Ping Sharon: Re: Rebecca "More Power!" Ore <was Re: Lookie what I found crawling out of the woodwork <was Re: [BOB] - Phase 2 of the Invasion...>>

[little toad]

In article <3b072941$0$12281$45be...@newscene.com>, jet says...
>In article <9e6vak$ci0$1...@dimpledchad.databasix.com>, "Sadistic Emperor Agente da la Cabala, Numero Uno of AHM, the DataBasix War Machine" <specia...@hell-flame-wars.org> wrote:
>>"jet" <morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net> wrote in message
>>news:3b06ee0d$0$41613$45be...@newscene.com...
>>> In article <9e6p27$rih$1...@astroconsulting.databasix.com>, "Sadistic Emperor
>>Agente da la Cabala, Numero Uno of AHM, the DataBasix War Machine"
>><specia...@hell-flame-wars.org> wrote:
>>> >"Unit" <headl...@hushmail.com> wrote in message
>>> >news:9e4jl3$7bt$1...@dimpledchad.databasix.com...
>>> >> On Fri, 18 May 2001 19:39:26 -0500, "little toad"
>>> >> <littl...@this.is.invalid> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> >"jet" <morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net> wrote in message
>>> >> >news:9dsvr3$aj0$1...@dosa.alt.net...
>>> >> >> In article <9dstl6$498$1...@flonk.databasix.com>, Delete Me
>>> >> ><dele...@databasix.com> wrote:
>>> >> >> >On Wed, 16 May 2001 02:08:45 GMT, morr...@pyrophore.ogoense.net
>>(jet)
>>> >> >> >wrote:
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> ><snips>
>>> >> >> >>Sharon, -this- is the kind of hysterics Rebecca was referring to.
>>Did
>>> >> >> >>you see a post where she said Gregs post wasn't about her? I
>>didn't.
>>> >> >> >>If you can point it out to me, I'll be grateful.
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >I don't suppose a message-id would be of help to you?
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >Message-ID: <m3k83i5...@pyrophore.ogoense.net>
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >Granted, she didn't answer the question, she just said "Read it
>>again"
>>> >> >> >which makes one assume she is denying that the post might apply to
>>> >her.
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> So, you're admitting she didn't say it. She didn't even -imply- that
>>> >> >> it wasn't about her.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >you seem not to grok context.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> Did it ever occir to you that the part she wanted you
>>> >> >> to read again was the part where he said he'd read the thread and
>>> >didn't
>>> >> >> understand what everyone was all wound up about? She -admitted- that
>>> >> >> she name drops and is trying to stop. Got that?
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> She Did Not Deny It Was About Her.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Is that perfectly clear, or are you going to keep repeating it Garys
>>> >> >> bullshit lies, over and over, until you believe them?
>>> >> >
>>> >> >teh apostrophe is your friend.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> >>Gary is on another rampage and he'll say -anything-. I think
>>you're
>>> >> >> >>discerning enough to read my and her posts, without filtering them
>>> >> >> >>through Garys neurosis. Go back and verify and you'll see exactly
>>> >> >> >>what he's doing. Just don't -ever- confront him about it. I'd like
>>> >> >> >>you to see the truth but, it isn't worth you being harassed.
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >I like this paragraph? May I rewrite it? ==>
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> I've read Garys posts since before I knew Rebecca.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >who do you think cares?
>>> >> >
>>> >> >do you think that people don't recognize your agenda/mission?
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> He shows all
>>> >> >> the signs of a complete psychotic break.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >i doubt that you have the intellectual acumen to make this
>>> >> >medical diagnosis.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> ><rewrite>
>>> >> >> >Rebecca is on another rampage and she'll say -anything-. I think
>>> >you're
>>> >> >> >discerning enough to read my and his posts, without filtering them
>>> >> >> >through Rebecca's neurosis. Go back and verify and you'll see
>>exactly
>>> >> >> >what she's doing. Just don't -ever- confront her about it. I'd like
>>> >> >> >you to see the truth but, it isn't worth you being harassed.
>>> >> >> ></rewrite>
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> Shut Up.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >why do you feel a need to censor voices?
>>> >>
>>> >> This, for me, is the Big Question.
>>> >
>>> >Maybe someone's trying to sell an agenda? Time and the usenet archive
>>will
>>> >tell....
>>> >
>>> If you think telling someone to shut up is censorship, I hope you
>>> never encounter the real thing.
>>
>>We'll see, jet. I certainly hope my suspicions are wrong. And go re-read my
>>previous post. You telling people to shut up isn't censorship (although it
>>does sound a bit desperate on your part), so don't even begin to hope that
>>I'd start yelling "censorship" at merely that. I'm talking about something
>>else, a much more sinister and darker purpose.
>>
>Uh huh. Sure you were.
>
>>> I expect that kind of specious
>>> remark from some people but I had higher hopes for you. Oh, well,
>>> life is full of disappointment, sometimes.
>>
>>I highly doubt you had "higher hopes" for me, jet. That kind of specious
>>remark is what I've come to expect from certain people.
>>
>Truthfully, I did. I hadn't considered you one of the lameass
>troll wannabes who natters on just to make noise. Maybe it was
>your former abuse fighter role that confused me.

are you a foo fighter or a tie fighter?

--

little toad