Merry Christmas, Eric! :)

6 views
Skip to first unread message

terra

unread,
Dec 23, 2006, 4:06:03 PM12/23/06
to
OK, for your gift and the gift of everyone else here I have yet again
killfiled you, so I am missing your most recent meltdown. But I did want
to impart a few things to you before I go...

1.) You claim you want to see change (YOU FIRST!!!), yet I have far more
often admitted and modified my behaviour. You have *never* done so, not
in nearly ten years. In fact, you never change your criticism. If I
displease you (quite easy to do apparently) you blast me. IF I APOLOGIZE
then you deem it a false apology, crafted for sympathy or perhaps you'll
just aver that my meds have now kicked in, and you will still blast me.
A lose-lose with you, every and any time. Something I've brought up
before and you of course conveniently ignored (as you do any cogent
thought).

2.) Pretty much everything you accuse me, donna or marcus of is a figment
of *your own imagination* (a polite way to say lies) or a severe
projection of *your very own behaviour*. This is not normal. Hence, you
possess a mental illness (of a possibly mild sort), unmistakable in it's
grand delusion. You think it's just a buzzword for me, but I am honestly
evaluating your lack of social grace and intelligence and you are found
wanting.

2a) Following (stalking) three regular posters religiously; counting my
every post and offering stats (as if they had any meaning to anyone but
yourself); following me to other newsgroups then gleefully reporting such
as if you are outting someone... (who is not trying to hide!) You
i.d.'ed whatever name I'd used (been terra now a long time) as if you
were offering a gift to God. You claim using your real name is somehow
an offense, but that is a HUGE joke given your obsessive and harrassing
behaviour.

3.) I have killfiled you repeatedly, and you have changed your addy
*specifically to elude my killfile*, something you have admitted openly.
Hm, smells like a troll...yet he can't POSSIBLY be trolling, can he?

4.) When I first got here you were laying into marcus and I stuck up for
him, forever putting me on your shit list. No problem, I didn;t like you
anyway, Gondola Bob. But first I spent a couple of years -attempting- to
discuss content and reasoning with you like any normal adult. I did the
same with derek, fatt, and others. After enough time and arguing elapses
and I see that the person I am addressing respectfully deserves no
respect because they are not here to discuss but to *preach their own
agenda* and will refuse to acknowledge ANYthing anyone says, they go on
my shit list, and they get exactly the lack of respect they deserve.

And even then I STILL agree openly with derek, fatt and even -you- at
times. You have only agreed with me when you wanted to take a left-
handed swipe at someone, usually marcus. The difference between us is
striking. Yet you openly lie about my posting habits with such hyperbole
I can't imagine anyone would hire you to write more than a church
bulletin.

5.) The facts are clear: you are a bitter, souless troll who looks for a
fight and will say any stupid thing to get a reaction. If I give you
content you snip it, ignore it, twist it and give it nothing but stock
repetitive bon mots apropos of nothing I'd said. You strain to find the
worst in everything anyone you dislike says or does.

You made up this whole housewifey thing about Donna and have relentlessly
pushed that line, no matter how untrue. You've assailed marcus for
longer than I've been here, and you have your stock little lies about me
that you repeat ad nauseum as if they were a security blanket for you,
and who knows, maybe they are?

6.) Now you're melting down again, yet you will scream that it is me
instead.

You cannot even talk normally to anyone about music without getting that
snotty condescending all-knowing attitude that eventually wins you even
more support (lol!). Hell, once I mentioned that no one supported you in
your rage campaign against me and you said it WAS IMPLIED!!! LO fucking
L Eric! How much more delusional does one have to be??? Your latest
salvo included the lamest of lames, a typo flame. Wow. In that same
post you claim to be running circles around me...your obvious intent, as
you fancy yourself somehow winning these exchanges....more proof of some
sort of a mental illness. Or an emotional stunting heretofore unseen.

7.) You are a joke, an unfunny, bad joke that I simply cannot take
seriously anymore. I was wrong to ever attempt to engage you as if you
were a normal thinking adult, when it comes to anyone other than yourself
you give no quarter.

You've lied about me for so long and I foolishly kept trying to defend
myself against your b.s., but then one has to at some point say "geez, no
one else cares what this moron is screaming", I can't take anything you
say seriously anymore. So I will just have my fun, should I see you
quoted somewhere and you have anything pertinent to say about me. I
shall just punk you in response, because everything has been said
repeatedly. Over and over. Another definition of insanity, eh Eric?

Except I can occasionally mock my own, you could never in a million
years, you take yourself FAR too seriously. Guess what? You're neither
as hip, smart or clever as you think. I am fully aware of my foibles, no
one appointed you the newsgroup arbiter of behaviour. Netkopping, Eric?

So say what you want, it's only the voices in your head speaking. I
think most everyone here is pretty clear as to where you come from, the
kind of mindless hypocrite you've constantly shown yourself to be, a
stiff necked philistine who prides himself on his "poisonous" ways.

Sorry, pally, you have no thorns anymore. You're uncovered, undone and a
disgrace.


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

TAR

unread,
Dec 23, 2006, 6:14:16 PM12/23/06
to

It's Christmastime and my heart is soft, but unfortunately not soft
enough to disagree with you about any of this. It's sad but true. I
don't wish the guy harm, but I do wish he would realize that he created
this, himself.

