When your literary characters run amok...
palmer.william
of your literary characters got away from you, and you began
to suspect they were running amok.
Well, that is the situation I am now dealing with regarding
Twinkles. the alt.genius dwarf.
Before I tell you more, I must point out that I am not referring
to the forged postings where someone else has kidnapped
little Twinkles because of his great popularity. That is forgery
and theft of literary characters. That is another case entirely,
but it MAY be one of the things that have gotten Twinkles so
disturbed and confused. It certainly has not helped the
situation, and I would ask all persons engaged in this to
desist immediately. (And I can't claim to be totally blameless
here, because I DID poke Twinkles in the eye with a pencil
a few months back when he got on my nerves.)
At any rate, I am talking about the behavior of the authentic
Twinkles the alt.genius.dwarf, and I am referring to postings
I have recently made while trying to put myself in the mentality
of my literary character. This net performance art is akin to
acting in at least some respects. The best way to do it
well is to try and get yourself in a frame of mind that is
suitable for a realistic portrayal.
As you know, for quite a while I was able to do that very
effectively with Twinkles. Recently though, there have been
ominous developments. Twinkles has started acting in
ways I don't really approve of. In fact, he has been doing
terrible things.
At first he was just annoying. For instance, Twinkles made
a cavalier remark to a very senior citizen in misc.writing.
That was uncalled for, because if the dear old fellow wants
to write about taking his grandaughter out for a ride and uses
the word grandaughter over and over in a very short post,
it is not the place of Twinkles to make sarcastic remarks
Maybe the poster wanted to stress his age, to gain reader
sympathy. That is his right and his choice, after all. Yes,
Twinkles' follow-up bothered me a bit at the time, but I let the
incident go by the boards.
Then Twinkles made some rather vicious postings about
Hank-the-angry-drunken-dwarf. Frankly, I think Twinkles was
jealous because Hank has his own newsgroup and Twinkles
does not. Also, if you have seen Hank on Howard Stern,
you know that he is a short person of great dignity, and I
feel that Twinkles was way out of line in trying to pick a
fight with Hank by making personal remarks's about
Hank's size.
Twinkles gave himself away, as far as I am concerned,
when he announced that he was going to take over Hank's
modest little newsgroup. So THAT was what it was all
about! He's cunning. It was not simply someone trying
to start a flame fight, but it was a scheme to highjack a
newsgroup. Twinkles is making me ashamed..
Now, some might try to defend Twinkles by pointing out that
he is at least one foot shorter than Hank, so he has a right to
call hank a "runt" and a "shrimp" and so forth, as a friendly
flaming challenge.
I can't quite agree with that. It strikes me as demeaning to
entire group of people, sort of like when a person of one
minority group uses racially disparaging remarks in public
toward another member of the same group. Some might
see that as funny, but it simply stikes me as the sort of thing
that is not needed in a public forum. It detracts from
everyone's dignity, including the readers.
I don't know what Twinkles' problem is. For one thing,
he blames me for making him a "flat character." In a way,
that is true, though I intend to explore ways of making him
more well-rounded as a human being. Even so, being a
flat character is no excuse for wrong-headed and insensitive
behavior.
One of the silliest notions I have heard Twinkles express
occurred the other day when Twinkles informed me that he
wanted to be like Bulldog Drummond.
The idea was absurd. For those who don't real generations-
old detective stories, Bulldog Drummond was a sort of proto-
typical hard-boiled detective type, a literary ancestor of Marlow
and Mike Hammer. The idea of Twinkles somehow becoming
"like Bulldog Drummond" is the most ridiculous thing I can
imagine. Well, almost.
Twinkles is no more a Bulldog Drummond than a pug is a
Mastiff. I hasten to point out--as the result of the
embarrassment Twinkles has caused me--that my amusement
over his wanting to be like Bulldog Drummond has nothing to
do with physical size. I think it might be great to have a short
person as a sort of hard-boiled detective type, and in no way
do I mean as a spoof or anything like that. I mean an
authentic portrayal, perhaps in stories where the short
person's effectiveness with computers--and with an
"electronic whip" (or some other high-tech device to level
the playing field in physical combat--compensites for
the detective-hero's lack of physical size customarly used
to toss the bad guys around.
Don't EVER try to limit the goals or ambitions of short people.
In our modern age, they can be anything, even a famous
net performance artist.
