How sweet it is...
Kadaitcha Man
In article <XAUWb.1831$_g....@twister.socal.rr.com>,
tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
> Classic invective, as expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
robot with no logical thought process.
Dan
In article <1pWWb.2127$_g....@twister.socal.rr.com>,
tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
> expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
robot with no logical thought process.
Dan
In article <RqWWb.2128$_g.2...@twister.socal.rr.com>,
tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with foul language,
> as expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
robot with no logical thought process.
Dan
In article <zzWWb.2130$_g.1...@twister.socal.rr.com>,
tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
> Another classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
robot with no logical thought process.
Dan
In article <1pWWb.2127$_g....@twister.socal.rr.com>,
tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
> expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
robot with no logical thought process.
Dan
In article <ADUWb.1832$_g....@twister.socal.rr.com>,
tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
> You're erroneously presupposing that what Kadaitcha Man says is
> necessarily the truth, Hills.
Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
robot with no logical thought process.
Dan
In article <XAUWb.1831$_g....@twister.socal.rr.com>,
tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
> You're still erroneously presupposing the existence of some "TholenBot",
> Dan. Rather ironic, coming from someone who has reposted the same old
> unsubstantiated and erroneous claim multiple times.
You're still erroneously presupposing that I am erroneously
presupposing. Rather ironic, coming from someone who has reposted the
same old unsubstantiated and erroneous claim multiple times.
Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
robot with no logical thought process.
Dan
--
Your Free Insult: Thou trisecting, stalking, habitual undertaker visioning puffball.
Kaiser Bun
LOL
tho...@antispam.ham
> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>> .. to be an idiot. Two idiots dancing the light fandango:
>> I wrote:
>>> Classic invective, as expected from someone who lacks a logical
>>> argument.
>> Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
>> robot with no logical thought process.
>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
>>> expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
>> Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
>> robot with no logical thought process.
>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with foul
>>> language, as expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
>> Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
>> robot with no logical thought process.
>>> Another classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>> Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
>> robot with no logical thought process.
>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
>>> expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
>> Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
>> robot with no logical thought process.
>>> You're erroneously presupposing that what Kadaitcha Man says is
>>> necessarily the truth, Hills.
>> Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
>> robot with no logical thought process.
>>> You're still erroneously presupposing the existence of some
>>> "TholenBot", Dan. Rather ironic, coming from someone who has
>>> reposted the same old unsubstantiated and erroneous claim multiple
>>> times.
>> You're still erroneously presupposing that I am erroneously
>> presupposing. Rather ironic, coming from someone who has reposted
>> the same old unsubstantiated and erroneous claim multiple times.
>> Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
>> robot with no logical thought process.
> LOL
What does your amusement have to do with OS/2, Bun?
tho...@antispam.ham
> ... to be an idiot.
First-hand experience, eh Kadaitcha?
> Two idiots dancing the light fandango:
Illogical, given that USENET is not a visual medium, Kadaitcha.
> I wrote:
>> Classic invective, as expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
> Classic TholenBot response,
You're also erroneously presupposing the existence of some "Tholenbot",
Kadaitcha.
> laced with paranoia,
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
> as expected from a robot with no logical thought process.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
> Dan
Why are you signing with "Dan", Kadaitcha?
>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
>> expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
> Classic TholenBot response,
You're also erroneously presupposing the existence of some "Tholenbot",
Kadaitcha.
> laced with paranoia,
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
> as expected from a robot with no logical thought process.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
> Dan
Why are you signing with "Dan", Kadaitcha?
>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with foul language,
>> as expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
> Classic TholenBot response,
You're also erroneously presupposing the existence of some "Tholenbot",
Kadaitcha.
> laced with paranoia,
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
> as expected from a robot with no logical thought process.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
> Dan
Why are you signing with "Dan", Kadaitcha?
>> Another classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
> Classic TholenBot response,
You're also erroneously presupposing the existence of some "Tholenbot",
Kadaitcha.
> laced with paranoia,
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
> as expected from a robot with no logical thought process.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
> Dan
Why are you signing with "Dan", Kadaitcha?
>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
>> expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
> Classic TholenBot response,
You're also erroneously presupposing the existence of some "Tholenbot",
Kadaitcha.
> laced with paranoia,
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
> as expected from a robot with no logical thought process.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
> Dan
Why are you signing with "Dan", Kadaitcha?
>> You're erroneously presupposing that what Kadaitcha Man says is
>> necessarily the truth, Hills.
> Classic TholenBot response,
You're also erroneously presupposing the existence of some "Tholenbot",
Kadaitcha.
> laced with paranoia,
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
> as expected from a robot with no logical thought process.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
> Dan
Why are you signing with "Dan", Kadaitcha?
>> You're still erroneously presupposing the existence of some "TholenBot",
>> Dan. Rather ironic, coming from someone who has reposted the same old
>> unsubstantiated and erroneous claim multiple times.
> You're still erroneously presupposing that I am erroneously
> presupposing.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
> Rather ironic, coming from someone who has reposted the
> same old unsubstantiated and erroneous claim multiple times.
You're erroneously presupposing that I've posted any unsubstantiated and
erroneous claims, Kadaitcha.
> Classic TholenBot response,
You're also erroneously presupposing the existence of some "Tholenbot",
Kadaitcha.
> laced with paranoia,
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
> as expected from a robot with no logical thought process.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
> Dan
Why are you signing with "Dan", Kadaitcha?
Nena Sadad
In a short time you have been coerced, cajoled, prodded with the
stick of psychology and now reduced to 'hesitation', 'repetition' and
'mimicry'.
Regretably for you, you have lost, although you were marvelous
entertainment while you lasted. You may now breathe easy again.
--
tho...@antispam.ham
>> Kadaitcha Man writes:
>> First-hand experience, eh Kadaitcha?
>>> I wrote:
>>> Classic TholenBot response,
>>> laced with paranoia,
>>> Dan
>>> Classic TholenBot response,
>>> laced with paranoia,
>>> Dan
>>> Classic TholenBot response,
>>> laced with paranoia,
>>> Dan
>>> Classic TholenBot response,
>>> laced with paranoia,
>>> Dan
>>> Classic TholenBot response,
>>> laced with paranoia,
>>> Dan
>>> Classic TholenBot response,
>>> laced with paranoia,
>>> Dan
>>> Classic TholenBot response,
>>> laced with paranoia,
>>> Dan
What does your entertainment have to do with OS/2, Sadad?
> You may now breathe easy again.
Non sequitur.
Dan
<S9x57V9C0qgyB46E...@readersemporium.com/.net/.org>,
"Kadaitcha Man" <nos...@rainx.cjb.net> wrote:
> .. to be an idiot. Two idiots dancing the light fandango:
>
> In article <XAUWb.1831$_g....@twister.socal.rr.com>,
> tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
>
>
> > Classic invective, as expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
>
>
> Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
> robot with no logical thought process.
Classic Kadaitcha Man response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
Dan
tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
>Non sequitur.
Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
robot with no logical thought process.
Dan
Judas
LOL
LOL
You're priceless! Worthless, but a laugh a minute.
<aside: what an impotent fuck.>
--
"Trust me"
Kaiser Bun
Why did you repost the entire content with your reply if you
feel it is so disruptive?
Greig Bushr
A bot, even.
--
Edwin
"Dan" <m...@here.net> wrote in message
news:me-D5E23B.07...@28-74.newscene.com...
Typical erroneous and unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, where is your
logical argument? Why, nowhere to be seen!
Edwin
tho...@antispam.ham
>> Kaiser Bun writes:
>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>>>> I wrote:
>>> LOL
> LOL
> LOL
What does your repeated amusement have to do with OS/2, Judas?
> You're priceless!
Difficult to put a price tag on human life, but what does that have to
do with OS/2, Judas?