I do want to add something to what you said about PR lying about you,
though. He repeatedly says that you're angry, hoping that if he says it
often enough, it'll stick. I've known you for years, and I've only seen
you angry a handful of times, and not even on this newsgroup. He's
mistaking anger for being expressive. You don't pound on your keyboard
in anger, or any of the things that PR likes to repeat about you. Not
sure if he believes his own lies, but I had to at least say that much by
explaining that his vision of you is untrue.

Unlike some others here, I'm not going to turn my back and look the
other way when I see people being stalked and verbally attacked for no
good reason other than to satisy a desire to make someone feel better
about himself... or smarter. I see him doing this to so many people...
people who just come here to share information or a few laughs. But the
season is upon us. So, pr, please go wrap some gifts, have some egg
nog, and chill out for a while. You can start in again after the new
year if you must, but let's at least try to have some peace around here
during the holidays.

Merry Crimble.

Jeff

unread,
Dec 23, 2006, 6:43:25 PM12/23/06
to

Hi ya all. I hope you have a very Merry Christmas and a happy new year.
Donna, is there any new Beatles news that you would like to share? What
did you think
of the latest Beatles album? It's grown on me somewhat. I'm not sure I
would like to hear
parts 2,3 and 4 though. I would just like to see the entire Beatles
catolog remastered/remixed. I like that extra Beat on "Get back" on
"Love." Not an extra beat
but I can hear the high hat and the snare better..at the end..until it
goes into the next song.
Maybe it was put there from another song? Any Harrison news...about any
new albums coming out that you know of? George said right before his
death that he had enough material for about 3 1/2 albums.

Well, I'll let you go, Donna. Happy holidays to you..and your family.

TAR

unread,
Dec 23, 2006, 6:54:19 PM12/23/06
to
Jeff wrote:
>
> Hi ya all. I hope you have a very Merry Christmas and a happy new year.

Same to you.


> Donna, is there any new Beatles news that you would like to share?

Actually there is a lot of Beatles news, but it's not up to me to share
it. Some of it involves a Beatle's wife.


> What
> did you think
> of the latest Beatles album?

I'll let you know after I open it on Christmas morning.


> It's grown on me somewhat. I'm not sure I
> would like to hear
> parts 2,3 and 4 though. I would just like to see the entire Beatles
> catolog remastered/remixed. I like that extra Beat on "Get back" on
> "Love." Not an extra beat
> but I can hear the high hat and the snare better..at the end..until it
> goes into the next song.
> Maybe it was put there from another song? Any Harrison news...about any
> new albums coming out that you know of? George said right before his
> death that he had enough material for about 3 1/2 albums.

I don't know about any new releases.


> Well, I'll let you go, Donna. Happy holidays to you..and your family.

Just taking little breaks from all the gift wrapping. A happy one to
you and yours, too, Jeff.

Message has been deleted

Rhonda

unread,
Dec 23, 2006, 7:31:59 PM12/23/06
to
TAR wrote:

> Actually there is a lot of Beatles news, but it's not up to me to share
> it. Some of it involves a Beatle's wife.


That doesn't count.

TAR

unread,
Dec 23, 2006, 7:54:09 PM12/23/06
to
poisoned rose wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> Impress everyone, Charlie, and resist replying to this post of your
> own free will. After all, since you can't take me seriously anymore,
> why should you care about addressing what I write? How about just
> sticking one of your patented "YAWN's" at the bottom of this text,
> and leaving it at that? Challenge yourself.


<s-t-r-e-t-c-h> Aaaaaaah! (Sound of Donna yawning.)

Remember, Santa knows if you've been bad or good. Merry Christmas, Eric
Poisoned Rose.

terra

unread,
Dec 23, 2006, 8:26:40 PM12/23/06
to
poisoned rose <andmerryxm...@aol.com> wrote in
news:ASjjh.17733$QU1....@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net:

> terra <smoker...@myway.com> wrote:

Hey, a new addy, so Eric ensures I can see his reply. Unless I simply
delete it unread, but why bother? You want my attention so badly, Eric,
I'll play along, sure.
>
> God, can you imagine how much time Charlie spent on this pitiful act
> of ego repair?

Not much. Bing bang boom it was done and sent. Pretty well written too
if I do say so myself. And it's not -my- ego that nbeeds repair,
nutball.

And he's really delusional enough to believe that
> anyone gives a damn besides TAR and Marcus. Just another indulgent
> outpouring of self-involved rancor from the newsgroup's grand dame,
> which will go almost totally ignored.

Except by you, who is incapable of ignoring me. Never killfiled me,
marcus or Donna and you never will. Pathetic little man.


>
>> OK, for your gift and the gift of everyone else here I have yet again
>> killfiled you, so I am missing your most recent meltdown. But I did
>> want to impart a few things to you before I go...
>

> OK, here we see some classic Charlie strategies, in all their
> cop-out feebleness.

Ah, here we go with the fictions. I have few 'startegies' if any. Not
like you.
>
> 1) The person who spends so much of his time here tossing out
> "TROLL!" and "STALKER!" accusations again uses a standard troll's
> tactic of launching a separate, off-topic, character-attack thread
> (something which "trolling" me never does).

