OT: Hold on
zara
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080327/economy.html
Economy Sputters With 0.6 Percent Growth
Thursday March 27, 9:18 am ET
By Jeannine Aversa, AP Economics Writer
Economy Nearly Sputtered Out at End of 2007, Probably Faring Worse Now
more.....
Chance Furlong
"zara" <Joeyis...@curses.com> wrote:
> More.
I thought I was in your killfile, Pussy. At least I got your mind off
Ballmer long enough to mention me in your post.
nospamatall
> Economy Sputters With 0.6 Percent Growth
> Thursday March 27, 9:18 am ET
> By Jeannine Aversa, AP Economics Writer
> Economy Nearly Sputtered Out at End of 2007, Probably Faring Worse Now
>
So now the wintroll line is, don't buy a mac because industrial
civilization is about to collapse. How things have changed in 10 years.
And this time they might be correct.
zara
"nospamatall" <nospa...@iol.ie> wrote in message
news:fsgs66$ks$4...@aioe.org...
I don't recall seeing that in the article. But you can bet your ass that
sales of high ticket items will slow in the next twelve months.. People
will start looking for value.
Why don't you try trolling on your own dime with one of your sockpuppets?
nospamatall
> Why don't you try trolling on your own dime with one of your sockpuppets?
>
??
Snit
3/27/08 6:02 PM:
> zara wrote:
>
>> Why don't you try trolling on your own dime with one of your sockpuppets?
>>
>
> ??
According to Sandman if you have enough sock puppets call someone a liar
they somehow become one.
--
Satan lives for my sins... now *that* is dedication!
zara
"Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
news:C411990F.B08C1%use...@gallopinginsanity.com...
> "nospamatall" <nospa...@iol.ie> stated in post fshg2h$1oc$3...@aioe.org on
> 3/27/08 6:02 PM:
>
>> zara wrote:
>>
>>> Why don't you try trolling on your own dime with one of your
>>> sockpuppets?
>>>
>>
>> ??
>
> According to Sandman if you have enough sock puppets call someone a liar
> they somehow become one.
It's amazing how few "real" people are on this group. It's about 80%
sockpuppets. I only use a sock puppet once or twice to get past the KF. And
I have done that at least on a dozen occasions. I don't have another
identity that I use regularly. I like using the name "zara",---- maccies
hate it.
Snit
> "Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
>
> news:C411990F.B08C1%use...@gallopinginsanity.com...
>
> > 3/27/08 6:02 PM:
>
> >> zara wrote:
>
> >>> Why don't you try trolling on your own dime with one of your
> >>> sockpuppets?
>
> >> ??
>
> > According to Sandman if you have enough sock puppets call someone a liar
> > they somehow become one.
>
> It's amazing how few "real" people are on this group. It's about 80%
> sockpuppets. I only use a sock puppet once or twice to get past the KF. And
> I have done that at least on a dozen occasions. I don't have another
> identity that I use regularly. I like using the name "zara",---- maccies
> hate it.
Long ago I used the name "Brock McNuggets" as a joke. I was also told
by some of the trolls that if I admitted to using another name they
would stop trolling me - so I used that name and then admitted to it.
They, of course, lied and then whined for *years* about my using the
name they asked me to.
Only in CSMA... some people are just whacked!
Steve Mackay
Ummm, okay sigmond.
Snit
47ec65fb$0$30599$4c36...@roadrunner.com on 3/27/08 8:32 PM:
LOL! Thanks for making my point.
--
Dear Aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1123221217782777472
Steve Mackay
What point was that? That you're a lying piece of elephant dung that
uses sockpuppets?
Snit
Ah, your claim - with no evidence nor support - shall make Sandman happy.
He thinks that if enough people spew such unsupported accusations that it
makes them become meaningful.
--
"If a million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."
- Anatole France
Steve Carroll
Steve Mackay <steve_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Snit likes to claim that no one ever points to his lies... recently he
pretended that he had a 'special' contract with GoDaddy where they were
letting him use false reg info ro register a domain name. For some
strange reason GoDaddy no longer seems to be honoring this alleged
contract... Snit now has all of his info up there accurately... that he
previously wanted to keep private. Yet another Snit lie busted... one
can only wonder how he'll try to spin this;)
--
"Apple is pushing how green this is - but it [Macbook Air] is
clearly disposable... when the battery dies you can pretty much
just throw it away". - Snit
Steve Carroll
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
It's spring break, Mr. Teacher... do you ever take a vacation? Ever? You
haven't left this forum for almost 5 years... maybe it's time;)
Tim Adams
Steve Carroll <troll...@TK.com> wrote:
Steve, what I found funny with snit's comments above were the obvious lies it
contained.
