info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
DFS and TomB... You were right....
4 views
Skip to first unread message
Torre Starnes
Mar 27, 2012, 9:13:10 PM3/27/12
to
Apologies....
Also to Peter Kohlmann as well.
You were correct as well.
Also to Peter Kohlmann as well.
You were correct as well.
DFS
Mar 27, 2012, 9:48:26 PM3/27/12
to
If so, I was fooled by him for a long time, too, mostly because I didn't
closely read his threads. I knew he liked to split hairs and argue
endlessly, so I usually glossed over his threads. I didn't realize he
would keep babbling "Support your accusation" even in the face of direct
evidence of his lies.
Oh well. I finally decided to killfile him again (my only entry).
Torre Starnes
Mar 27, 2012, 10:05:11 PM3/27/12
to
On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 21:48:26 -0400, DFS wrote:
> On 3/27/2012 9:13 PM, Torre Starnes wrote:
>> Apologies....
>> Also to Peter Kohlmann as well.
>> You were correct as well.
>
>
> About Snit?
>
Yep.
> On 3/27/2012 9:13 PM, Torre Starnes wrote:
>> Apologies....
>> Also to Peter Kohlmann as well.
>> You were correct as well.
>
>
> About Snit?
>
I admit I was sucked in.
In the dumper.....
Snit
Mar 28, 2012, 12:03:26 AM3/28/12
to
DFS stated in post jktqlh$hfo$2...@dont-email.me on 3/27/12 6:48 PM:
What direct evidence?
I keep asking you that and you run. And that is the point... yes, I ask for
evidence of accusations. And when the evidence shows I am wrong, as you
have seen, I openly and quickly admit to my error. But when the evidence
does not show it I will not claim it does.
With Peter, as I have noted, there is an open question: he says I am wrong
about JPGs and EXIF data... but wrong about *what*? The only think I have
said about those is that JPGs *can* have EXIF data. There is nothing else
for him to disagree with... and when asked he runs... not even he can think
of any other place where he thinks I am wrong on the topic. Yes, I know
there was a single image he disagreed with me about - but he makes the claim
as a general claim, not about a single file (of which is not even available
any more and has not been for years).
So what is he saying I am wrong about? What???
You do not know. He will not say. I have postulated that when he says I am
wrong he is saying I am wrong about the only real thing I have said on the
topic... nothing else makes sense (how can I be wrong about something I did
not say on the topic?). This is all easily shown and common sense.
And yet you claim I have lied... but cannot show it.
Same thing with Stallman: I showed the quotes - direct from Stallman - that
completely back up my claims. Completely and totally. 100%. No
interpretation needed. To help you and TomB out I even put the pieces
together - something I have not had to do with people outside of COLA. A
*normal* person reads Stallman's quotes and finds his comments repulsive and
reprehensible and needs no explanation. Heck, many take things much further
than I do and claim that anyone who would say such things must have
committed illegal acts... and I *defend* Stallman on such things.
But you still say I am lying... with *no* backing, no support, no evidence.
Nothing. Not a thing.
And that is what I am against: accusations you know you cannot back up...
accusations where the evidence points to me not only being correct, but
being so obviously and powerfully correct that no rational person would
question the conclusion. We are not talking a topic with much gray are
here!
But when challenged to back up your claims you either run or post nonsense
that does not back your claims. An example of this is the BS about me
saying all Linux users are a part of a cult or herd or cult-like group or
whatever... a claim you make about my views which is completely contrary to
my views... a lie. So, yes, when you say I accuse all Linux users of being
a part of a herd or cult or whatever you are saying things which are
contrary to the facts. And since you have not backed down from that claim,
even when the evidence has shown you to be wrong, you are lying.
In your desire to show me to have lied you have repeatedly lied yourself.
And that is not something you should be proud of.
--
🙈🙉🙊
I keep asking you that and you run. And that is the point... yes, I ask for
evidence of accusations. And when the evidence shows I am wrong, as you
have seen, I openly and quickly admit to my error. But when the evidence
does not show it I will not claim it does.
With Peter, as I have noted, there is an open question: he says I am wrong
about JPGs and EXIF data... but wrong about *what*? The only think I have
said about those is that JPGs *can* have EXIF data. There is nothing else
for him to disagree with... and when asked he runs... not even he can think
of any other place where he thinks I am wrong on the topic. Yes, I know
there was a single image he disagreed with me about - but he makes the claim
as a general claim, not about a single file (of which is not even available
any more and has not been for years).
So what is he saying I am wrong about? What???
You do not know. He will not say. I have postulated that when he says I am
wrong he is saying I am wrong about the only real thing I have said on the
topic... nothing else makes sense (how can I be wrong about something I did
not say on the topic?). This is all easily shown and common sense.
And yet you claim I have lied... but cannot show it.
Same thing with Stallman: I showed the quotes - direct from Stallman - that
completely back up my claims. Completely and totally. 100%. No
interpretation needed. To help you and TomB out I even put the pieces
together - something I have not had to do with people outside of COLA. A
*normal* person reads Stallman's quotes and finds his comments repulsive and
reprehensible and needs no explanation. Heck, many take things much further
than I do and claim that anyone who would say such things must have
committed illegal acts... and I *defend* Stallman on such things.
But you still say I am lying... with *no* backing, no support, no evidence.
Nothing. Not a thing.
And that is what I am against: accusations you know you cannot back up...
accusations where the evidence points to me not only being correct, but
being so obviously and powerfully correct that no rational person would
question the conclusion. We are not talking a topic with much gray are
here!
But when challenged to back up your claims you either run or post nonsense
that does not back your claims. An example of this is the BS about me
saying all Linux users are a part of a cult or herd or cult-like group or
whatever... a claim you make about my views which is completely contrary to
my views... a lie. So, yes, when you say I accuse all Linux users of being
a part of a herd or cult or whatever you are saying things which are
contrary to the facts. And since you have not backed down from that claim,
even when the evidence has shown you to be wrong, you are lying.
In your desire to show me to have lied you have repeatedly lied yourself.
And that is not something you should be proud of.
--
🙈🙉🙊
Snit
Mar 28, 2012, 12:14:37 AM3/28/12
to
Torre Starnes stated in post cjmva6miuhc4$.765g3lie...@40tude.net on
3/27/12 6:13 PM:
> Apologies....
> Also to Peter Kohlmann as well.
> You were correct as well.
About what?
If this is tied to DFS's recent accusations against me, I will - as is my
norm - ask for the evidence.
But for some reason it never can be found.
If this is about something else, my apologies for the misunderstanding.
--
🙈🙉🙊
3/27/12 6:13 PM:
> Apologies....
> Also to Peter Kohlmann as well.
> You were correct as well.
If this is tied to DFS's recent accusations against me, I will - as is my
norm - ask for the evidence.
But for some reason it never can be found.
If this is about something else, my apologies for the misunderstanding.
--
🙈🙉🙊
0 new messages