No, you simply pop out of killfiles for everyone's benefit.
>
> 2) We also see his common strategy of posting an extended, all-out
> attack on someone, and then announcing he's immediately killfiling
> the person...thus sparing himself the responsibility of dealing with
> the fallout from his dopey tirade.

Nah, I KNEW you would do just what you did. You're THAT predictable.

His swollen pride doesn't have to
> worry about anyone thinking he "chickened out" of answering for
> himself, because he's announcing from the start that he will not see
> the response (whether he actually does killfile is anyone's guess).

I suppose you guessed I did, hence your addy change. :D


> This strategy of using a pre-emptive killfiling as a cowardly crutch
> is why I have sometimes switched my address in the middle of a
> thread to thwart this ploy. And of course if I do switch my address,
> does Charlie just re-adjust his killfile and continue ignoring me?
> No. He immediately flames me at great length back, because once he
> *does* see a post, his total lack of self-control compels him to
> fire back with both barrels. He's powerless over his rage. He
> *needs* a killfile.

Right. I love how you attempt to twist this around to your changing
addys as being some sort of noble gesture. You really are a larf, Eric.
LOL!


>
>> 1.) You claim you want to see change (YOU FIRST!!!), yet I have far
>> more often admitted and modified my behaviour.
>

> The only "modification" I can see is that you're not as profane as
> you used to be. And I'll give you credit for that,

I don't want your credit.

even if it only
> might be because your schoolmarm mate noodged you about this in
> private. But otherwise, it's the same old. Meanwhile, your
> "admissions" of bad behavior are always a complete sham --

Ah, here comes the patented Broome Mind Reading technique. And thanks
for once again proving my point. You cannot be happy with anything I do,
and any words otherwise are all one big lie.


full of
> backhanded attacks on your enemies, and full of excuses where you
> "apologize" for being heroically unable to resist calling out the
> much worse behavior of others.


>
>> In fact, you never change your criticism.
>

> Because you never stop overreacting, beating your chest and flaming
> people.

Now look in the mirror, pot. Because that's about all you do. But I'm
aware of it. You are delusionally thinking you have a pass where I
don't?

>
>> 2.) Pretty much everything you accuse me, donna or marcus of is a
>> figment of *your own imagination* (a polite way to say lies) or a
>> severe projection of *your very own behaviour*. This is not normal.
>> Hence, you possess a mental illness (of a possibly mild sort),
>> unmistakable in it's grand delusion. You think it's just a buzzword
>> for me, but I am honestly evaluating your lack of social grace and
>> intelligence and you are found wanting.
>

> Whatever you need to believe to get through the night, Charlie. Yes,
> I'm only imagining all the time you and Marcus spend "belittling"
> people, to use TAR's syntax.

And you...? Never belittled anyone? Again, your denial is the worst I
have ever seen. Along with your self-love. You can do no wrong but
anyone else is in for a withering scorn from the Gondola. Feh.
>
> For instance, our latest argument started when I objected to you
> beating up on Fattuchus yet again.

And you have NEVER criticized fatt for the exact same thing I do? I can
quote you if you'd like. ("Not as often!" you'll cry....so what? Since
when does post count mean ANYthing? It doesn't, except in your most
fervent desire for it to. Sickie.)

A typical scenario, which you
> always attempt to twist into you being somehow "victimized."

Right. Twisting and spinning is your forte, not mine.
>
> Meanwhile, above is where your hysterical demonizing techniques
> serve the exact opposite purpose you intend: They make you look
> crackers yourself. You sure do think about mental illness an awful
> lot, Charlie. Really seems like a daily preoccupation of yours. Hmm.

You mean like stalking me and counting my posts is a daily obsession of
yours? No, I don't think so. The few I refer to as mentally feeble do
indeed daily demonstrate a sick need for assurance that eclipses normal
behaviour. And YOU are Number One, congrats.

>
>> 2a) Following (stalking) three regular posters religiously;
>

> I don't even know which three you're talking about. I haven't
> directly replied to one of TAR's posts in months, so she can't be
> the third.

Bullshit.
>
>> counting my every post
>
> The usual hysterical hyperboles.

Nope. You've spent many hours ticking up my postings in some imagined
fevered victory. Sick sick sick, boy.


>
>> following me to other newsgroups
>

> What other newsgroups have I attacked you in?

Strawman (again). I said follow. When I settled on terra and started
posting again it was you who triumphantly crowed about how terra was me,
and I was also in the freeware group, the 60's and 70's group, yada yada.

You may not want to archive your precious words but don't think no one
else is capable of it.


>
>> 3.) I have killfiled you repeatedly, and you have changed your addy
>> *specifically to elude my killfile*, something you have admitted
>> openly.
>

> Absolutely.

Well, there ya go.

Because I don't allow you this cowardly tactic of
> dropping a stink bomb and then running away.

I see, because you are the end all and be all of adjudicating how one is
to post in 'your' little group? Get help.

You can killfile me
> when this thread is over. Until then, let's see if, stripped of your
> killfile crutch, you have the strength of character to resist
> replying to this post. As if there's any suspense about the answer.

Why should I? You made a point for me to see it, therefore you shall see
my reply. And you will repeat verbatim the same tired crap you always
do, thinking it makes some cosmic difference when indeed it does not.