He was outed as using a sock puppet named "Brock McNuggets" just like he was
outed with his using sigmond and others.
he's also delusional claiming that people told him that if he admitted to
using another name, they would stop trolling him.
Is it any wonder then that people tell him that he's "a lying piece of elephant
dung that uses sockpuppets?"
--
regarding Snit "You are not flamed because you speak the truth,
you are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting
the newsgroup." Andrew J. Brehm
Snit
teadams$2$0$0$3-444C80.13...@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns.net on
3/29/08 10:20 AM:
> Steve, what I found funny with snit's comments above were the obvious lies it
> contained.
>
> He was outed as using a sock puppet named "Brock McNuggets" just like he
> was
> outed with his using sigmond and others.
> he's also delusional claiming that people told him that if he admitted to
> using another name, they would stop trolling him.
>
> Is it any wonder then that people tell him that he's "a lying piece of
> elephant dung that uses sockpuppets?"
If you think I have lied then try to support your accusation.
It is clear, however, that you will not even try... but don't worry, the
mere fact you have made an accusation - even though completely unsupported -
is enough to not only make some people build an association it also leads
Sandman to believe he has specific evidence.
CSMA is a funny place, eh?
--
Try not to become a man of success, but rather try to become a man of value.
--Albert Einstein
Steve Carroll
<teadams$2$0$0$3-444C80.13...@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns.net>,
Tim Adams <teadams$2$0$0$3...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Of course Snit will claim that Steve Mackay is the troll in all of this.
Tim Adams
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> "Tim Adams" <teadams$2$0$0$3...@earthlink.net> stated in post
> teadams$2$0$0$3-444C80.13...@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns.net on
> 3/29/08 10:20 AM:
>
> > Steve, what I found funny with snit's comments above were the obvious lies
> > it
> > contained.
> >
> > He was outed as using a sock puppet named "Brock McNuggets" just like he
> > was
> > outed with his using sigmond and others.
> > he's also delusional claiming that people told him that if he admitted
> > to
> > using another name, they would stop trolling him.
> >
> > Is it any wonder then that people tell him that he's "a lying piece of
> > elephant dung that uses sockpuppets?"
>
> If you think I have lied then try to support your accusation.
Why not support you *claim*? You made it, but then you can't support it as we
all know it is another of your LIES.
All the more reason people tell you that you're a lying piece of elephant dung
Snit
3/29/08 1:45 PM:
> In article <C413CB86.B0C92%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> "Tim Adams" <teadams$2$0$0$3...@earthlink.net> stated in post
>> teadams$2$0$0$3-444C80.13...@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns.net on
>> 3/29/08 10:20 AM:
>>
>>> Steve, what I found funny with snit's comments above were the obvious lies
>>> it
>>> contained.
>>>
>>> He was outed as using a sock puppet named "Brock McNuggets" just like he
>>> was
>>> outed with his using sigmond and others.
>>> he's also delusional claiming that people told him that if he admitted
>>> to
>>> using another name, they would stop trolling him.
>>>
>>> Is it any wonder then that people tell him that he's "a lying piece of
>>> elephant dung that uses sockpuppets?"
>>
>> If you think I have lied then try to support your accusation.
>
> Why not support you *claim*? You made it, but then you can't support it as we
> all know it is another of your LIES.
>
> All the more reason people tell you that you're a lying piece of elephant dung
Your lack of support for your accusation is noted... and was completely
predictable.
--
I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is to try to please
everyone. -- Bill Cosby
Tim Adams
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
michael glasser, aka snit, running from offering any support for his claims is
noted. Did you forget all the lies you wrote michael? Here they are again, since
you felt the need earlier to snip them out of your reply.
Lie #1 "Long ago I used the name "Brock McNuggets" as a joke."
Lie #2 "I was also told by some of the trolls that if I admitted to using
another name they would stop trolling me - so I used that name and then admitted
to it.