Anyway, I simply mean that Twinkles has none of the personality
traits need to make him another Bulldog Drummond. Furthermore,
it would a presciption for failure for the writer, because Bulldog
Drummond, went out of fashion decades ago. I mean, when was
the last time someone went into a bookstore and asked if they
had any Bulldog Drummond thrillers by Sapper, for pity's sake?
A writer would have just as much luck trying to make Twinkles'
a new version of "The Sooper" by Edgar Wallace! Twinkle's is
just not being sensible. He's acting like a nut. He finds a book
of mine about Bulldog Drummond, and then he gets mad at me
for writing him as Twinkles instead as someone "like Bulldog
Drummond."
So, you can see, I can't reason with Twinkles anymore.
He gets more stubborn and impulsive every day.
You might say, well, give the horse his head and see where he
goes. Fine, but as far as I can see, the "horse" has a head full
of mischief and bad ideas.
Ever have to deal with this sort of thing with one of your own
literary characters? Is it time to kill Twinkles off, or what?
the alt.genius.bill-palmer
--firing posts at random from the window of the office
upstairs from rec.arts.prose
fundoc
"palmer.william" <palmer....@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:DSzqb.5290$iT....@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com...
> desist immediately. (And I can't claim to be totally blameless
> here, because I DID poke Twinkles in the eye with a pencil
> a few months back when he got on my nerves.)
You, Bill, are extraordinarily, divinely, almost archetypically imbecilic, an
addle-brain of mythological proportion, the alpha and omega of inanity, scaling
the Olympian heights of fuckwititudininity while simultaneously roiling in a
bottomless pit of your own omnipresent shitiosity.
However, credit where due, "poking Twinkles in the eye with a pencil" is the
single greatest euphemism for masturbation that has ever issued from the mind of
man.
palmer.william
After I posted the portion below in misc.writing earlier, I decided to
send the post around the horn to alt.fiction.original. (Just don't ask
me what "around the horn" means, I simply think it has a nicely
dramatic righ, don't you?) Kidding aside, I decided to write a
very serious introduction for the alt.fiction.original readers, as a
thoughtful reaction to some clueless remarks I had seen posted
in that group. After I wrote the introduction, then it further occurred
to me that there a few people in misc.writing who plainly need to
be informed on the potential of Usenet for developing literary
characters.
By the way, yes, unfortunately I read the envious splash of
drivel posted by Fundoc. They always give themselves
away don't they? Invariably, they show you what is really
on their mind, That's a big thing with our faked-named libel
artist: accusing others of his favorite perversions, and,
frankly, Fundoc seems to be polymorph perverse, because
his posting history reeks of such unsavory rubbish--as does,
I quite suspect, Fundoc himself. When you are constantly
pointing your fingers at innocent parties and accusing them
of vile perversions, I think that says a lot about where your
head is at. The two biggest offenders in this regard are
Fundoc and ICEKNIFE. Of course, they both cower under
phony names, hoping, no doubt, that they will never be in
any way associated with the libelous mound of aberrant
rubbish consisting of their archive. Sad. Sad? Hell,
no, its revolting!
Often when I make a post such as the one below, I get a certain
amount of clueless and unnecessary flack from people are too thick
or too hidebound to grasp what I have been trying to do in Usenet.
Such carping wretches have a very narrow view of how fictional
characters might be used, and they refuse to allow for experimentation
of any sort. To the people I am referring to, fictional characters belong
between the covers of a book, or at least in a screenplay, short story,
play, whatever. Something very traditional, in other words.
For years, I have been developing fictional characters through
Usenet postings as part of my famous performance art. In other
words, instead of a character showing up on Page 15, and then
perhaps resurfacing on Page 35, readers might first encounter
him or her in a posting I made on January 18, in select groups,
and they might next meet him in a February 3 posting.
Experience has shown me that his is is a useful and
challenging way to develop fictional characters.
Exactly WHAT is so difficult to grasp about that concept?
(I don't mean to be confrontive, but when you have been flamed
for such experiments in fiction by closed-minded twits who refuse
to enlarge their consciousness even a little to allow for the possibilty
of fiction going beyond traditional literary forms, matters can
get irritating, and my boiling point eventually takes a nose dive.
So again, if you are inspired to comment on anything relating
to what I say below, fine. Criticize all you want to. Challenge as
much as you desire. But please spare all readers the ignorant
flames that make it clear that you are only sniping because you
are so blinkered regarding the traditional forms of fiction that you
refuse to allow for any experimentation. When you do that, you
might as well be wearing a big button that says "Stupid."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHEN YOUR LITERARY CHARACTERS RUN AMOK...