>
>> Hm, smells like a troll...yet he can't POSSIBLY be trolling, can he?
>

> God. Yet more vapid "troll" namecalling.

Smells like a troll, sounds like a troll, squawks like a troll, Eric
broome old buddy, Gondola Bob or Poisoned Rose, you are nothing BUT a
troll, and not a very good one.

Which only three or four
> people are even reading. Wouldn't you think all this verbiage would
> strive to achieve something beyond the same old superficial
> demonizing and labeling?

Wouldn't you? Yet here is a point by point refutation of what I wrote.
For who's benefit? I knew what you'd say before you even said it. Not
like I haven't heard your broken record before. So who are YOU trying to
impress?

Always accusing, never seeing yourself in your own pathetic wails.


>
>> 4.) When I first got here you were laying into marcus and I stuck up
>> for him, forever putting me on your shit list.
>

> That is just so WRONG.

Oh geez, sorry, since you say so it must be true...NOT! It is as correct
as anything.

Even given your bizarre hysteria,

Hysteria is your calling card, not mine.

I can't
> imagine how you connect my irritation with you to Marcus. The two
> are totally unrelated. Actually, I find you a lot more irritating
> than Marcus, because you're far more prolific. And while Marcus may
> be a pompous buffoon, he at least doesn't post with your steadily
> frenetic, overheated tone.

More hyperbole. Just words, hot button words meant to piss
off...trollish behaviour? YES!

>
> Since the objections I make to your posts so rarely have anything to
> do with Marcus, how can you manage to convince yourself of this
> conclusion?

OK, then, you're just an asshole.

I criticize you because you continually overreact, get
> angry, abuse people and escalate threads into battles.

And who died and made you God? And when has your constant complaining
made a difference? Insanity, see definition of:.

You don't
> even stick up for Marcus all that often, so I can't even criticize
> you for *that*. Actually, you have often voiced more measured
> objections to his rigid pontificating, which are basically identical
> to mine.

As you have agreed with my take on fatt. So? I disagree with Marcus, I
don't attack him. I don't need to. You can do nothing more than follow,
stalk, and jump on his comments with your 'wry' 'intelligent' remarks.

You had no excuse to nail him for a joke in the midst of others, yet you
somehow (weakly) tried to justify it ... terrible, just terrible. You
make such a fool of yourself so often (while accusing others of doing so)
that it takes my breath away.

>
>> But first I spent a couple of years -attempting- to
>> discuss content and reasoning with you like any normal adult.
>

> Yes, I think everyone here is well-acquainted with your "normal"
> tone of dialogue. LOL!!! FLAP OF SKIN! TURD! ASS! TROLL! STALKER!
> SICK! PSYCHOTIC! LOL!!!!

Again, hyperbole, strawman and the usual Eric obfuscation.

>
>> Yet you openly lie about my posting habits
>

> You are delusional, Charlie. You simply cry "LIAR!" like all the
> other namecalling you do, rather than address points in a
> substantial way. It's funny how you love to call me "liar," but
> never really say what these "lies" are.

Sure I do. And you ignore them, snip them and/or twist them around.
It's your only talent.

>
>> 5.) The facts are clear: you are a bitter, souless troll who looks
>> for a fight and will say any stupid thing to get a reaction.
>

> Still waiting to see if, even once, you will give an example of
> something I've written which you think I didn't mean and only said
> to be annoying. About the closest you ever come is when you
> occasionally claim that I pretend to like obscure bands just to look
> "cool." But that's very seldom.

You have no facility to judge yourself, that much is clear, so you have
even less ability to judge me or anyone else. You have issues, my
friend. REAL issues.

>
>> If I give you content
>

> You mean content like just screaming "TROLL!" "STALKER!"
> "PSYCHOTIC!" over and over, like a complete fool?

Nupe. But then you knew that. Melting down much today? LOL!


>
>> You made up this whole housewifey thing about Donna and have
>> relentlessly pushed that line, no matter how untrue.
>

> Uh...so Donna is not a housewife? She's married (seemingly to
> someone who's quite "connected" and successful, thus removing the
> need for her to work); I don't recall if she has children or not,
> but she obviously goes gooey over "babies" and kids, so motherhood
> seems highly likely; and she's avid about at least one daytime soap
> opera, again suggesting she doesn't work. And her prune-faced,
> puritanical moralizing is straight from the "housewife" playbook.
> But I hardly go into this "relentlessly" -- as I said, her posts
> don't even get past my filters anymore, so there's not much cause to
> address her.

Just another excuse to get all your shots in, and you'll claim this was a
reasoned paragraph? Tsk. Get help, seriously. Your every post
virtually screams for attention.


>
>> You've assailed marcus for
>> longer than I've been here, and you have your stock little lies about
>> me that you repeat ad nauseum as if they were a security blanket for
>> you, and who knows, maybe they are?
>

> What are these lies? That you flame people a lot? Who besides you
> (and perhaps TAR) would deny this?

I flame assholes like you. I also post other things, and as I said I
will even agree with you on the rare occasion you say something worthy of
it. So yes, these are your lies. Hyperbole is a lie technique.

>
>> 6.) Now you're melting down again, yet you will scream that it is me
>> instead.
>

> It really is tragic how in denial you are about your anger problem.
> It completely cripples you.