Please note how they even contradict each other.
Lie #3 "They, of course, lied and then whined for *years* about my using the
name they asked me to."
Go ahead mr. prescott computer idiot - support one of your claims once in a
while. You never will but then that's typical of you.
run michael run
Snit
3/29/08 8:19 PM:
> ... snit, running from offering any support for his claims is
> noted. Did you forget all the lies you wrote michael? Here they are again,
> since
> you felt the need earlier to snip them out of your reply.
>
> Lie #1 "Long ago I used the name "Brock McNuggets" as a joke."
Where is the lie?
> Lie #2 "I was also told by some of the trolls that if I admitted to using
> another name they would stop trolling me - so I used that name and then
> admitted
> to it.
Again, where is the lie?
> Please note how they even contradict each other.
>
> Lie #3 "They, of course, lied and then whined for *years* about my using the
> name they asked me to."
If you think those comments of mine are dishonest then *support* your
claim... do not merely repeat it as you try to tie words related to my
business name and real name to your trolling.
In the future if you do so I shall report your actions to
ab...@supernews.com.
--
Is Swiss cheese made out of hole milk?
Tim Adams
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
You didn't do it as a 'joke'. You were using the sock puppet to troll with and
were caught at it.
>
> > Lie #2 "I was also told by some of the trolls that if I admitted to using
> > another name they would stop trolling me - so I used that name and then
> > admitted
> > to it.
>
> Again, where is the lie?
Don't see the contradiction with your first claim? Of course, the full statement
is a lie in that nobody told you that if you admitted to using another name that
they would then stop trolling you. Since you are the troll, such a statement by
you is a TOTLAL LIE.
>
> > Please note how they even contradict each other.
> >
> > Lie #3 "They, of course, lied and then whined for *years* about my using
> > the
> > name they asked me to."
>
> If you think those comments of mine are dishonest then *support* your
> claim...
The story is YOUR claim. It is a total LIE. You posted it, now support it if you
really think you can. I know you can't, and from your total lack of trying, it
is clear that even you know you can't.
You even made up a story in another thread about having 'offered help to people
with their web design'. That was proven a total lie way back when you first
posted it. You couldn't support it then, you can't support it now, yet you
continue to post your lie and try to make people believe it.
> do not merely repeat it as you try to tie words related to my
> business name and real name to your trolling.
So your company is now known as the 'prescott computer idiot'? You might want to
change that name, as most intelligent people won't do business with somebody who
admits to being an idiot.
Snit
3/30/08 5:42 AM:
You are failing to support your accusations and still using terms from my
business name.
Can you rise above that level and actually *try* to support your accusations
of dishonesty?
--
It usually takes me more than three weeks to prepare a good impromptu
speech. -- Mark Twain
Tim Adams
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
running away from supporting your lies once again snit. No wonder you call your
company the prescott computer idiot. you fit the bill perfectly.
michael glasser posted the lies but can't support any of them. so typical.
keep running michael.
Snit
3/30/08 12:25 PM:
Reported to ab...@supernews.com
--
I am one of only .3% of people who have avoided becoming a statistic.
Tim Adams
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
Poor michael, posts his lies, gets called on them and rather than either correct
his claims OR even try to support them (something even he knows he can't do), he
runs away from reality. is it any wonder that you are referred to as 'lying
piece of elephant dung" run michael run
Steve Carroll
<teadams$2$0$0$3-B1E423.06...@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns.net>,
Tim Adams <teadams$2$0$0$3...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Here is concrete proof that Snit used the Brock McNuggets sock puppet in
another newsgroup (before csma)... a poster wrote this after outing Snit
due to Snit's carelessness:
"Good grief, Snit - I would never have thought Brock McNuggets was YOU".
Snit's reply tried to pretend he'd made some sort of honest 'mistake'
(as if one could do that with sock puppets), but it's followed by an
easily proven lie. Snit writes:
"Oops. I am just setting up my new computer and I forgot to change the
name back to snit before posting. But, yes, Brock McNuggets is another
name I sometimes use. I just find it funny".
<gF_C7.53265$W87.3...@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>
If you do a google search for Brock McNuggets before the date of this
'Brock McNuggets post' he is being confronted with you won't a single
"posting" event using that name, not "sometimes", as Snit is shown
claiming here, or any other time. Obviously, Snit was preparing to troll
in a newsgroup devoted to people prone to anxiety with a brand new sock
puppet... got busted immediately... and then proceeded to lie about it.
