominated
movie 'A Beautiful Mind' does not indicate that I am trolling. If you
weren't implying that I -was- trolling, why did you specifically announce
that I'm a troll? Making casual conversation?
>> You added groups and the groups you added would most
>> >likely respond. Sort of like posting a pro smoking article to a smokers
>> >group and adding a lung cancer group. What you did /is/ the text book
>> >definition of a troll.
>> >
>> I sincerely wanted their opinion of someone who feels a flame war is
>> justification for saying -anything- rather than admit he's mistaken.
>
>Sorta of like two wrongs don't make a right or just because you post
>doesn't mean you should be targeted for outing?
>
If I post to AHM, I should be prepared for the possibility that I'll be
outed. 'Two wrongs don't make a right' is a platitude. To every wrong,
there's an equal and opposite wrong.
>> I believe that stable people have mental brakes that keep them from
>> crossing certain lines.
>
>I could zing you on that one Jet, it would have been funny.
>
Go ahead. I could very easily hit people with things I know about their
trauma and pain. I've come close but, I don't think I do it.
>> >You know if there was a group alt.hypocrisy I would of cross-posted to
>> >it. :->
>> >
>> If you weren't so hell-bent on convincing yourself that I think and write
>> things that I don't, you'd realize that I'm generally consistant about the
>> beliefs I express.
>
>Twist
>
You have frequently -frequently- accused me of saying things I haven't
and of holding views I don't. The inconsistancies you claim aren't there.
Fex, I haven't jumped on anyone for posting publically available info,
but you say I play favorites by criticizing some and not others for it.
>Did anyone else see the colondashgreaterthansign besides me?
>
--
jet
ACCUSE ME OF THINGS I ALREADY ADMITTED TO?
<affinity>
jet wrote:
>
> >
> Go ahead. I could very easily hit people with things I know about their
> trauma and pain. I've come close but, I don't think I do it.
"Nevermind. I'm sure you'll find some justification. Maybe a broken
relationship is the most important thing in the world, when it happens
to (generic) you, and it's okay to wah wash about it. Or maybe you're
just a shallow bitch who can't deal with other people having emotions,
unless they're wrapped up in a pretentious bundle of "creativity" and
"flonking". Trust me, girlfriend, you ain't no Dorothy Parker.
Whatever. Affinity obviously has no connection to empathy."
Message-ID: <a6opjq$59v$1...@paradoxa.ogoense.net>
Fucking liar. You, my dear, are right up there with Kate.
jet
>karma police arrest jet for posting this in
>alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
>
>> In article <Xns91D0CD216BA05m...@64.154.60.171>,
>> miscreant <as...@right.here> wrote:
>>>karma police arrest jet for posting this in
>>>alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
>>>
>>>> In article <Xns91D0B3F5FDA5Bm...@64.154.60.171>,
>>>> miscreant <as...@right.here> wrote:
>>>>>karma police arrest jet for posting this in
>>>>>alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
>>>>>
>>>>>[support froups removed]
>>>>>
>>>>>> There have been -many-
>>>>>> emotionally fragile people who spooge has dragged into
>>>>>> alt.usenet.kooks with the sole intention of trying to break them.
>>>>>
>>>>>Please post proof of these allegations. With headers. TIA
>>>>>
>>>> Do it yourself. For a start, go look up what kookologists do.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>why should i do it myself? you're the one with the burden of proof,
>>>since you stated he did it.
>>>
>> If you're unaware of several years of AUK reality, it isn't really my
>> job to update you. If you have evidence he didn't do so, present it
>> and I'll provide proof to the contrary. Your ignorance doesn't impose
>> a burden of proof on me.
>>
>>
>
>If you have evidence that he *did* do it, please do present it to me. Since
>
>you made the initial statement that he "dragged emotionally fragile people
>to auk with the sole intention of breaking them down". Why should I provide
>evidence that he *didn't* do it when you are the one making claims that he
>did?
>
that to me, which is part of the foundation of the thread and provides
all necessary proof. If you aren't familiar with the details of the
immediately related threads, you should become so, before making demands.
>And why did you originally have this thread Xposted to support groups? It
>has nothing to do with them.
>
1. Prejudice against people with emotional illness and attempts to corral
them in appropriate groups is on topic in support groups for people with
emotional illness.
2. Why do you crosspost to other groups? My ToS doesn't restrict me from
crossposting to support groups and, while it may not be a nice thing to
do, it isn't abuse.
Russell B
wrote:
>In article <n3fv8uonnv4ap0tkc...@4ax.com>, Russell B <mai...@here.not> wrote:
>>On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 20:47:48 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In article <gv8v8us7i8i29vpnf...@4ax.com>, Russell B
>>><mai...@here.not> wrote:
>>>>On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 08:32:05 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet)
>>>>wrote:
>>To wit: when it *actually* *starts* *to* *seem* *like* *a* *good* *idea* to
>>subject a bunch of emotionally fragile noncombatants to flaming because
>>somebody flamed you in alt.flame, that should tip you off that you're
>>allowing UseNet flaming to hurt you in a big way.
>>
>No,
Yes. What you're trying to do is a severe overreaction to some name-calling
between you and a guy you're in a catfight with. His comments are not
important to anybody but you, I promise you.
> I'm recognizing that people in recovery from anything aren't confined
>in segregated newsgroups and fair game if they ever decide to leave. The
>awareness of that is disturbing me. I'd rather expect better from people.
More like they're fair game if they choose to post flames to flame
newsgroups, as you've done.
You chose to insert yourself into a particularly bitter and destructive
flamewar, and as a consequence you were flamed. That's how it works. To
expect "better" from flamers than flaming is unreasonable, and to be
outraged about it is pointless and self-destructive.
>>It's also a good time to sit down and think about perspective. Which of the
>>following is more important: the desire of hundreds of support-group users
>>to use their fora for support, or your anger at Spooge for calling you
>>names? No, really; which is more important? What do you think a person
>>with a healthy sense of proportion would say?
>>
>I'm not angry at spooge for calling me names. If you were acquainted with
>me (which you obviously choose to not be), you'd know that I'm angry that
>someone would be so wrapped up in flaming an individual, that they don't
>care about all the friends that they're insulting with those flames.
Maybe his friends aren't as insulted as you imagine them to be. I don't
notice them making a big deal out of it, do you?
>>Now, what do you think a person with a healthy sense of proportion would do?
>>
>Retaliate.
Not if he wanted to stop being angry, he wouldn't. Because that would lead
to more name-calling, and more anger, and more retaliation, until one day,
months down the road, he would find himself surrounded by people boggling
their eyes at him and saying things like, "Did he just threaten to crosspost
a bunch of insults to three different mental health support newsgroups?"
>>"Tired and fed up," you say. "Isn't meant to amuse anyone." "There are
>>some things that bother me." No shit.
>>
>So?
So you're prolonging your tired-and-fed-uppitude by dwelling on a bunch of
trash-talking that you willingly subjected yourself to when you chose to be
a flamer--trash-talking that you could cause to evaporate with the flip of a
switch if you could just muster the willpower.
You're also insisting that other people, who haven't chosen to be flamers,
listen to the name-calling as well.
Does this make things better for you? Does it make things better for the
other people? For anybody?
>It's me here at the keyboard. I don't pretend to be some tower of
>non-emotional rationality. I don't want to be you or anyone else.
Do you want the pain to stop? Stop the war.
> And you--seriously--should
>>think about turning the machine off for a while, and taking that vacation.
>>
>>Hobbies shouldn't make you angry, and hanging around with people who don't
>>want you to recover is no way to go through recovery. Let it go.
>>
>Sorry, Russell. I'm not someone who compartmentalizes their life and never
>the twain shall meet. Usenet isn't a hobby, it's a way to communicate with
>people who are too physically distant to meet face to face.
<blink>
>Strength is achieved through adversity.
Ask anybody with a stress-related ulcer about strength through adversity.
Be sure to bring pudding.
jet
you could, means that you're the same as people who do it.
This is why I hate talking to you, Affinity.
You're relationship was discussed in the flonk, and mentioning it isn't
using it to hit you or hurt you. I was responding to your implication that
I'm being a crybaby by pointing out that you didn't feel you were being a
crybaby, because you felt your pain was important.
Russell B
wrote:
How could I not know? You keep bringing it up.
Let it go, Jet.
miscreant
IOW, you don't have proof. You could've just said that to begin with, you
know.
>
>>you made the initial statement that he "dragged emotionally fragile
>>people to auk with the sole intention of breaking them down". Why
>>should I provide evidence that he *didn't* do it when you are the one
>>making claims that he did?
>>
> Because an -observant- person would have noticed that he did precisely
> that to me, which is part of the foundation of the thread and provides
> all necessary proof. If you aren't familiar with the details of the
> immediately related threads, you should become so, before making
> demands.
So *you* alone are the "many" people that he dragged to auk? Do you have
MPD in addition to agoraphobia?
>
>>And why did you originally have this thread Xposted to support groups?
>>It has nothing to do with them.
>>
> 1. Prejudice against people with emotional illness and attempts to
> corral them in appropriate groups is on topic in support groups for
> people with emotional illness.
How can one attempt to "corral" anyone into a group?
>
> 2. Why do you crosspost to other groups? My ToS doesn't restrict me
> from crossposting to support groups and, while it may not be a nice
> thing to do, it isn't abuse.
>
>
Oh, so crossposting unrelated threads to support newsgroups is ok? Thanks
for clearing that up.
<affinity>
jet wrote:
My relationship, and the fact that it was discussed in the flonk, had absolutely
*nothing* to do with your reasons for posting whinging dribble to support groups. You
brought it into the discussion, in some lame comparison to your pathetic floor show
with Spooge. The fact that I sought support form the flonk, after spending twenty four
hours wrestling a knife out of someone's hands, is in NO WAY the same thing as
throwing a histrionic pity party just because some (pathetic) lamer decides to jibe
you about your anxiety disorder in some long dead, long dull, thread.
jet
>On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 00:46:29 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet)
>wrote:
>You chose to insert yourself into a particularly bitter and destructive
>flamewar, and as a consequence you were flamed. That's how it works. To
>
>expect "better" from flamers than flaming is unreasonable, and to be
>outraged about it is pointless and self-destructive.
>
Pointless, yes, self-destructive, no.
>>>It's also a good time to sit down and think about perspective. Which of the
>>>following is more important: the desire of hundreds of support-group users
>>>to use their fora for support, or your anger at Spooge for calling you
>>>names? No, really; which is more important? What do you think a person
>>>with a healthy sense of proportion would say?
>>>
>>I'm not angry at spooge for calling me names. If you were acquainted with
>>me (which you obviously choose to not be), you'd know that I'm angry that
>>someone would be so wrapped up in flaming an individual, that they don't
>>care about all the friends that they're insulting with those flames.
>
>Maybe his friends aren't as insulted as you imagine them to be. I don't
>notice them making a big deal out of it, do you?
>
What does that have to do with my caring about their feelings?
>>>Now, what do you think a person with a healthy sense of proportion would do?
>>>
>>Retaliate.
>
>Not if he wanted to stop being angry, he wouldn't. Because that would lead
>to more name-calling, and more anger, and more retaliation, until one day,
>months down the road, he would find himself surrounded by people boggling
>their eyes at him and saying things like, "Did he just threaten to crosspost
>a bunch of insults to three different mental health support newsgroups?"
>
Why do I want to stop being angry? There are times when it's enjoyable
and productive. This isn't one of them, I admit.
>>>"Tired and fed up," you say. "Isn't meant to amuse anyone." "There are
>>>some things that bother me." No shit.
>>>
>>So?
>
>So you're prolonging your tired-and-fed-uppitude by dwelling on a bunch of
>trash-talking that you willingly subjected yourself to when you chose to be
>a flamer--trash-talking that you could cause to evaporate with the flip of a
>switch if you could just muster the willpower.
>
I've never considered confiding something in the flonk to be deliberately
subjecting myself to flames. If that's the way you think, I kinda feel
sorry for you.
>You're also insisting that other people, who haven't chosen to be flamers,
>listen to the name-calling as well.
>
>Does this make things better for you? Does it make things better for the
>other people? For anybody?
>
Of course not. I over-reacted. It's still not a cardinal sin and it
-would- be self-distructive to drown in guilt over a mistake.
>>It's me here at the keyboard. I don't pretend to be some tower of
>>non-emotional rationality. I don't want to be you or anyone else.
>
>Do you want the pain to stop? Stop the war.
>
Okay. :)
>> And you--seriously--should
>>>think about turning the machine off for a while, and taking that vacation.
>>>
>>>Hobbies shouldn't make you angry, and hanging around with people who don't
>>>want you to recover is no way to go through recovery. Let it go.