Yes, I am soooo crippled. LOL! You're so unreal, man. Over and over,
on and on, say it enough maybe it'll stick.

>
>> You cannot even talk normally to anyone about music without getting
>> that snotty condescending all-knowing attitude that eventually wins
>> you even more support (lol!). Hell, once I mentioned that no one
>> supported you in your rage campaign against me and you said it WAS
>> IMPLIED!!! LO fucking L Eric!
>

> More level-headed, calmly analytical text from the guy accusing me
> of mental illness and "meltdowns."

More ignoring the content of what I said.


>
>> 7.) You are a joke, an unfunny, bad joke that I simply cannot take
>> seriously anymore.
>

> More hollow posturing.

You're the expert on it, but no, not this time. Not from me.

If you didn't take me seriously, you'd
> respond quickly, casually and without emotion. Instead, you
> do...this.

What? Outline all the ways your lies need to be addressed yet again?

>
>> You've lied about me for so long
>

> Never told even one lie about you.

Jesus Christ, man, there's the top whopper right there!

In fact, the main reason I have
> "counted" posts by you and that sort of thing is that you vacantly
> scream "LIAR!" and call for substantiation.

Nope. You lie some more. You volunteer in some retarded attempt to show
me up. Never works, but you keep counting.

Then when I give you
> such evidence, you just say I made it up. But of course, you offer
> nothing concrete in rebuttal.

I have never accused you of making it up. I accuse you of attempting to
use figures in some weird way to condemn me, something that figures have
no leaning on. How many times I post is irrelevant to any discussion,
yet you keep flogging it hoping it will stick somehow. (see: Insanity,
definition of:).


>
>> Except I can occasionally mock my own, you could never in a
>> million years, you take yourself FAR too seriously.
>

> Yeah, like when I make a self-deprecating joke about myself
> "trolling" on my webpage, and you and TAR howl like it's a fiery
> declaration of war.

Then I guess, that being your only confessed attempt at humor, that you
are simply a very unfunny person. And it's a joke based on an obvious
truth, one you seem quite proud of.

>
>>Netkopping, Eric?
>
> Wow. This post had so much hypocrisy, it almost makes me gag.

If only you would.


>
> Impress everyone, Charlie, and resist replying to this post of your
> own free will.

Nope. I plan on joshing you every chance I get but as you were
DETERMINED I see your little repeat of your daily mental illness, I shall
say whatever I wish. And here's a clue for you, Eric: you don;t set the
agenda for what impresses ANYone, let alone EVERYone. All talk.

After all, since you can't take me seriously anymore,
> why should you care about addressing what I write? How about just
> sticking one of your patented "YAWN's" at the bottom of this text,
> and leaving it at that? Challenge yourself.

No, you 'challenge' yourself.

LOL!

terra

unread,
Dec 23, 2006, 8:27:32 PM12/23/06
to
TAR <tom....@ix.netcom.com> wrote in news:458DD0...@ix.netcom.com:


You think he'd get tired of all the fictional pontificating, but no, he
has stamina, gotta give him that. Like a tasmanian devil.

TAR

unread,
Dec 23, 2006, 9:30:52 PM12/23/06
to


Must be those candy cane sugar rushes.

TAR

unread,
Dec 23, 2006, 9:58:03 PM12/23/06
to
terra wrote:
>
> poisoned rose <andmerryxm...@aol.com> wrote in
> news:ASjjh.17733$QU1....@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net:
>
> > For instance, our latest argument started when I objected to you
> > beating up on Fattuchus yet again.
>
> And you have NEVER criticized fatt for the exact same thing I do? I can
> quote you if you'd like. ("Not as often!" you'll cry....so what? Since
> when does post count mean ANYthing? It doesn't, except in your most
> fervent desire for it to. Sickie.)

Duh, wasn't PR the one who posted something like, "fattuchus wrote:" and
then filled a page with just "Yoko, Yoko, Yoko..."? And wasn't it he
who went into the Google archives just to count how many times fattuchus
wrote the name "Yoko", and how many times he/she wrote the name,
"John"? See, this is the reason why PR tells Google not to archive his
posts. He's afraid that something will come back and bite him.

Sixties Gen

unread,
Dec 24, 2006, 12:17:41 AM12/24/06
to

I agree with Charlie's and Donna's remarks about Eric's need to be the
judge of others, act as the final arbiter of what should or should not
be discussed here, and be the social advisor of what tone and words
should be used in the posts to this newsgroup.

I find Eric's behavior sad because somewhere beneath that hostile,
pompous exterior there is most likely someone intelligent who does not
know how to use that intelligence in a benevolent way. Perhaps in the
past, sincere emotional comments were shot down by someone he admired,
so now Eric views similar responses by others as a weakness, and
pounces on those who do so, thereby "proving" to himself that he was
correct in resisting heartfelt honesty, and self-examination, in his
discourse with others.

Of course, that is only a theory, but if it is true, Eric, it doesn't
have to be that way.