Did you ever have to confront a situation where one or more
of your literary characters got away from you, and you began
to suspect they were running amok?
That is the situation I am now dealing with regarding
Twinkles. the alt.genius dwarf.
Before I tell you more, I must point out that I am not referring
to the forged postings whereby someone else has kidnapped
little Twinkles because of his great popularity. That is forgery
and theft of literary characters. That is another case entirely,
but it MAY be one of the things that have gotten Twinkles so
disturbed and confused and generally wrought up these days.
It certainly has not helped the situation, and I would ask all
persons engaged in this to desist immediately. (And I can't
claim to be totally blameless here, because I DID poke Twinkles
in the eye with a pencil a few months back when he badly got
on my nerves. That's a matter of public record, so I have to
'fess up.)
At any rate, I am talking about the behavior of the authentic
Twinkles the alt.genius.dwarf, and I am referring to postings
I have recently made while trying to put myself in the mentality
of my literary character.
Net performance art is akin to acting in at least some respects.
The best way to do it well is to try and get yourself in a frame of
mind that is suitable for a realistic portrayal.
As you know, for quite a while I was able to do that very
effectively with Twinkles. Recently though, there have been
ominous developments. Twinkles has started acting in
troubling ways.In fact, he has been doing terrible things.
At first he was just annoying. For instance, Twinkles made
a cavalier remark to a very senior citizen in misc.writing.
That was uncalled for, because if the dear old fellow wants
to write about taking his grandaughter out for a ride and uses
the word grandaughter over and over in a very short post,
it is not the place of Twinkles to make sarcastic remarks.
Maybe the poster wanted to stress his age, to gain reader
sympathy. That is his right and his choice, after all. Yes,
Twinkles' follow-up bothered me a bit at the time, but I let the
incident go by the boards.
Then Twinkles made some rather vicious postings about
Hank-the-angry-drunken-dwarf. Frankly, I think Twinkles was
jealous because Hank has his own newsgroup and Twinkles
does not.
Also, if you have seen Hank on Howard Stern, you know that
he is a short person of great dignity, and I feel that Twinkles
was way out of line in trying to pick a fight with Hank by making
personal remarks about Hank's size.
Twinkles gave himself away, as far as I am concerned,
when he announced that he was going to take over Hank's
modest little newsgroup.
So THAT was what it was all about! He's cunning, that
Twinkles, just like the time last year when he grabbed at a
lady's argyle cashmere sweater and then tried to justify his
actions by saying there was a bug on her sweater--a bug
which no one but Twinkles seemed to see..
But in this case with Hank, It was plainly not simply someone
trying to start a flame fight, but it was a scheme to highjack a
newsgroup. Twinkles is making me ashamed..
YOU HEAR THAT, YOU SHRIMP? YOU ARE MAKING ME
ASHAMED IN FRONT OF ALL THESE READERS AND FANS!
Now, some might try to defend Twinkles by pointing out that
he is at least one foot shorter than Hank, so he has a license to
call Hank a "runt" and a "shrimp" and so forth, as a friendly
flaming challenge.
I can't quite agree with that. It strikes me as demeaning to
an entire group of people, sort of like when a person of one
minority group uses racially disparaging epithets in public
toward another member of the same group. Some might
see that as funny, but it simply stikes me as the sort of thing
that is not needed in a public forum. It detracts from
everyone's dignity, including the readers.
I don't know what Twinkles' problem is. For one thing,
he blames me for making him a "flat character." In a way,
that is true, though I intend to explore ways of making him
more well-rounded as a human being. Perhaps that will
get him settled down a bit. Even so, being a flat character
is no excuse for wrong-headed and insensitive behavior.
One of the silliest notions I have heard Twinkles express
occurred the other day when Twinkles informed me that he
wanted to be like Bulldog Drummond.
The idea was absurd. For those who don't real generations-
old detective stories, Bulldog Drummond was a sort of proto-
typical hard-boiled detective type, a literary ancestor of Marlow
and Mike Hammer. The idea of Twinkles somehow becoming
"like Bulldog Drummond" is the most ridiculous thing I can
imagine. Well, almost.
Twinkles is no more a Bulldog Drummond than a pug is a
mastiff. Oops! I hasten to point out--as the result of the
embarrassment Twinkles has caused me--that my amusement
over his wanting to be like Bulldog Drummond has nothing to
do with physical size.