> Worthless, but a laugh a minute.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
> <aside: what an impotent fuck.>
Such foul lanugage.
tho...@antispam.ham
>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>>>> I wrote:
>>> LOL
I see that you didn't answer my question, Bun. No surprise there,
really.
tho...@antispam.ham
> Judas wrote:
>> I wrote:
>>> Kaiser Bun writes:
>>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>>>>> I wrote:
>>>> LOL
> A bot, even.
What does your pontification have to do with OS/2, Bushr?
tho...@antispam.ham
> Dan wrote:
>> I wrote:
>>> Non sequitur.
>> Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
>> robot with no logical thought process.
> Typical erroneous and unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, where is your
> logical argument? Why, nowhere to be seen!
What does that have to do with OS/2, Edwin?
Edwin
<tho...@antispam.ham> wrote in message
news:NnaXb.2487$_g....@twister.socal.rr.com...
Enlightenment comes from within, Grasshopper.
Edwin
Mark Gary
appeared, at Fri, 13 Feb 2004 20:23:24 GMT and said the following:
> Greig Bushr writes:
>
[snip]
>
> What does your pontification have to do with OS/2, Bushr?
>
You do appear to be a bot, there appears to be no doubt about it. But I may be
wrong. However, you have accused almost everyone of going Off Topic, which is true,
but I have yet to see you do any on topic discusion yourself.
So, if I may for a moment, bring this thread to an "On Topic" discusion, and give
you a chance to advocate a little OS/2 to me, and to the general readership at large.
Now let me tell you what I know about OS/2. A big fat zero. I saw it installed
on someones PC once, about 6 years ago, and thats about it. My background
is definately Microsoft Windows based, with a little Unix and VMS thrown in
for good measure. At home, I run exclusively Linux.
So, in a nutshell, I am interested in knowing all I can about OS/2 in
its modern form. does IBM still sell it. Is it any better than
the offering sold by Microcrud. What is the hardware support like,
and, more to the point, where the hell can I get a copy of it from, and
how much would I be expected to pay for it.
--
Mark Gary
System Powered by Gentoo Linux 1.4
Registered Linux User #329755 - http://counter.li.org
email me at : uk.co.demon.mwgary.nospam@mark (reverse and remove nospam)
tho...@antispam.ham
>>> Dan wrote:
>>>> I wrote:
>>>>> Non sequitur.
>>>> Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
>>>> robot with no logical thought process.
>>> Typical erroneous and unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, where is your
>>> logical argument? Why, nowhere to be seen!
>> What does that have to do with OS/2, Edwin?
> Enlightenment comes from within, Grasshopper.
Irrelevant, given that I didn't request enlightenment, Edwin.
tho...@antispam.ham
>> Greig Bushr writes:
> [snip]
>> What does your pontification have to do with OS/2, Bushr?
> You do appear to be a bot,
What appears to you is irrelevant, Gary.
> there appears to be no doubt about it.
What appears to you is irrelevant, Gary.
> But I may be wrong.
I know that you are wrong, Gary.
> However, you have accused almost everyone of going Off Topic,
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
> which is true,
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
> but I have yet to see you do any on topic discusion yourself.
Asking someone what their posting has to do with OS/2 is on topic for
an OS/2 newsgroup, Gary.
> So, if I may for a moment, bring this thread to an "On Topic" discusion, and give
> you a chance to advocate a little OS/2 to me, and to the general readership at large.
Then what was all the text above for, Gary?
> Now let me tell you what I know about OS/2. A big fat zero. I saw it installed
> on someones PC once, about 6 years ago, and thats about it. My background
> is definately Microsoft Windows based, with a little Unix and VMS thrown in
> for good measure. At home, I run exclusively Linux.
>
> So, in a nutshell, I am interested in knowing all I can about OS/2 in
> its modern form.
Unfortunately, I don't have enough time to tell you everything about
OS/2 in its modern form. You'll have to be more specific, Gary.
> does IBM still sell it.
Yes.
> Is it any better than the offering sold by Microcrud.
Define "better".
> What is the hardware support like,
Adequate.
> and, more to the point, where the hell can I get a copy of it from,
Try IBM, or Serenity Systems for their OS/2 derviative, eComStation.
> and how much would I be expected to pay for it.
I haven't priced it recently.
Mark Gary
> Mark Gary writes:
>
>>> Greig Bushr writes:
>
>> [snip]
>
>>> What does your pontification have to do with OS/2, Bushr?
>
>> You do appear to be a bot,
>
> What appears to you is irrelevant, Gary.
>
>> there appears to be no doubt about it.
>
> What appears to you is irrelevant, Gary.
>
>> But I may be wrong.
>
> I know that you are wrong, Gary.
>
>> However, you have accused almost everyone of going Off Topic,
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
>> which is true,
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
True = that I have noticed most topic here on this group appears
"OT", but i've only been here a week, so have not had the time
to read everything.
>> but I have yet to see you do any on topic discusion yourself.
>
> Asking someone what their posting has to do with OS/2 is on topic for
> an OS/2 newsgroup, Gary.
That is True. I've done it myself, many times, on another advocacy group.
>
>> So, if I may for a moment, bring this thread to an "On Topic" discusion, and give
>> you a chance to advocate a little OS/2 to me, and to the general readership at large.
>
> Then what was all the text above for, Gary?
>
Your style is short, and to the point. Mine is long and round the houses.
I've always been like that, and always will.
>> Now let me tell you what I know about OS/2. A big fat zero. I saw it installed
>> on someones PC once, about 6 years ago, and thats about it. My background
>> is definately Microsoft Windows based, with a little Unix and VMS thrown in
>> for good measure. At home, I run exclusively Linux.
>>
>> So, in a nutshell, I am interested in knowing all I can about OS/2 in
>> its modern form.
>
> Unfortunately, I don't have enough time to tell you everything about
> OS/2 in its modern form. You'll have to be more specific, Gary.
OK, point taken. I will come up with something better, after giving
it some thought.
>> does IBM still sell it.
>
> Yes.
>
>> Is it any better than the offering sold by Microcrud.
>
> Define "better".
>
>> What is the hardware support like,
>
> Adequate.
>
>> and, more to the point, where the hell can I get a copy of it from,
>
> Try IBM, or Serenity Systems for their OS/2 derviative, eComStation.
>
>> and how much would I be expected to pay for it.
>
> I haven't priced it recently.
>
Hmmm. Well, I only came to this group initially to watch Kadaitcha at play.
But my interest is now quite piqued on OS/2. So I'm going to go away,
do some research, perhaps try it out, if I can get a copy of it, and
who knows, I may be back here one day, as an advocacy myself.
Kaiser Bun
I figured you were just being rhetorical and pretending to be a moron
because you had reposted the entire message in your reply. It seems
you were not pretending.
Marty
> Enlightenment comes from within, Grasshopper.
It's also distributed with various flavors of Linux, Edwin.
Marty
> Hmmm. Well, I only came to this group initially to watch Kadaitcha at play.
> But my interest is now quite piqued on OS/2. So I'm going to go away,
> do some research, perhaps try it out, if I can get a copy of it, and
> who knows, I may be back here one day, as an advocacy myself.
Check out http://www.ecomstation.org for more information.
This web site is run by Serenity Systems, a company which sells a
distribution of OS/2 known as eComStation. IBM also still supports
OS/2, but finding out how to purchase through them is difficult and not
at my fingertips.
This website also contains some news snippets from the OS/2 "community"
as a whole. You'll probably notice prominent mentions of Scitech, Odin,
and Innotek.
Scitech produces cross-platform video drivers that work very nicely on
OS/2 for many (dare I say, most) modern video hardware.
Odin is a translation layer and loader patch for OS/2 that allows us to
run some Win32 software as if they were OS/2 native applications. Some
examples of programs that have run are: Quake 2, Fallout 2, Heroes of
Might and Magic 3, a hoard of command line programs, Acrobat
Reader/Distiller, and many others. This is unlike Wine on Linux because
these applications are not running through an emulation layer. They are
translated into native OS/2 applications at runtime.
Innotek is a company which has released many key ports of applications
to OS/2. They have ported Flash, Sun Java, and Acrobat so far. They
are also working with the OS/2 Mozilla team to enable anti-aliased fonts
in OS/2.
The premier OS/2 freeware software archive is here for your browsing
pleasure:
http://hobbes.nmsu.edu
Hopefully others will fill in some gaps. Any questions, just ask.
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>> Greig Bushr writes:
>>> [snip]
>>>> What does your pontification have to do with OS/2, Bushr?
>>> You do appear to be a bot,
>> What appears to you is irrelevant, Gary.
>>> there appears to be no doubt about it.
>> What appears to you is irrelevant, Gary.
>>> But I may be wrong.
>> I know that you are wrong, Gary.
>>> However, you have accused almost everyone of going Off Topic,
>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>>> which is true,
>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
> True = that I have noticed most topic here on this group appears
> "OT", but i've only been here a week, so have not had the time
> to read everything.
What you have noticed is irrelevant, Gary. What is relevant is
your unsubstantiated and erroneous claim that I have accused almost
everyone of going off topic, Gary.
>>> but I have yet to see you do any on topic discusion yourself.
>> Asking someone what their posting has to do with OS/2 is on topic for
>> an OS/2 newsgroup, Gary.
> That is True. I've done it myself, many times, on another advocacy group.
Ironic that you should come here and start posting about something other
than OS/2, Gary.
>>> So, if I may for a moment, bring this thread to an "On Topic" discusion, and give
>>> you a chance to advocate a little OS/2 to me, and to the general readership at large.
>> Then what was all the text above for, Gary?
> Your style is short, and to the point. Mine is long and round the houses.
> I've always been like that, and always will.
Is that supposed to be some sort of rationalization for posting off-topic
material to this newsgroup, Gary?
>>> Now let me tell you what I know about OS/2. A big fat zero. I saw it installed
>>> on someones PC once, about 6 years ago, and thats about it. My background
>>> is definately Microsoft Windows based, with a little Unix and VMS thrown in
>>> for good measure. At home, I run exclusively Linux.
>>>
>>> So, in a nutshell, I am interested in knowing all I can about OS/2 in
>>> its modern form.
>> Unfortunately, I don't have enough time to tell you everything about
>> OS/2 in its modern form. You'll have to be more specific, Gary.
> OK, point taken. I will come up with something better, after giving
> it some thought.
Good.
>>> does IBM still sell it.
>> Yes.
>>> Is it any better than the offering sold by Microcrud.
>> Define "better".
Note: no response.
>>> What is the hardware support like,
>> Adequate.
>>> and, more to the point, where the hell can I get a copy of it from,
>> Try IBM, or Serenity Systems for their OS/2 derviative, eComStation.
>>> and how much would I be expected to pay for it.
>> I haven't priced it recently.
> Hmmm. Well, I only came to this group initially to watch Kadaitcha at play.
Watching Kadaitcha play has nothing to do with OS/2, Gary.
> But my interest is now quite piqued on OS/2. So I'm going to go away,
> do some research, perhaps try it out, if I can get a copy of it, and
> who knows, I may be back here one day, as an advocacy myself.
Or maybe not.
Bob St.John
> Mark Gary wrote:
>
>> Hmmm. Well, I only came to this group initially to watch Kadaitcha at
>> play.
>> But my interest is now quite piqued on OS/2. So I'm going to go away,
>> do some research, perhaps try it out, if I can get a copy of it, and
>> who knows, I may be back here one day, as an advocacy myself.
>
>
> Check out http://www.ecomstation.org for more information.
>
> This web site is run by Serenity Systems,
Correction .. http://www.ecomstation.com is run by Serenity Systems.
There are several ecomstation or "ecs" sites which are run by other
organizations and individuals. ecomstation.org is not officially
associated with Serenity Sytems or eComStation. It is essentially an
advocacy site.
Regards,
Bob St.John
Serenity Systems International
Edwin
Edwin
> Edwin wrote:
> > Enlightenment comes from within, Grasshopper.
>
> It's also distributed with various flavors of Linux, Edwin.
Posting for entertainment purposes again, Marty (little boy)? How typical.
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>>> Dan wrote:
>>>>>> I wrote:
>>>>>>> Non sequitur.
>>>>>> Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
>>>>>> robot with no logical thought process.
>>>>> Typical erroneous and unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, where is your
>>>>> logical argument? Why, nowhere to be seen!
>>>> What does that have to do with OS/2, Edwin?
>>> Enlightenment comes from within, Grasshopper.
>> Irrelevant, given that I didn't request enlightenment, Edwin.
> Incorrect.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
Marty
Classic Timbol-esque response. I see you have ignored the other ways to
gain Enlightenment. Figures.
I wonder what Jim (little boy) Stuyck would say about your misattribution.
Elizabot
What does that have to do with Mac Advocacy, Tholen?
tho...@antispam.ham
>> Edwin writes:
>>>>>>> Dan wrote:
>>>>>>>> I wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Non sequitur.
>>> Incorrect.
Ask the person who chose the cross-posting, Elizabot.
Elizabot
I am, Tholen.
tho...@antispam.ham
Elizabot
So you deny choosing to cross-post to csma.
Curious.
Edwin
Typical erroneous and unsubstantiated claim.
> because you had reposted the entire message in your reply.
Irrelevant.
> It seems you were not pretending.
Prove it, if you think you can.
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>>>> Edwin writes:
>>>>>>>>>>> Dan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Non sequitur.
>>>>>>> Incorrect.
>>> I am, Tholen.
I deny choosing the newsgroup distribution, Elizabot.
> Curious.
What is allegedly curious about the truth, Elizabot?
Marty
Balderdash, Thorne. Kaiser Bun has already established that he figured
you were being rhetorical and pretending to be a moron. Haven't you
been paying attention?
>>because you had reposted the entire message in your reply.
>
> Irrelevant.
On the contrary, it is quite relevant given that it is evidence of
posting in a moronic fashion.
>>It seems you were not pretending.
>
> Prove it, if you think you can.
Unnecessary, Thorne. What "seems" to him is irrelevant. You'd know
that if you weren't suffering from reading comprehension problems.
TehGhodTrole
[snip Marty on the subject of his posts]
> On the contrary, it is quite relevant given that it is evidence of
> posting in a moronic fashion.
I agree with your poast.
--
TehGhodTrole: Trolling, for God's sake.
Your Free Insult: Jesus loves you.
Marty
> Marty wrote:
>
> [snip Marty on the subject of his posts]
Still having vision problems or is this further evidence of your reading
comprehension problems?
> I agree with your toast.
Let's all raise our glasses to TehGhodTrole... May all trolls be as
ineffective and unintelligible as he strives to be. He's lowered the
bar for all of us.
<polite applause>
TehGhodTrole
> S
*yawn*
*plonk*
Judas
Delusional. He spnaked you! Go hide now.
--
"Trust me"
Kaiser Bun
> Kaiser Bun wrote:
>> tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
[snip]
You're 4 days late responding to this post. Here's a load
of old posts just waiting for your useless input:
Have fun.
Elizabot
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>>>>>> Edwin writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Non sequitur.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> robot with no logical thought process.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Typical erroneous and unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, where is your
>>>>>>>>>>>>> logical argument? Why, nowhere to be seen!
>>>>>>>>>>>> What does that have to do with OS/2, Edwin?
>>>>>>>>>>> Enlightenment comes from within, Grasshopper.
>>>>>>>>>> Irrelevant, given that I didn't request enlightenment, Edwin.
>>>>>>>>> Incorrect.
>>>>>>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>>>>>>> What does that have to do with Mac Advocacy, Tholen?
>>>>>> Ask the person who chose the cross-posting, Elizabot.
>>>>> I am, Tholen.
>>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>>> So you deny choosing to cross-post to csma.
>> I deny choosing the newsgroup distribution, Elizabot.
> What does that have to do with Mac Advocacy, Tholen?
You should know, Elizabot, given that you asked me that question in
a Mac advocacy newsgroup.
>>> Curious.
>> What is allegedly curious about the truth, Elizabot?
> What does that have to do with Mac Advocacy, Tholen?
You should know, Elizabot, given that you made the statement in
a Mac advocacy newsgroup.
Dan
tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
> You should know, Elizabot, given that you asked me that question in
> a Mac advocacy newsgroup.
You're erroneously presupposing the existence of some "Elizabot",
TholenBot.
Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a bot.
Larry Chauvet,
The OS/2 Guy
tho...@antispam.ham
>> You should know, Elizabot, given that you asked me that question in
>> a Mac advocacy newsgroup.
> You're erroneously presupposing the existence of some "Elizabot",
Incorrect, given the attribution line, Dan. Suffering from reading
comprehension problems?
> TholenBot.
You're erroneously presupposing the existence of some "TholenBot", Dan.
> Classic TholenBot response,
You're still erroneously presupposing the existence of some "TholenBot",
Dan.
> laced with paranoia,
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
> as expected from a bot.
You're erroneously presupposing that I'm a "bot", Dan.
> Larry Chauvet,
> The OS/2 Guy
Odd that the attribution line says you're "Dan", Dan. Classic
schizophrenia.
While you're posting in this thread, Dan, why don't you just come out
and admit that you're the one who added the Mac advocacy newsgroup to
the distribution? Afraid to come clean, Dan?
Edwin
Prove it, if you think you can.
Edwin
> Edwin wrote:
> > Marty <unspe...@this.time> wrote in message news:<402d5d69$1...@news.cadence.com>...
> >
> >>Edwin wrote:
> >>
> >>>Enlightenment comes from within, Grasshopper.
> >>
> >>It's also distributed with various flavors of Linux, Edwin.
> >
> > Posting for entertainment purposes again, Marty (little boy)? How typical.
>
> Classic Timbol-esque response.
Classic invective, laced with irony.
> I see you have ignored the other ways to gain Enlightenment.
You erroneously presuppose the existencce of Enlightenment.
> Figures.
Illogical.
> I wonder what Jim (little boy) Stuyck would say about your misattribution.
Are you taking a stroll down irrevelency lane again, Marty? How typical.
Elizabot
> Elizabot writes:
>
>
>>>>>>>>>Edwin writes:
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Dan wrote:
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I wrote:
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Non sequitur.
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>robot with no logical thought process.
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Typical erroneous and unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, where is your
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>logical argument? Why, nowhere to be seen!
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>What does that have to do with OS/2, Edwin?
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Enlightenment comes from within, Grasshopper.
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>Irrelevant, given that I didn't request enlightenment, Edwin.
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>Incorrect.
>
>
>>>>>>>>>Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
>
>>>>>>>>What does that have to do with Mac Advocacy, Tholen?
>
>
>>>>>>>Ask the person who chose the cross-posting, Elizabot.
>
>
>>>>>>I am, Tholen.
>
>
>>>>>Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
>
>>>>So you deny choosing to cross-post to csma.
>
>
>>>I deny choosing the newsgroup distribution, Elizabot.
>
>
>>What does that have to do with Mac Advocacy, Tholen?
>
>
> You should know, Elizabot, given that you asked me that question in
> a Mac advocacy newsgroup.
I see that you didn't answer my question, Tholen. No surprise there,
really.
>
>>>>Curious.
>
>
>>>What is allegedly curious about the truth, Elizabot?
>
>
>>What does that have to do with Mac Advocacy, Tholen?
>
>
> You should know, Elizabot, given that you made the statement in
> a Mac advocacy newsgroup.
I see that you didn't answer my question, Tholen. No surprise there,
really.
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>>>>> Dan wrote:
>>>>>>>> I wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Non sequitur.
>>>>>>>> Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a
>>>>>>>> robot with no logical thought process.
>>>>>>> Typical erroneous and unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, where is your
>>>>>>> logical argument? Why, nowhere to be seen!
>>>>>> What does that have to do with OS/2, Edwin?
>>>>> Enlightenment comes from within, Grasshopper.
>>>> Irrelevant, given that I didn't request enlightenment, Edwin.
>>> Incorrect.
>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
> Prove it, if you think you can.
Simple: note the absence of any substantiation from you, Edwin.
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>>>>>>>> Edwin writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Non sequitur.
>>>>>>>>>>> Incorrect.
>>>>>>> I am, Tholen.
Unnecessary, given that you should already know the answer, Elizabot.
>>>>> Curious.
>>>> What is allegedly curious about the truth, Elizabot?
>>> What does that have to do with Mac Advocacy, Tholen?
>> You should know, Elizabot, given that you made the statement in
>> a Mac advocacy newsgroup.
> I see that you didn't answer my question, Tholen. No surprise there,
> really.
Unnecessary, given that you should already know the answer, Elizabot.
The OS/2 Guy
tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
> While you're posting in this thread, Dan, why don't you just come out
> and admit that you're the one who added the Mac advocacy newsgroup to
> the distribution? Afraid to come clean, Dan?
No, I'm not afraid of you or anyone else here. Yes, I added Mac
advocacy to a couple of threads that Kadaitcha Man was in, hoping that
He/She/It would go there.
You got a problem with that?
Elizabot
I see you fail to substantiate your claim, Tholen.
>
>>>>>>Curious.
>
>
>>>>>What is allegedly curious about the truth, Elizabot?
>
>
>>>>What does that have to do with Mac Advocacy, Tholen?
>
>
>>>You should know, Elizabot, given that you made the statement in
>>>a Mac advocacy newsgroup.
>
>
>>I see that you didn't answer my question, Tholen. No surprise there,
>>really.
>
>
> Unnecessary, given that you should already know the answer, Elizabot.
I see you fail to substantiate your claim, Tholen.
tho...@antispam.ham
>> While you're posting in this thread, Dan, why don't you just come out
>> and admit that you're the one who added the Mac advocacy newsgroup to
>> the distribution? Afraid to come clean, Dan?
> No, I'm not afraid of you or anyone else here.
Non sequitur, given that I wasn't talking about fear of someone, Guy.
Rather, I was talking about fear of the truth. Suffering from reading
comprehension problems, Guy?
> Yes, I added Mac advocacy to a couple of threads that Kadaitcha Man
> was in, hoping that He/She/It would go there.
What has that got to do with me, Guy?
> You got a problem with that?
Elizabot does, Guy.
tho...@antispam.ham
Elizabot
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
Elizabot
Incorrect.
>
>>>>>>>>Curious.
>
>
>>>>>>>What is allegedly curious about the truth, Elizabot?
>
>
>>>>>>What does that have to do with Mac Advocacy, Tholen?
>
>
>>>>>You should know, Elizabot, given that you made the statement in
>>>>>a Mac advocacy newsgroup.
>
>
>>>>I see that you didn't answer my question, Tholen. No surprise there,
>>>>really.
>
>
>>> Unnecessary, given that you should already know the answer, Elizabot.
>
>
>
>>I see you fail to substantiate your claim, Tholen.
>
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
Incorrect.
tho...@antispam.ham
Elizabot
> Incorrect, given your questions about the inclusion of Mac advocacy in
> the distribution, Elizabot.
You incorrectly inferred that my asking you "What does that have to do
with Mac Advocacy, Tholen?" means that I "have a problem" with people
posting OT remarks.
> Having memory problems, Elizabot?
Classic unsubstantiated claim, laced with invective, as expected from
Elizabot
Incorrect.
>>>>>>>>>>Curious.
>
>
>>>>>>>>>What is allegedly curious about the truth, Elizabot?
>
>
>>>>>>>>What does that have to do with Mac Advocacy, Tholen?
>
>
>>>>>>>You should know, Elizabot, given that you made the statement in
>>>>>>>a Mac advocacy newsgroup.
>
>
>>>>>>I see that you didn't answer my question, Tholen. No surprise there,
>>>>>>really.
>
>
>>>>>Unnecessary, given that you should already know the answer, Elizabot.
>
>
>>>>I see you fail to substantiate your claim, Tholen.
>
>
>>>Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
>
>>Incorrect.
>
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
Incorrect.
tho...@antispam.ham
Snit
vZUYb.10827$jf....@twister.socal.rr.com on 2/18/04 7:13 PM:
> Elizabot writes:
>
>>>>> The OS/2 Guy writes:
>
>>>>>>> While you're posting in this thread, Dan, why don't you just come out
>>>>>>> and admit that you're the one who added the Mac advocacy newsgroup to
>>>>>>> the distribution? Afraid to come clean, Dan?
>
>>>>>> No, I'm not afraid of you or anyone else here.
>
>>>>> Non sequitur, given that I wasn't talking about fear of someone, Guy.
>>>>> Rather, I was talking about fear of the truth. Suffering from reading
>>>>> comprehension problems, Guy?
>
>>>>>> Yes, I added Mac advocacy to a couple of threads that Kadaitcha Man
>>>>>> was in, hoping that He/She/It would go there.
>
>>>>> What has that got to do with me, Guy?
>
>>>>>> You got a problem with that?
>
>>>>> Elizabot does, Guy.
>
>>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
>>> Incorrect, given your questions about the inclusion of Mac advocacy in
>>> the distribution, Elizabot.
>
>> You incorrectly inferred that my asking you "What does that have to do
>> with Mac Advocacy, Tholen?" means that I "have a problem" with people
>> posting OT remarks.
>
> Why else would you ask the question, Elizabot? Trying to be
> irrelevant, Elizabot?
She showed herself to be irrelevant long ago. :)
>
>>> Having memory problems, Elizabot?
>
>> Classic unsubstantiated claim, laced with invective, as expected from
>> someone who lacks a logical argument.
>
> Where is the alleged invective, Elizabot?
>
Snit
niVYb.10833$jf....@twister.socal.rr.com on 2/18/04 7:36 PM:
> Snit writes:
>
>>> Elizabot writes:
>
>>>>>>> The OS/2 Guy writes:
>
>>>>>>>>> While you're posting in this thread, Dan, why don't you just come out
>>>>>>>>> and admit that you're the one who added the Mac advocacy newsgroup to
>>>>>>>>> the distribution? Afraid to come clean, Dan?
>
>>>>>>>> No, I'm not afraid of you or anyone else here.
>
>>>>>>> Non sequitur, given that I wasn't talking about fear of someone, Guy.
>>>>>>> Rather, I was talking about fear of the truth. Suffering from reading
>>>>>>> comprehension problems, Guy?
>
>>>>>>>> Yes, I added Mac advocacy to a couple of threads that Kadaitcha Man
>>>>>>>> was in, hoping that He/She/It would go there.
>
>>>>>>> What has that got to do with me, Guy?
>
>>>>>>>> You got a problem with that?
>
>>>>>>> Elizabot does, Guy.
>
>>>>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
>>>>> Incorrect, given your questions about the inclusion of Mac advocacy in
>>>>> the distribution, Elizabot.
>
>>>> You incorrectly inferred that my asking you "What does that have to do
>>>> with Mac Advocacy, Tholen?" means that I "have a problem" with people
>>>> posting OT remarks.
>
>>> Why else would you ask the question, Elizabot? Trying to be
>>> irrelevant, Elizabot?
>
>> She showed herself to be irrelevant long ago. :)
>
> On what basis do you use "she", Snit?
Good point. That is what has been claimed, but I have no real knowledge.
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>> Elizabot writes:
>>>>>>>> The OS/2 Guy writes:
>>>>>>>> Elizabot does, Guy.
Where was the claim made?
Snit
CfWYb.10845$jf....@twister.socal.rr.com on 2/18/04 8:41 PM:
In the past I was in a big long debate with "her". I do not want to get
into details, but it came out in those debates. "She" was insistent that I
had something against women. This was a complete fabrication, of course,
but during that time "she" claimed to be a "she".
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>>>> Elizabot writes:
>>>>>>>>>> The OS/2 Guy writes:
>>>>>>>>>> Elizabot does, Guy.
Interesting; "Elizabot" is a persona also used by one Eric Bennett.
Could it be the same person?
Elizabot
> Elizabot writes:
>
>
>>>>>The OS/2 Guy writes:
>
>
>>>>>>>While you're posting in this thread, Dan, why don't you just come out
>>>>>>>and admit that you're the one who added the Mac advocacy newsgroup to
>>>>>>>the distribution? Afraid to come clean, Dan?
>
>
>>>>>>No, I'm not afraid of you or anyone else here.
>
>
>>>>>Non sequitur, given that I wasn't talking about fear of someone, Guy.
>>>>>Rather, I was talking about fear of the truth. Suffering from reading
>>>>>comprehension problems, Guy?
>
>
>>>>>>Yes, I added Mac advocacy to a couple of threads that Kadaitcha Man
>>>>>>was in, hoping that He/She/It would go there.
>
>
>>>>>What has that got to do with me, Guy?
>
>
>>>>>>You got a problem with that?
>
>
>>>>>Elizabot does, Guy.
>
>
>>>>Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
>
>>>Incorrect, given your questions about the inclusion of Mac advocacy in
>>>the distribution, Elizabot.
>
>
>>You incorrectly inferred that my asking you "What does that have to do
>>with Mac Advocacy, Tholen?" means that I "have a problem" with people
>>posting OT remarks.
>
>
> Why else would you ask the question, Elizabot?
I was hoping you would have a cogent answer, Tholen.
> Trying to be
> irrelevant, Elizabot?
Is it your claim that my asking you what your comments have to do with
Mac Advocacy makes me irrelevant, Tholen?
>>>Having memory problems, Elizabot?
>
>
>>Classic unsubstantiated claim, laced with invective, as expected from
>>someone who lacks a logical argument.
>
>
> Where is the alleged invective, Elizabot?
Having reading comprehension problems, Tholen?
Elizabot
Incorrect.
>>>>>>>>>>>>Curious.
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>What is allegedly curious about the truth, Elizabot?
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>What does that have to do with Mac Advocacy, Tholen?
>
>
>>>>>>>>>You should know, Elizabot, given that you made the statement in
>>>>>>>>>a Mac advocacy newsgroup.
>
>
>>>>>>>>I see that you didn't answer my question, Tholen. No surprise there,
>>>>>>>>really.
>
>
>>>>>>>Unnecessary, given that you should already know the answer, Elizabot.
>
>
>>>>>>I see you fail to substantiate your claim, Tholen.
>
>
>>>>>Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
>
>>>>Incorrect.
>
>
>>>Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
>
>
>>Incorrect.
>
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
Incorrect.
Steve Carroll
Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
Back to harrassing her, eh Snit? Perhaps I should let her know what
you've been saying about her in the teachers NG:) Better be careful...
Steve
Elizabot
His harassment is being documented.
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>>>> The OS/2 Guy writes:
>>>>>>>> While you're posting in this thread, Dan, why don't you just come out
>>>>>>>> and admit that you're the one who added the Mac advocacy newsgroup to
>>>>>>>> the distribution? Afraid to come clean, Dan?
>>>>>>> No, I'm not afraid of you or anyone else here.
>>>>>> Non sequitur, given that I wasn't talking about fear of someone, Guy.
>>>>>> Rather, I was talking about fear of the truth. Suffering from reading
>>>>>> comprehension problems, Guy?
>>>>>>> Yes, I added Mac advocacy to a couple of threads that Kadaitcha Man
>>>>>>> was in, hoping that He/She/It would go there.
>>>>>> What has that got to do with me, Guy?
>>>>>>> You got a problem with that?
>>>>>> Elizabot does, Guy.
>>>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>>>> Incorrect, given your questions about the inclusion of Mac advocacy in
>>>> the distribution, Elizabot.
>>> You incorrectly inferred that my asking you "What does that have to do
>>> with Mac Advocacy, Tholen?" means that I "have a problem" with people
>>> posting OT remarks.
>> Why else would you ask the question, Elizabot?
> I was hoping you would have a cogent answer, Tholen.
Why would you need an answer if you didn't have a problem with that,
Elizabot?
>> Trying to be irrelevant, Elizabot?
> Is it your claim that my asking you what your comments have to do with
> Mac Advocacy makes me irrelevant, Tholen?
You do know the difference between an irrelevant question and an
irrelevant person, don't you, Elizabot?
>>>> Having memory problems, Elizabot?
>>> Classic unsubstantiated claim, laced with invective, as expected from
>>> someone who lacks a logical argument.
>> Where is the alleged invective, Elizabot?
> Having reading comprehension problems, Tholen?
I see that you didn't answer the question, Elizabot. No surprise there,
really.
tho...@antispam.ham
Sandman
tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
> >> Back to harrassing her, eh Snit? Perhaps I should let her know what
> >> you've been saying about her in the teachers NG:) Better be careful...
>
> > His harassment is being documented.
>
> What does that have to do with OS/2, Elizabot?
What does that have to do with Macintosh, Tholenbot?
The OS/2 Guy
tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
> Non sequitur, given that I wasn't talking about fear of someone, Guy.
> Rather, I was talking about fear of the truth. Suffering from reading
> comprehension problems, Guy?
Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a bot.
Steve Carroll
tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
This question presupposes that only a problem can necessitate the asking
of a question, an illogical position to take.
> >> Trying to be irrelevant, Elizabot?
>
> > Is it your claim that my asking you what your comments have to do with
> > Mac Advocacy makes me irrelevant, Tholen?
>
> You do know the difference between an irrelevant question and an
> irrelevant person, don't you, Elizabot?
She seems to as the incorrect inference belongs to you. Is there a
particular reason you engaged in such an inference here and the
illogical position above?
> >>>> Having memory problems, Elizabot?
>
> >>> Classic unsubstantiated claim, laced with invective, as expected from
> >>> someone who lacks a logical argument.
>
> >> Where is the alleged invective, Elizabot?
>
> > Having reading comprehension problems, Tholen?
>
> I see that you didn't answer the question, Elizabot. No surprise there,
> really.
The invective was inferred and incorrect, much like the incorrect
inference you previously engaged in above. Do you make it a habit to
engage in incorrect inferences with all posters or are they confined to
Elizabot? Your failure to recognize this activity here exemplifies your
inability to comprehend what you have read.
Steve
Sandman
tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
> Sandman writes:
>
> >>>> Back to harrassing her, eh Snit? Perhaps I should let her know what
> >>>> you've been saying about her in the teachers NG:) Better be careful...
>
> >>> His harassment is being documented.
>
> >> What does that have to do with OS/2, Elizabot?
>
> > What does that have to do with Macintosh,
>
> Ask Dan, who chose to add Mac advocacy to the newsgroup distribution,
> Sandman.
Stop harassing me Tholen, I wasn't talking to you.
> > Tholenbot?
>
> You're also erroneously presupposing the existence of some "Tholenbot",
> Sandman.
No.
> For the record, note that it was Sandman who decided to jump into the
> fray. He has a history of doing that, yet he likes to deny being the
> instigator.
FOr the record, note that it was Tholen who decided to jump into a
discussion with me when I was clearly talking to 'Tholenbot'.
Marty
> Marty wrote:
>
>>S
Note: no response.
> *yawn*
Perhaps if you were more original, you'd be less bored.
> *plonk*
You missed.
Joe Malloy
> For the record, note that it was Sandman who decided to jump into the
> fray. He has a history of doing that, yet he likes to deny being the
> instigator.
Um, Tholen? [tapping on the shoulder oh-so-nicely] ONE CAN'T BE AN
INSTIGATOR OF AN ONGOING "FRAY". I thought you would have known that; I was
obviously mistaken about your abilities. Sandman is thus quite right to
deny that he is the "instigator"; instead, you have that role.
You're curiously illogical, you know. Carry on.
Marty
> Marty wrote:
>
>>TehGhodTrole wrote:
>>
>>>Marty wrote:
>>>
>>>[snip Marty on the subject of his posts]
>>
>>Still having vision problems or is this further evidence of your
>>reading comprehension problems?
>>
>>>I agree with your toast.
>>
>>Let's all raise our glasses to TehGhodTrole... May all trolls be as
>>ineffective and unintelligible as he strives to be. He's lowered the
>>bar for all of us.
>>
>><polite applause>
>
> Delusional: He spnaked you! Go hide now.
Smug: I agree with this post.
Snit
e7XYb.10853$jf....@twister.socal.rr.com on 2/18/04 9:40 PM:
LOL. That would be interesting to find out. At one point she and Steve
were sort of claiming to be the same person as well, though I think they
were just messing around. There are from the same state, though.
Again, I do not want to get into too much detail, but look through Google at
the old discussions between Elizabot and myself. You will see that, in the
end, things got pretty nasty.
If you feel that "she" poses any type of threat outside of Usenet, I would
be happy to assist you in any legal needs... yeah... it got that bad with
us. I do suggest you look at my old postings.
Elizabot
I was seeking information, Tholen.
>>>Trying to be irrelevant, Elizabot?
>
>
>>Is it your claim that my asking you what your comments have to do with
>>Mac Advocacy makes me irrelevant, Tholen?
>
>
> You do know the difference between an irrelevant question and an
> irrelevant person, don't you, Elizabot?
Yes I do, Tholen.
>>>>>Having memory problems, Elizabot?
>
>
>>>>Classic unsubstantiated claim, laced with invective, as expected from
>>>>someone who lacks a logical argument.
>
>
>>>Where is the alleged invective, Elizabot?
>
>
>>Having reading comprehension problems, Tholen?
>
>
> I see that you didn't answer the question, Elizabot. No surprise there,
> really.
I answered your question with a question, Tholen.
Elizabot
Incorrect.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Curious.
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>What is allegedly curious about the truth, Elizabot?
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>What does that have to do with Mac Advocacy, Tholen?
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>You should know, Elizabot, given that you made the statement in
>>>>>>>>>>>a Mac advocacy newsgroup.
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>I see that you didn't answer my question, Tholen. No surprise there,
>>>>>>>>>>really.
>
>
>>>>>>>>>Unnecessary, given that you should already know the answer, Elizabot.
>
>
>>>>>>>>I see you fail to substantiate your claim, Tholen.
>
>
>>>>>>>Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
>
>>>>>>Incorrect.
>
>
>>>>>Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
>
>>>>Incorrect.
>
>
>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
>
>>Incorrect.
>
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
Incorrect.
Elizabot
> Elizabot writes:
>
>
>>Steve Carroll wrote:
>
>
>>>Snit wrote:
The same as it has to do with Mac Advocacy, Tholen.
Marty
> Marty <unspe...@this.time> wrote in message news:<4032...@news.cadence.com>...
>
>>Edwin wrote:
>>
>>>Marty <unspe...@this.time> wrote in message news:<402d5d69$1...@news.cadence.com>...
>>>
>>>>Edwin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Enlightenment comes from within, Grasshopper.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Posting for entertainment purposes again, Marty (little boy)? How typical.
>>
>>Classic Timbol-esque response.
>
> Classic invective, laced with irony.
What is allegedly "classical" about it, Edwin?
>>I see you have ignored the other ways to gain Enlightenment.
>
> You erroneously presuppose the existencce of Enlightenment.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with improper verb
tenses. Taking posting lessons from Chris "TholenBotPro" Pott again?
>>Figures.
>
> Illogical.
Yet more evidence of your reading comprehension problems.
>>I wonder what Jim (little boy) Stuyck would say about your misattribution.
>
> Are you taking a stroll down irrevelency lane again, Marty?
Of what relevance is this question?
> How typical.
Typical of you to ask an irrelevant question.
Edwin
> Edwin wrote:
> > Marty <unspe...@this.time> wrote in message news:<4032...@news.cadence.com>...
> >
> >>Edwin wrote:
> >>
> >>>Marty <unspe...@this.time> wrote in message news:<402d5d69$1...@news.cadence.com>...
> >>>
> >>>>Edwin wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>Enlightenment comes from within, Grasshopper.
> >>>>
> >>>>It's also distributed with various flavors of Linux, Edwin.
> >>>
> >>>Posting for entertainment purposes again, Marty (little boy)? How typical.
> >>
> >>Classic Timbol-esque response.
> >
> > Classic invective, laced with irony.
>
> What is allegedly "classical" about it, Edwin?
Reading comprehension makes a cameo appearence in Marty's reply.
> >>I see you have ignored the other ways to gain Enlightenment.
> >
> > You erroneously presuppose the existencce of Enlightenment.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with improper verb
> tenses.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, as expected from someone
who lacks a logical argument.
> Taking posting lessons from Chris "TholenBotPro" Pott again?
What does your antagonistic question have to do with OS/2, Marty?
> >>Figures.
> >
> > Illogical.
>
> Yet more evidence of your reading comprehension problems.
Classic invective, as expected from someone who lacks a logical
argument.
> >>I wonder what Jim (little boy) Stuyck would say about your misattribution.
> >
> > Are you taking a stroll down irrevelency lane again, Marty?
>
> Of what relevance is this question?
Take it up with Mike "Olga and Horatio" Trimbol.
> > How typical.
>
> Typical of you to ask an irrelevant question.
Balderdash.
tho...@antispam.ham
>> Elizabot writes:
>>>>>>>> The OS/2 Guy writes:
>>>>>>>> Elizabot does, Guy.
Not in this situation, Carroll.
>>>> Trying to be irrelevant, Elizabot?
>>> Is it your claim that my asking you what your comments have to do with
>>> Mac Advocacy makes me irrelevant, Tholen?
>> You do know the difference between an irrelevant question and an
>> irrelevant person, don't you, Elizabot?
> She seems to as the incorrect inference belongs to you. Is there a
> particular reason you engaged in such an inference here and the
> illogical position above?
You're erroneously presupposing that I took an illogical position
above, Carroll.
>>>>>> Having memory problems, Elizabot?
>>>>> Classic unsubstantiated claim, laced with invective, as expected from
>>>>> someone who lacks a logical argument.
>>>> Where is the alleged invective, Elizabot?
>>> Having reading comprehension problems, Tholen?
>> I see that you didn't answer the question, Elizabot. No surprise there,
>> really.
> The invective was inferred and incorrect, much like the incorrect
> inference you previously engaged in above. Do you make it a habit to
> engage in incorrect inferences with all posters or are they confined to
> Elizabot? Your failure to recognize this activity here exemplifies your
> inability to comprehend what you have read.
You're erroneously presupposing that I made an inncorrect inference
above, Carroll.
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>>>>>> Elizabot writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>> The OS/2 Guy writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Elizabot does, Guy.
Rather odd behavior for someone adopting the "Elizabot" persona.
> If you feel that "she" poses any type of threat outside of Usenet, I would
> be happy to assist you in any legal needs... yeah... it got that bad with
> us. I do suggest you look at my old postings.
Are you a lawyer?
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>>>>>> The OS/2 Guy writes:
>>>>>>>> Elizabot does, Guy.
For what purpose, Elizabot?
>>>> Trying to be irrelevant, Elizabot?
>>> Is it your claim that my asking you what your comments have to do with
>>> Mac Advocacy makes me irrelevant, Tholen?
>> You do know the difference between an irrelevant question and an
>> irrelevant person, don't you, Elizabot?
> Yes I do, Tholen.
Then why did you ask about what makes you irrelevant, Elizabot?
>>>>>> Having memory problems, Elizabot?
>>>>> Classic unsubstantiated claim, laced with invective, as expected from
>>>>> someone who lacks a logical argument.
>>>> Where is the alleged invective, Elizabot?
>>> Having reading comprehension problems, Tholen?
>> I see that you didn't answer the question, Elizabot. No surprise there,
>> really.
> I answered your question with a question, Tholen.
On the contrary, you evaded my question with a question, Elizabot.
tho...@antispam.ham
Steve Carroll
tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
What evidence can you provide that distinguishes this situation from any
other situation with respect to my statement?
> >>>> Trying to be irrelevant, Elizabot?
>
> >>> Is it your claim that my asking you what your comments have to do with
> >>> Mac Advocacy makes me irrelevant, Tholen?
>
> >> You do know the difference between an irrelevant question and an
> >> irrelevant person, don't you, Elizabot?
>
> > She seems to as the incorrect inference belongs to you. Is there a
> > particular reason you engaged in such an inference here and the
> > illogical position above?
>
> You're erroneously presupposing that I took an illogical position
> above, Carroll.
What evidence can you provide supporting your assertion that I
erroneously presupposed you took an illogical position above? You,
merely making such a statement, offers no support for your claim.
> >>>>>> Having memory problems, Elizabot?
>
> >>>>> Classic unsubstantiated claim, laced with invective, as expected from
> >>>>> someone who lacks a logical argument.
>
> >>>> Where is the alleged invective, Elizabot?
>
> >>> Having reading comprehension problems, Tholen?
>
> >> I see that you didn't answer the question, Elizabot. No surprise there,
> >> really.
>
> > The invective was inferred and incorrect, much like the incorrect
> > inference you previously engaged in above. Do you make it a habit to
> > engage in incorrect inferences with all posters or are they confined to
> > Elizabot? Your failure to recognize this activity here exemplifies your
> > inability to comprehend what you have read.
>
> You're erroneously presupposing that I made an inncorrect inference
> above, Carroll.
How do you intend to prove this assertion?
Steve
Snit
mYcZb.11331$jf.1...@twister.socal.rr.com on 2/19/04 5:57 PM:
No, but I was placed in a position to seek legal aid when she made public
threats. If needed (in other words if she were to do something similar to
you), I would be happy to share information. Hopefully just knowing that I
am willing to do so will prevent her from going down the path she did
before. Her previous comments were possibly made just to annoy me, and
perhaps she has learned not to make such comments. You never can tell,
though, so I make this offer to any others she may be inclined to threaten
the way she did me.
You will see her and Steve make all sorts of allegations about me based on
what I am saying now. I encourage you, if interested, to look up the old
posts on Google and make up you own mind.
Marty
> Marty <unspe...@this.time> wrote in message news:<40351145$1...@news.cadence.com>...
>
>>Edwin wrote:
>>
>>>Marty <unspe...@this.time> wrote in message news:<4032...@news.cadence.com>...
>>>
>>>>Edwin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Marty <unspe...@this.time> wrote in message news:<402d5d69$1...@news.cadence.com>...
>>>>>
>>>>>>Edwin wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Enlightenment comes from within, Grasshopper.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>It's also distributed with various flavors of Linux, Edwin.
>>>>>
>>>>>Posting for entertainment purposes again, Marty (little boy)? How typical.
>>>>
>>>>Classic Timbol-esque response.
>>>
>>>Classic invective, laced with irony.
>>
>>What is allegedly "classical" about it, Edwin?
>
> Reading comprehension makes a cameo appearence in Marty's reply.
Where, allegedly?
>>>>I see you have ignored the other ways to gain Enlightenment.
>>>
>>>You erroneously presuppose the existencce of Enlightenment.
>>
>>Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with improper verb
>>tenses.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, as expected from someone
> who lacks a logical argument.
How ironic.
>>Taking posting lessons from Chris "TholenBotPro" Pott again?
>
> What does your antagonistic question have to do with OS/2, Marty?
You're presupposing that my question was antagonistic, Edwin.
>>>>Figures.
>>>
>>>Illogical.
>>
>>Yet more evidence of your reading comprehension problems.
>
> Classic invective, as expected from someone who lacks a logical
> argument.
More evidence of your invective recognition problems. Meanwhile I see
you failed to address the issue of your reading comprehension problems.
No surprise there.
>>>>I wonder what Jim (little boy) Stuyck would say about your misattribution.
>>>
>>>Are you taking a stroll down irrevelency lane again, Marty?
>>
>>Of what relevance is this question?
>
> Take it up with Mike "Olga and Horatio" Trimbol.
Unnecessary.
>>>How typical.
>>
>>Typical of you to ask an irrelevant question.
>
> Balderdash.
I see you've taken up tending Chris Pott's Balderdash garden. No
surprise there.
Steve Carroll
Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
There is no information you have that tholen is interested in:)
> Her previous comments were possibly made just to annoy me, and
> perhaps she has learned not to make such comments. You never can tell,
> though, so I make this offer to any others she may be inclined to threaten
> the way she did me.
>
> You will see her and Steve make all sorts of allegations about me based on
> what I am saying now. I encourage you, if interested, to look up the old
> posts on Google and make up you own mind.
LOL! This is funny as hell! Sorry, Snit... I'm not laughing AT you...
just at this situation.
Steve
tho...@antispam.ham
> Snit wrote:
>> I wrote:
>>> Snit wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Elizabot writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The OS/2 Guy writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Elizabot does, Guy.
>>> Are you a lawyer?
On what basis do you speak for me, Carroll?
>> Her previous comments were possibly made just to annoy me, and
>> perhaps she has learned not to make such comments. You never can tell,
>> though, so I make this offer to any others she may be inclined to threaten
>> the way she did me.
>>
>> You will see her and Steve make all sorts of allegations about me based on
>> what I am saying now. I encourage you, if interested, to look up the old
>> posts on Google and make up you own mind.
> LOL! This is funny as hell! Sorry, Snit... I'm not laughing AT you...
> just at this situation.
The situation is that "Dan" took his little game to another newsgroup,
namely a Mac advocacy group, and as usual, like flies attracted to dung,
his troll has attracted others to the thread, including some of the
usual suspects like Elizabot, Edwin Thorne, and Sandman.
Steve Carroll
tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
History, tholen... (I owed you that one:)
> >> Her previous comments were possibly made just to annoy me, and
> >> perhaps she has learned not to make such comments. You never can tell,
> >> though, so I make this offer to any others she may be inclined to threaten
> >> the way she did me.
> >>
> >> You will see her and Steve make all sorts of allegations about me based on
> >> what I am saying now. I encourage you, if interested, to look up the old
> >> posts on Google and make up you own mind.
>
> > LOL! This is funny as hell! Sorry, Snit... I'm not laughing AT you...
> > just at this situation.
>
> The situation is that "Dan" took his little game to another newsgroup,
> namely a Mac advocacy group, and as usual, like flies attracted to dung,
> his troll has attracted others to the thread, including some of the
> usual suspects like Elizabot, Edwin Thorne, and Sandman.
>
So why are you continuing to answer and crossposting while doing it? Are
you even aware you have control over the situation by simply stopping
this activity? Or is the single brain cell you timeshare unavailable to
you at present?
Steve
The OS/2 Guy
Dan is an identity thief and nothing more.
Tim Martin, The Official and Only OS/2 Guy
Warp City Web Site - http://www.warpcity.com
From his Warp 4.53 ThinkPad T40 w/2GIG of RAM,
80GIG of Hard Disk and IBM's Web Browser for OS/2
The OS/2 Guy
out of a service called newscene.com. You can file your complaints
against Dan and against newscene.com with the Internet Crime
Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
It's one quick way to shut down newscene.com AND send Dan
to the cleaners. We did it to the Grey Ghost and we can do it
to this guy too.
Here's the url: http://www.cybercrime.gov/reporting.htm
Tim Martin, The Official and Only OS/2 Guy
Warp City Web Site - http://www.warpcity.com
From his Warp 4.53 ThinkPad T40 w/2GIG of RAM,
80GIG of Hard Disk and IBM's Web Browser for OS/2
The OS/2 Guy wrote:
> In article <hlKYb.10716$jf....@twister.socal.rr.com>,
> tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
>
> > While you're posting in this thread, Dan, why don't you just come out
> > and admit that you're the one who added the Mac advocacy newsgroup to
> > the distribution? Afraid to come clean, Dan?
>
> No, I'm not afraid of you or anyone else here. Yes, I added Mac
> advocacy to a couple of threads that Kadaitcha Man was in, hoping that
> He/She/It would go there.
>
> You got a problem with that?
>
The OS/2 Guy
Dan is doing that today. You can nail this guy easily
by filing a complaint with the FBI's Internet Cybercrime
Division: http://www.cybercrime.gov/reporting.htm
and the DOJ's Identity Theft Division located here:
http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/fraud/idtheft.html
You can rid these newsgroups of such criminals all
it takes is one legitimate complaint.
Tim Martin, The Official and Only OS/2 Guy
Warp City Web Site - http://www.warpcity.com
From his Warp 4.53 ThinkPad T40 w/2GIG of RAM,
80GIG of Hard Disk and IBM's Web Browser for OS/2
Dan wrote:
> In article <qxGYb.10703$jf....@twister.socal.rr.com>,
> tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
>
> > You should know, Elizabot, given that you asked me that question in
> > a Mac advocacy newsgroup.
>
> You're erroneously presupposing the existence of some "Elizabot",
> TholenBot.
>
> Classic TholenBot response, laced with paranoia, as expected from a bot.
>
Sandman
wrote:
> Sandman writes:
>
> >>>>>> Back to harrassing her, eh Snit? Perhaps I should let her know what
> >>>>>> you've been saying about her in the teachers NG:) Better be careful...
>
> >>>>> His harassment is being documented.
>
> >>>> What does that have to do with OS/2, Elizabot?
>
> >>> What does that have to do with Macintosh,
>
> >> Ask Dan, who chose to add Mac advocacy to the newsgroup distribution,
> >> Sandman.
>
> > Stop harassing me Tholen, I wasn't talking to you.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim:
The text below does not support your claim that it is a unsubstantiated claim.
Now stop harassing me.
> ] From: Sandman <m...@sandman.net>
> ] Message-ID: <mr-A270FC.13...@news.fu-berlin.de>
> ]
> ] In article <fb0Zb.10895$jf....@twister.socal.rr.com>, tho...@antispam.ham
> ] wrote:
>
> >>> Tholenbot?
>
> >> You're also erroneously presupposing the existence of some "Tholenbot",
> >> Sandman.
>
> > No.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim:
>
> ] What does that have to do with Macintosh, Tholenbot?
The above line is irrelevant to your claim that I am errenously presupposing
anything. Now stop harassing me.
> >> For the record, note that it was Sandman who decided to jump into the
> >> fray. He has a history of doing that, yet he likes to deny being the
> >> instigator.
>
> > FOr the record, note that it was Tholen who decided to jump into a
> > discussion with me when I was clearly talking to 'Tholenbot'.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim:
>
> ] From: Sandman <m...@sandman.net>
> ] Message-ID: <mr-A270FC.13...@news.fu-berlin.de>
> ]
> ] In article <fb0Zb.10895$jf....@twister.socal.rr.com>, tho...@antispam.ham
> ] wrote:
>
Anyone will see what kind of liar you are, since it was quite clear that I was
talking to Tholenbot, and not you.
Now stop harassing me.
--
Sandman[.net]