Only you can change you.

abe slaney

unread,
Dec 24, 2006, 5:04:11 AM12/24/06
to
Sixties Gen wrote:

> I agree with Charlie's and Donna's remarks about Eric's need to be the
> judge of others, act as the final arbiter of what should or should not
> be discussed here, and be the social advisor of what tone and words
> should be used in the posts to this newsgroup.
>
> I find Eric's behavior sad because somewhere beneath that hostile,
> pompous exterior there is most likely someone intelligent who does not
> know how to use that intelligence in a benevolent way. Perhaps in the
> past, sincere emotional comments were shot down by someone he admired,
> so now Eric views similar responses by others as a weakness, and
> pounces on those who do so, thereby "proving" to himself that he was
> correct in resisting heartfelt honesty, and self-examination, in his
> discourse with others.
>
> Of course, that is only a theory, but if it is true, Eric, it doesn't
> have to be that way.
>
> Only you can change you.

What a load. You don't like him, he doesn't like you, period.
If you were straining any harder to position yourself as the serene and
wise one, you'd want a truss.

Sixties Gen

unread,
Dec 24, 2006, 10:45:20 AM12/24/06
to

Not true. I was being sincere.

Message has been deleted

Lookingglass

unread,
Dec 24, 2006, 3:28:54 PM12/24/06
to
An Observation...

It is a curious thing...this 'usenet'.

We all come here and voice our opinions and arguements...our positions on
particular points...we defend ourselves...assert ourselves...make fools of
ourselves, and sometimes make 'saints' of ourselves. We curse and moan about
each other...praise and pat one another on the back...share bits about our
'lives' with the other inhabitants of RMB...and with those that lurk beyond
it's virtual borders. We laugh here...we grieve here...we SHARE ourselves
with one another here. As we are all Human Beings, we are all multi-faceted.
Some of those 'facets' are obvious...some not so obvious. There does seem to
be an excess of wasted keystrokes though..."sound and fury...signifying
nothing!"

We do all of this, as if we KNOW one another. That is not to say we DON'T
know something about each other. This *place* is full of ambition and
agenda...and that comes across in the various threads and posts. I don't
pretend to know why others are here. I often wonder why some folks are here.
Part of my interaction with PR (and his exchanges with others), caused me to
wonder why was he here. Sometimes I think maybe he is (was) the Captain of
the Debate Team...and he is honing his debating skills. Maybe he is a
Teacher in some degree, and is trying to 'stimulate' some thinking here.
(Hey...it's MY obsevation!) Maybe he's a jerk..a short jerk. Who
knows...only PR.

The point is *I* don't know. I only know what I think I know.

When I first 'dipped my toe in the waters' here, Francie asked me WHY was I
here? I was surprised by that question...I hadn't thought about a reason, I
believed I just wanted to join in the appreciation of THE BEATLES...and to
learn...nothing more.

I HAVE learned a great deal from listening and interacting with everyone
here at RMB...and that includes PR. (For some reason, the phrase "The Devil
you know is better than the Devil you don't know", comes to mind here.)
Heck, I even learned from Francie.

Thanks Abe...(though your comment was not directed at me)...I don't need a
truss. I am not so serene...or wise! I'm just a guy who came here to join in
the general melee, and learn.

Now, I will push myself away from the keyboard and monitor, and let my other
personality take the controls...

Isn't that right Alfred? (Stop that!)


www.Shemakhan.com
(End of Automatic Writing attack)


Message has been deleted

Sixties Gen

unread,
Dec 24, 2006, 5:59:05 PM12/24/06
to

Very good post. None of us, unless we know the person in real life,
really knows the other. Who knows, were PR and I to meet, we might
genuinely like each other...I realize that is unlikely given our usenet
history, but stranger things have been known to happen.

One of my dislikes of modern technology(and I resisted even having a
computer for almost 5 years because of it) is the impersonal nature of
it, the ability to not always be courteous, and to hide behind the mask
of anonymity. That nature of the internet does tend to bring out the
worst in some people, and I have been guilty of that myself. I am not
proud of all of the exchanges I've had with everyone here, save for the
ones who are truly repulsive trolls who have absolutely nothing to
offer except swearing at people, and talking about bowel movements etc.


PR keeps posting about how I treated Frank. Well, he might not think
so, but until I became exasperated with Frank's continued
"johnny-one-note" on his "Earth is flat" type belief (which I still
can't believe any rationale human being can continue to hold), I
actually posed questions to Frank to try and get some honest answers
with perspective, and not the knee-jerk "America can do no wrong"
catechism he continued to spout with each post.

However, that again is the problem with the Internet, and emails, and
posting to newsgroups...it's hard to discern emotions, credibility, and
voice intonation in posts. Perhaps, Frank feels he was being honest,
whereas I thought he was stonewalling me, and merely repeat rote
right-wing drivel.

The real problem I see with a poster like PR, and you'll have to take
me at my word that I am not blowing my own horn here, is that I am
willing to admit that I am wrong...he can't or won't.

And I don't need a "truss" here to say that is a real shame.

Lookingglass

unread,
Dec 24, 2006, 6:09:42 PM12/24/06
to

"poisoned rose" <andmerryxm...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:TVBjh.2385$sR....@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
>
> I'm just going to clip most of the delirious "troll"/"sick"-type
> namecalling below, because it's utterly inconsequential and such an
> empty, crashing bore. Though I can't cut *all* of it, because
> otherwise there would be scarcely any text to address.