Actually, it might be great to have a short person as a sort of
hard-boiled detective type, and in no way do I mean as a spoof
or anything like that. I mean an authentic portrayal, perhaps in
stories where the short person's effectiveness with computers--
and with an "electronic whip" (or some other high-tech device
to level the playing field in physical combat) compensates for
the detective-hero's lack of physical size customarily used
to toss bad guys around.
Don't EVER try to limit the goals or ambitions of short people.
In our modern age, they can be anything, even a famous
net performance artist.
Anyway, I simply mean that Twinkles has none of the personality
traits need to make him another Bulldog Drummond. Furthermore,
it would a presciption for failure for the writer, because Bulldog
Drummond (along with many of his remarks which would be viewed
as racist in our own day) went out of fashion decades ago. I mean,
when was the last time someone went into a bookstore and asked
if they had any Bulldog Drummond thrillers by Sapper, for pity's sake?
A writer would have just as much luck trying to make Twinkles'
a new version of "The Sooper" by Edgar Wallace! Twinkles is
Alan Hope
You seem to have neglected to mention me in this post.
What am I, chopped liver all of a sudden?
Get it into your head, Palmjob, people only read you to see what
you're saying about me. So get with the programme: mention me more
often.
After all, I'm more popular than you are. You ought to pay some
obeisance to that fact.
--
AH
Email replies to alan dot hope at skynet dot be only
Clicking on Reply won't work
Dr Zen
> "palmer.william" <palmer....@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:DSzqb.5290$iT....@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com...
>
> > desist immediately. (And I can't claim to be totally blameless
> > here, because I DID poke Twinkles in the eye with a pencil
> > a few months back when he got on my nerves.)
>
> You, Bill, are extraordinarily, divinely, almost archetypically imbecilic, an
> addle-brain of mythological proportion, the alpha and omega of inanity, scaling
> the Olympian heights of fuckwititudininity while simultaneously roiling in a
> bottomless pit of your own omnipresent shitiosity.
>
It's a dwarf envy thing.
> However, credit where due, "poking Twinkles in the eye with a pencil" is the
> single greatest euphemism for masturbation that has ever issued from the mind of
> man.
It's a penis envy thing.
Zen
gekko
I saved this off and did a quick text search on it to see
what you might've been saying about Hope. Having found
nothing, I was going to just toss it, when it occurred to
me that you may benefit from a little "feedback".
Next time you get the urge to spew thousands of words
across the thoughtstream, if you want to ensure readers,
you will need to incorporate your finest character into
the barrage of words -- namely Alan Hope -- or you WILL
lose readership.
Oh, and make him a little less flat, dull and predictable,
willya? Maybe you could read some Harry Potter to get
some pointers on how to improve *your* characters, and
use that as the stepping stone on up the literary food
chain.
HTH
--
gekko
Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away. - Antoine de Saint Exupery
fundoc
> By the way, yes, unfortunately I read the envious splash of
> drivel posted by Fundoc. They always give themselves
> away don't they? Invariably, they show you what is really
> on their mind, That's a big thing with our faked-named libel
> artist: accusing others of his favorite perversions, and,
> frankly, Fundoc seems to be polymorph perverse, because
> his posting history reeks of such unsavory rubbish--as does,
> I quite suspect, Fundoc himself. When you are constantly
> pointing your fingers at innocent parties and accusing them
> of vile perversions, I think that says a lot about where your
> head is at. The two biggest offenders in this regard are
> Fundoc and ICEKNIFE. Of course, they both cower under
> phony names, hoping, no doubt, that they will never be in
> any way associated with the libelous mound of aberrant
> rubbish consisting of their archive. Sad. Sad? Hell,
> no, its revolting!
And the award for the longest IKYABWAI of 2003 goes to .... Bill Palmer.
No suprise there.
fundoc
Ultraviolet
news:slrnbqo2kr....@enews2.newsguy.com:
> The Voices are telling me that on Fri, 07 Nov 2003 00:29:58 GMT,
> palmer.william <palmer....@sbcglobal.net> said:
<>
>> Did you ever have to confront a situation where one or more
>> of your literary characters got away from you, and you began
>> to suspect they were running amok?
No, but there was an IDOJ episode about genies running amok. Well, they
weren't *really*, but Roger was trying to get Tony to think so in order to
steal Jeannie. Or something. I forget the details. Maybe fundoc can help.