>>>
>>Sorry, Russell. I'm not someone who compartmentalizes their life and never
>>the twain shall meet. Usenet isn't a hobby, it's a way to communicate with
>>people who are too physically distant to meet face to face.
>
><blink>
>
What? I don't separate usenet, email, telephone and face to face into
segregated, untouching parts of my life. They aren't the same, but they
connect. Usenet isn't a hobby, it's just one way I communicate.
>>Strength is achieved through adversity.
>
>Ask anybody with a stress-related ulcer about strength through adversity.
>Be sure to bring pudding.
>
Ulcers are cause by viruses. They're simply irritated by the hyper-
acidity caused by stress. Milk aggravates ulcers by creating mucus
that the stomach has trouble processing.
jet
>On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 00:58:55 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet)
>wrote:
>
>>In article <67rv8u8pda3o54rsr...@4ax.com>, Russell B
> <mai...@here.not> wrote:
>How could I not know? You keep bringing it up.
>
>Let it go, Jet.
>
was coming from someone else.
It is a lost cause, though. I give up.
jet
experiences. Dismissing or minimizing someone else's problems because
you feel yours are bigger is rather silly.
Once again, you're chosing to rant and rave hysterically over something
that's already been openly acknowledged (and snipped that part, too).
jet
so defensive about spooge doing exactly what kookologists have always
done?
>>>you made the initial statement that he "dragged emotionally fragile
>>>people to auk with the sole intention of breaking them down". Why
>>>should I provide evidence that he *didn't* do it when you are the one
>>>making claims that he did?
>>>
>> Because an -observant- person would have noticed that he did precisely
>> that to me, which is part of the foundation of the thread and provides
>> all necessary proof. If you aren't familiar with the details of the
>> immediately related threads, you should become so, before making
>> demands.
>
>So *you* alone are the "many" people that he dragged to auk? Do you have
>MPD in addition to agoraphobia?
>
>>>And why did you originally have this thread Xposted to support groups?
>>>It has nothing to do with them.
>>>
>> 1. Prejudice against people with emotional illness and attempts to
>> corral them in appropriate groups is on topic in support groups for
>> people with emotional illness.
>
>How can one attempt to "corral" anyone into a group?
>
>> 2. Why do you crosspost to other groups? My ToS doesn't restrict me
>> from crossposting to support groups and, while it may not be a nice
>> thing to do, it isn't abuse.
>>
>>
>
>Oh, so crossposting unrelated threads to support newsgroups is ok? Thanks
>for clearing that up.
>
Crossposting unrelated threads -anywhere- is not net abuse.
Crossposting related threads to support groups isn't abuse. My ToS
doesn't forbid either. Things don't automatically become abuse because
you don't approve of them. Saying that something isn't nice, but isn't
abuse, is not saying it's "ok".
I can spell it out in wood blocks, if necessary.
<affinity>
jet wrote:
Right, so why did you compare my experiences in the flonk (re: relationship) with your
need for support? Why did you bring it up IN THE FIRST INSTANCE?
> Dismissing or minimizing someone else's problems because
> you feel yours are bigger is rather silly.
What do you think you were doing when you posted YOUR problems with Spooge to support
groups? You dismissed and minimized everyone else's right in those groups to feel
comfortable about posting by bringing Spooge (someone who you say is intolerant of
mental illness) into them.
> Once again, you're chosing to rant and rave hysterically over something
> that's already been openly acknowledged (and snipped that part, too).
Well, no. I'll leave the hysteria to those who need the combined backing of two
support groups to settle their flame wars for them.
Rebecca Ore
>
> So *you* alone are the "many" people that he dragged to auk? Do you have
> MPD in addition to agoraphobia?
Um, I don't know if spooge alone tried to drag me to auk, but he got
extremely upset that I said all the auk'ers are kooks, some of them
dom kooks, others sub kooks.
>
> Oh, so crossposting unrelated threads to support newsgroups is ok? Thanks
> for clearing that up.
(Cough) Note that she didn't do it from paradoxa, where Iron Whim is
the rule.
--
Rebecca Ore
miscreant
Asking for proof doesn't equal defending someone. I am genuinely interested
in seeing proof that spooge dragged all these "emotionally fragile people"
into auk. You referenced yourself as one, but didn't provide any other
examples. And since you failed to prove it, I have no choice but to believe
you are bullshitting.
>
>>>>you made the initial statement that he "dragged emotionally fragile
>>>>people to auk with the sole intention of breaking them down". Why
>>>>should I provide evidence that he *didn't* do it when you are the
>>>>one making claims that he did?
>>>>
>>> Because an -observant- person would have noticed that he did
>>> precisely that to me, which is part of the foundation of the thread
>>> and provides all necessary proof. If you aren't familiar with the
>>> details of the immediately related threads, you should become so,
>>> before making demands.
>>
>>So *you* alone are the "many" people that he dragged to auk? Do you
>>have MPD in addition to agoraphobia?
>>
> Why don't you wait until he denies it, before making a fool of
> yourself?
Until he denies that he dragged you into auk, or that he "dragged
emotionally fragile people to auk with the sole intention of breaking them
down"?
>>>>And why did you originally have this thread Xposted to support
>>>>groups? It has nothing to do with them.
>>>>
>>> 1. Prejudice against people with emotional illness and attempts to
>>> corral them in appropriate groups is on topic in support groups for
>>> people with emotional illness.
>>
>>How can one attempt to "corral" anyone into a group?
>>
> Easily.
>
That doesn't answer *how*.
>>> 2. Why do you crosspost to other groups? My ToS doesn't restrict me
>>> from crossposting to support groups and, while it may not be a nice
>>> thing to do, it isn't abuse.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Oh, so crossposting unrelated threads to support newsgroups is ok?
>>Thanks for clearing that up.
>>
> Jeez, I didn't think I'd have to simplify it any more than I did.
> Crossposting unrelated threads -anywhere- is not net abuse.
> Crossposting related threads to support groups isn't abuse. My ToS
> doesn't forbid either. Things don't automatically become abuse because
> you don't approve of them. Saying that something isn't nice, but isn't
> abuse, is not saying it's "ok".
And when did I state that something I don't approve of is abuse? I *am*
allowed to have an opinion, aren't I?
>
> I can spell it out in wood blocks, if necessary.
>
>
That won't be necessary. I'm really not that interested in your convoluted
explanations, but thanks anyway.
jet
> Why did you bring it up IN THE FIRST INSTANCE?
>
Because -you- were pissing about the fact that I was talking about
something that was a bad experience for me. Woe is me, wah, remember?
Do you compare what you went through to other people's experiences
to decide if they're permitted to be upset, before shooting your big
mouth off?
I also mentioned the way that your friends jumped all over the person who
flamed you because you talked about your bad experience, and wondered why
you'd do the same or support spooge doing the same.
>> Dismissing or minimizing someone else's problems because
>> you feel yours are bigger is rather silly.
>
>What do you think you were doing when you posted YOUR problems with Spooge to
> support
>groups? You dismissed and minimized everyone else's right in those groups to
>
Bullshit.
> feel
>comfortable about posting by bringing Spooge (someone who you say is intolerant
> of
>mental illness) into them.
>
I. over-reacted. I've said it 5 times now and you're still having problems
comprehending it. Like I said, this is why I hate talking to you. You
go completely off the deep edge at the slightest hint of opposition.
>> Once again, you're chosing to rant and rave hysterically over something
>> that's already been openly acknowledged (and snipped that part, too).
>
>Well, no. I'll leave the hysteria to those who need the combined backing of two
>support groups to settle their flame wars for them.
>
Uh huh. I'll remind you of your perfection, the next time you make a
mistake. Now, are you going to continue to screech like a harpy over a
relatively minor error, or are you going to calm down and shut the fuck
up?
jet
it out yourself.
>examples. And since you failed to prove it, I have no choice but to believe
>you are bullshitting.
>
>>>>>you made the initial statement that he "dragged emotionally fragile
>>>>>people to auk with the sole intention of breaking them down". Why
>>>>>should I provide evidence that he *didn't* do it when you are the
>>>>>one making claims that he did?
>>>>>
>>>> Because an -observant- person would have noticed that he did
>>>> precisely that to me, which is part of the foundation of the thread
>>>> and provides all necessary proof. If you aren't familiar with the
>>>> details of the immediately related threads, you should become so,
>>>> before making demands.
>>>
>>>So *you* alone are the "many" people that he dragged to auk? Do you
>>>have MPD in addition to agoraphobia?
>>>
>> Why don't you wait until he denies it, before making a fool of
>> yourself?
>
>Until he denies that he dragged you into auk, or that he "dragged
>emotionally fragile people to auk with the sole intention of breaking them
>down"?
>
a usenet group, which is technically true, but is still a common
euphemism for continually crossposting someone into a group where they
don't want to post, in order to ridicule them and have others ridicule
them.
>>>>>And why did you originally have this thread Xposted to support
>>>>>groups? It has nothing to do with them.
>>>>>
>>>> 1. Prejudice against people with emotional illness and attempts to
>>>> corral them in appropriate groups is on topic in support groups for
>>>> people with emotional illness.
>>>
>>>How can one attempt to "corral" anyone into a group?
>>>
>> Easily.
>>
>
>That doesn't answer *how*.
>
Bummer.
>>>> 2. Why do you crosspost to other groups? My ToS doesn't restrict me
>>>> from crossposting to support groups and, while it may not be a nice
>>>> thing to do, it isn't abuse.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Oh, so crossposting unrelated threads to support newsgroups is ok?
>>>Thanks for clearing that up.
>>>
>> Jeez, I didn't think I'd have to simplify it any more than I did.
>> Crossposting unrelated threads -anywhere- is not net abuse.
>> Crossposting related threads to support groups isn't abuse. My ToS
>> doesn't forbid either. Things don't automatically become abuse because
>> you don't approve of them. Saying that something isn't nice, but isn't
>> abuse, is not saying it's "ok".
>
>And when did I state that something I don't approve of is abuse? I *am*
>allowed to have an opinion, aren't I?
>
Of course but, if your opinion is that anything I said translated to
crossposting unrelated posts to support groups is "ok", you're an idiot.
>>
>> I can spell it out in wood blocks, if necessary.
>>
>>
>
>That won't be necessary. I'm really not that interested in your convoluted
>explanations, but thanks anyway.
>
Good, then maybe you'll stop asking, over and over. I tend to doubt it,
though.
Rebecca Ore
>
> That doesn't answer *how*.
>
I suggest reading "Flowers for Algernon."
--
Rebecca Ore
<affinity>
jet wrote:
You wanted support from all of us mental cases out there (that have to deal with
anxiety on a day to day basis), you scatterbrained pathetic. You wanted US to carry
YOUR tired carcass from a flame war which should've, with all fucking respect to
common decency, petered out months ago.
> > Why did you bring it up IN THE FIRST INSTANCE?
> >
> Because -you- were pissing about the fact that I was talking about
> something that was a bad experience for me. Woe is me, wah, remember?
> Do you compare what you went through to other people's experiences
> to decide if they're permitted to be upset, before shooting your big
> mouth off?
Wah, fucking wah. You wanted to be ms.alt.flame, I was amazed that you were stupid
enough to x-post the tired remains of that excruciatingly boring spoog-a-thon to three
support groups. Personally, I don't happen to give a toss whether flaming is a bad
experience for you, or not. I suspect it's not all that enjoyable, given your glaring
ineptness at it.
> I also mentioned the way that your friends jumped all over the person who
> flamed you because you talked about your bad experience, and wondered why
> you'd do the same or support spooge doing the same.
Huh? I thought your actions were stupid and destructive, how does that equate to me
supporting Spooge?
> >> Dismissing or minimizing someone else's problems because
> >> you feel yours are bigger is rather silly.
> >
> >What do you think you were doing when you posted YOUR problems with Spooge to
> > support
> >groups? You dismissed and minimized everyone else's right in those groups to
> >
> Bullshit.
That's exactly what you did, you lost your perspective.
> > feel
> >comfortable about posting by bringing Spooge (someone who you say is intolerant
> > of
> >mental illness) into them.
> >
> I. over-reacted. I've said it 5 times now and you're still having problems
> comprehending it. Like I said, this is why I hate talking to you. You
> go completely off the deep edge at the slightest hint of opposition.
PKB. Take your lumps and move on.
> >> Once again, you're chosing to rant and rave hysterically over something
> >> that's already been openly acknowledged (and snipped that part, too).
> >
> >Well, no. I'll leave the hysteria to those who need the combined backing of two
> >support groups to settle their flame wars for them.
> >
> Uh huh. I'll remind you of your perfection, the next time you make a
> mistake. Now, are you going to continue to screech like a harpy over a
> relatively minor error, or are you going to calm down and shut the fuck
> up?