With apologies to Terra, I DID take a guilty pleasure type laugh at that
one.

www.Shemakhan.com


Message has been deleted

Lookingglass

unread,
Dec 24, 2006, 6:14:22 PM12/24/06
to

"poisoned rose" <andmerryxm...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:TVBjh.2385$sR....@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...

> Look here again, you baboon:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.beatles/about

Thank you...I couldn't find the forest as the 'trees' kept getting in the
way...or words to that effect.

;^)

www.Shemakhan.com


Lookingglass

unread,
Dec 24, 2006, 6:17:43 PM12/24/06
to

"poisoned rose" <andmerryxm...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:TVBjh.2385$sR....@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...


Cheese and Crackers! I managed a #3 at 213 posts this month!!! Well, I guess
214 including this one. I think I need to shut it down for awhile.

www.Shemakhan.com


abe slaney

unread,
Dec 24, 2006, 7:24:49 PM12/24/06
to
Lookingglass wrote:

> Thanks Abe...(though your comment was not directed at me)...I don't need a
> truss. I am not so serene...or wise! I'm just a guy who came here to join in
> the general melee, and learn.

Merry Christmas to you Dave, and to everybody else!

Lookingglass

unread,
Dec 24, 2006, 8:02:49 PM12/24/06
to

"abe slaney" <abesl...@itagain.com> wrote in message
news:458f1a51$0$16703$4c36...@roadrunner.com...


...and a very Merry Christmas to you and yours Abe.

www.Shemakhan.com


Manfred Noland

unread,
Dec 27, 2006, 10:56:44 AM12/27/06
to
and a happy, healthy, safe and prosperous New Year !

Sean Carroll

unread,
Dec 29, 2006, 6:32:35 PM12/29/06
to
poisoned rose wrote:
> "Sixties Gen" <sixti...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>>I agree with Charlie's and Donna's remarks

> Gee, there's a shocker. Let the daisy chain begin anew! You three
> are becoming your own isolated triangle, more and more.

Yeah, they're completely isolated. Except from the people who are here
to post about actual things and ideas (sometimes even having something
to do with the Beatles), and not carry on personal animosities.

I have never understood the people who treat Usenet like some sort of
political campaign, where the idea is to gain supporters and attack your
foes. What would these people have left to post about if all of a sudden
the people they spend all their time attacking disappeared? Would they
just find new enemies? And people think *high school* is bad.

--
--Sean
http://spclsd223.livejournal.com/
'Just 'cause he says I hit him doesn't make it true. Watch. "I am
surrounded by naked cheerleaders." See?' --Dr Gregory House

Sean Carroll

unread,
Dec 29, 2006, 6:39:04 PM12/29/06
to
Lookingglass wrote:
> "poisoned rose" <andmerryxm...@aol.com> wrote

>>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.beatles/about

> Cheese and Crackers! I managed a #3 at 213 posts this month!!! Well, I guess
> 214 including this one. I think I need to shut it down for awhile.

Wow! I made it to 6th place at 199.

This calls for a transfer of whiskey from the bottle in my drawer to my
bloodstream.

TAR

unread,
Dec 29, 2006, 7:49:48 PM12/29/06
to
Sean Carroll wrote:
>
> poisoned rose wrote:
> > "Sixties Gen" <sixti...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>I agree with Charlie's and Donna's remarks
>
> > Gee, there's a shocker. Let the daisy chain begin anew! You three
> > are becoming your own isolated triangle, more and more.
>
> Yeah, they're completely isolated. Except from the people who are here
> to post about actual things and ideas (sometimes even having something
> to do with the Beatles), and not carry on personal animosities.
>
> I have never understood the people who treat Usenet like some sort of
> political campaign, where the idea is to gain supporters and attack your
> foes.


Excuse me, Sean, but I've been reading a lot of off-topic posts from you
lately (thanks for telling us so much about your penis, btw), and just
about everyone here goes off-topic now and then. With few exceptions,
most of us come here to mainly talk about the Beatles. It's when they
do, and others decide to get personal and pick fights for no reason,
that things can get a little rough. And, just so you know, we're not
"completely isolated" in our exasperation with pr's long history of
unprovoked criticisms on posters here. You just don't see what goes on
outside of this newsgroup.

Now before I go, I would especially like to thank you, Sean, for not
coming here now to gain a supporter or to attack your foes, and
especially for not bringing this all up again.

Sean Carroll

unread,
Dec 29, 2006, 8:34:27 PM12/29/06
to
TAR wrote:
> Sean Carroll wrote:

>>I have never understood the people who treat Usenet like some sort of
>>political campaign, where the idea is to gain supporters and attack your
>>foes.

> Excuse me, Sean, but I've been reading a lot of off-topic posts from you
> lately

I didn't say anything about being on-topic. Just about making your sole
purpose for posting to talk about other posters.

> And, just so you know, we're not
> "completely isolated" in our exasperation with pr's long history of
> unprovoked criticisms on posters here. You just don't see what goes on
> outside of this newsgroup.

> Now before I go, I would especially like to thank you, Sean, for not
> coming here now to gain a supporter or to attack your foes, and
> especially for not bringing this all up again.