Anyway, the point is that *you* are in control, Bill, and you mustn't let
them forget it. Make Twinkles bow to your authoritay. Otterwise, you'll end
up with a visit from his mean uncle Omar and you'll have to marry him.
Twinkles, not Omar, obviously.
<biggest snip in the history of usenet>
> Alan Hope
Ooh, I *thought* I saw his name in here! How's he doing these days? Have
you seen his blog? I haven't and vigorously deny all allegations that I did
that other thing, too. Never was there with that guy. And I sure as hell
wasn't wearing those shoes!
--
UV
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
http://paulalight.blogspot.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Davida Chazan - The Chocolate Lady
2003 21:11:56 GMT, during the misc.writing Community News Flash gekko
<ge...@lutz.kicks-ass.org.invalid> reported:
>or you WILL
>lose readership.
You mean that all *four* of them might stop reading him?
Sad, that.
(Or are my statistics wrong and there are only two of them now -
including Bill and William?)
--
Davida Chazan (The Chocolate Lady)
< davida at jdc dot org dot il >
~*~*~*~*~*~
"What you see before you, my friend, is the result of a lifetime of
chocolate."
--Katharine Hepburn (May 12, 1907 - June 29, 2003)
~*~*~*~*~*~
Links to my published poetry - http://davidachazan.homestead.com/
~*~*~*~*~*~
Dr Zen
Got a new battery for your anal invader then?
Zen
fundoc
"Dr Zen" <gol...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5e7da04d.03110...@posting.google.com...
> "fundoc" <fundocyo...@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:<gZTqb.37288$ji3....@twister.nyroc.rr.com>...
> > "Dr Zen" <gol...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:5e7da04d.03110...@posting.google.com...
> >
> > > Zen
> >
> > Zzz
>
> Got a new battery for your anal invader then?
Glenwall lame, penis lame, and now homo lame. You are a mere *sigh* short of the
superfecta.
> Zen
Zzz
Dr Zen
> "Dr Zen" <gol...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:5e7da04d.03110...@posting.google.com...
> > "fundoc" <fundocyo...@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:<gZTqb.37288$ji3....@twister.nyroc.rr.com>...
> > > "Dr Zen" <gol...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:5e7da04d.03110...@posting.google.com...
> > >
> > > > Zen
> > >
> > > Zzz
> >
> > Got a new battery for your anal invader then?
>
> Glenwall lame, penis lame, and now homo lame. You are a mere *sigh* short of the
> superfecta.
*sigh*
Zen
Alan Hope
>I have you in my crosshairs now, too.
Ooh. Menacing.
fundoc
"Ursula" <Ursula_d...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:76eb424f.03110...@posting.google.com...news:<F7Bqb.62657$ZC4....@twister.nyroc.rr.com>...
No.
> Well, rest assured that
> the tone and tenor of your post only assures him new friends every
> time you make loathesome, insensitive comments of the type you just
> made.
Oh.
> I have you in my crosshairs now, too.
Ooooo.
> BTW, re the writing thing, don't quit your day job, chump.
OK.
I must say, Bill, that it's a tad disconcerting watching your personality
fragment. First Twinkles, then BP II, then Twinkles II, and now this: Bill
Palmer rendered as a beautiful lady. Not a bad thing, I suppose; I suspect that
even living in California it must be difficult for you to get in touch with your
feminine side; and yet you seem to have slipped into Ursula's skin like it was
your own. Or your mother's.
Don't feel bad though. I've had usenet characters run amok on me on occasion.
One of my favorite characters, Dominique the 16 year old misc. writing
prostitute, once escaped from captivity - my fault really, should have been more
careful, as she's double jointed - and I had the devil of the time tracking her
down. Turns out she was hiding at her aunts' house -- plural that, the aunts
being twins -- and as you can well imagine it was all I could do to subdue and
discipline the unruly trio. Poor me against Dominique and her 32 year old
aerobic instructor aunts, and the three of them double jointed. Thank god for
those handcuffs .. but I digress. The point being that sometimes one's literary
characters er squirt through one's fingers, leaving one to clean up the mess.
Bit of advice: in an emergency, use a sock; worst case, you can hide the
evidence in your shoe. In a perfect world, of course, your rocks glass has a
vagina and it's a moot point. But that's utopia, and this is usenet, and one
must make do as best as one can, mustn't one.