(cue up Snit's BS machine... we can probably expect some outrageous
story that will attempt to stretch reality far beyond belief)
Tim Adams
Steve Carroll <troll...@TK.com> wrote:
Having remembered that post (or a link that referred to it), I knew his claim of
using 'Brock McNuggets as a joke' was a lie as well as was his story of some
'troll' offering to 'stop trolling him'.
Steve Carroll
<teadams$2$0$0$3-64F1AC.18...@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns.net>,
Tim Adams <teadams$2$0$0$3...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Amazingly, today... Snit told a new lie to zara about using Brock
McNuggets in that anxiety newsgroup:
"though I did once post with the name "Brock McNuggets" into such a
group *by mistake* and then told people about the mistake".
As I wrote to zara... notice how Snit said he posted as Brock McNuggets
"once"... and that it was done "*by mistake*". So why did Snit repeat
the "mistake" in that ng (google proves this) and then repeat it again
in this one? His BS doesn't pass the laugh test. Snit can't keep his
lies straight;)
PeterBP
You must forgive him, he is suffering from severe delusions combined
with projection, probably due to extended tissue death in his major
cortex.
Rigor mortis will soon set in and he'll kinda be too stiff to type.
Then, the horny undertaker comes and give him the love he never had
while he was alive.
--
regards , Peter B. P. http://macplanet.dk
Washington D.C.: District of Criminals
"I dont drink anymore... of course, i don't drink any less, either!
Tim Adams
Steve Carroll <troll...@TK.com> wrote:
Color me not surprised.
Joey is fucked@demoncaller.com The zara
"PeterBP" <a...@me.com> wrote in message
news:1iep7vx.1tsukt4qn53k4N%a...@me.com...
> nospamatall <nospa...@iol.ie> wrote:
>
>> zara wrote:
>>
>> > Why don't you try trolling on your own dime with one of your
>> > sockpuppets?
>> >
>>
>> ??
>
> You must forgive him, he is suffering from severe delusions combined
> with projection, probably due to extended tissue death in his major
> cortex.
Forgiveness is not in my playbook.
> Rigor mortis will soon set in and he'll kinda be too stiff to type.
> Then, the horny undertaker comes and give him the love he never had
> while he was alive.
The above shows just how fucked- up you are. Why not try women instead of
animals? Any man who really wants a woman, can get one. So I guess that
leaves you standing there with your dick in one hand, and your other hand
around a chickens throat.
Steve Carroll
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
Your "point" can only be how you were busted early on...
Elizabot:
Shut up, Snit. You're not fooling anybody.
"Sigmond's" NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.117.214.4
Snit's NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.117.214.4 (from a different nesgroup):
From: Snit <snit-nos...@cableone.net>
Approved: ASAPM Robomoderator <asapm-...@stump.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <BC172FBE.37F1C%snit-...@cableone.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.117.214.4
Perhaps your are actually Snit's significant other. Whatever you are,
you are a pathetic sockpuppet.
Snit:
"I have no idea who Sigmond is. Maybe someone who snuck into
my house".
<BC20B927.3972D%sn...@nospam-cableone.net>
--
Steve Mackay's "Snit's "sockpuppet" exposed" thread:
<pan.2004.04.03....@hotmail.com>
--
Sandman's "The Official Sigmond FAQ" thread:
<mr-52E11E.12...@individual.net>
--
Additional sigmond data collected by Elizabot:
[excerpt]
4/2 Mackay posts "Snit's 'Sockpuppet' exposed," showing Snit's address
as 24.117.214.36.
Suddenly, a half hour later, sigmond's posting address changes (sure
sign of guilt)...
<40a79db4$0$200$7586...@news.frii.net>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Snit... on the sex webpage he created while using the sigmond handle:
"Since you ask: I find it barely amusing but poorly worded,
inappropriate, and in poor taste.
While I do not condone such comments, I can understand why such a post
would be directed toward the target that it was. "
A few replies over the Elizabot/sigmond incident:
Alan Baker:
"Cut the bullshit. It was you".
Edwin:
"Did you think your post was amusing, Snit/Sigmond? How sad for you..."
Bill Riel:
"Agreed - I don't know if Snit/Sigmond are the same person or not, but
that posting is the lowest thing I've seen on CSMA and that IS saying
something. I'm really disgusted.
Even with all the idiots posting here I've never felt the need for a
killfile until now..."
Snit replied to Bill Riel with:
"We are not the same person, and I will agree with you that the posting
was in very poor taste and was not something I condone or find
appropriate".
--
Strange lie told by Snit as he tries to distance himself from the
reality he created with his 'sigmond' sockpuppet he got busted with:
"You even sink to trying to use clear sarcasm of mine against me, when I
stated, *sarcastically* that someone must have broken into my house when
Steve first started playing his games".
Obviously, someone needs to look up the word "sarcasm", sigmond.
Steve Mackay
See, even snit finds his own behavior inappropriate! LOL!
Snit
>
> See, even snit finds his own behavior inappropriate! LOL!
Nope.
Steve Mackay
> "Steve Mackay" <steve_...@hotmail.com> stated in post
> 47f2712e$0$1081$4c36...@roadrunner.com on 4/1/08 10:32 AM:
>
>> See, even snit finds his own behavior inappropriate! LOL!
>
> Nope.
>
>
So were you lying then, or are you lying now snit?
Snit
Neither. Notice how you make accusations but offer *no* support for them.
None.
Come on, Steve: if you think I have been dishonest then by all means
*support* your claim. Frankly the best you and your co-trolls can do is
dredge up debates from, literally, *years* ago where you failed to support
your claims at the time. And, no, I am *not* interested in rehashing the
failures of yours from *years* ago - deal with them and move on. Heck,
disagree and think you were a raging success and then move on. Just live in
the present... if you can.
--
Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and
conscientious stupidity. -- Martin Luther King, Jr.
Steve Mackay
> "Steve Mackay" <steve_...@hotmail.com> stated in post
> 47f3d6cb$0$6140$4c36...@roadrunner.com on 4/2/08 11:58 AM:
>
>> Snit wrote:
>>> "Steve Mackay" <steve_...@hotmail.com> stated in post
>>> 47f2712e$0$1081$4c36...@roadrunner.com on 4/1/08 10:32 AM:
>>>
>>>> See, even snit finds his own behavior inappropriate! LOL!
>>> Nope.
>>>
>>>
>> So were you lying then, or are you lying now snit?
>
> Neither.
See, there you go, another lie.
> Notice how you make accusations but offer *no* support for them.
> None.
Ummm.. No. There has been /SUBSTANTIAL/ proof given in the past. You've
just feverishly tried to deny it. So, chock that up as another lie.
>
> Come on, Steve: if you think I have been dishonest then by all means
> *support* your claim.
It's been supported.
> Frankly the best you and your co-trolls can do is
> dredge up debates from, literally, *years* ago where you failed to support
> your claims at the time.
Umm no... See, there ya go lying again...
> And, no, I am *not* interested in rehashing the
> failures of yours from *years* ago - deal with them and move on. Heck,
> disagree and think you were a raging success and then move on. Just live in
> the present... if you can.
If you quit lying about the past, it wouldn't come back to haunt you.
Snit
Your support was fully underwhelming.
--
Teachers open the door but you must walk through it yourself.
Snit
trollkiller-033A...@newsgroups.comcast.net on 4/1/08 7:43 AM:
I could not find the post in the Google record that is referred to, above.
Do you mean the one you referenced when you authored this quote:
"I did post as sigmond and create that sex webpage starring
elizabot... what of it?" - Steve Carroll
And is the name "Sigmond" the same one you referred to when you wrote the
following:
"I admitted to posting as sigmond" - Steve Carroll
Just curious, Steve. If so, as it seems, then you clearly are not being
exactly honest about the whole ancient debate you are obsessing over.
Then again, as much as you obsess over ancient history you will not answer
my two above questions... you know you are lying and you know that you
cannot explain away your own quotes.
Note the only quotes from me you used in your "evidence" were my saying:
I have no idea who Sigmond is. Maybe someone who snuck
into my house
The second part being, obviously, sarcasm. And:
We are not the same person, and I will agree with you that
the posting was in very poor taste and was not something I
condone or find appropriate
Great evidence to show your point! LOL!