I'm perfectly calm, how are you fairing? Should we x-post this to alt.support.panic
for group consensus?
miscreant
alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
> miscreant <as...@right.here> writes:
>
>>
>> That doesn't answer *how*.
>>
>
>
> I suggest reading "Flowers for Algernon."
>
>
>
I have, several times.
Good book.
miscreant
Mmm hmm no proof.
>
>>examples. And since you failed to prove it, I have no choice but to
>>believe you are bullshitting.
>>
> and your belief is still inconsequential.
>
and so are your accusations.
>>>>>>you made the initial statement that he "dragged emotionally
>>>>>>fragile people to auk with the sole intention of breaking them
>>>>>>down". Why should I provide evidence that he *didn't* do it when
>>>>>>you are the one making claims that he did?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Because an -observant- person would have noticed that he did
>>>>> precisely that to me, which is part of the foundation of the
>>>>> thread and provides all necessary proof. If you aren't familiar
>>>>> with the details of the immediately related threads, you should
>>>>> become so, before making demands.
>>>>
>>>>So *you* alone are the "many" people that he dragged to auk? Do you
>>>>have MPD in addition to agoraphobia?
>>>>
>>> Why don't you wait until he denies it, before making a fool of
>>> yourself?
>>
>>Until he denies that he dragged you into auk, or that he "dragged
>>emotionally fragile people to auk with the sole intention of breaking
>>them down"?
>>
> Either one. Of course, he'll deny that anyone can be "dragged" to
> a usenet group, which is technically true, but is still a common
> euphemism for continually crossposting someone into a group where they
> don't want to post, in order to ridicule them and have others ridicule
> them.
>
So who are the "many" people this supposedly happened to?
>>>>>>And why did you originally have this thread Xposted to support
>>>>>>groups? It has nothing to do with them.
>>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Prejudice against people with emotional illness and attempts to
>>>>> corral them in appropriate groups is on topic in support groups
>>>>> for people with emotional illness.
>>>>
>>>>How can one attempt to "corral" anyone into a group?
>>>>
>>> Easily.
>>>
>>
>>That doesn't answer *how*.
>>
> Bummer.
>
It doesn't surprise me that you skirt answering the question yet again.
>>>>> 2. Why do you crosspost to other groups? My ToS doesn't restrict
>>>>> me from crossposting to support groups and, while it may not be a
>>>>> nice thing to do, it isn't abuse.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Oh, so crossposting unrelated threads to support newsgroups is ok?
>>>>Thanks for clearing that up.
>>>>
>>> Jeez, I didn't think I'd have to simplify it any more than I did.
>>> Crossposting unrelated threads -anywhere- is not net abuse.
>>> Crossposting related threads to support groups isn't abuse. My ToS
>>> doesn't forbid either. Things don't automatically become abuse
>>> because you don't approve of them. Saying that something isn't nice,
>>> but isn't abuse, is not saying it's "ok".
>>
>>And when did I state that something I don't approve of is abuse? I
>>*am* allowed to have an opinion, aren't I?
>>
> Of course but, if your opinion is that anything I said translated to
> crossposting unrelated posts to support groups is "ok", you're an
> idiot.
If your ToS doesn't restrict you from doing it, and it's therefore allowed,
then it must be "ok" according to your server's ToS.
>
>>>
>>> I can spell it out in wood blocks, if necessary.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>That won't be necessary. I'm really not that interested in your
>>convoluted explanations, but thanks anyway.
>>
> Good, then maybe you'll stop asking, over and over. I tend to doubt
> it, though.
>
>
You tend to give yourself way too much credit.
spo...@petitmorte.net
news:a6p7qh$dpg$0...@dosa.alt.net:
> Once again, you're chosing to rant and rave hysterically over something
> that's already been openly acknowledged (and snipped that part, too).
You mean like your agorophobia, perhaps?
Poor, poor Jet.
--
You're so very ordinary
You're so very lame
Tastes like whiskey on your lips
And earthworms rule your brain
spo...@petitmorte.net
news:a6n2tk$g99$0...@dosa.alt.net:
Support groups snecked
> In article <101600706...@iapetus.uk.clara.net>, "Steve Leyland"
> <steveleyland...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
> [alt.flame removed, sorry I left it in before]
>>"jet" <morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net> wrote in message
>>news:a6mvcj$5h3$0...@dosa.alt.net...
>>> In article <Xns91CFC482322...@207.14.113.17>,
>>> "spo...@petitmorte.net" <spo...@petitmorte.net> wrote:
>>> >morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet) wrote in
>>> >news:a6k8p2$rbr$1...@paradoxa.ogoense.net:
>>> [...]
>>> >Jet, you lied, I stuffed it in your face. Deal with it kooky. You
>>> >read
>>a
>>> >little angry, Jet. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Take another pill, m'kay?
>>> >
>>> [...]
>>> >Sorry, Refresh. When you lie like a bad Persion Rug, I'll be there
>>> >to remind you. If you don't like it, find someplace else to flush
>>> >your delusional, brain damaged dreck. You are fucking nuts,
>>> >"lady".
>>> >
>>> Okay, spunky, you've been using my agoraphobia as flame fodder for
>>> quite some time and urging me to commit suicide for nearly a year.
>>
>>if this is true, it sux0rs big-time. that's a well fucking dangerous
>>thing to suggest to anyone :-(
>>I'm glad you didn't do it, jet.
>>
> Me too. It's not just about me, though, Steve. There have been -many-
> emotionally fragile people who spooge has dragged into
> alt.usenet.kooks with the sole intention of trying to break them. I
> personally think that kind of behavior is an illness in itself.
Jet, you're lying, yet again. I've never "dragged" *anyone* into AUK. And
the only emotionally fragile person I've ever paid more than
passing attention to has been you.
You'll be not posting any proof of your bull shit, of course. There is
none, you loon.
Any sickness you see in your monitor is your own reflection, Jet. Get help.
trippy
<a6mvcj$5h3$0...@dosa.alt.net>, said the following tripped out things....
> In article <Xns91CFC482322...@207.14.113.17>,
> "spo...@petitmorte.net" <spo...@petitmorte.net> wrote:
> >morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet) wrote in
> >news:a6k8p2$rbr$1...@paradoxa.ogoense.net:
> [...]
> >Jet, you lied, I stuffed it in your face. Deal with it kooky. You read a
> >little angry, Jet. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Take another pill, m'kay?
> >
> [...]
> >Sorry, Refresh. When you lie like a bad Persion Rug, I'll be there to
> >remind you. If you don't like it, find someplace else to flush your
> >delusional, brain damaged dreck. You are fucking nuts, "lady".
> >
> Okay, spunky, you've been using my agoraphobia as flame fodder for quite
> time other people with similar emotional and psychological problems should
> hear about you.
>
> From now on, I'm going to crosspost all your insulting remarks, about
> losers who have to take meds to go outside and being "loony" because
> I take meds for SAD and panic disorder, to the appropriate groups and,
> maybe, other people will be moved to tell you what they think of someone
> like you.
>
> I know you natter on about never trolling support or recovery groups but,
> you have no problem harassing people for being in recovery, so I'm sure
> you won't avoid the crossposts.
I think that's a bad idea. The recovery froups have enough to deal with
without bringing some flamefest that has nothing to do with them on
their heads.
Look Jet, let's talk reason a sec, k? They aren't flaming people with
emotional issues in general, they're flaming YOU. Just because their
flaming you with your condition, they aren't flaming everybody with your
condition. As far as flaming you with your issues goes, hey, it's a
flamefest, and you've openly admitted it. You should know that someone's
gonna use the info you put out about yourself. You're smart enough to
realize that.
You're pissed at *them* so you're gonna put their caddish behavior on
display. The only problem is nobody's paying attention. I guess it'd be
different if you brought some of your buds from the recovery froup here
to stick up for you, but that's not what I'm seeing. I'm seeing you
taking a flamewar where it doesn't belong. Keep it here Jet, I'm asking
you as a reasonable person.
--
Trippy
tri...@XspamblockXthetrippy.com
You're different, and that's bad.
Doobie Doobie Doo
jet
>miscreant <as...@right.here> writes:
>
>>
>> That doesn't answer *how*.
>>
>
>
>I suggest reading "Flowers for Algernon."
>
what she's been taught a troll does. By irritating someone into answering
a question that was too lame to have been asked in the first place, you
win.
She'll, also, keep demanding I prove something that's known by anyone
who's read spooge's AUK posts and that he's been confronted with many
times. It's possible, of course, that she's had him killfiled for 2 or
3 years, but I think she's well aware of how AUK works and is just running
one of those incredibly tedious stock trolls that newbies are fond of.
Redundancy = trolling. It's the New UPA.
<affinity>
jet wrote:
> In article <m3y9gvu...@pyrophore.ogoense.net>, Rebecca Ore <reb...@pyrophore.ogoense.net> wrote:
> >miscreant <as...@right.here> writes:
> >
> >>
> >> That doesn't answer *how*.
> >>
> >
> >
> >I suggest reading "Flowers for Algernon."
> >
> That's not going to do any good. She'll keep asking me because that's
> what she's been taught a troll does. By irritating someone into answering
> a question that was too lame to have been asked in the first place, you
> win.
>
> She'll, also, keep demanding I prove something that's known by anyone
> who's read spooge's AUK posts and that he's been confronted with many
> times. It's possible, of course, that she's had him killfiled for 2 or
> 3 years, but I think she's well aware of how AUK works and is just running
> one of those incredibly tedious stock trolls that newbies are fond of.
>
> Redundancy = trolling. It's the New UPA.
Really? I thought the new UPA was drowning in a sickly vat of your own self-pity, re: you.
spo...@petitmorte.net
news:10160107...@iapetus.uk.clara.net:
> "jet" <morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net> wrote in message
> news:a6n2tk$g99$0...@dosa.alt.net...
>> In article <101600706...@iapetus.uk.clara.net>, "Steve Leyland"
>> <steveleyland...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> [alt.flame removed, sorry I left it in before]
>> >"jet" <morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net> wrote in message
>> >news:a6mvcj$5h3$0...@dosa.alt.net...
>> >> In article <Xns91CFC482322...@207.14.113.17>,
>> >> "spo...@petitmorte.net" <spo...@petitmorte.net> wrote:
>> >> >morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet) wrote in
>> >> >news:a6k8p2$rbr$1...@paradoxa.ogoense.net:
>> >> [...]
>> >> >Jet, you lied, I stuffed it in your face. Deal with it kooky.
>> >> >You
> read
>> >a
>> >> >little angry, Jet. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Take another pill, m'kay?
>> >> >
>> >> [...]
>> >> >Sorry, Refresh. When you lie like a bad Persion Rug, I'll be
>> >> >there to remind you. If you don't like it, find someplace else
>> >> >to flush your delusional, brain damaged dreck. You are fucking
>> >> >nuts, "lady".
>> >> >
>> >> Okay, spunky, you've been using my agoraphobia as flame fodder for
> quite
>> >> some time and urging me to commit suicide for nearly a year.
>> >
>> >if this is true, it sux0rs big-time. that's a well fucking dangerous
> thing
>> >to suggest to anyone :-(
>> >I'm glad you didn't do it, jet.
>> >
>> Me too. It's not just about me, though, Steve. There have been -many-
>> emotionally fragile people who spooge has dragged into
>> alt.usenet.kooks with the sole intention of trying to break them. I
>> personally think that kind of behavior is an illness in itself.
>
> subscribed!
> and I like to think I'm pretty stable *most* of teh time ;-/
Dude, she's full of shit. She'll not be able to support her words, you
just watch. She's doing this because she got slapped good and hard a
couple of days ago. The support group fuckery she is practicing now is
just a cover for that humiliation she's carrying.
>> > I think it's
>> >> time other people with similar emotional and psychological
>> >> problems
> should
>> >> hear about you.
>> >>
>> >> From now on, I'm going to crosspost all your insulting remarks,
>> >> about losers who have to take meds to go outside and being "loony"
>> >> because I take meds for SAD and panic disorder, to the appropriate
>> >> groups and, maybe, other people will be moved to tell you what
>> >> they think of
> someone
>> >> like you.
>> >>
>> >> I know you natter on about never trolling support or recovery
>> >> groups
> but,
>> >> you have no problem harassing people for being in recovery, so I'm
>> >> sure you won't avoid the crossposts.
>> >
>> >bad move IMHO. alt.support.* contains many vulnerable people who
>> >could suffer actual RL harm from trolling.
>> >
>> I agree but they suffer just as much for hearing things like spooge
>> says -outside- of the recovery groups. I think they should know that
>> there are people out on usenet who will pay lip-service to their
>> problems, as long as they stay in support groups "where they belong"
>> but will use their problems to attack them, just for entertainment.
>
> IMHO that's just not entertainment.
> true usenet entertainment/UPA comes from tongue-in-cheek humour, not
> personal attacks. but then as you know, I'm just an old hippy....
She wants to be a "flamer", she learns to deal with it. She shows up in
groups that she has no interest in, looking for flaming, she gets it.
That's life on the Net.
> (I snecked alt.support.* from my reply btw.)
The only person trying to involve support groups is Jet. I bet you already
noticed that, didn't you?
>> I don't intend to 'troll' there, at all, because I know first hand
>> what they're going through. There's a very easy way for spooge to
>> avoid having his bigotry and abusive nature exposed.
>>
>> Yeah, I know this isn't funny and "flonkish" enough. I don't find it
>> particularly amusing, either.
>
> hmmm..now who flamed me for x-posting to teh flonk a while back....
> mheh <wink>
Probably the same person who thinks flame wars should be cross posted to
support groups who have had no involvement in any of the previous stuff.
Alt.flame added.
miscreant
alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
> It's possible, of course, that she's had him killfiled for 2 or
> 3 years,
Considering I've only been on Usenet for a year and a half, that'd be
pretty impossible.
trippy
things....
> >alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
> >
> >>>alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
> >>>
> >>>>>alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> There have been -many-
> >>>>>> emotionally fragile people who spooge has dragged into
> >>>>>> alt.usenet.kooks with the sole intention of trying to break them.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> Do it yourself. For a start, go look up what kookologists do.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>why should i do it myself? you're the one with the burden of proof,
> >>>since you stated he did it.
> >>>
> >> If you're unaware of several years of AUK reality, it isn't really my
> >> job to update you. If you have evidence he didn't do so, present it
> >> and I'll provide proof to the contrary. Your ignorance doesn't impose
> >> a burden of proof on me.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >If you have evidence that he *did* do it, please do present it to me. Since
> >
> No.
Then you admit you have no proof?
> Your belief is inconsequential to me.
That may be, but it may not be inconsequential to whoever's reading the
thread. I'd like to see some proof too, since you DID state that.
spo...@petitmorte.net
news:a6opjq$59v$1...@paradoxa.ogoense.net:
> In article <3C8FDF60...@bigpond.com>, "<affinity>"
> <lu...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>jet wrote:
> [...]
>>> Ummmm...I'm crossposting -from- the flonk. :) I have no doubt that
>>> someone will say I'm taking things too seriously and that usenet has
>>> nothing to do with RL. It's not that important, anyway. I dunno.
>>> Maybe it's true that nobody -really- cares about anyone but
>>> themselves.
>>
>>Oh woe, and fucking wah. Using support groups to take the heat off a
>>personal
>> flame war is a pretty good indication
>>that some people only care about themselves, yes.
>>
> That would make lots of sense if there was any heat or if you had any
> idea what you're talking about. Oops, I forgot; Russell flamed so
> little fnord must following right behind.
>
> It rather surprises me that you, the flag bearer for exposing
> hypocrites, doesn't think there's anything amiss with someone who has
> made a mega- issue about not trolling in recovery groups having no
> problem with trying to damage someone's recovery.
Just a minute, Refresh. You came looking for me. Remember? What the fuck
else were you doing in AHM? For someone in "recovery", that's a pretty
stupid thing to do, even for someone as unbalanced as you are.
This isn't at all about your mental well being. You're pissed because I
caught you out in a big fib.
> Or are you one of those people who believe that, if you reveal
> anything about yourself on usenet, you're fair game for any psychotic
> who wanders by. No, that can't be true. IIRC, you and your friends
> were very upset about someone flaming you because a relationship broke
> up.
>
> Nevermind. I'm sure you'll find some justification. Maybe a broken
> relationship is the most important thing in the world, when it happens
> to (generic) you, and it's okay to wah wah about it. Or maybe you're
> just a shallow bitch who can't deal with other people having emotions,
> unless they're wrapped up in a pretentious bundle of "creativity" and
> "flonking". Trust me, girlfriend, you ain't no Dorothy Parker.
And your justification for taking a flame war into support groups is
'Spooge made me do it'? Laugh out fucking loud at you, Refresh.
> Whatever. Affinity obviously has no connection to empathy.
Ah, now the flamer grrl is looking for empathy...
jet
In article <MPG.16f9f40d8...@news.alt.net>, trippy
>This dude, "jet" morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net, in message
><a6mvcj$5h3$0...@dosa.alt.net>, said the following tripped out things....
>> In article <Xns91CFC482322...@207.14.113.17>,
>> I know you natter on about never trolling support or recovery groups but,
>> you have no problem harassing people for being in recovery, so I'm sure
>> you won't avoid the crossposts.
>
>I think that's a bad idea. The recovery froups have enough to deal with
>without bringing some flamefest that has nothing to do with them on
>their heads.
>
anger.
>Look Jet, let's talk reason a sec, k? They aren't flaming people with
>emotional issues in general, they're flaming YOU. Just because their
>flaming you with your condition, they aren't flaming everybody with your
>condition. As far as flaming you with your issues goes, hey, it's a
>flamefest, and you've openly admitted it. You should know that someone's
>gonna use the info you put out about yourself. You're smart enough to
>realize that.
>
That's true, but somehow my expectations are never low enough to encompass
some behavior.
>You're pissed at *them* so you're gonna put their caddish behavior on
>display. The only problem is nobody's paying attention. I guess it'd be
>
Actually, more people are paying attention than I expected. :)
>different if you brought some of your buds from the recovery froup here
>to stick up for you, but that's not what I'm seeing. I'm seeing you
>
No, it wouldn't make a difference. To me, it's no different that when
a couple of people were joking about Tom dying. To other people, it
really doesn't matter. Everyone has their own line in the sand.
>taking a flamewar where it doesn't belong. Keep it here Jet, I'm asking
>you as a reasonable person.
>
I already have and thanks for the advice. I'm not going to change my
values to get affirmation from the crowd but I can, at least try to
stay clear of the people who don't share them. Fair enough?
spo...@petitmorte.net
news:a6p0pp$nv9$0...@dosa.alt.net:
> In article <Xns91D0CD216BA05m...@64.154.60.171>,
> miscreant <as...@right.here> wrote:
>>karma police arrest jet for posting this in
>>alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
>>
>>> In article <Xns91D0B3F5FDA5Bm...@64.154.60.171>,
>>> miscreant <as...@right.here> wrote:
>>>>karma police arrest jet for posting this in
>>>>alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
>>>>
>>>>[support froups removed]
>>>>
>>>>> There have been -many-
>>>>> emotionally fragile people who spooge has dragged into
>>>>> alt.usenet.kooks with the sole intention of trying to break them.
>>>>
>>>>Please post proof of these allegations. With headers. TIA
>>>>
>>> Do it yourself. For a start, go look up what kookologists do.
>>>
>>
>>why should i do it myself? you're the one with the burden of proof,
>>since you stated he did it.
>>
> If you're unaware of several years of AUK reality, it isn't really my
> job to update you. If you have evidence he didn't do so, present it
> and I'll provide proof to the contrary. Your ignorance doesn't impose
> a burden of proof on me.
Typical of you, Jet. You made the false claim, now you prove it. I was
never one that "dragged" any kooks into AUK... unless you followed me
there, that is. Did you?
So, either you can prove what you've said, or this is another February 2001
thing. Which is it?
spo...@petitmorte.net
news:m3bsdrv...@pyrophore.ogoense.net:
> miscreant <as...@right.here> writes:
>
>>
>> So *you* alone are the "many" people that he dragged to auk? Do you
>> have MPD in addition to agoraphobia?
>
> Um, I don't know if spooge alone tried to drag me to auk, but he got
> extremely upset that I said all the auk'ers are kooks, some of them
> dom kooks, others sub kooks.
Oh, Rebecca... you know that wasn't the case at all. I asked you why you
snipped AUK from a post. You were hiding what you said about a reg from
AUK by posting just to alt.flame. And you know it. Then you made up some
creative crap, put it in quotation marks, and tried to use that as some
kind of 'flame'.
>> Oh, so crossposting unrelated threads to support newsgroups is ok?
>> Thanks for clearing that up.
>
> (Cough) Note that she didn't do it from paradoxa, where Iron Whim is
> the rule.
That's a good rule.
Russell B
wrote:
>In article <jq509u48mh6j1ejge...@4ax.com>, Russell B <mai...@here.not> wrote:
>>On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 00:58:55 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In article <67rv8u8pda3o54rsr...@4ax.com>, Russell B
>> <mai...@here.not> wrote:
>[...]
>>How could I not know? You keep bringing it up.
>>
>>Let it go, Jet.
>>
>Good advice and I'd probably be more inclined to listed to it, if it
>was coming from someone else.
If you won't listen to it from your friends (Ore), and you won't listen to
it from your enemies (me), from whom will you listen to it?
Let it go.
spo...@petitmorte.net
news:a6mvcj$5h3$0...@dosa.alt.net:
support groups snipped - I won't help *you* troll support groups.
> In article <Xns91CFC482322...@207.14.113.17>,
> "spo...@petitmorte.net" <spo...@petitmorte.net> wrote:
>>morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet) wrote in
>>news:a6k8p2$rbr$1...@paradoxa.ogoense.net:
> [...]
>>Jet, you lied, I stuffed it in your face. Deal with it kooky. You
>>read a little angry, Jet. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Take another pill, m'kay?
>>
> [...]
>>Sorry, Refresh. When you lie like a bad Persion Rug, I'll be there to
>>remind you. If you don't like it, find someplace else to flush your
>>delusional, brain damaged dreck. You are fucking nuts, "lady".
>>
> Okay, spunky, you've been using my agoraphobia as flame fodder for
> quite some time and urging me to commit suicide for nearly a year. I
> think it's time other people with similar emotional and psychological
> problems should hear about you.
You know, you're even crazier than I have given you credit for, Jet.
Trolling support groups to hide your humiliation is just pathetic.
I flame *you* about your mental deficiencies, Loon-Cakes. None of those
support groups have anything to do with you being shown up, yet again, for
posting bullshit. None of them are responsible for your inability to deal
with words on a screen. It's all your problem, Jet, nobody else's. You
wanted to be some flamer grrl, remember? Poor Jet. Poor, poor Jet.
> From now on, I'm going to crosspost all your insulting remarks, about
> losers who have to take meds to go outside and being "loony" because
> I take meds for SAD and panic disorder, to the appropriate groups and,
> maybe, other people will be moved to tell you what they think of
> someone like you.
Those insults are aimed at a deserving target, ie: *you*. Your willingness
to spread your personal humiliation/misery into unrelated groups is just
further proof of what I've been saying all along, Jet. You Are A Nut.
Crazy, loony, and fucked in the head = Jet/Refresh/Shadow.
I won't participate in that kind of fuckheaded stuff, Jet. You can whack
out all on your own. You're showing your true nature.
> I know you natter on about never trolling support or recovery groups
> but, you have no problem harassing people for being in recovery, so
> I'm sure you won't avoid the crossposts.
That is correct, I don't troll recovery groups, you idiot. I do indeed
flame *you*. There is a big difference, and if you had any grasp on
reality, if Usenet wasn't your entire life, you'd understand that.
You are one sad, silly, crazy loon, Jet. You are broken.
trippy
> [everything but the flonk removed]
> In article <MPG.16f9f40d8...@news.alt.net>, trippy
> <tri...@spam.sucks> wrote:
> >This dude, "jet" morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net, in message
> ><a6mvcj$5h3$0...@dosa.alt.net>, said the following tripped out things....
> >> In article <Xns91CFC482322...@207.14.113.17>,
> [...]
> >> I know you natter on about never trolling support or recovery groups but,
> >> you have no problem harassing people for being in recovery, so I'm sure
> >> you won't avoid the crossposts.
> >
> >I think that's a bad idea. The recovery froups have enough to deal with
> >without bringing some flamefest that has nothing to do with them on
> >their heads.
> >
> Yes, I know, which is why I stopped and admitted I over-reacted in
> anger.
No biggie. I've done it too.
>
> >Look Jet, let's talk reason a sec, k? They aren't flaming people with
> >emotional issues in general, they're flaming YOU. Just because their
> >flaming you with your condition, they aren't flaming everybody with your
> >condition. As far as flaming you with your issues goes, hey, it's a
> >flamefest, and you've openly admitted it. You should know that someone's
> >gonna use the info you put out about yourself. You're smart enough to
> >realize that.
> >
> That's true, but somehow my expectations are never low enough to encompass
> some behavior.
Then don't expect anything. You won't be dissapointed that way.
>
> >You're pissed at *them* so you're gonna put their caddish behavior on
> >display. The only problem is nobody's paying attention. I guess it'd be
> >
> Actually, more people are paying attention than I expected. :)
Fair enough.
>
> >different if you brought some of your buds from the recovery froup here
> >to stick up for you, but that's not what I'm seeing. I'm seeing you
> >
> No, it wouldn't make a difference. To me, it's no different that when
> a couple of people were joking about Tom dying. To other people, it
> really doesn't matter. Everyone has their own line in the sand.
>
> >taking a flamewar where it doesn't belong. Keep it here Jet, I'm asking
> >you as a reasonable person.
> >
> I already have and thanks for the advice. I'm not going to change my
> values to get affirmation from the crowd but I can, at least try to
> stay clear of the people who don't share them. Fair enough?
>
Cool.
Russell B
wrote:
>In article <02tv8uo6el8i1kslo...@4ax.com>, Russell B <mai...@here.not> wrote:
>>On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 00:46:29 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet)
>>wrote:
>[...]
>>You chose to insert yourself into a particularly bitter and destructive
>>flamewar, and as a consequence you were flamed. That's how it works. To
>>
>I beg your pardon? What flame war did I insert myself into?
The flamewar in which you remain to this day. Don't be coy with me; it's
very Kate-like and unseemly.
>>expect "better" from flamers than flaming is unreasonable, and to be
>>outraged about it is pointless and self-destructive.
>>
>Pointless, yes, self-destructive, no.
Self-destructive, yes.
Needless anger destroys people. It doesn't seem to be doing you much good.
Why must you keep soaking yourself in it? What about it is so hard for you
to give up?
>>Maybe his friends aren't as insulted as you imagine them to be. I don't
>>notice them making a big deal out of it, do you?
>>
>What does that have to do with my caring about their feelings?
If their feelings aren't particularly hurt by what Spooge says to you,
you're wasting your sympathy on them. You're also risking hurting their
feelings needlessly by calling their attention to comments that they might
never have otherwise noticed--believe it or not, the entire UseNet does not
anxiously await each new installment of Boyd's and your "Do post proof that
I'm not a raving obsesso, m'kay, Sweetpea?" circle jerk.
If I were one of your friends (insert wisecrack here ---> <---), frankly, I
would be a tad miffed by your insistence upon constantly waving my
"feelings" around like the bloody shirt of a labor martyr. Maybe they don't
think of themselves as victims of Spooge's mean words. Have you asked them
yet, or were you going to wait until after the smoke cleared?
>>>Retaliate.
>>
>>Not if he wanted to stop being angry, he wouldn't. Because that would lead
>>to more name-calling, and more anger, and more retaliation, until one day,
>>months down the road, he would find himself surrounded by people boggling
>>their eyes at him and saying things like, "Did he just threaten to crosspost
>>a bunch of insults to three different mental health support newsgroups?"
>>
>Why do I want to stop being angry?
Because in this case, it's neither enjoyable nor productive.
> There are times when it's enjoyable
>and productive. This isn't one of them, I admit.
What an excellent reason, then, to undertake to stop what's causing the
joyless and unproductive anger. Namely, the joyless and unproductive war.
>>So you're prolonging your tired-and-fed-uppitude by dwelling on a bunch of
>>trash-talking that you willingly subjected yourself to when you chose to be
>>a flamer--trash-talking that you could cause to evaporate with the flip of a
>>switch if you could just muster the willpower.
>>
>I've never considered confiding something in the flonk to be deliberately
>subjecting myself to flames.
Hence my use of the adverbial phrase "when you chose to be a flamer" to
modify "subjected [to]." You subjected yourself to flaming when you chose
to be a flamer.
There's no such thing as "confiding" something in the Flonk. It's a public
UseNet newsgroup. Anything you say there (to coin a phrase) can be used
against you; and if you present yourself to the world as a flamer, it will
be. If you can't handle that, you will never be a happy flamer--as indeed
you clearly are not.
>>>It's me here at the keyboard. I don't pretend to be some tower of
>>>non-emotional rationality. I don't want to be you or anyone else.
>>
>>Do you want the pain to stop? Stop the war.
>>
>Okay. :)
That's the spirit. Now, are you willing to walk the walk?
>>>Sorry, Russell. I'm not someone who compartmentalizes their life and never
>>>the twain shall meet. Usenet isn't a hobby, it's a way to communicate with
>>>people who are too physically distant to meet face to face.
>>
>><blink>
>>
>What? I don't separate usenet, email, telephone and face to face into
>segregated, untouching parts of my life. They aren't the same, but they
>connect. Usenet isn't a hobby, it's just one way I communicate.
And yet you expect others to separate the "vulnerable-you" in newsgroup A
from the "flamer-you" in newsgroup B. That's will never happen, and you
will never be happy here if you expect it to happen.
The elements of your persona that you bring to those two newsgroups are
inseparably connected. They aren't the same (to coin a phrase), but they
connect.
Flamers will flame you, flamer. If this troubles you to excess, you will
have to stop flaming. Trust me; they won't stop. Why should they?
>>>Strength is achieved through adversity.
>>
>>Ask anybody with a stress-related ulcer about strength through adversity.
>>Be sure to bring pudding.
>>
>Ulcers are cause by viruses. They're simply irritated by the hyper-
>acidity caused by stress. Milk aggravates ulcers by creating mucus
>that the stomach has trouble processing.
Ask anybody with a stress-related heart condition about strength through
adversity. Bring a defibrillator.
jet
03:15:38 GMT
> It rather surprises me that you, the flag bearer for exposing hypocrites,
> doesn't think there's anything amiss with someone who has made a mega-
> issue about not trolling in recovery groups having no problem with trying
> to damage someone's recovery.
>
> Or are you one of those people who believe that, if you reveal anything
> about yourself on usenet, you're fair game for any psychotic who wanders
> by. No, that can't be true. IIRC, you and your friends were very upset
> about someone flaming you because a relationship broke up.
So, why not flame him for it? If you think it's a fuckheaded thing to
do, tell him it's a fuckheaded thing to do. You can be as graphic as
you like. That's what people did to Krazy Kate when the incident you
refer to happened, and it worked better than getting very upset, too.
> Nevermind. I'm sure you'll find some justification. Maybe a broken
> relationship is the most important thing in the world, when it happens
> to (generic) you, and it's okay to wah wah about it. Or maybe you're
> just a shallow bitch who can't deal with other people having emotions,
> unless they're wrapped up in a pretentious bundle of "creativity" and
> "flonking". Trust me, girlfriend, you ain't no Dorothy Parker.
>
> Whatever. Affinity obviously has no connection to empathy.
Ah, yes; empathy. If you're so concerned about the flames, why are
crossposting them - comments you think are meant to "damage recovery",
no less - into a recovery group?
--
Ari <fun...@all.at>
jet
>On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 03:49:48 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet)
>wrote:
>
>>In article <02tv8uo6el8i1kslo...@4ax.com>, Russell B
> <mai...@here.not> wrote:
>>>On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 00:46:29 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet)
>>>wrote:
>>[...]
>>>You chose to insert yourself into a particularly bitter and destructive
>>>flamewar, and as a consequence you were flamed. That's how it works. To
>>>
>>I beg your pardon? What flame war did I insert myself into?
>
>The flamewar in which you remain to this day. Don't be coy with me; it's
>very Kate-like and unseemly.
>
information.
>>>expect "better" from flamers than flaming is unreasonable, and to be
>>>outraged about it is pointless and self-destructive.
>>>
>>Pointless, yes, self-destructive, no.
>
>Self-destructive, yes.
>
>Needless anger destroys people. It doesn't seem to be doing you much good.
>Why must you keep soaking yourself in it? What about it is so hard for you
>to give up?
>
I'm not -that- angry. After months, I finally got angry about one thing
and over-reacted. As far as I can remember, it's the second time I've
been angry about something on usenet. Trust me on this. Those meds that
spooge keeps harping on make it extremely difficult for me to even get
moderately huffy, much less angry. :) That's why I rather enjoy when
it happens. I was so angry at one of my usenet/email friends, last month,
that it was -liberating-.
>>>Maybe his friends aren't as insulted as you imagine them to be. I don't
>>>notice them making a big deal out of it, do you?
>>>
>>What does that have to do with my caring about their feelings?
>
>If their feelings aren't particularly hurt by what Spooge says to you,
>you're wasting your sympathy on them. You're also risking hurting their
>feelings needlessly by calling their attention to comments that they might
>never have otherwise noticed--believe it or not, the entire UseNet does not
>anxiously await each new installment of Boyd's and your "Do post proof that
>I'm not a raving obsesso, m'kay, Sweetpea?" circle jerk.
>
>If I were one of your friends (insert wisecrack here --->as if <---),
but it's was your choice before I'd ever heard of you.
frankly, I
>would be a tad miffed by your insistence upon constantly waving my
>"feelings" around like the bloody shirt of a labor martyr. Maybe they don't
>think of themselves as victims of Spooge's mean words. Have you asked them
>yet, or were you going to wait until after the smoke cleared?
>
Russell, you may think I'm stupid and obtuse, but I'm not.
>>>>Retaliate.
>>>
>>>Not if he wanted to stop being angry, he wouldn't. Because that would lead
>>>to more name-calling, and more anger, and more retaliation, until one day,
>>>months down the road, he would find himself surrounded by people boggling
>>>their eyes at him and saying things like, "Did he just threaten to crosspost
>>>a bunch of insults to three different mental health support newsgroups?"
>>>
>>Why do I want to stop being angry?
>
>Because in this case, it's neither enjoyable nor productive.
>
>> There are times when it's enjoyable
>>and productive. This isn't one of them, I admit.
>
>What an excellent reason, then, to undertake to stop what's causing the
>joyless and unproductive anger. Namely, the joyless and unproductive war.
>
So what would you suggest?
>>>So you're prolonging your tired-and-fed-uppitude by dwelling on a bunch of
>>>trash-talking that you willingly subjected yourself to when you chose to be
>>>a flamer--trash-talking that you could cause to evaporate with the flip of a
>>>switch if you could just muster the willpower.
>>>
>>I've never considered confiding something in the flonk to be deliberately
>>subjecting myself to flames.
>
>Hence my use of the adverbial phrase "when you chose to be a flamer" to
>modify "subjected [to]." You subjected yourself to flaming when you chose
>to be a flamer.
>
Didn't know that was something one chose.
>There's no such thing as "confiding" something in the Flonk. It's a public
>UseNet newsgroup. Anything you say there (to coin a phrase) can be used
>against you; and if you present yourself to the world as a flamer, it will
>be. If you can't handle that, you will never be a happy flamer--as indeed
>you clearly are not.
>
Would you be offended if I giggled at this point? Last time we had
a discussion, you informed me I wasn't a flamer and never would or
could be.
>>>>It's me here at the keyboard. I don't pretend to be some tower of
>>>>non-emotional rationality. I don't want to be you or anyone else.
>>>
>>>Do you want the pain to stop? Stop the war.
>>>
>>Okay. :)
>
>That's the spirit. Now, are you willing to walk the walk?
>
Sure, but it won't stop the noise. You know that.
>>>>Sorry, Russell. I'm not someone who compartmentalizes their life and never
>>>>the twain shall meet. Usenet isn't a hobby, it's a way to communicate with
>>>>people who are too physically distant to meet face to face.
>>>
>>><blink>
>>>
>>What? I don't separate usenet, email, telephone and face to face into
>>segregated, untouching parts of my life. They aren't the same, but they
>>connect. Usenet isn't a hobby, it's just one way I communicate.
>
>And yet you expect others to separate the "vulnerable-you" in newsgroup A
>from the "flamer-you" in newsgroup B. That's will never happen, and you
>will never be happy here if you expect it to happen.
>
I'd tell you a secret but this is a public newsgroup and someone might
see it.
>The elements of your persona that you bring to those two newsgroups are
>inseparably connected. They aren't the same (to coin a phrase), but they
>connect.
>
>Flamers will flame you, flamer. If this troubles you to excess, you will
>have to stop flaming. Trust me; they won't stop. Why should they?
>
I love flamers. I just go bonkers at people who repeat the same thing,
over and over, for months at a time. I mean, how many fag lames can
you read from Roger, until you want him dismembered? How many times can
you see spooge write 'm'kay' or 'sunshine', before you want to stuff him
in a sack and dump him in the nearest nuclear waste facility?
Do you know how many words there are in the English language? Why do some
people have to use the same ones in every post?
>>>>Strength is achieved through adversity.
>>>
>>>Ask anybody with a stress-related ulcer about strength through adversity.
>>>Be sure to bring pudding.
>>>
>>Ulcers are cause by viruses. They're simply irritated by the hyper-
>>acidity caused by stress. Milk aggravates ulcers by creating mucus
>>that the stomach has trouble processing.
>
>Ask anybody with a stress-related heart condition about strength through
>adversity. Bring a defibrillator.
>
Okay, that's better, though heart conditions are caused by structural
damage to the circulatory system, such as blockage, sclerosis or
cardio-vascular edema. Stress causes an increased load on an already
over-taxed heart.
jet
>jet <morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net> did this:
>
>> It rather surprises me that you, the flag bearer for exposing hypocrites,
>> doesn't think there's anything amiss with someone who has made a mega-
>> issue about not trolling in recovery groups having no problem with trying
>> to damage someone's recovery.
>>
>> Or are you one of those people who believe that, if you reveal anything
>> about yourself on usenet, you're fair game for any psychotic who wanders
>> by. No, that can't be true. IIRC, you and your friends were very upset
>> about someone flaming you because a relationship broke up.
>
>So, why not flame him for it? If you think it's a fuckheaded thing to
>do, tell him it's a fuckheaded thing to do. You can be as graphic as
>you like. That's what people did to Krazy Kate when the incident you
>refer to happened, and it worked better than getting very upset, too.
>
wall. He doesn't understand a thing you say and replies with one of
his flash card lames. I'm tempted to cut and paste his old posts to
answer his new ones. He'd never notice and it would be fun to watch
him say how stupid my responses are.
>> Nevermind. I'm sure you'll find some justification. Maybe a broken
>> relationship is the most important thing in the world, when it happens
>> to (generic) you, and it's okay to wah wah about it. Or maybe you're
>> just a shallow bitch who can't deal with other people having emotions,
>> unless they're wrapped up in a pretentious bundle of "creativity" and
>> "flonking". Trust me, girlfriend, you ain't no Dorothy Parker.
>>
>> Whatever. Affinity obviously has no connection to empathy.
>
>Ah, yes; empathy. If you're so concerned about the flames, why are
>crossposting them - comments you think are meant to "damage recovery",
>no less - into a recovery group?
>
Because, on very rare occasions, I don't think before I hit send.
Russell B
wrote:
>In article <rd809uonn2gofffe5...@4ax.com>, Russell B <mai...@here.not> wrote:
>>On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 03:49:48 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In article <02tv8uo6el8i1kslo...@4ax.com>, Russell B
>> <mai...@here.not> wrote:
>>>>On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 00:46:29 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet)
>>>>wrote:
>>>[...]
>>>>You chose to insert yourself into a particularly bitter and destructive
>>>>flamewar, and as a consequence you were flamed. That's how it works. To
>>>>
>>>I beg your pardon? What flame war did I insert myself into?
>>
>>The flamewar in which you remain to this day. Don't be coy with me; it's
>>very Kate-like and unseemly.
>>
>Actually, I have no idea what you're talking about. You may have incorrect
>information.
I suppose my newsreader could be lying to me, but I prefer not to think of
such things.
>>Needless anger destroys people. It doesn't seem to be doing you much good.
>>Why must you keep soaking yourself in it? What about it is so hard for you
>>to give up?
>>
>I'm not -that- angry. After months, I finally got angry about one thing
>and over-reacted. As far as I can remember, it's the second time I've
>been angry about something on usenet. Trust me on this. Those meds that
>spooge keeps harping on make it extremely difficult for me to even get
>moderately huffy, much less angry. :) That's why I rather enjoy when
>it happens. I was so angry at one of my usenet/email friends, last month,
>that it was -liberating-.
If you insist. May I say, though, that you're doing a bang-up impression of
somebody operating at a constant low level of irkdom--especially when you
confess to being "tired and fed up with everything."
>>If I were one of your friends (insert wisecrack here --->as if <---),
>but it's was your choice before I'd ever heard of you.
>
>frankly, I
>>would be a tad miffed by your insistence upon constantly waving my
>>"feelings" around like the bloody shirt of a labor martyr. Maybe they don't
>>think of themselves as victims of Spooge's mean words. Have you asked them
>>yet, or were you going to wait until after the smoke cleared?
>>
>Russell, you may think I'm stupid and obtuse, but I'm not.
OK, but have you asked Spooge's friends yet? Or were you going to wait
until after the smoke cleared?
>>>>Not if he wanted to stop being angry, he wouldn't. Because that would lead
>>>>to more name-calling, and more anger, and more retaliation, until one day,
>>>>months down the road, he would find himself surrounded by people boggling
>>>>their eyes at him and saying things like, "Did he just threaten to crosspost
>>>>a bunch of insults to three different mental health support newsgroups?"
>>>>
>>>Why do I want to stop being angry?
>>
>>Because in this case, it's neither enjoyable nor productive.
>>
>>> There are times when it's enjoyable
>>>and productive. This isn't one of them, I admit.
>>
>>What an excellent reason, then, to undertake to stop what's causing the
>>joyless and unproductive anger. Namely, the joyless and unproductive war.
>>
>So what would you suggest?
Stop participating in it. Straight up. I dare you.
>>>>So you're prolonging your tired-and-fed-uppitude by dwelling on a bunch of
>>>>trash-talking that you willingly subjected yourself to when you chose to be
>>>>a flamer--trash-talking that you could cause to evaporate with the flip of a
>>>>switch if you could just muster the willpower.
>>>>
>>>I've never considered confiding something in the flonk to be deliberately
>>>subjecting myself to flames.
>>
>>Hence my use of the adverbial phrase "when you chose to be a flamer" to
>>modify "subjected [to]." You subjected yourself to flaming when you chose
>>to be a flamer.
>>
>Didn't know that was something one chose.
Don't act obtuse. It's very Kate-like and unseemly.
Of course being a flamer is something one chooses. You made the volitional
decision to flame flamers in flame newsgroups, day after day after day. On
my planet we call that making a "choice." Contrast your behavior to that of
the thousands and thousands of UseNetizens who don't flame flamers in flame
newsgroups, day after day after day; you chose--that word again!--to go down
this path rather than that.
>>There's no such thing as "confiding" something in the Flonk. It's a public
>>UseNet newsgroup. Anything you say there (to coin a phrase) can be used
>>against you; and if you present yourself to the world as a flamer, it will
>>be. If you can't handle that, you will never be a happy flamer--as indeed
>>you clearly are not.
>>
>Would you be offended if I giggled at this point? Last time we had
>a discussion, you informed me I wasn't a flamer and never would or
>could be.
I was flaming you.
>>>>>It's me here at the keyboard. I don't pretend to be some tower of
>>>>>non-emotional rationality. I don't want to be you or anyone else.
>>>>
>>>>Do you want the pain to stop? Stop the war.
>>>>
>>>Okay. :)
>>
>>That's the spirit. Now, are you willing to walk the walk?
>>
>Sure, but it won't stop the noise. You know that.
So? Your unwillingness to let the noise go on without you is what got you
into this mess in the first place. You're empowered to walk the fuck away
from it, and let the people oppressed by Spooge's wisecracks--if indeed they
exist--fend for themselves.
>>>>>Sorry, Russell. I'm not someone who compartmentalizes their life and never
>>>>>the twain shall meet. Usenet isn't a hobby, it's a way to communicate with
>>>>>people who are too physically distant to meet face to face.
>>>>
>>>><blink>
>>>>
>>>What? I don't separate usenet, email, telephone and face to face into
>>>segregated, untouching parts of my life. They aren't the same, but they
>>>connect. Usenet isn't a hobby, it's just one way I communicate.
>>
>>And yet you expect others to separate the "vulnerable-you" in newsgroup A
>>from the "flamer-you" in newsgroup B. That's will never happen, and you
>>will never be happy here if you expect it to happen.
>>
>I'd tell you a secret but this is a public newsgroup and someone might
>see it.
Har har.
You should go back and reread that sentence, because it's important (but
pretend I proofread the fucking thing, please).
If you reject the compartmentalization of your meatspace, pen-and-paper, and
UseNet personae, you must be prepared to see what you say here come back and
bite you in the ass over there.
>>The elements of your persona that you bring to those two newsgroups are
>>inseparably connected. They aren't the same (to coin a phrase), but they
>>connect.
>>
>>Flamers will flame you, flamer. If this troubles you to excess, you will
>>have to stop flaming. Trust me; they won't stop. Why should they?
>>
>I love flamers. I just go bonkers
Easy, now. I don't want to have to defend any members of the
mentally-disturbed community from your insensitive wisecracks.
> at people who repeat the same thing,
>over and over, for months at a time. I mean, how many fag lames can
>you read from Roger, until you want him dismembered? How many times can
>you see spooge write 'm'kay' or 'sunshine', before you want to stuff him
>in a sack and dump him in the nearest nuclear waste facility?
>
>Do you know how many words there are in the English language? Why do some
>people have to use the same ones in every post?
<exasperated sigh>
Yes, yes; lame flamers bore me, too. The problem at hand, though, is not
the flamers who bore you but the flamers who anger you to the point of doing
foolish things that you later regret. They're not to blame for your anger.
You are.
You can stop handing them ammunition, you can equip yourself to flame them
back when they hit below the belt, or you can walk away from the whole
thing. What's it going to be?
Rebecca Ore
> karma police arrest Rebecca Ore for posting this in
> alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
>
> > miscreant <as...@right.here> writes:
> >
> >>
> >> That doesn't answer *how*.
> >>
> >
> >
> > I suggest reading "Flowers for Algernon."
> >
> >
> >
>
> I have, several times.
> Good book.
A person doesn't have to be retarded to be so desperate to fit in that
she will allow herself to be abused to have some human connections,
even malignant ones.
I don't think spooge needs to be singled out for what auk does,
though.
--
Rebecca Ore
Rebecca Ore
(Snips)
>
> Redundancy = trolling. It's the New UPA.
Why bite, though? And why single spooge out for auk's inherent
problems? Your friend Martin's done damage in his day. So have I,
for that matter, with Carlin.
--
Rebecca Ore
03:15:38 GMT
> Ari <fun...@all.at> wrote:
>>So, why not flame him for it? If you think it's a fuckheaded thing to
>>do, tell him it's a fuckheaded thing to do. You can be as graphic as
>>you like. That's what people did to Krazy Kate when the incident you
>>refer to happened, and it worked better than getting very upset, too.
>
> Have you ever tried to flame spooge? It's like nailing jello to a
> wall. He doesn't understand a thing you say and replies with one of
> his flash card lames. I'm tempted to cut and paste his old posts to
> answer his new ones. He'd never notice and it would be fun to watch
> him say how stupid my responses are.
If a) you think your flames aren't effective against him, b) you don't
care about the spectators, and c) you're not having fun yourself,
what's the point in continuing?
>>Ah, yes; empathy. If you're so concerned about the flames, why are
>>crossposting them - comments you think are meant to "damage recovery",
>>no less - into a recovery group?
>
> Because, on very rare occasions, I don't think before I hit send.
Seeing people admit it when they're wrong warms the cockles of my
little, frozen heart. Good job, jet.
--
Ari <fun...@all.at>
Rebecca Ore
> Rebecca Ore <reb...@pyrophore.ogoense.net> wrote in
> news:m3bsdrv...@pyrophore.ogoense.net:
>
> > miscreant <as...@right.here> writes:
> >
> >>
> >> So *you* alone are the "many" people that he dragged to auk? Do you
> >> have MPD in addition to agoraphobia?
> >
> > Um, I don't know if spooge alone tried to drag me to auk, but he got
> > extremely upset that I said all the auk'ers are kooks, some of them
> > dom kooks, others sub kooks.
>
> Oh, Rebecca... you know that wasn't the case at all. I asked you why you
> snipped AUK from a post. You were hiding what you said about a reg from
> AUK by posting just to alt.flame. And you know it. Then you made up some
> creative crap, put it in quotation marks, and tried to use that as some
> kind of 'flame'.
I've had people try to drag me to auk earlier, don't really care at
this point. My opinion of auk is that it's for people who like to
harrass emotionally unstable people who aren't willing to admit their
unstability even as they demonstrate it. This isn't a flame.
I also note that people tend to have a lot in common with the people
they've decided to pick on, in auk or out. People with IQs in the 120
and up range aren't the ones who mock the retarded.
--
Rebecca Ore
Rebecca Ore
> >
> Sure, but it won't stop the noise. You know that.
Nope, wrong. The noise may never completely stop, but it will die
down quite a lot if you stop feeding it, to the point where it's not a
problem unless you feed it.
Putting yourself in the company of people who won't stop replying
because the other side won't stop taunting -- come on.
--
Rebecca Ore
jet
>On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 07:28:59 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet)
>wrote:
>
>>In article <rd809uonn2gofffe5...@4ax.com>, Russell B
> <mai...@here.not> wrote:
>>>On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 03:49:48 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <02tv8uo6el8i1kslo...@4ax.com>, Russell B
>>> <mai...@here.not> wrote:
>>>>>On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 00:46:29 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet)
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>[...]
>>>>>You chose to insert yourself into a particularly bitter and destructive
>>>>>flamewar, and as a consequence you were flamed. That's how it works. To
>>>>>
>>>>I beg your pardon? What flame war did I insert myself into?
>>>
>>>The flamewar in which you remain to this day. Don't be coy with me; it's
>>>very Kate-like and unseemly.
>>>
>>Actually, I have no idea what you're talking about. You may have incorrect
>>information.
>
>I suppose my newsreader could be lying to me, but I prefer not to think of
>such things.
>
on. Period. If you're referring to the DB6 flamewar, I didn't join it,
it joined me.
>>>Needless anger destroys people. It doesn't seem to be doing you much good.
>>>Why must you keep soaking yourself in it? What about it is so hard for you
>>>to give up?
>>>
>>I'm not -that- angry. After months, I finally got angry about one thing
>>and over-reacted. As far as I can remember, it's the second time I've
>>been angry about something on usenet. Trust me on this. Those meds that
>>spooge keeps harping on make it extremely difficult for me to even get
>>moderately huffy, much less angry. :) That's why I rather enjoy when
>>it happens. I was so angry at one of my usenet/email friends, last month,
>>that it was -liberating-.
>
>If you insist. May I say, though, that you're doing a bang-up impression of
>somebody operating at a constant low level of irkdom--especially when you
>confess to being "tired and fed up with everything."
>
That isn't constant, it just started last weekend, for perfectly good
reason that isn't any of your business. Nothing to do with usenet, to
be honest.
>>>If I were one of your friends (insert wisecrack here --->as if <---),
>>but it's was your choice before I'd ever heard of you.
>>
>>frankly, I
>>>would be a tad miffed by your insistence upon constantly waving my
>>>"feelings" around like the bloody shirt of a labor martyr. Maybe they don't
>>>think of themselves as victims of Spooge's mean words. Have you asked them
>>>yet, or were you going to wait until after the smoke cleared?
>>>
>>Russell, you may think I'm stupid and obtuse, but I'm not.
>
>OK, but have you asked Spooge's friends yet?
>
Why would I ask spooge's friends?
Or were you going to wait
>until after the smoke cleared?
>
Since this issue started quite some time ago, it wasn't necessary to ask
them. None of them -need- my protection.
>>>>>Not if he wanted to stop being angry, he wouldn't. Because that would lead
>>>>>to more name-calling, and more anger, and more retaliation, until one day,
>>>>>months down the road, he would find himself surrounded by people boggling
>>>>>their eyes at him and saying things like, "Did he just threaten to
> crosspost
>>>>>a bunch of insults to three different mental health support newsgroups?"
>>>>>
>>>>Why do I want to stop being angry?
>>>
>>>Because in this case, it's neither enjoyable nor productive.
>>>
>>>> There are times when it's enjoyable
>>>>and productive. This isn't one of them, I admit.
>>>
>>>What an excellent reason, then, to undertake to stop what's causing the
>>>joyless and unproductive anger. Namely, the joyless and unproductive war.
>>>
>>So what would you suggest?
>
>Stop participating in it. Straight up. I dare you.
>
You don't need to dare me.
>>>>>So you're prolonging your tired-and-fed-uppitude by dwelling on a bunch of
>>>>>trash-talking that you willingly subjected yourself to when you chose to be
>>>>>a flamer--trash-talking that you could cause to evaporate with the flip of
> a
>>>>>switch if you could just muster the willpower.
>>>>>
>>>>I've never considered confiding something in the flonk to be deliberately
>>>>subjecting myself to flames.
>>>
>>>Hence my use of the adverbial phrase "when you chose to be a flamer" to
>>>modify "subjected [to]." You subjected yourself to flaming when you chose
>>>to be a flamer.
>>>
>>Didn't know that was something one chose.
>
>Don't act obtuse. It's very Kate-like and unseemly.
>
>Of course being a flamer is something one chooses. You made the volitional
>decision to flame flamers in flame newsgroups, day after day after day. On
>
I did no such thing.
>my planet we call that making a "choice." Contrast your behavior to that of
>the thousands and thousands of UseNetizens who don't flame flamers in flame
>newsgroups, day after day after day; you chose--that word again!--to go down
>this path rather than that.
>
I never made that particular choice.
>>>There's no such thing as "confiding" something in the Flonk. It's a public
>>>UseNet newsgroup. Anything you say there (to coin a phrase) can be used
>>>against you; and if you present yourself to the world as a flamer, it will
>>>be. If you can't handle that, you will never be a happy flamer--as indeed
>>>you clearly are not.
>>>
>>Would you be offended if I giggled at this point? Last time we had
>>a discussion, you informed me I wasn't a flamer and never would or
>>could be.
>
>I was flaming you.
>
Sorry. I'm easily amused by little things. I'll revert to my serious face.
There.
>>>>>>It's me here at the keyboard. I don't pretend to be some tower of
>>>>>>non-emotional rationality. I don't want to be you or anyone else.
>>>>>
>>>>>Do you want the pain to stop? Stop the war.
>>>>>
>>>>Okay. :)
>>>
>>>That's the spirit. Now, are you willing to walk the walk?
>>>
>>Sure, but it won't stop the noise. You know that.
>
>So? Your unwillingness to let the noise go on without you is what got you
>into this mess in the first place. You're empowered to walk the fuck away
>from it, and let the people oppressed by Spooge's wisecracks--if indeed they
>exist--fend for themselves.
>
If, as you say, I've chosen to be a flamer, wouldn't that be a violation
of flamer etiquette? I'm willing to ignore certain people entirely, but
protocol must be observed.
>>>>>>Sorry, Russell. I'm not someone who compartmentalizes their life and never
>>>>>>the twain shall meet. Usenet isn't a hobby, it's a way to communicate with
>>>>>>people who are too physically distant to meet face to face.
>>>>>
>>>>><blink>
>>>>>
>>>>What? I don't separate usenet, email, telephone and face to face into
>>>>segregated, untouching parts of my life. They aren't the same, but they
>>>>connect. Usenet isn't a hobby, it's just one way I communicate.
>>>
>>>And yet you expect others to separate the "vulnerable-you" in newsgroup A
>>>from the "flamer-you" in newsgroup B. That's will never happen, and you
>>>will never be happy here if you expect it to happen.
>>>
>>I'd tell you a secret but this is a public newsgroup and someone might
>>see it.
>
>Har har.
>
>You should go back and reread that sentence, because it's important (but
>pretend I proofread the fucking thing, please).
>
I meant that literally. I'd tell you something about your statement but,
I don't want to have to explain it to the satisfaction of a half dozen
other people.
>If you reject the compartmentalization of your meatspace, pen-and-paper, and
>UseNet personae, you must be prepared to see what you say here come back and
>bite you in the ass over there.
>
Of course, and it's just other's good fortune that I won't use similar
things against them, or do you suggest I should?
>>>The elements of your persona that you bring to those two newsgroups are
>>>inseparably connected. They aren't the same (to coin a phrase), but they
>>>connect.
>>>
>>>Flamers will flame you, flamer. If this troubles you to excess, you will
>>>have to stop flaming. Trust me; they won't stop. Why should they?
>>>
>>I love flamers. I just go bonkers
>
>Easy, now. I don't want to have to defend any members of the
>mentally-disturbed community from your insensitive wisecracks.
>
Bonkers is pc, this year.
>> at people who repeat the same thing,
>>over and over, for months at a time. I mean, how many fag lames can
>>you read from Roger, until you want him dismembered? How many times can
>>you see spooge write 'm'kay' or 'sunshine', before you want to stuff him
>>in a sack and dump him in the nearest nuclear waste facility?
>>
>>Do you know how many words there are in the English language? Why do some
>>people have to use the same ones in every post?
>
><exasperated sigh>
>
>Yes, yes; lame flamers bore me, too. The problem at hand, though, is not
>the flamers who bore you but the flamers who anger you to the point of doing
>foolish things that you later regret. They're not to blame for your anger.
>You are.
>
Generally they're the same people. Bore me at your peril.
>You can stop handing them ammunition, you can equip yourself to flame them
>back when they hit below the belt, or you can walk away from the whole
>thing. What's it going to be?
>
A little of each, according to each individual. Spooge is negligible
and it's more fun to -not- answer him.
paint it black
@In article <lutv8ucit6er1h2l4...@4ax.com>, Jelliebun <bunni...@shaw.ca> wrote:
@>Optional Identity <Troll4U...@meow.org> wrote:
@>
@>>On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 19:06:39 +0000, according to the old (pre-meow)
@>>calendar. The troll paint it black <spo...@moew.org> attempted to push
@>>back the boundaries of post-contemporary UPA, by poasting this, their
@>>latest creation, in alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk
@>>
@>>>On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 18:21:02 GMT, Ąmhm...@iname.com! (WeeSaul) wrote:
@>>>
@>>>@morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet) had a seizure and out popped:
@>>>@
@>>>@>In article <b38a981b.02031...@posting.google.com>,
@> bubbl...@hotmail.com (bubbles)
@>>>wrote:
@>>>@>>morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet) wrote in message
@>>>@>> news:<a6mvcj$5h3$0...@dosa.alt.net>...
@>>>@>>> In article <Xns91CFC482322...@207.14.113.17>,
@>>>@>>> "spo...@petitmorte.net" <spo...@petitmorte.net> wrote:
@>>>@>>> >morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet) wrote in
@>>>@>>> >news:a6k8p2$rbr$1...@paradoxa.ogoense.net:
@>>>@>>> [...]
@>>>@>>> >Jet, you lied, I stuffed it in your face. Deal with it kooky. You
@> read a
@>>>@>>> >little angry, Jet. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Take another pill, m'kay?
@>>>@>>> >
@>>>@>>> [...]
@>>>@>>> >Sorry, Refresh. When you lie like a bad Persion Rug, I'll be there to
@>>>@>>> >remind you. If you don't like it, find someplace else to flush your
@>>>@>>> >delusional, brain damaged dreck. You are fucking nuts, "lady".
@>>>@>>> >
@>>>@>>> Okay, spunky, you've been using my angoraphobia...
@>>>@>>
@>>>@>>(Fear of sweaters.)
@>>>@>>
@>>>@>(Fear of bunnies with big, sharp, pointy teeth.}
@>>>@
@>>>@(Fear of people who rap class rings in yarn.)
@>>>
@>>>(Fear of cascades that don't last very long)
@>>
@>>(fear of being the last person to psot in a cascade)
@>
@>(fear of being made to look like a sheep by following the crowd)
@>
@(fear of goats with knitting needles)
(fear of flames with not heat, on a cold winters day)
@>Jelliebun
@>mhm20x20
@>baa
--
rocky
mhm x v i x i i i
woof
paint it black
@I was so angry at one of my usenet/email friends, last month,
@that it was -liberating-.
Did you burn your bra?
WeeSaul
(fear of flying to California dreaming)
--
-Dulce et decorum est Pro patria mori-
WeeSaul mhm15x5
http://www.angelfire.com/pa/anticrust/
http://www.usaor.net/users/weesaul/
http://www.angelfire.com/pa/anticrust/icecream.html
-Simple ideas from simple folk(TM)-
-Idle thoughts from idle minds(TM)-
-Quia ursus pusilli ingenii sum verba difficilia fastidio-
Optional Identity
calendar. The troll Dowap <do...@petitmorte.net> attempted to push
back the boundaries of post-contemporary UPA, by poasting this, their
>In article <a6oveq$omh$1...@paradoxa.ogoense.net>, jet
><morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net> wrote:
>
>> In article <130320022021154097%do...@petitmorte.net>, Dowap
>> <do...@petitmorte.net> wrote:
>> >In article <a6oqlr$8um$1...@paradoxa.ogoense.net>, jet
>> ><morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> In article <130320021859390328%do...@petitmorte.net>, Dowap
>> >> <do...@petitmorte.net> wrote:
>> >> >In article <a6mvcj$5h3$0...@dosa.alt.net>, jet
>> >> ><morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> In article <Xns91CFC482322...@207.14.113.17>,
>> >> >> "spo...@petitmorte.net" <spo...@petitmorte.net> wrote:
>> >> >> >morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet) wrote in
>> >> >> >news:a6k8p2$rbr$1...@paradoxa.ogoense.net:
>> >> >> [...]
>> >> >> >Jet, you lied, I stuffed it in your face. Deal with it kooky. You
>> >> >> >read
>> >> >> >a
>> >> >> >little angry, Jet. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Take another pill, m'kay?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> [...]
>> >> >> >Sorry, Refresh. When you lie like a bad Persion Rug, I'll be there to
>> >> >> >remind you. If you don't like it, find someplace else to flush your
>> >> >> >delusional, brain damaged dreck. You are fucking nuts, "lady".
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> Okay, spunky, you've been using my agoraphobia as flame fodder for quite
>> >> >> some time and urging me to commit suicide for nearly a year. I think
>> >> >> it's
>> >> >> time other people with similar emotional and psychological problems
>> >> >> should
>> >> >> hear about you.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> From now on, I'm going to crosspost all your insulting remarks, about
>> >> >> losers who have to take meds to go outside and being "loony" because
>> >> >> I take meds for SAD and panic disorder, to the appropriate groups and,
>> >> >> maybe, other people will be moved to tell you what they think of
>> >> >> someone
>> >> >> like you.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I know you natter on about never trolling support or recovery groups
>> >> >> but,
>> >> >> you have no problem harassing people for being in recovery, so I'm sure
>> >> >> you won't avoid the crossposts.
>> >> >
>> >> >So, it is only bad if you say so. Okie dokey.
>> >> >
>> >> How did you come to that conclusion? I've -always- supported Formosa's
>> >> Rule and I'm not the only one who does.
>> >>
>> >> Don't you think it is
>> >> >kind of hypocritical to be complaining about something in a "flame"
>> >> >
>> >> alt.flame was already in the group line and I didn't notice it. I took
>> >> it out in all followups, except this one, where I removed the support
>> >> groups.
>> >>
>> >> >group? What did you say about AHM. You don't want people to post about
>> >> >it then don't give out the information or post in a group that will use
>> >> >it to flame you. Sound familiar??
>> >> >
>> >> Uh huh. Do you consider the flonk to be a group where people flame each
>> >> other for disabilities or problems? Oops, scratch that. There are newbies
>> >> there, now, that do just that.
>> >>
>> >> >Run along Jet, you try to take a moral stand *only* when it betters
>> >> >your position.
>> >> >
>> >> That's such nonsense, dowap. When have I -ever- supported bashing the
>> >> mentally ill for entertainment?
>> >
>> >That is *not* what I am accusing you of.
>> >
>> You're accusing me of everything you think might stick. I'm not sure why
>> you're so concerned about what I do but, do what you must.
>
>OK Jet here is what I am going to do to try and help you out. When I
>say "twist" it is my opinion (however I believe others will concur)
>that yo have just taken something that is staightforward and twisted it
>around to make it look like someone is trying to berrate you.
>
>
>twist
>
>>
>> >> I've actually taken some very unpopular
>> >> public stands against it. (fex Wollmann)
>> >>
>> >> >To those that read this in the 'support' groups, my apologies. As I
>> >> >normally wouldn't cross-post to you, our friend Jet would try and
>> >> >accuse me of doing something under handed if I snipped out your group.
>> >> >
>> >> I've -never- accused someone of that. Quite the opposite.
>> >
>> >Didn't want to deal with the question "Why did you snekk the groups?"
>> >
>> So, instead, you lied about what I would do. You see, I've never asked
>> that, either.
>
>
>twist
>
>>
>> >> >If you will notice she has in the groups, alt.flame and
>> >> >alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk, known troll/flame groups. In fact
>> >> >
>> >> The flonk is not a troll/flame group and the majority of regs there have
>> >> dealt with just the problems that spooge is ridiculing. That's why I
>> >> brought this up, in the first place. Duh.
>> >
>> >By bringing it over to a "support" group /is/ trolling. If someone is
>> >
>> Maybe, maybe not. I think the bigotry towards people with emotional
>> problems is on topic.
>>
>> >busting on you about your mental problem (whether right or wrong) but
>> >is not cross-posting it to the "support" group then except for you what
>> >harm is being done to the "other" people? Maybe I'm seeing it from a
>> >different angle, but the impression I have gotten from these posts is
>> >that he is directing it at you and only you. I do see your argument
>> >that it is a "slap" to all those that suffer but "those" people haven't
>> >brought it up in alt.flame. I mean let's use what you said but just
>> >change a couple of words, "What did you expect when you posted that in
>> >alt.flame?"
>> >
>> I didn't put it in alt.flame and,
>
>How am I supposed to know this?
>
>> at times, the flonk is one of the best
>> support groups anyone could wish for.
>>
>> >Now, if we want to discuss the concept of whether anyone should be
>> >flamed for that we could. However you seem to change using an existing
>> >situation for an example into someone whining about what happend.
>> >>
>> >> See above about alt.flame.
>> >>
>> >> >Jet claims to be a troll. Any future response to this thread (should it
>> >> >occur) from myself will include the appropriate group removal.
>> >> >
>> >> Ah, here it comes. If one is a troll, everything they do is trolling. I
>> >> didn't think your were -that- much of an ignorant jackass.
>> >
>> >It's in your sig.
>> >
>> What's in my sig? That everything I say is a troll?
>
>Twist
>
>>
>> You added groups and the groups you added would most
>> >likely respond. Sort of like posting a pro smoking article to a smokers
>> >group and adding a lung cancer group. What you did /is/ the text book
>> >definition of a troll.
>> >
>> I sincerely wanted their opinion of someone who feels a flame war is
>> justification for saying -anything- rather than admit he's mistaken.
>
>Sorta of like two wrongs don't make a right or just because you post
>doesn't mean you should be targeted for outing?
>
>
>> I believe that stable people have mental brakes that keep them from
>> crossing certain lines.
>
>I could zing you on that one Jet, it would have been funny.
>
>>
>> >You know if there was a group alt.hypocrisy I would of cross-posted to
>> >it. :->
>> >
>> If you weren't so hell-bent on convincing yourself that I think and write
>> things that I don't, you'd realize that I'm generally consistant about the
>> beliefs I express.
>
>Twist
>
>Did anyone else see the colondashgreaterthansign besides me?
I did, and I thought it was an amusing comment, but then I was
horrified to think that there isn't an alt.hypocrisy. I think there
should be, so then if one felt it was appropriate threads that contain
hypocrisy could be x-posted there.
miscreant
I simply asked for proof of an accusation, nothing more. I condoned
*nothing*.
Jelliebun
(fear of Wheel of Fortune contestants)
Jelliebun
mhm20x20
quaking
--
__
/ /\
.---/ /\ |
/ /o 0\ \|
/ /\ ^ / - meow
/ / / \_
\ |/\\ //\}
\|\ v_v /
"" ""
Optional Identity
calendar. The troll morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet) attempted to
push back the boundaries of post-contemporary UPA, by poasting this,
their latest creation, in alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk
>In article <Xns91D0B3F5FDA5Bm...@64.154.60.171>, miscreant <as...@right.here> wrote:
>>karma police arrest jet for posting this in
>>alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
>>
>>[support froups removed]
>>
>>> There have been -many-
>>> emotionally fragile people who spooge has dragged into alt.usenet.kooks
>>> with the sole intention of trying to break them.
>>
>>Please post proof of these allegations. With headers. TIA
>>
>Do it yourself. For a start, go look up what kookologists do.
Jet, honey. You have dragged *me* into auk with the "sole intention"
of trying to break *me*, in the past. You have done the same thing to
Kate, and others numerous times. You have even stated in posts where
you have added auk to the headers, that this is what you were doing.
You call yourself a meower, a troll and a flamer, and you hang in UPA
"troll/flame" groups. You even pick fights with known "troll/flamers"
and add alt.flame and whatever "troll/flame" groups you think will aid
your cause, whatever your cause is. How can you justify suddenly
seeking refuge in your status as a recovering mentally ill person,
when you insist on trolling flamers with your mental illness?
In fact Jet, honey, let's have a look at what your cause is, shall we?
Many people seem to think that you added the support groups to this
thread at its inception in order to garner support for you in the
endless flame wars you involve yourself in. I don't think you are dumb
enough to think that would work, I think you were hoping Spooge would
flame you some more without snecking the froup line, so you could turn
about and call him a hypocrite. I can't think of any other reason for
your suddenly adding support groups to your cross-posts. After all you
are a well know supporter of "ethical trolling", and state quite
regularly that you *never* troll in support groups. You maintain, of
course, that you added those groups to warn them of the allegedly evil
Spooge, so they wouldn't be a victim of his alleged evil trolling of
support groups and/or people who desire support for mental illnesses.
Do you not realise just how transparent and lame an action this is?
The thing is Jet, honey, Spooge assiduously avoids trolling in support
groups, or at least he has for the last two years or so, since I have
been posting in the UPA "flame/troll" groups. You offered the
information on your mental illnesses in auk, ahm, af and the flonk
while you continued to goad Spooge and others into flaming you. You
have been around long enough to know full well what result this would
be much more than just likely to have. Now you want to complain about
it happening? You have lost the current "battle" over your mental
illnesses, in your endless flame wars with various people who post in
the UPA "flamer/troll" groups, and now you compound your loss by
behaving irrationally. For the sake of what's left of your sanity,
Jet, honey, please stop!
Why don't you take Russell's advice and take a break? At least from
flaming? You already, finally, decided to agree with him after 47,000
replies (hyperbole), and agreed to drop the whole thing.
I suspect no-one will think the less of you for letting it all go, on
the contrary. No-one wants the "Jet Wars" to fill the void left by the
current lull in hostilities in the "Kate Wars". Why do you find it so
hard to just graciously accept defeat? You *have* lost, after all.
It's all part of growing up and being a flamer Jet, honey (yes, yes I
*do* realise growing up *and* being a flamer is an oxymoron). Chalk
this one up to experience and stop trying to goad Spooge, or whoever
else into flaming you some more. Flogging this dead horse isn't going
to bring it back to life, just move on. Being the center of negative
attention isn't as much fun as you initially thought it would be, is
it? Can you post without needing to be flamed rather than be ignored?
You might start to enjoy posting again. You might even find that
posting *does* allow you to communicate more than simple antagonism to
others. You might find posting suddenly aids your recovery rather than
hinders it, if you stick to the flonking for a bit and leave the
flaming out until your sense of perspective returns, who knows?
You could give it a try, just to see, couldn't you? Do you realise
just how much you and Kate have in common?
JTTH, honestly.
OpI
Optional Identity
calendar. The troll miscreant <as...@right.here> attempted to push
back the boundaries of post-contemporary UPA, by poasting this, their
latest creation, in alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk
>karma police arrest Rebecca Ore for posting this in
>alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
>
>> miscreant <as...@right.here> writes:
>>
>>>
>>> That doesn't answer *how*.
>>>
>>
>>
>> I suggest reading "Flowers for Algernon."
>>
>>
>>
>
>I have, several times.
>Good book.
Who wrote it? What is it about?
Optional Identity
calendar. The troll miscreant <as...@right.here> attempted to push
back the boundaries of post-contemporary UPA, by poasting this, their
latest creation, in alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk
>karma police arrest jet for posting this in
>alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk:
>
>> It's possible, of course, that she's had him killfiled for 2 or
>> 3 years,
>
>Considering I've only been on Usenet for a year and a half, that'd be
>pretty impossible.
I thought you were an oldbie when I first saw one of your posts, about
18 mths ago. How did you get into Usenet?
Rebecca Ore
Amazon probably has it -- I want to say Daniel Keyes and the thing you
want to read is the novella length verision. It's about a EMR
(educatable mentally retarded) guy who is given a neurological
treatment which sends his IQ up to the hyper-genius level. He keeps a
journal throughout the processes. The guy who wrote it taught EMR
classes if I'm remembering correctly.
There's also a novel version, and a movie called _Charly_ was based on
the book/novella.
--
Rebecca Ore
jet
alt.binaries.multimedia.flonk. Subject: For OpI
May take a bit to show up, since newscene is slow.
Optional Identity
calendar. The troll morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet) attempted to
push back the boundaries of post-contemporary UPA, by poasting this,
their latest creation, in alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk
>In article <t8f09u8gs1gc9dn62...@4ax.com>, Russell B <mai...@here.not> wrote:
>>On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 03:54:26 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In article <jq509u48mh6j1ejge...@4ax.com>, Russell B
>> <mai...@here.not> wrote:
>>>>On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 00:58:55 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net (jet)
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>In article <67rv8u8pda3o54rsr...@4ax.com>, Russell B
>>>> <mai...@here.not> wrote:
>>>[...]
>>>>How could I not know? You keep bringing it up.
>>>>
>>>>Let it go, Jet.
>>>>
>>>Good advice and I'd probably be more inclined to listed to it, if it
>>>was coming from someone else.
>>
>>If you won't listen to it from your friends (Ore), and you won't listen to
>>it from your enemies (me), from whom will you listen to it?
>>
>>Let it go.
>>
>I'm trying, but I'm not the one who needs to let go, at this point.
You are the one facing impending complete psychological melt down,
however.
Rebecca Ore
OI, just let it go, yourself. The melodrama over this is sufficient
for a 6 inch layer over three 16x4 community garden planting beds.
--
Rebecca Ore