Alan Hope
>"fundoc" <fundocyo...@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message news:<qrNrb.85409$ZC4....@twister.nyroc.rr.com>...
>> I must say, Bill, that it's a tad disconcerting watching your personality
>> fragment. First Twinkles, then BP II, then Twinkles II, and now this: Bill
>> Palmer rendered as a beautiful lady. Not a bad thing, I suppose; I suspect that
>> even living in California it must be difficult for you to get in touch with your
>> feminine side; and yet you seem to have slipped into Ursula's skin like it was
>> your own. Or your mother's.
>(snip)
>You're a pretty bright guy, OneCrock, but clearly not bright enough to
>check posting data by way of getting a handle on just who it is that's
>posting. Moreover, you seem not to have a sense for syntax, for if you
>did you'd have known immediately that Ursula is not one of Bill's
>socks. One can't fake writing styles, dear boy - at least not beyond
>two or three posts. After that it becomes increasingly difficult to
>pull off. Everyone, no matter their level of skill with the language,
>combines words differently. For instance, my writing is slightly
>ungrammatical, pompous, stilted and near impossible to duplicate with
>any consistency. And it's a damn good thing I might add!
>Yep, Bill runs all around the country with a notepad posting under
>different IPs. Gets around, he does, we'll give him that. Now about
>that strawberry jam, Captain...
This is not Palmjob, it's Glen Wall. His dabs are all over it.
So, Mr. Wall, we meet again, as Fate indeed decreed. I wonder what
Usenet has in store for us this time round.
I'm eating monkey nuts like they were going out of fashion. Yourself?
Twinkles the alt.genius dwarf
> twinkles...@hotmail.com (Twinkles the alt.genius dwarf) wrote in message news:<821d03f0.03110...@posting.google.com>...
> > Isn't it nice to see that Bill has gotten over me leaving him and is
> > getting on with life with his new dwarf, Ursula. He needs someone to
> > pretend to like his posts and agree with his weird opinions and Ursula
> > seems to be just the person, why, she even writes exactly like Bill.
> > In fact, one could be forgiven for thinking that she was Bill.
> > Couldn't one Bill?
> >
> > Twinkles - the alt.genius dwarf
>
> Hah, a lot you know, Twinkletoes! If you had a clue as to how to check
> out posting data and ISPs, you'd know right off the bat that you're
> dealing with two different geniuses. There aren't many of us left,
> perhaps three or four in the entire United States, so it's not that
> hard to track us down. But you are right on one score: Geniuses of a
> feather do indeed flock together. A Karma thing I suppose. Ursula
You seem to forget Bill, I post through all manner of (apparent) ISPs
and from a wide range of (apparent) IP addresses so that little piece
of bullshit isn't going to fool anyone. You forget to turn off
archiving while you were practicing changing your headers in a number
of the test groups so I guess the secret is out.
Another give away is that anyone who had read more than a couple of
your posts and claimed that you were a genius is patently lacking in
IQ. Only a total idiot could consider you to be normal let alone a
genius.
Now you remember to have Ursula join the dwarf union and get her
licenced, you know how nasty they can get about unlicenced dwarfs.
Twinkles - the alt.genius dwarf
BTW Ursula, if Bill tells you that the state law requires you to be
strip searched after you shower, (to ensure that you haven't stolen
any soap he says), you tell him that he is bullshitting. I fell for
that one for a while then I discovered that the dirty old bugger
didn't even own a copy of "Regulations for Private Dwarf Ownership"
let alone have the ability to quote from it. Besides, I could never
have gotten soap up there.
Twinkles the alt.genius dwarf
wrote:
>twinkles...@hotmail.com (Twinkles the alt.genius dwarf) wrote in message news:<821d03f0.03111...@posting.google.com>...
>> On 11 Nov 2003 19:14:35 -0800, Ursula_d...@yahoo.com (Ursula)
>> wrote:
>> BTW, I gather that you don't like Bill Clinton, America's greatest
>> president. Why is that? He is a model of decorum and good manners,
why
>> although he was forever being sexually harassed by young trollops
>> around the White House, man of character that he is, he never
>> complained once. He just took it in his strides. My kind of
president.
>>
>>
>> Twinkles - the alt.genius dwarf
>
>Twinkles, you're not a person but rather a convenient platform that
>pops right up in front of me whenever you make your appearance.
>Yeppers, Twinkles the alt.genius.platform. And this is a real sturdy
>one!
Damn!
I told the barber that I didn't want a flat top, but at least that gel
seems to holding up. Sturdy stuff innit?
BTW, you aren't taking the piss out of my height are you?
>
>"Don't like" Bill Clinton? I'm not sure if that gets it done for me.
>However, words like despise, loathe, detest, hate, revile and abhor
do
>come readily to mind whenever this despicable son-of-a-bitch, this
>piece of human putrefaction comes up in polite conversation.
Ah, I knew that deep down you really liked him.
>
>Bill Clinton is not a person, per se, but a dark metaphor for all
>that's wrong with western culture. He is a man whose time had come,
and cum, and cum ...
>the embodiment, as it were, of every evil degeneracy, every debauched
>excess that the human mind can dream up.
You really should stop reading de Sade before going to sleep, it is
affecting you perception of nice people like Bill Clinton.
> A small man with no vision
I don't know about not having any vision, if he looked down on
occasion he would see some interesting sights. Blondes, brunettes, red
heads, Hitlary, oops.
>and coarse appetites, his infantile, narcissistic preoccupation with
>that little thingee effectively translates into Everyman circa 2003
in
>the western world. Pogo had it, right.
Pogo had it as well? Looks like everyone's getting it except me.
>
>But there are evils in this world infinitely worse than even little
>men like Bubba. And they take the form of men like Sadaam Hussein,
men
>who actually kill and torture and maim and cripple and defile and
rape
>and impoverish their own people.
Everyone has to have a hobby. Sometimes collecting stamps just doesn't
cut it.
> For evils like this we require great
>men, men like George Bush,
God made bushes for dogs to piss on. God is wise.
>men not inclined to grab some young woman
>by the hair and stick her face in his crotch when things get dicey.
Get dicey? You mean when Hitlary is about to enter the room?
>
>Other than this, Bubba's just a lovable lummox. Ursula
Yeah, isn't he just.
Twinkles - the alt.genius dwarf
BTW Ursula, you were asking about bulk zapping from Google. Well, for
those with the skills, it is quite easy. How about I zap this thread
from Google just to show you how easy it is?
Check Google now to try and find the missing posts.
I will put them back later, just so people don't get upset.
Kirby Cook
The way is out there, no doubt, and probably in Google. Although I
didn't find it in the first two pages of the 80,000 plus results I got
from searching Google groups for "google AND zap OR nuke" (Google
helpfully responded that I didn't need the AND), the results I did read
were promising. Look around. Besides, once you know it's not
impossible, you might find it easy, if you think about it.
Kirby
Twinkles the alt.genius dwarf
>On 12 Nov 2003 17:57:15 -0800, twinkles...@hotmail.com
(Twinkles the alt.genius dwarf) wrote:
>
>
>Snip Bubba eulogy
>
>>Twinkles - the alt.genius dwarf
>>
>>BTW Ursula, you were asking about bulk zapping from Google. Well,
for
>>those with the skills, it is quite easy. How about I zap this thread
>>from Google just to show you how easy it is?
>>
>>Check Google now to try and find the missing posts.
>>
>>I will put them back later, just so people don't get upset.
>
>Ok, up until 5 minutes ago I would have bet my mother's virginity
that no one
>could delete Google archived posts that they didn't originate.
>
>How did you do it? I've been around usenet for years and I have
never even
>heard of anyone being able to do it. None of the posts in this thread
are
>there, not by subject, author or message id. There were fifteen posts
from six
>different posters and they are all gone.
>
>If I give an email address, will you email me and tell me how it is
done.
No.
>If you do, I will give you some pornography with Jennifer Aniston. If
you don't,
>I will email you some porn with Pat Butler in it.
Pat Butler would be more dwarf-like than a skinny little streak of
self indulgence like Aniston. Go ahead.
>
>Meathead
>
>Please tell me how it is done, I really want to know.
>
>Send to Ghost_in_the*Mac...@hotmail.com
>
>Remove asterisk before mailing
I am replacing the missing index entries now. You have seen how
quickly and easily it can be done, now try to figure out how I did it.
Alan Hope
>I am replacing the missing index entries now. You have seen how
>quickly and easily it can be done, now try to figure out how I did it.
Very cute. Maybe now you can put back those weapons of mass
destruction you zapped.
Frank ess
"Twinkles the alt.genius dwarf" <twinkles...@hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:821d03f0.03111...@posting.google.com...
Are you taking nominations for the next thread to vaporize?