I think you have misunderstood what I was saying. It was a general
observation of a phenomenon that is universal on Usenet, not a personal
observation about any one person. I was simply exasperated by one more
post that had no content, even off-topic content, except to express
dislike of (an)other poster(s).

Surely everyone, myself not excepted, does it once in a while. But some
people make it their mission in life, and seem to post about nothing
else. I am not naming any particular person as belonging to this group.
I am merely saying that some posters on Usenet have a bizarre and
annoying tendency to become obsessed with one another.

TAR

unread,
Dec 29, 2006, 8:47:20 PM12/29/06
to
Sean Carroll wrote:

>
> TAR wrote:
>
> > Excuse me, Sean, but I've been reading a lot of off-topic posts from you
> > lately
>
> I didn't say anything about being on-topic. Just about making your sole
> purpose for posting to talk about other posters.

To whom are you referring?


> > Now before I go, I would especially like to thank you, Sean, for not
> > coming here now to gain a supporter or to attack your foes, and
> > especially for not bringing this all up again.
>
> I think you have misunderstood what I was saying. It was a general
> observation of a phenomenon that is universal on Usenet, not a personal
> observation about any one person. I was simply exasperated by one more
> post that had no content, even off-topic content, except to express
> dislike of (an)other poster(s).

It sounded to me as if you were agreeing with poisoned rose.


> Surely everyone, myself not excepted, does it once in a while. But some
> people make it their mission in life, and seem to post about nothing
> else. I am not naming any particular person as belonging to this group.
> I am merely saying that some posters on Usenet have a bizarre and
> annoying tendency to become obsessed with one another.

And with that, I agree, but I'll go as far as to admit that even
poisoned rose doesn't seem to make this his only mission in life.

Sean Carroll

unread,
Dec 29, 2006, 9:29:25 PM12/29/06
to
TAR wrote:
> Sean Carroll wrote:

>>I think you have misunderstood what I was saying. It was a general
>>observation of a phenomenon that is universal on Usenet, not a personal
>>observation about any one person. I was simply exasperated by one more
>>post that had no content, even off-topic content, except to express
>>dislike of (an)other poster(s).

> It sounded to me as if you were agreeing with poisoned rose.

Not in the slightest. I was expressing my exasperation at him, in fact.
But even so, it had less to do with him specifically than just a thought
he prompted me to have.

Message has been deleted

Sean Carroll

unread,
Dec 29, 2006, 9:37:32 PM12/29/06
to
poisoned rose wrote:
> Sean Carroll <sean...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>>Not in the slightest. I was expressing my exasperation at him, in fact.
>>But even so, it had less to do with him specifically than just a thought
>>he prompted me to have.

> You might note that I'm not the one starting these "Hey enemy, I'm
> calling YOU out for a personal flamewar!" threads.

As I said, I don't care who started it. And that is the extent of my
comment, as to dwell any longer on the subject would be just as annoying
as what I was complaining about.

Sixties Gen

unread,
Dec 29, 2006, 9:58:26 PM12/29/06
to

Sean,

Save for a strange, out-of-character-not-seeming-to-belong-in-this
thread post by Manfred Nolan, no one has posted in this thread
regarding the subject at hand for five days...until you did today.

Why now?

Anyway, Happy New Year...and don't forget new "House" episodes start on
January 9th.

terra

unread,
Dec 29, 2006, 11:56:24 PM12/29/06
to
poisoned rose <andmerryxm...@aol.com> wrote in
news:odklh.26410$Gr2...@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net:

> Sean Carroll <sean...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >>I think you have misunderstood what I was saying. It was a general
>> >>observation of a phenomenon that is universal on Usenet, not a
>> >>personal observation about any one person. I was simply exasperated
>> >>by one more post that had no content, even off-topic content,
>> >>except to express dislike of (an)other poster(s).
>>
>> > It sounded to me as if you were agreeing with poisoned rose.
>>
>> Not in the slightest. I was expressing my exasperation at him, in
>> fact. But even so, it had less to do with him specifically than just
>> a thought he prompted me to have.
>

> You might note that I'm not the one starting these "Hey enemy, I'm
> calling YOU out for a personal flamewar!" threads.
>

Yes, so that absolves all the other things you DO do? One of your great
techniques, talking about all the things you don't do, and always
ignoring the things you do.

Nevertheless, I was wrong to make this thread a personal one.

Sean Carroll

unread,
Jan 9, 2007, 7:10:16 AM1/9/07
to
Sixties Gen wrote:

> Save for a strange, out-of-character-not-seeming-to-belong-in-this
> thread post by Manfred Nolan, no one has posted in this thread
> regarding the subject at hand for five days...until you did today.

> Why now?

I have been spending a lot of time away from my computer lately. I have
been going through several days' worth of posts at a time to catch up.

--
--Sean
http://spclsd223.livejournal.com/
'Well, normally I'd put on a festive hat and celebrate the fact that the
earth has circled the sun one more time. I really didn't think it was
gonna make it this year, but, darnit if it wasn't the Little Planet That
Could all over again!' --Dr Gregory House

Megan Meadows

unread,
Nov 17, 2021, 4:46:52 AM11/17/21
to
We CAN remove Tax Liens,
Repo’s, Late Payments & Bankruptcies from your credit!
The Credit People can help!
Text us now at (614) 414-2437. Reply STOP to Cancel
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages