Re: Ping: Snit

[Shadow]

On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 13:20:25 +0100, David_B <Dav...@nomail.afraid.org>
wrote:

>><slight snit of APD's conclusion that SC is NOT the bot-master>
>><Original discussion re-instated>

>On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 12:07:03 +0000 (UTC), Gilly <planeto...@mail.com> wrote:

>>> SC saw the bot had a wrap issue from the comment Ahlstrom made and
>>> knowing you also had one (albeit only on reading), took the opportunity
>>> to poke you with a stick or make a prediction you'd fix it after you'd
>>> fixed the AZ. Sure enough, the bot got fixed but I don't know if you
>>> fixed your reading problem. It only suggests to me that the bot runner
>>> (which in his mind is you) took notice and fixed it or it might have
>>> been complete coincidence. If SC was running the bot why would he even
>>> mention it?
>
>>Precisely.

+1.
>>Snit has always failed the "what's more likely than not" test for as long
>>as I can remember. He fails this basic sniff test because he truly
>>believes that people are as stupid as he needs them to be. It's just the
>>way that snit is wired.

Or "un-wired". He's probably feeling the effects of drug
withdrawal this week. Welfare only buys a 3 week supply.
>>
>>As far as the bot is concerned the biggest question is why would Carroll
>>use his real name, which is not "Carroll", in so many derogatory posts,
>>especially at the inception of the bot? Surely this is causing grief for
>>Carroll and his family members as it typically is very high in Google
>>rankings.

Obviously. snit tries to Glugle seed even when he's not using
the bot.
>>
>>This alone makes no logical sense at all and in fact the Google seeding
>>of this and other personal information is one huge, glaring example of
>>why Carroll is not the person behind the bot.
>>
>>As far as snit's warped reasoning that Carroll is playing victim and just
>>wants attention is a ludicrous excuse as well because both of them are
>>receiving inordinate amounts of attention in this and other groups and
>>most people would never drag family members into their business. This is
>>solidified by the fact that Carroll's real name has been used 1000's of
>>times by the bot and some quite derogatory, personal information has been
>>posted by the bot.

True.
>>
>>And this is only one example of snit failing the "what's more likely than
>>not" test.
>>There are many, many others.
>>
>>Add them all up and you have your bot owner.

Pretty logical to me.

>
>And just where have YOU just sprung from 'Gilly'?

This is Usenet. Why does it matter? More important is what he
has to say(which you maliciously snitted), not who he is. If you wish
to make this a sane discussion, bring up each point he made and point
out any inconsistencies.
You also snitted Apd's comments. After all he's done to try to
help you! Rude.
>
>Might I be forgiven for deducing that you are really a sock of Mr Carroll?

You're posting drunk, so OK, I'll forgive your mistake, but
not the posting while under the influence or the rudeness.
>
>I appreciate folk being honest and true here in ACW.

And yet you snit their "honest and true" replies?
You imagine "your rules" don't apply to you because you're the
"moderator"?
Drink less. And confabulate less.
BD's favorite groups re-instated. He always misses the posts
to acw. Fixed.

-------------------------------------
BD: I want people to "get to know me better. I have nothing to
hide".
I'm always here to help, this page was put up at BD's request,
rather, he said "Do it *NOW*!":

<https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php>

66 confirmed #FAKE_NYMS, most used in cybercrimes!
Google "David Brooks Devon"
[]'s



--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012