Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
NOMINATION: Moronic Murphy for CNotM (was Re: NOMINATION: Chimpy Checkmate for CNotM)
17 views
Skip to first unread message
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Nadegda
Oct 30, 2012, 9:51:53 PM10/30/12
to
On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 22:31:47 -0400, CastAlone (Pie Gurl) P...@yahoo.calm
wrote:
[Froups desnecked, lily-livered lunatic.]
> "Penix" (Paula) G Derby<SLAP! Proof, kooky?>
>
>>Time I had me tabs...
>>
>>"Nadegda" (P<SLAP! Nice postedit, fuckwit!>
>>
>>> On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 19:29:21 -0500, Fred Hall wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://66.39.71.195/Derbyshire/fractgal.html
>>>
>>> Eww. Your website design is *soooo* last century, Hall. And there's
>>> quite a few broken images on it.
>>
> yet so proud you were of that megaphone of your personality, paula.
Not my website, goofball. Not only that, whois says the IP belongs to
United States Pittsburgh Pair Networks. So much for Derbyshire being in
Pembroke, Ontario.
Whose home did you surreptitiously photograph when you flew all the way
there to stalk Derbyshire, kook? Obviously not Derbyshire, if his ISP and
chintzy webpage are in Pittsburgh. Some innocent person, no matter what
you allege Derbyshire did to you. You truly do deserve that Pickett, goof.
And this as well.
NOMINATION: Murphy for Clueless Newbie of the Month for getting
"Pittsburgh" and "Pembroke" confused apparently because they both begin
with the letter "P".
> then the string broke...
That would be the final thread of your sanity, to be specific, kooky.
>>Well, thank Fat Fred for proving you're not Derbyshire. If you were,
>>you'd have already known about Mandelbrot.
>>
> issat how you comfort yourself, paula... doing a INMIH at yourself?
Doing a what?
Here's a hint: try writing your posts in *English*. *English*!
>>http://66.39.71.195/Derbyshire/manguide.html
>>
>>SPNAK!, Fat Fred.
>>
> can you say "limp dick" derbyshire?
Transparent deflection, no real rebuttal, and gratuitous namecalling
thrown in for good measure. Judges?
___ ___ ___ ___ ___
|0.1| |0.2| |0.0| |-19| |0.1|
~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
'*` | '*` | '*` | '*` | '*` |
(o o) | (o o) | (o o) | (o o) | (o o) |
ooO--(_)--Ooo-ooO--(_)--Ooo-ooO--(_)--Ooo-ooO--(_)--Ooo-ooO--(_)--Ooo-
Euuuurgh. *Terrible* performance, kooky! Absolutely horrendous. Your
attempt at a basic riposte here got worse scores than Gabrielle Douglas's
gymnastics routine when she kept falling off the balance beam this summer.
Wait a minute. Did ... did one of the judges actually give you a
*negative* score?
<snicker>
>><snicker><--------yer fucking sick dude, no way are you a horse. i saw
>>the video.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdyBYSuqQBQ&feature=youtu.be
>
> what was it that moved you back to Rogers.com paula?
First Paul's in Pembroke with Sympatico. Then he's in Pittsburgh with
Pair Networks. Then he's back in Canada (somewhere) with Rogers. When are
you planning to make up your mind where your invisible, omnipresent
bogeyman lives, kook?
wrote:
[Froups desnecked, lily-livered lunatic.]
> "Penix" (Paula) G Derby<SLAP! Proof, kooky?>
>
>>Time I had me tabs...
>>
>>"Nadegda" (P<SLAP! Nice postedit, fuckwit!>
>>
>>> On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 19:29:21 -0500, Fred Hall wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://66.39.71.195/Derbyshire/fractgal.html
>>>
>>> Eww. Your website design is *soooo* last century, Hall. And there's
>>> quite a few broken images on it.
>>
> yet so proud you were of that megaphone of your personality, paula.
Not my website, goofball. Not only that, whois says the IP belongs to
United States Pittsburgh Pair Networks. So much for Derbyshire being in
Pembroke, Ontario.
Whose home did you surreptitiously photograph when you flew all the way
there to stalk Derbyshire, kook? Obviously not Derbyshire, if his ISP and
chintzy webpage are in Pittsburgh. Some innocent person, no matter what
you allege Derbyshire did to you. You truly do deserve that Pickett, goof.
And this as well.
NOMINATION: Murphy for Clueless Newbie of the Month for getting
"Pittsburgh" and "Pembroke" confused apparently because they both begin
with the letter "P".
> then the string broke...
That would be the final thread of your sanity, to be specific, kooky.
>>Well, thank Fat Fred for proving you're not Derbyshire. If you were,
>>you'd have already known about Mandelbrot.
>>
> issat how you comfort yourself, paula... doing a INMIH at yourself?
Doing a what?
Here's a hint: try writing your posts in *English*. *English*!
>>http://66.39.71.195/Derbyshire/manguide.html
>>
>>SPNAK!, Fat Fred.
>>
> can you say "limp dick" derbyshire?
Transparent deflection, no real rebuttal, and gratuitous namecalling
thrown in for good measure. Judges?
___ ___ ___ ___ ___
|0.1| |0.2| |0.0| |-19| |0.1|
~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
'*` | '*` | '*` | '*` | '*` |
(o o) | (o o) | (o o) | (o o) | (o o) |
ooO--(_)--Ooo-ooO--(_)--Ooo-ooO--(_)--Ooo-ooO--(_)--Ooo-ooO--(_)--Ooo-
Euuuurgh. *Terrible* performance, kooky! Absolutely horrendous. Your
attempt at a basic riposte here got worse scores than Gabrielle Douglas's
gymnastics routine when she kept falling off the balance beam this summer.
Wait a minute. Did ... did one of the judges actually give you a
*negative* score?
<snicker>
>><snicker><--------yer fucking sick dude, no way are you a horse. i saw
>>the video.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdyBYSuqQBQ&feature=youtu.be
>
> what was it that moved you back to Rogers.com paula?
First Paul's in Pembroke with Sympatico. Then he's in Pittsburgh with
Pair Networks. Then he's back in Canada (somewhere) with Rogers. When are
you planning to make up your mind where your invisible, omnipresent
bogeyman lives, kook?
kensi
Oct 30, 2012, 10:11:01 PM10/30/12
to
On 30/10/2012 9:51 PM, Nadegda wrote:
> NOMINATION: Murphy for Clueless Newbie of the Month for getting
> "Pittsburgh" and "Pembroke" confused apparently because they both begin
> with the letter "P".
Seconded.
> NOMINATION: Murphy for Clueless Newbie of the Month for getting
> "Pittsburgh" and "Pembroke" confused apparently because they both begin
> with the letter "P".
Holy shit. Murphy went from one nomination to *five* this month because
of just one day of screeding.
--
"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain
the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks
Checkmate
Oct 30, 2012, 11:07:19 PM10/30/12
to
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
Checkmate!
First, check out what kensi said:
>
> On 30/10/2012 9:51 PM, Nadegda wrote:
> > NOMINATION: Murphy for Clueless Newbie of the Month for getting
> > "Pittsburgh" and "Pembroke" confused apparently because they both begin
> > with the letter "P".
>
> Seconded.
>
> Holy shit. Murphy went from one nomination to *five* this month because
> of just one day of screeding.
I could coax twice that out of you k00ks in an hour... without even
breaking a sweat.
--
Checkmate
KotAGoR XXXIV
AUK Hammer of Thor award, Feb. 2012
co-winner, Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker award, May 2001
Copyright © 2012
all rights reserved
My name is Checkmate, and I approve this message...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpZhZAr1cQU
Read what others are saying about Checkmate!
_____________________________________________________________________
"I keep forgetting you've been doing this for so long that it's easy
for you. I can't wait to piss on your grave."
Uncle Steve
Message-ID: <b18ab6cb2c...@gmail.com>
_____________________________________________________________________
"Did... did you just tell someone to attempt to ROT-13 *numbers*, you
Clueless Newbie of the Month candidate?"
Paul Derbyshire, socked-up as [tor] Phoenix
Message-ID: <k3ae35$prb$1...@news.mixmin.net>
_____________________________________________________________________
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
Paul Derbyshire, socked up as Andrew Wilson
Message-ID: <9870030e-6c49-4f16-af9e-
070a57...@g18g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>
_____________________________________________________________________
Checkmate!
First, check out what kensi said:
>
> On 30/10/2012 9:51 PM, Nadegda wrote:
> > NOMINATION: Murphy for Clueless Newbie of the Month for getting
> > "Pittsburgh" and "Pembroke" confused apparently because they both begin
> > with the letter "P".
>
> Seconded.
>
> Holy shit. Murphy went from one nomination to *five* this month because
> of just one day of screeding.
breaking a sweat.
--
Checkmate
KotAGoR XXXIV
AUK Hammer of Thor award, Feb. 2012
co-winner, Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker award, May 2001
Copyright © 2012
all rights reserved
My name is Checkmate, and I approve this message...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpZhZAr1cQU
Read what others are saying about Checkmate!
_____________________________________________________________________
"I keep forgetting you've been doing this for so long that it's easy
for you. I can't wait to piss on your grave."
Uncle Steve
Message-ID: <b18ab6cb2c...@gmail.com>
_____________________________________________________________________
"Did... did you just tell someone to attempt to ROT-13 *numbers*, you
Clueless Newbie of the Month candidate?"
Paul Derbyshire, socked-up as [tor] Phoenix
Message-ID: <k3ae35$prb$1...@news.mixmin.net>
_____________________________________________________________________
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
Paul Derbyshire, socked up as Andrew Wilson
Message-ID: <9870030e-6c49-4f16-af9e-
070a57...@g18g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>
_____________________________________________________________________
Message has been deleted
Andrew Wilson
Oct 31, 2012, 5:11:38 AM10/31/12
to
On Oct 31, 8:55 am, Kook Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> location as the person who set up and maintains the site, huh?
For professionally hosted web sites, no, but this Derbyshire guy is
obviously hosting it on his home computer if it has no domain name. So
the IP will resolve to his ISP.
> Self spank much?
You do indeed.
> >Whose home did you surreptitiously photograph when you flew all the way
> >there to stalk Derbyshire, kook? Obviously not Derbyshire, if his ISP and
> >chintzy webpage are in Pittsburgh.
>
> Please present your evidence that Paul's IP is in Pittsburgh. I
> am willing to accept the host for his web site is in Pittsburgh.
The host is clearly his PC, rather than a proper hosting company's
servers, or why would the domain part of the URL be a raw IP address,
you retard?
> >Some innocent person, no matter what
> >you allege Derbyshire did to you. You truly do deserve that Pickett, goof.
>
> >And this as well.
>
> You present a bogus claim
No, she didn't. She just knows that separately-hosted web sites have
domain names and not just IP addresses in their URLs.
> >NOMINATION: Murphy for Clueless Newbie of the Month for getting
> >"Pittsburgh" and "Pembroke" confused apparently because they both begin
> >with the letter "P".
>
> Your fake awards mean less than the real ones. And they always
> will.
They're not the fake ones, dumbass.
> >> then the string broke...
>
> >That would be the final thread of your sanity, to be specific, kooky.
>
> >>>Well, thank Fat Fred for proving you're not Derbyshire. If you were,
> >>>you'd have already known about Mandelbrot.
>
> >> issat how you comfort yourself, paula... doing a INMIH at yourself?
>
> >Doing a what?
>
> >Here's a hint: try writing your posts in *English*. *English*!
>
> >>>http://66.39.71.195/Derbyshire/manguide.html
Seriously. Does that LOOK like the URL of a web page hosted elsewhere
than on the guy's own computer?
> >>>SPNAK!, Fat Fred.
>
> >> can you say "limp dick" derbyshire?
>
> >Transparent deflection, no real rebuttal, and gratuitous namecalling
> >thrown in for good measure. Judges?
>
> Did Cast adopt your party trick?
What the hell are you babbling about now, Kook Wills?
> > ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
> > |0.1| |0.2| |0.0| |-19| |0.1|
> > ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
> > '*` | '*` | '*` | '*` | '*` |
> > (o o) | (o o) | (o o) | (o o) | (o o) |
> >ooO--(_)--Ooo-ooO--(_)--Ooo-ooO--(_)--Ooo-ooO--(_)--Ooo-ooO--(_)--Ooo-
>
> >Euuuurgh. *Terrible* performance, kooky! Absolutely horrendous. Your
> >attempt at a basic riposte here got worse scores than Gabrielle Douglas's
> >gymnastics routine when she kept falling off the balance beam this summer.
>
> >Wait a minute. Did ... did one of the judges actually give you a
> >*negative* score?
>
> ><snicker>
>
> >>><snicker><--------yer fucking sick dude, no way are you a horse. i saw
> >>>the video.
> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdyBYSuqQBQ&feature=youtu.be
>
> >> what was it that moved you back to Rogers.com paula?
>
> >First Paul's in Pembroke with Sympatico. Then he's in Pittsburgh with
> >Pair Networks. Then he's back in Canada (somewhere) with Rogers. When are
> >you planning to make up your mind where your invisible, omnipresent
> >bogeyman lives, kook?
>
> I eagerly await your evidence for your claims.
I've got a response to that, but it's been sent off to be laminated
and you'll have to wait a couple of days for it. Can you be patient?
> Cr<SLAP!>
Shut the fuck up, kook! You'll just have to wait. ;)
> On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 01:51:53 +0000 (UTC), Nadegda
> <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> >On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 22:31:47 -0400, CastAlone (Pie Gurl) P...@yahoo.calm
> >wrote:
>
> >[Froups desnecked, lily-livered lunatic.]
>
> >> "Penix" (Paula) G Derby<SLAP! Proof, kooky?>
>
> >>>Time I had me tabs...
>
> >>>"Nadegda" (P<SLAP! Nice postedit, fuckwit!>
>
> >>>> On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 19:29:21 -0500, Fred Hall wrote:
>
> >>>>>http://66.39.71.195/Derbyshire/fractgal.html
>
> >>>> Eww. Your website design is *soooo* last century, Hall. And there's
> >>>> quite a few broken images on it.
>
> >> yet so proud you were of that megaphone of your personality, paula.
>
> >Not my website, goofball. Not only that, whois says the IP belongs to
> >United States Pittsburgh Pair Networks. So much for Derbyshire being in
> >Pembroke, Ontario.
>
> Because the location of a web site's host MUST be the same
> <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> >On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 22:31:47 -0400, CastAlone (Pie Gurl) P...@yahoo.calm
> >wrote:
>
> >[Froups desnecked, lily-livered lunatic.]
>
> >> "Penix" (Paula) G Derby<SLAP! Proof, kooky?>
>
> >>>Time I had me tabs...
>
> >>>"Nadegda" (P<SLAP! Nice postedit, fuckwit!>
>
> >>>> On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 19:29:21 -0500, Fred Hall wrote:
>
> >>>>>http://66.39.71.195/Derbyshire/fractgal.html
>
> >>>> Eww. Your website design is *soooo* last century, Hall. And there's
> >>>> quite a few broken images on it.
>
> >> yet so proud you were of that megaphone of your personality, paula.
>
> >Not my website, goofball. Not only that, whois says the IP belongs to
> >United States Pittsburgh Pair Networks. So much for Derbyshire being in
> >Pembroke, Ontario.
>
> location as the person who set up and maintains the site, huh?
For professionally hosted web sites, no, but this Derbyshire guy is
obviously hosting it on his home computer if it has no domain name. So
the IP will resolve to his ISP.
> Self spank much?
You do indeed.
> >Whose home did you surreptitiously photograph when you flew all the way
> >there to stalk Derbyshire, kook? Obviously not Derbyshire, if his ISP and
> >chintzy webpage are in Pittsburgh.
>
> am willing to accept the host for his web site is in Pittsburgh.
The host is clearly his PC, rather than a proper hosting company's
servers, or why would the domain part of the URL be a raw IP address,
you retard?
> >Some innocent person, no matter what
> >you allege Derbyshire did to you. You truly do deserve that Pickett, goof.
>
> >And this as well.
>
No, she didn't. She just knows that separately-hosted web sites have
domain names and not just IP addresses in their URLs.
> >NOMINATION: Murphy for Clueless Newbie of the Month for getting
> >"Pittsburgh" and "Pembroke" confused apparently because they both begin
> >with the letter "P".
>
> will.
They're not the fake ones, dumbass.
> >> then the string broke...
>
> >That would be the final thread of your sanity, to be specific, kooky.
>
> >>>Well, thank Fat Fred for proving you're not Derbyshire. If you were,
> >>>you'd have already known about Mandelbrot.
>
> >> issat how you comfort yourself, paula... doing a INMIH at yourself?
>
> >Doing a what?
>
> >Here's a hint: try writing your posts in *English*. *English*!
>
> >>>http://66.39.71.195/Derbyshire/manguide.html
than on the guy's own computer?
> >>>SPNAK!, Fat Fred.
>
> >> can you say "limp dick" derbyshire?
>
> >Transparent deflection, no real rebuttal, and gratuitous namecalling
> >thrown in for good measure. Judges?
>
What the hell are you babbling about now, Kook Wills?
> > ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
> > |0.1| |0.2| |0.0| |-19| |0.1|
> > ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
> > '*` | '*` | '*` | '*` | '*` |
> > (o o) | (o o) | (o o) | (o o) | (o o) |
> >ooO--(_)--Ooo-ooO--(_)--Ooo-ooO--(_)--Ooo-ooO--(_)--Ooo-ooO--(_)--Ooo-
>
> >Euuuurgh. *Terrible* performance, kooky! Absolutely horrendous. Your
> >attempt at a basic riposte here got worse scores than Gabrielle Douglas's
> >gymnastics routine when she kept falling off the balance beam this summer.
>
> >Wait a minute. Did ... did one of the judges actually give you a
> >*negative* score?
>
> ><snicker>
>
> >>><snicker><--------yer fucking sick dude, no way are you a horse. i saw
> >>>the video.
> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdyBYSuqQBQ&feature=youtu.be
>
> >> what was it that moved you back to Rogers.com paula?
>
> >First Paul's in Pembroke with Sympatico. Then he's in Pittsburgh with
> >Pair Networks. Then he's back in Canada (somewhere) with Rogers. When are
> >you planning to make up your mind where your invisible, omnipresent
> >bogeyman lives, kook?
>
I've got a response to that, but it's been sent off to be laminated
and you'll have to wait a couple of days for it. Can you be patient?
> Cr<SLAP!>
Shut the fuck up, kook! You'll just have to wait. ;)
Message has been deleted
Nadegda
Oct 31, 2012, 8:16:32 PM10/31/12
to
On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 04:10:54 -0700, Where's all the China Blue food?
wrote:
> In article
> <26da41b1-091b-43dc...@4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
> doesn't have a domain name.
An internal server on a LAN. Clearly not applicable here.
> You do understand that a domain name is optional, right? That it's the
> IP address that's actually used in connect and accept?
Sez a kook who clearly is clueless when it comes to how virtual hosting
works. Go read a book or two on modern web hosting, then get back to me
once you understand why you're wrong here.
wrote:
> In article
> <26da41b1-091b-43dc...@4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
> Andrew Wilson <awils...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> For professionally hosted web sites, no, but this Derbyshire guy is
>> obviously hosting it on his home computer if it has no domain name. So
>> the IP will resolve to his ISP.
>
> That's odd because the server I use sometimes in a office in a business
>
>> For professionally hosted web sites, no, but this Derbyshire guy is
>> obviously hosting it on his home computer if it has no domain name. So
>> the IP will resolve to his ISP.
>
> doesn't have a domain name.
An internal server on a LAN. Clearly not applicable here.
> You do understand that a domain name is optional, right? That it's the
> IP address that's actually used in connect and accept?
Sez a kook who clearly is clueless when it comes to how virtual hosting
works. Go read a book or two on modern web hosting, then get back to me
once you understand why you're wrong here.
Message has been deleted
Nadegda
Nov 1, 2012, 12:24:36 AM11/1/12
to
On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 20:04:51 -0700, Where's all the China Blue food?
wrote:
> In article <k6sf10$jdt$6...@dont-email.me>, Nadegda
WAN or VPN, then. The next point still stands:
wrote:
> In article <k6sf10$jdt$6...@dont-email.me>, Nadegda
> <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 04:10:54 -0700, Where's all the China Blue food?
>> wrote:
>>
>> > In article
>> > <26da41b1-091b-43dc...@4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
>> > Andrew Wilson <awils...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> For professionally hosted web sites, no, but this Derbyshire guy is
>> >> obviously hosting it on his home computer if it has no domain name.
>> >> So the IP will resolve to his ISP.
>> >
>> > That's odd because the server I use sometimes in a office in a
>> > business doesn't have a domain name.
>>
>> An internal server on a LAN. Clearly not applicable here.
>
> Acually it's on the other side of a continent.
>
>> On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 04:10:54 -0700, Where's all the China Blue food?
>> wrote:
>>
>> > In article
>> > <26da41b1-091b-43dc...@4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
>> > Andrew Wilson <awils...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> For professionally hosted web sites, no, but this Derbyshire guy is
>> >> obviously hosting it on his home computer if it has no domain name.
>> >> So the IP will resolve to his ISP.
>> >
>> > That's odd because the server I use sometimes in a office in a
>> > business doesn't have a domain name.
>>
>> An internal server on a LAN. Clearly not applicable here.
>
WAN or VPN, then. The next point still stands:
Message has been deleted
Nadegda
Nov 1, 2012, 1:39:56 AM11/1/12
to
On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 22:02:44 -0700, Where's all the China Blue food?
wrote:
> In article <k6sti3$na0$3...@dont-email.me>, Nadegda
Not really. VPNs and WANs play the same functional role as LANs; they
just aren't co-located in a single building. From the POV of application-
layer software, though, the physical location of the network nodes is
irrelevant.
The fact remains, using Dreamhost et. al. doesn't result in having only
an IP address; self-hosting on your own hardware does. And trying to
reach a consumer-level webhost site by raw IP won't work. Bulk cheap
webhosting is always virtual, because the IPv4 address space is running
low.
Thus, when IPs are dedicated to a single site, it's always self-hosted by
its owner, and lacks a domain name if that owner is an individual without
much means and has one if it's a business entity. Since the instant
website is clearly someone's personal page and not a business, *and* had
just an IP in its URL and not a domain name, the result follows from two
separate converging lines of evidence.
>> >> > You do understand that a domain name is optional, right? That it's
>> >> > the IP address that's actually used in connect and accept?
>> >>
>> >> Sez a kook who clearly is clueless when it comes to how virtual
>> >> hosting works. Go read a book or two on modern web hosting, then get
>> >> back to me once you understand why you're wrong here.
>
> It's also odd how you keep responding for Ken or Andy. Sounds to me like
> you aren't clever enough to compartmentalise.
The Tetrarchy work as a team, unlike you squabbling k00ks.
wrote:
> In article <k6sti3$na0$3...@dont-email.me>, Nadegda
> <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 20:04:51 -0700, Where's all the China Blue food?
>> wrote:
>>
>> > In article <k6sf10$jdt$6...@dont-email.me>, Nadegda
>> > <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 04:10:54 -0700, Where's all the China Blue food?
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > In article
>> >> > <26da41b1-091b-43dc...@4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
>> >> > Andrew Wilson <awils...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> For professionally hosted web sites, no, but this Derbyshire guy
>> >> >> is obviously hosting it on his home computer if it has no domain
>> >> >> name. So the IP will resolve to his ISP.
>> >> >
>> >> > That's odd because the server I use sometimes in a office in a
>> >> > business doesn't have a domain name.
>> >>
>> >> An internal server on a LAN. Clearly not applicable here.
>> >
>> > Acually it's on the other side of a continent.
>>
>> WAN or VPN, then. The next point still stands:
>
> Since your first guess was wrong,
>
>> On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 20:04:51 -0700, Where's all the China Blue food?
>> wrote:
>>
>> > In article <k6sf10$jdt$6...@dont-email.me>, Nadegda
>> > <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 04:10:54 -0700, Where's all the China Blue food?
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > In article
>> >> > <26da41b1-091b-43dc...@4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
>> >> > Andrew Wilson <awils...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> For professionally hosted web sites, no, but this Derbyshire guy
>> >> >> is obviously hosting it on his home computer if it has no domain
>> >> >> name. So the IP will resolve to his ISP.
>> >> >
>> >> > That's odd because the server I use sometimes in a office in a
>> >> > business doesn't have a domain name.
>> >>
>> >> An internal server on a LAN. Clearly not applicable here.
>> >
>> > Acually it's on the other side of a continent.
>>
>> WAN or VPN, then. The next point still stands:
>
Not really. VPNs and WANs play the same functional role as LANs; they
just aren't co-located in a single building. From the POV of application-
layer software, though, the physical location of the network nodes is
irrelevant.
The fact remains, using Dreamhost et. al. doesn't result in having only
an IP address; self-hosting on your own hardware does. And trying to
reach a consumer-level webhost site by raw IP won't work. Bulk cheap
webhosting is always virtual, because the IPv4 address space is running
low.
Thus, when IPs are dedicated to a single site, it's always self-hosted by
its owner, and lacks a domain name if that owner is an individual without
much means and has one if it's a business entity. Since the instant
website is clearly someone's personal page and not a business, *and* had
just an IP in its URL and not a domain name, the result follows from two
separate converging lines of evidence.
>> >> > You do understand that a domain name is optional, right? That it's
>> >> > the IP address that's actually used in connect and accept?
>> >>
>> >> Sez a kook who clearly is clueless when it comes to how virtual
>> >> hosting works. Go read a book or two on modern web hosting, then get
>> >> back to me once you understand why you're wrong here.
>
> you aren't clever enough to compartmentalise.
The Tetrarchy work as a team, unlike you squabbling k00ks.
Message has been deleted
Nadegda
Nov 1, 2012, 2:04:32 AM11/1/12
to
On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 05:46:35 +0000, convicted sex offender Gary L Burnore
wrote:
> In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>> Bulk cheap webhosting is always virtual, because the IPv4 address
>> space is running low.
>
> Wrong, of course. Those who can afford it can get as many IPs as they
> need.
That doesn't have anything to do with bulk, cheap hosting, child
molester. Also, those who can afford it can and do get domain names.
Also, if certain other kooks' k'lames about Derbyshire are even halfway
accurate, he *can't* afford it. If he's hosting at a bare IP on his home
computer, he can't even afford Dreamhost or a single lousy domain name,
let alone lots of IPs. (And if his one lonely IP is static, it's more
proof that he's not the same person as myself or kensi or any other
person that demonstrably has a dynamic IP, contrary to various k'lames
that have been made here recently, in an obsessively incessant manner, by
various kooks.)
>> Thus, when IPs are dedicated to a single site, it's always self-hosted
>> by its owner,
>
> Yet another innacurate statement, Dumbnads.
Says the kiddy diddler that can't even spell.
>> and lacks a domain name if that owner is an individual without much
>> means and has one if it's a business entity.
>
> Domain names cost 12 bucks a year with privacy settings, DumbNads. You
> that poor?
No, but apparently Derbyshire is, or why does his web site's URL lack one?
>> Since the instant website is clearly someone's personal page and not a
>> business, *and* had just an IP in its URL and not a domain name, the
>> result follows from two separate converging lines of evidence.
>
> Both point to the fact that you know little about the internet and how
> it works.
Sez a kook with a criminal conviction that knows little about economics
and how it works to a senior developer at Like I'm Stupid Enough To Tell
You, Inc.
> [snip excuse for using sock]
Lack of evidence to support that rather lame and unoriginal insult noted,
kooky.
NOMINATION: Gary L. Burnore for the November, 2012 Loony Maroon Award.
Derbyshire the pauper's lack of a hostname doesn't mean he's self-
hosting, because anyone with loads of money can afford as many IPs as he
wants? Derbyshire can't afford a 12 dollar a year domain name but can
afford a webhost expensive enough to be dedicating individual IPs to
individual sites instead of virtual hosting? Say what? That's insane
troll logic right there.
wrote:
> In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>> Bulk cheap webhosting is always virtual, because the IPv4 address
>> space is running low.
>
> need.
That doesn't have anything to do with bulk, cheap hosting, child
molester. Also, those who can afford it can and do get domain names.
Also, if certain other kooks' k'lames about Derbyshire are even halfway
accurate, he *can't* afford it. If he's hosting at a bare IP on his home
computer, he can't even afford Dreamhost or a single lousy domain name,
let alone lots of IPs. (And if his one lonely IP is static, it's more
proof that he's not the same person as myself or kensi or any other
person that demonstrably has a dynamic IP, contrary to various k'lames
that have been made here recently, in an obsessively incessant manner, by
various kooks.)
>> Thus, when IPs are dedicated to a single site, it's always self-hosted
>> by its owner,
>
Says the kiddy diddler that can't even spell.
>> and lacks a domain name if that owner is an individual without much
>> means and has one if it's a business entity.
>
> that poor?
No, but apparently Derbyshire is, or why does his web site's URL lack one?
>> Since the instant website is clearly someone's personal page and not a
>> business, *and* had just an IP in its URL and not a domain name, the
>> result follows from two separate converging lines of evidence.
>
> it works.
Sez a kook with a criminal conviction that knows little about economics
and how it works to a senior developer at Like I'm Stupid Enough To Tell
You, Inc.
> [snip excuse for using sock]
Lack of evidence to support that rather lame and unoriginal insult noted,
kooky.
NOMINATION: Gary L. Burnore for the November, 2012 Loony Maroon Award.
Derbyshire the pauper's lack of a hostname doesn't mean he's self-
hosting, because anyone with loads of money can afford as many IPs as he
wants? Derbyshire can't afford a 12 dollar a year domain name but can
afford a webhost expensive enough to be dedicating individual IPs to
individual sites instead of virtual hosting? Say what? That's insane
troll logic right there.
This account has been banned because it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use
Nov 1, 2012, 2:58:44 AM11/1/12
to
AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA Nadegda
http://nahee.com/Derbyshire/index.html
"Reverse IP of 66.39.71.195 - 1 website uses this address (nahee.com)"
"/Derbyshire" is a subdirectory of nahee.com, Paul, and so your kooky
website isn't the only page hosted at that IP address, you stupid cunt.
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Anahee.com
SPANK!
But I expect your "Andrew Wilson" sock will be along shortly to second
your faux nomination, Paul.
You're a sad, stupid cunt, Paul - and you always will be.
--
"Sweetness Seal Of Approval" #4
Co-winning trainer, Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog-Whistle - August 2012
Winner of multiple fake awards from serial Usenet kook, Paul G. Derbyshire
If you want to see something lamer than John Edward Kook's frogeries of
Aratzio, check out Scatboi's forgeries.
Anonypussy [Tard] <fnvw@altusenetkooks.*> is the Official AUK Peg Boi.
http://blackhelicopternews.blogspot.com/2012/08/new-award.html
Paul Derbyshire gets tarred and feathered - <5smbjh....@news.alt.net>
<nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>> Domain names cost 12 bucks a year with privacy settings, DumbNads. You
>> that poor?
>
> No, but apparently Derbyshire is, or why does his web site's URL lack one?
It doesn't, Paul.
>> Domain names cost 12 bucks a year with privacy settings, DumbNads. You
>> that poor?
>
> No, but apparently Derbyshire is, or why does his web site's URL lack one?
http://nahee.com/Derbyshire/index.html
"Reverse IP of 66.39.71.195 - 1 website uses this address (nahee.com)"
"/Derbyshire" is a subdirectory of nahee.com, Paul, and so your kooky
website isn't the only page hosted at that IP address, you stupid cunt.
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Anahee.com
SPANK!
But I expect your "Andrew Wilson" sock will be along shortly to second
your faux nomination, Paul.
You're a sad, stupid cunt, Paul - and you always will be.
--
"Sweetness Seal Of Approval" #4
Co-winning trainer, Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog-Whistle - August 2012
Winner of multiple fake awards from serial Usenet kook, Paul G. Derbyshire
If you want to see something lamer than John Edward Kook's frogeries of
Aratzio, check out Scatboi's forgeries.
Anonypussy [Tard] <fnvw@altusenetkooks.*> is the Official AUK Peg Boi.
http://blackhelicopternews.blogspot.com/2012/08/new-award.html
Paul Derbyshire gets tarred and feathered - <5smbjh....@news.alt.net>
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Andrew Wilson
Nov 1, 2012, 7:39:51 AM11/1/12
to
On Nov 1, 6:58 am, This account has been banned because it violated
the Google Groups Terms Of Use <laugh...@u.kook> wrote:
> AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA Nadegda<SPANK>
Proof?
> <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> >> Domain names cost 12 bucks a year with privacy settings, DumbNads. You
> >> that poor?
>
> > No, but apparently Derbyshire is, or why does his web site's URL lack one?
>
> It doesn't, Paul.
>
> http://nahee.com/Derbyshire/index.html
That's odd, since apparently it did before. Or else why was it first
posted with an IP address?
> "/Derbyshire" is a subdirectory of nahee.com, Paul, and so your kooky
> website isn't the only page hosted at that IP address, you stupid cunt.
First of all, you're not replying to Derbyshire.
Second, if it's hosting with user-name subdirectories rather than
virtual hosts with separate domain names, then it's the cheap webspace
that comes with his ISP account. In that case, he's not in Pembroke
the way you klaimed.
On the other hand, the subdirectory name could just separate his
personal site from other material. And then if Derbyshire can afford
his own domain name that points to non-virtual hosting at a dedicated
IP, then he's not the unemployed bum you kooks have kept klaiming him
to be.
No matter what you klaim, you're caught in at least one contradiction
somewhere. Now, it seems he's either not a bum or not in Pembroke.
Which is it, kook?
Or is he in some weird quantum Shrodinger(sp?) state of being
simultaneously poor and rich, and simultaneously in Pembroke, Ottawa,
Toronto, Pittsburgh, and Chicago?
<cackle>
the Google Groups Terms Of Use <laugh...@u.kook> wrote:
> AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA Nadegda<SPANK>
Proof?
> <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> >> Domain names cost 12 bucks a year with privacy settings, DumbNads. You
> >> that poor?
>
> > No, but apparently Derbyshire is, or why does his web site's URL lack one?
>
> It doesn't, Paul.
>
> http://nahee.com/Derbyshire/index.html
posted with an IP address?
> "/Derbyshire" is a subdirectory of nahee.com, Paul, and so your kooky
> website isn't the only page hosted at that IP address, you stupid cunt.
Second, if it's hosting with user-name subdirectories rather than
virtual hosts with separate domain names, then it's the cheap webspace
that comes with his ISP account. In that case, he's not in Pembroke
the way you klaimed.
On the other hand, the subdirectory name could just separate his
personal site from other material. And then if Derbyshire can afford
his own domain name that points to non-virtual hosting at a dedicated
IP, then he's not the unemployed bum you kooks have kept klaiming him
to be.
No matter what you klaim, you're caught in at least one contradiction
somewhere. Now, it seems he's either not a bum or not in Pembroke.
Which is it, kook?
Or is he in some weird quantum Shrodinger(sp?) state of being
simultaneously poor and rich, and simultaneously in Pembroke, Ottawa,
Toronto, Pittsburgh, and Chicago?
<cackle>
Andrew Wilson
Nov 1, 2012, 8:12:17 AM11/1/12
to
On Nov 1, 9:31 am, K Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote:
That's because you're stupid. What she wrote is perfectly clear to
anyone of normal intelligence.
> Are you claiming web sites will typically have dynamic IPs?
No, dolt, she's claiming home computers will sometimes have dynamic
IPs and sometimes not, so in the context of the theory that the site's
on his own computer, given that it has a static IP and Nadegda herself
has a dynamic one it proves they aren't the same person.
> >proof that he's not the same person as myself or kensi or any other
> >person that demonstrably has a dynamic IP,
>
> I've never checked your posting IP with anyone else's. That
> aside, to think a web site's IP must be the same as the IP used when
> posting to Usenet is laughable.
If the web site was on Paul's home computer, then the IP *would* be
the same as used when he posted to Usenet. Of course, he doesn't post
to Usenet anymore, according to some other evidence, so that's moot.
> >contrary to various k'lames
> >that have been made here recently, in an obsessively incessant manner, by
> >various kooks.)
>
> You are only one person. Your claim of various kooks can't be
> accurate.
That was a lame IKYABWAI, kook.
> >Says the kiddy diddler that can't even spell.
>
> BTW, kissing a 17 year old isn't, to the mentally sound, the same
> as being a kiddy diddler.
He was convicted of child molestation by a court of law, or hadn't you
heard?
> >>> and lacks a domain name if that owner is an individual without much
> >>> means and has one if it's a business entity.
>
> >> Domain names cost 12 bucks a year with privacy settings, DumbNads. You
> >> that poor?
>
> >No, but apparently Derbyshire is, or why does his web site's URL lack one?
>
> http://nahee.com/Derbyshire/index.html
>
> You're stupid.
She was going by the information you kooks had previously posted. If
you kooks had gotten it wrong, that's hardly her fault.
> >doesn't mean he's self-
> >hosting, because anyone with loads of money can afford as many IPs as he
> >wants?
>
> Anyone with loads of money can.
But some of you kooks have klaimed that he *doesn't* have loads of
money. Now, it seems, you can't make up your minds! Is this phantom of
yours rich or poor? Come on, decide already!
> >Derbyshire can't afford a 12 dollar a year domain name but can
>
> Interesting.
> Gary's question was about YOU being able to afford it.
Gary's question was irrelevant, since it isn't Nadegda's web site. His
statement about the price of a domain name, on the other hand, was
relevant. She was referring to that and not to Gary's subsequent and
irrelevant question, which would be clear if you actually possessed
decent reading comprehension skills.
> Here you claim it's about Paul. Either you've just slipped and admitted you are
> Paul, or you've been deceptive.
> If you see an option I don't, please offer it.
The web site in question is clearly Paul's. If it had lacked a domain
name (and it had appeared to do so, until now), then it would have
suggested that Paul could not possibly have afforded fancy hosting
rather than the cheap, bulk kind sites like Dreamhost (apparently)
provide. Gary irrelevantly asked whether Nadegda could afford the
domain name, which question she ignored because the site isn't hers.
Still confused? If so, get your head examined. Maybe you'll be lucky
and it'll turn out that the stupidity is from something you can take a
pill to fix. You never know until you try it.
> >afford a webhost expensive enough to be dedicating individual IPs to
> >individual sites instead of virtual hosting? Say what? That's insane
> >troll logic right there.
>
> Your failed attempt at deception is noted.
OK. The way I see it, based on what Nadegda said and my own somewhat
weaker knowledge of how the intertubes are run, there are four sorts
of web hosting.
1. You host on your own computer. Cheap. You may or may not have a
domain name. You may or may not have a static IP. Your IP will be your
own ISP's. Loading the web page by IP will work.
2. Your ISP provides cheap space. Cheap. You will have a domain name,
but it'll be your ISPs and you'll be at http://isp.com/username/...
The web site will have a static IP. It will be your ISP's. Loading the
web page by IP will work.
3. You have cheap, bulk, consumer webhosting. It will be virtual
hosting. You will have a domain name, which may be
yourname.dreamhost.com or similarly or, a bit more expensive, may be
yourname.com. The web site will have a static IP. It won't be your
ISP's. Loading the web page by IP won't work.
4. You have expensive, commercial webhosting. It may or may not be
virtual hosting. You will have a domain name and it will be your own,
e.g. yourname.com. The web site will have a static IP. It won't be
your ISP's. Loading the web page by IP may or may not work. Non-
virtual hosting will be more expensive.
Now, the web page in question loads by IP, so it's either option 2 or
the most expensive case of option 4. If it's option 2, that IP is
still Derbyshire's ISP's and he's in Pittsburgh, while you kooks have
previously klaimed no fewer than four OTHER cities of residence for
him. If it's the most expensive case of option 4, you kooks have been
wrong about his financial situation AND you've still claimed him to be
in FOUR cities, though not five.
Either way you've been SPNAKed, the lot of you.
Furthermore, until "Account Banned" found a domain name URL for the
same site, at least one of you kooks had implied that it lacked a
domain name by posting a URL with a raw IP address. Had that actually
been the case, which had been a reasonable assumption (if wrong, due
to one of you kooks being intentionally deceptive), then that would
have eliminated options 3 and 4 and left 1 and 2, and again the IP
would have been Derbyshire's ISP's.
Of course, there IS one ADDITIONAL possibility that's being overlooked
here, and that is that it isn't actually Derbyshire's web site at all,
but rather one someone else created in his name. In that case, the
whole thing is likely a sham by one of you kooks. Then it proves
nothing about Derbyshire's location OR his financial status, BUT its
very existence then proves the depths of depravity and creepy stalker
behavior you kooks are willing to sink to in your kooky quest to
harass the phantom. And then that's another SPNAK!
Now, is any one of you kooks going to tell us which it is? Is
Derbyshire rich? Or is Derbyshire in Pittsburgh? Or are you such LYING
LOWLIFE SCUM that you've forged an entire phony web site in his name,
lied about its origins, and everything? You've established that one of
those three must be the case. So which one is it?
And if Derbyshire is not in Pittsburgh, which of Pembroke, Ottawa,
Toronto, and Chicago is he in? Murphy alone has claimed him, at
different times, to be in three of those locations (not to mention
that that creep actually flew up there once and skulked around in the
bushes taking pictures of a trailer in Pembroke that he klaimed was
Derbyshire's residence).
And which does he use, Rogers or Sympatico? Murphy recently klaimed a
post by a "nebulous" was Derbyshire, which had a Rogers IP, and that
he'd recently switched from Sympatico. On the other hand, several
kooks klaimed that Series Expansion is Derbyshire, and Series
Expansion posted from a Sympatico IP both before AND after the
nebulous post. So is he switching back and forth every week? Or rich
enough to afford multiple consumer broadband accounts simultaneously?
Or maybe one, or both, of those aren't Derbyshire?
Of course, a bit of digging online reveals that Rogers does not appear
to operate in Pembroke, though it does in Ottawa. Neither it nor
Sympatico operate in Pittsburgh. Is Derbyshire living in multiple
cities at once? Or maybe he has a big travel budget? Or maybe not all
the posters that have been klaimed to be Derbyshire are Derbyshire?
You kooks are clearly wrong about SOMETHING there; all your so-called
"evidence", when it's not full of holes, has the much worse-for-you
problem of being full of CONTRADICTIONS!
> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 06:04:32 +0000 (UTC), Nadegda
> <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> >(And if his one lonely IP is static, it's more
>
> I'm not sure I'm following you here.
> <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> >(And if his one lonely IP is static, it's more
>
That's because you're stupid. What she wrote is perfectly clear to
anyone of normal intelligence.
> Are you claiming web sites will typically have dynamic IPs?
No, dolt, she's claiming home computers will sometimes have dynamic
IPs and sometimes not, so in the context of the theory that the site's
on his own computer, given that it has a static IP and Nadegda herself
has a dynamic one it proves they aren't the same person.
> >proof that he's not the same person as myself or kensi or any other
> >person that demonstrably has a dynamic IP,
>
> aside, to think a web site's IP must be the same as the IP used when
> posting to Usenet is laughable.
If the web site was on Paul's home computer, then the IP *would* be
the same as used when he posted to Usenet. Of course, he doesn't post
to Usenet anymore, according to some other evidence, so that's moot.
> >contrary to various k'lames
> >that have been made here recently, in an obsessively incessant manner, by
> >various kooks.)
>
> accurate.
That was a lame IKYABWAI, kook.
> >Says the kiddy diddler that can't even spell.
>
> as being a kiddy diddler.
He was convicted of child molestation by a court of law, or hadn't you
heard?
> >>> and lacks a domain name if that owner is an individual without much
> >>> means and has one if it's a business entity.
>
> >> Domain names cost 12 bucks a year with privacy settings, DumbNads. You
> >> that poor?
>
> >No, but apparently Derbyshire is, or why does his web site's URL lack one?
>
>
> You're stupid.
She was going by the information you kooks had previously posted. If
you kooks had gotten it wrong, that's hardly her fault.
> >doesn't mean he's self-
> >hosting, because anyone with loads of money can afford as many IPs as he
> >wants?
>
But some of you kooks have klaimed that he *doesn't* have loads of
money. Now, it seems, you can't make up your minds! Is this phantom of
yours rich or poor? Come on, decide already!
> >Derbyshire can't afford a 12 dollar a year domain name but can
>
> Gary's question was about YOU being able to afford it.
Gary's question was irrelevant, since it isn't Nadegda's web site. His
statement about the price of a domain name, on the other hand, was
relevant. She was referring to that and not to Gary's subsequent and
irrelevant question, which would be clear if you actually possessed
decent reading comprehension skills.
> Here you claim it's about Paul. Either you've just slipped and admitted you are
> Paul, or you've been deceptive.
> If you see an option I don't, please offer it.
The web site in question is clearly Paul's. If it had lacked a domain
name (and it had appeared to do so, until now), then it would have
suggested that Paul could not possibly have afforded fancy hosting
rather than the cheap, bulk kind sites like Dreamhost (apparently)
provide. Gary irrelevantly asked whether Nadegda could afford the
domain name, which question she ignored because the site isn't hers.
Still confused? If so, get your head examined. Maybe you'll be lucky
and it'll turn out that the stupidity is from something you can take a
pill to fix. You never know until you try it.
> >afford a webhost expensive enough to be dedicating individual IPs to
> >individual sites instead of virtual hosting? Say what? That's insane
> >troll logic right there.
>
OK. The way I see it, based on what Nadegda said and my own somewhat
weaker knowledge of how the intertubes are run, there are four sorts
of web hosting.
1. You host on your own computer. Cheap. You may or may not have a
domain name. You may or may not have a static IP. Your IP will be your
own ISP's. Loading the web page by IP will work.
2. Your ISP provides cheap space. Cheap. You will have a domain name,
but it'll be your ISPs and you'll be at http://isp.com/username/...
The web site will have a static IP. It will be your ISP's. Loading the
web page by IP will work.
3. You have cheap, bulk, consumer webhosting. It will be virtual
hosting. You will have a domain name, which may be
yourname.dreamhost.com or similarly or, a bit more expensive, may be
yourname.com. The web site will have a static IP. It won't be your
ISP's. Loading the web page by IP won't work.
4. You have expensive, commercial webhosting. It may or may not be
virtual hosting. You will have a domain name and it will be your own,
e.g. yourname.com. The web site will have a static IP. It won't be
your ISP's. Loading the web page by IP may or may not work. Non-
virtual hosting will be more expensive.
Now, the web page in question loads by IP, so it's either option 2 or
the most expensive case of option 4. If it's option 2, that IP is
still Derbyshire's ISP's and he's in Pittsburgh, while you kooks have
previously klaimed no fewer than four OTHER cities of residence for
him. If it's the most expensive case of option 4, you kooks have been
wrong about his financial situation AND you've still claimed him to be
in FOUR cities, though not five.
Either way you've been SPNAKed, the lot of you.
Furthermore, until "Account Banned" found a domain name URL for the
same site, at least one of you kooks had implied that it lacked a
domain name by posting a URL with a raw IP address. Had that actually
been the case, which had been a reasonable assumption (if wrong, due
to one of you kooks being intentionally deceptive), then that would
have eliminated options 3 and 4 and left 1 and 2, and again the IP
would have been Derbyshire's ISP's.
Of course, there IS one ADDITIONAL possibility that's being overlooked
here, and that is that it isn't actually Derbyshire's web site at all,
but rather one someone else created in his name. In that case, the
whole thing is likely a sham by one of you kooks. Then it proves
nothing about Derbyshire's location OR his financial status, BUT its
very existence then proves the depths of depravity and creepy stalker
behavior you kooks are willing to sink to in your kooky quest to
harass the phantom. And then that's another SPNAK!
Now, is any one of you kooks going to tell us which it is? Is
Derbyshire rich? Or is Derbyshire in Pittsburgh? Or are you such LYING
LOWLIFE SCUM that you've forged an entire phony web site in his name,
lied about its origins, and everything? You've established that one of
those three must be the case. So which one is it?
And if Derbyshire is not in Pittsburgh, which of Pembroke, Ottawa,
Toronto, and Chicago is he in? Murphy alone has claimed him, at
different times, to be in three of those locations (not to mention
that that creep actually flew up there once and skulked around in the
bushes taking pictures of a trailer in Pembroke that he klaimed was
Derbyshire's residence).
And which does he use, Rogers or Sympatico? Murphy recently klaimed a
post by a "nebulous" was Derbyshire, which had a Rogers IP, and that
he'd recently switched from Sympatico. On the other hand, several
kooks klaimed that Series Expansion is Derbyshire, and Series
Expansion posted from a Sympatico IP both before AND after the
nebulous post. So is he switching back and forth every week? Or rich
enough to afford multiple consumer broadband accounts simultaneously?
Or maybe one, or both, of those aren't Derbyshire?
Of course, a bit of digging online reveals that Rogers does not appear
to operate in Pembroke, though it does in Ottawa. Neither it nor
Sympatico operate in Pittsburgh. Is Derbyshire living in multiple
cities at once? Or maybe he has a big travel budget? Or maybe not all
the posters that have been klaimed to be Derbyshire are Derbyshire?
You kooks are clearly wrong about SOMETHING there; all your so-called
"evidence", when it's not full of holes, has the much worse-for-you
problem of being full of CONTRADICTIONS!
Checkmate
Nov 1, 2012, 11:30:30 AM11/1/12
to
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
Checkmate!
First, check out what Andrew Wilson said:
Checkmate!
>
> On Nov 1, 9:31ï¿œam, K Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 06:04:32 +0000 (UTC), Nadegda
> > <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> > >(And if his one lonely IP is static, it's more
> >
>
> That's because you're stupid. What she wrote is perfectly clear to
> anyone of normal intelligence.
>
> > ￜ ￜ ￜAre you claiming web sites will typically have dynamic IPs?
> That's because you're stupid. What she wrote is perfectly clear to
> anyone of normal intelligence.
>
>
> No, dolt, she's claiming home computers will sometimes have dynamic
> IPs and sometimes not, so in the context of the theory that the site's
> on his own computer, given that it has a static IP and Nadegda herself
> has a dynamic one it proves they aren't the same person.
>
> > >proof that he's not the same person as myself or kensi or any other
> > >person that demonstrably has a dynamic IP,
> >
> > ￜ ￜ ￜI've never checked your posting IP with anyone else's. That
> No, dolt, she's claiming home computers will sometimes have dynamic
> IPs and sometimes not, so in the context of the theory that the site's
> on his own computer, given that it has a static IP and Nadegda herself
> has a dynamic one it proves they aren't the same person.
>
> > >proof that he's not the same person as myself or kensi or any other
> > >person that demonstrably has a dynamic IP,
> >
> > aside, to think a web site's IP must be the same as the IP used when
> > posting to Usenet is laughable.
>
> If the web site was on Paul's home computer, then the IP *would* be
> the same as used when he posted to Usenet. Of course, he doesn't post
> to Usenet anymore, according to some other evidence, so that's moot.
>
> > >contrary to various k'lames
> > >that have been made here recently, in an obsessively incessant manner, by
> > >various kooks.)
> >
> > ￜ ￜ ￜYou are only one person. Your claim of various kooks can't be
> > posting to Usenet is laughable.
>
> If the web site was on Paul's home computer, then the IP *would* be
> the same as used when he posted to Usenet. Of course, he doesn't post
> to Usenet anymore, according to some other evidence, so that's moot.
>
> > >contrary to various k'lames
> > >that have been made here recently, in an obsessively incessant manner, by
> > >various kooks.)
> >
> > accurate.
>
> That was a lame IKYABWAI, kook.
>
> > >Says the kiddy diddler that can't even spell.
> >
> > ￜ ￜ ￜBTW, kissing a 17 year old isn't, to the mentally sound, the same
>
> That was a lame IKYABWAI, kook.
>
> > >Says the kiddy diddler that can't even spell.
> >
> > as being a kiddy diddler.
>
> He was convicted of child molestation by a court of law, or hadn't you
> heard?
>
> > >>> and lacks a domain name if that owner is an individual without much
> > >>> means and has one if it's a business entity.
> >
> > >> Domain names cost 12 bucks a year with privacy settings, DumbNads. ï¿œYou
>
> He was convicted of child molestation by a court of law, or hadn't you
> heard?
>
> > >>> and lacks a domain name if that owner is an individual without much
> > >>> means and has one if it's a business entity.
> >
> > >> that poor?
> >
> > >No, but apparently Derbyshire is, or why does his web site's URL lack one?
> >
> > http://nahee.com/Derbyshire/index.html
> >
> > ￜ ￜ ￜYou're stupid.
> >
> > >No, but apparently Derbyshire is, or why does his web site's URL lack one?
> >
> > http://nahee.com/Derbyshire/index.html
> >
>
> She was going by the information you kooks had previously posted. If
> you kooks had gotten it wrong, that's hardly her fault.
>
> > >doesn't mean he's self-
> > >hosting, because anyone with loads of money can afford as many IPs as he
> > >wants?
> >
> > ￜ ￜ ￜAnyone with loads of money can.
> She was going by the information you kooks had previously posted. If
> you kooks had gotten it wrong, that's hardly her fault.
>
> > >doesn't mean he's self-
> > >hosting, because anyone with loads of money can afford as many IPs as he
> > >wants?
> >
>
> But some of you kooks have klaimed that he *doesn't* have loads of
> money. Now, it seems, you can't make up your minds! Is this phantom of
> yours rich or poor? Come on, decide already!
>
> > >Derbyshire can't afford a 12 dollar a year domain name but can
> >
> > ￜ ￜ ￜInteresting.
> But some of you kooks have klaimed that he *doesn't* have loads of
> money. Now, it seems, you can't make up your minds! Is this phantom of
> yours rich or poor? Come on, decide already!
>
> > >Derbyshire can't afford a 12 dollar a year domain name but can
> >
> > ￜ ￜ ￜGary's question was about YOU being able to afford it.
>
> Gary's question was irrelevant, since it isn't Nadegda's web site. His
> statement about the price of a domain name, on the other hand, was
> relevant. She was referring to that and not to Gary's subsequent and
> irrelevant question, which would be clear if you actually possessed
> decent reading comprehension skills.
>
> > Here you claim it's about Paul. Either you've just slipped and admitted you are
> > Paul, or you've been deceptive.
> > ￜ ￜ ￜIf you see an option I don't, please offer it.
> Gary's question was irrelevant, since it isn't Nadegda's web site. His
> statement about the price of a domain name, on the other hand, was
> relevant. She was referring to that and not to Gary's subsequent and
> irrelevant question, which would be clear if you actually possessed
> decent reading comprehension skills.
>
> > Here you claim it's about Paul. Either you've just slipped and admitted you are
> > Paul, or you've been deceptive.
>
> The web site in question is clearly Paul's. If it had lacked a domain
> name (and it had appeared to do so, until now), then it would have
> suggested that Paul could not possibly have afforded fancy hosting
> rather than the cheap, bulk kind sites like Dreamhost (apparently)
> provide. Gary irrelevantly asked whether Nadegda could afford the
> domain name, which question she ignored because the site isn't hers.
>
> Still confused? If so, get your head examined. Maybe you'll be lucky
> and it'll turn out that the stupidity is from something you can take a
> pill to fix. You never know until you try it.
>
>
> > >afford a webhost expensive enough to be dedicating individual IPs to
> > >individual sites instead of virtual hosting? Say what? That's insane
> > >troll logic right there.
> >
> > ￜ ￜ ￜYour failed attempt at deception is noted.
> The web site in question is clearly Paul's. If it had lacked a domain
> name (and it had appeared to do so, until now), then it would have
> suggested that Paul could not possibly have afforded fancy hosting
> rather than the cheap, bulk kind sites like Dreamhost (apparently)
> provide. Gary irrelevantly asked whether Nadegda could afford the
> domain name, which question she ignored because the site isn't hers.
>
> Still confused? If so, get your head examined. Maybe you'll be lucky
> and it'll turn out that the stupidity is from something you can take a
> pill to fix. You never know until you try it.
>
>
> > >afford a webhost expensive enough to be dedicating individual IPs to
> > >individual sites instead of virtual hosting? Say what? That's insane
> > >troll logic right there.
> >
Take my word for it. He'll have you dancing for years... IF you last
that long.
SPANKY!-SPANKY!
--
Checkmate
KotAGoR XXXIV
AUK Hammer of Thor award, Feb. 2012
co-winner, Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker award, May 2001
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Checkmate
Nov 1, 2012, 2:12:49 PM11/1/12
to
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
Checkmate!
Checkmate!
First, check out what Gary L Burnore said:
>
> In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> > On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 05:46:35 +0000, convicted sex offender Gary L Burnore
> > wrote:
> >
> >> In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> >>> Bulk cheap webhosting is always virtual, because the IPv4 address
> >>> space is running low.
> >>
> >> Wrong, of course. Those who can afford it can get as many IPs as they
> >> need.
> >
> > That doesn't have anything to do with bulk, cheap hosting, child
> > molester.
>
> You've proof of neither, nads.
>
> In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> > On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 05:46:35 +0000, convicted sex offender Gary L Burnore
> > wrote:
> >
> >> In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> >>> Bulk cheap webhosting is always virtual, because the IPv4 address
> >>> space is running low.
> >>
> >> Wrong, of course. Those who can afford it can get as many IPs as they
> >> need.
> >
> > That doesn't have anything to do with bulk, cheap hosting, child
> > molester.
>
>
> >
> > Says the kiddy diddler that can't even spell.
>
> Speeel flames now? Hahahahahahahahaha DumbNads
> >
> > Says the kiddy diddler that can't even spell.
>
>
> >
> >>> and lacks a domain name if that owner is an individual without much
> >>> means and has one if it's a business entity.
> >>
> >> Domain names cost 12 bucks a year with privacy settings, DumbNads. You
> >> that poor?
> >
> > No, but apparently
>
> Means you don't know.
> >
> >>> and lacks a domain name if that owner is an individual without much
> >>> means and has one if it's a business entity.
> >>
> >> Domain names cost 12 bucks a year with privacy settings, DumbNads. You
> >> that poor?
> >
> > No, but apparently
>
> >
> > NOMINATION: Gary L. Burnore
>
> Denied of course.
Denial seconded, of course.
--
Checkmate
KotAGoR XXXIV
AUK Hammer of Thor award, Feb. 2012
co-winner, Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker award, May 2001
%
Nov 1, 2012, 2:32:25 PM11/1/12
to
This account has been banned because it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use
Nov 1, 2012, 8:55:46 PM11/1/12
to
AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA Andrew Wilson
>
> P<auto-SPANK #3>
for a very long time, you stupid cunt.
Paul, you've known the domain name owner, Paul Lee, from the fractals
forums for a long time - and you also know Mr Lee also hosts several other
factals pages for its members, which is clear from this URL you snipped.
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Anahee.com
You're a deceptive and stupid cunt, Paul.
>> "/Derbyshire" is a subdirectory of nahee.com, Paul, and so your kooky
>> website isn't the only page hosted at that IP address, you stupid cunt.
>
> First of all, you're not replying to Derbyshire.
Liar.
> Second<SPANK>
You're a predictable, stupid cunt, Paul -
>> But I expect your "Andrew Wilson" sock will be along shortly [....]
<chortle>
--
"Sweetness Seal Of Approval" #4
Co-winning trainer, Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog-Whistle - August 2012
Winner of multiple fake awards from serial Usenet kook, Paul G. Derbyshire
If you want to see something lamer than John Edward Kook's frogeries of
Aratzio, check out Scatboi's forgeries.
Anonypussy [Tard] <fnvw@altusenetkooks.*> is the Official AUK Peg Boi.
http://blackhelicopternews.blogspot.com/2012/08/new-award.html
Paul Derbyshire gets tarred and feathered - <5smbjh....@news.alt.net>
"My brother has Asperger's, which is kind of like a high functioning form
of autism" - Ian Derbyshire talking about his freaky brother Paul.
http://kydaimon.livejournal.com/
<awils...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 1, 6:58 am, This account has been banned because it violated
> the Google Groups Terms Of Use <laugh...@u.kook> wrote:
>> AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA
>> Nadegda<<nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> On Nov 1, 6:58 am, This account has been banned because it violated
> the Google Groups Terms Of Use <laugh...@u.kook> wrote:
>> AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA
>
> P<auto-SPANK #3>
>
>> >> Domain names cost 12 bucks a year with privacy settings, DumbNads.
>> >> You that poor?
>>
>> > No, but apparently Derbyshire is, or why does his web site's URL lack
>> > one?
>>
>> It doesn't, Paul.
>>
>> http://nahee.com/Derbyshire/index.html
>
> That's odd, since apparently it did before. Or else why was it first
> posted with an IP address?
Ask whoever first posted it, Paul - and 66.39.71.195 has hosted nahee.com
>> >> Domain names cost 12 bucks a year with privacy settings, DumbNads.
>> >> You that poor?
>>
>> > No, but apparently Derbyshire is, or why does his web site's URL lack
>> > one?
>>
>> It doesn't, Paul.
>>
>> http://nahee.com/Derbyshire/index.html
>
> That's odd, since apparently it did before. Or else why was it first
> posted with an IP address?
for a very long time, you stupid cunt.
Paul, you've known the domain name owner, Paul Lee, from the fractals
forums for a long time - and you also know Mr Lee also hosts several other
factals pages for its members, which is clear from this URL you snipped.
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Anahee.com
You're a deceptive and stupid cunt, Paul.
>> "/Derbyshire" is a subdirectory of nahee.com, Paul, and so your kooky
>> website isn't the only page hosted at that IP address, you stupid cunt.
>
> First of all, you're not replying to Derbyshire.
> Second<SPANK>
You're a predictable, stupid cunt, Paul -
>> But I expect your "Andrew Wilson" sock will be along shortly [....]
<chortle>
--
"Sweetness Seal Of Approval" #4
Co-winning trainer, Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog-Whistle - August 2012
Winner of multiple fake awards from serial Usenet kook, Paul G. Derbyshire
If you want to see something lamer than John Edward Kook's frogeries of
Aratzio, check out Scatboi's forgeries.
Anonypussy [Tard] <fnvw@altusenetkooks.*> is the Official AUK Peg Boi.
http://blackhelicopternews.blogspot.com/2012/08/new-award.html
Paul Derbyshire gets tarred and feathered - <5smbjh....@news.alt.net>
of autism" - Ian Derbyshire talking about his freaky brother Paul.
http://kydaimon.livejournal.com/
This account has been banned because it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use
Nov 1, 2012, 8:58:08 PM11/1/12
to
> you're stupid
So, Paul, you're resorting to speeling lames and PeeWees again, you stupid cunt?
Nice meltdown, Paul; you foamed 124 lines of unadulterated kook screed.
So, Paul, you're resorting to speeling lames and PeeWees again, you stupid cunt?
Nice meltdown, Paul; you foamed 124 lines of unadulterated kook screed.
Message has been deleted
Checkmate
Nov 1, 2012, 10:06:57 PM11/1/12
to
It just latched onto my leg one day. It whimpers a lot, and I felt sorry
for it.
Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler {One Of Four}
Nov 1, 2012, 11:15:39 PM11/1/12
to
Time to spin up the kooks again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
Checkmate, in <news:62qq3b....@news.alt.net> did thusly write:
> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
> Checkmate!
>
> First, check out what Andrew Wilson said:
>
>>
>> On Nov 1, 9:31 am, K Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 06:04:32 +0000 (UTC), Nadegda
>>> <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>> >(And if his one lonely IP is static, it's more
>>>
Seems to me that Andrew Wilson spanked Kunt pretty soundly.
And Kunt's a lightweight, he's already avoiding me after I used his
own words to force him to argue against himself. I never lose,
especially against Kunt, because he's just not too bright.
SPANKY-SPANKY!1!
<snicker>
--
/\ Properly known as Bill
\ /\ The Monster You Kooks Can't Handle
\ / \ THERE IS NO CABAL - LONG LIVE THE NEW CABAL
\/ The AUK coup is complete. The Old Cabal is no more.
Kook Awards Official Voting Ballot:
Message-ID: <k6smlo$psr$1...@newsfeed.x-privat.org>
http://narkive.com/Vnz0zZNK#post1
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=135173672500
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.usenet.kooks/msg/7c4b3cb3ad89b8f8
Checkmate, in <news:62qq3b....@news.alt.net> did thusly write:
> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
> Checkmate!
>
> First, check out what Andrew Wilson said:
>
>>
>> On Nov 1, 9:31 am, K Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 06:04:32 +0000 (UTC), Nadegda
>>> <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>> >(And if his one lonely IP is static, it's more
>>>
>>> I'm not sure I'm following you here.
>>
>> That's because you're stupid. What she wrote is perfectly clear to
>> anyone of normal intelligence.
>>
>>
>> That's because you're stupid. What she wrote is perfectly clear to
>> anyone of normal intelligence.
>>
>>> Are you claiming web sites will typically have dynamic IPs?
>>
>> No, dolt, she's claiming home computers will sometimes have dynamic
>> IPs and sometimes not, so in the context of the theory that the site's
>> on his own computer, given that it has a static IP and Nadegda herself
>> has a dynamic one it proves they aren't the same person.
>>
>>> >proof that he's not the same person as myself or kensi or any other
>>> >person that demonstrably has a dynamic IP,
>>>
>>
>> No, dolt, she's claiming home computers will sometimes have dynamic
>> IPs and sometimes not, so in the context of the theory that the site's
>> on his own computer, given that it has a static IP and Nadegda herself
>> has a dynamic one it proves they aren't the same person.
>>
>>> >proof that he's not the same person as myself or kensi or any other
>>> >person that demonstrably has a dynamic IP,
>>>
>>> I've never checked your posting IP with anyone else's. That
>>> aside, to think a web site's IP must be the same as the IP used when
>>> posting to Usenet is laughable.
>>
>> If the web site was on Paul's home computer, then the IP *would* be
>> the same as used when he posted to Usenet. Of course, he doesn't post
>> to Usenet anymore, according to some other evidence, so that's moot.
>>
>>> >contrary to various k'lames
>>> >that have been made here recently, in an obsessively incessant manner, by
>>> >various kooks.)
>>>
>>> aside, to think a web site's IP must be the same as the IP used when
>>> posting to Usenet is laughable.
>>
>> If the web site was on Paul's home computer, then the IP *would* be
>> the same as used when he posted to Usenet. Of course, he doesn't post
>> to Usenet anymore, according to some other evidence, so that's moot.
>>
>>> >contrary to various k'lames
>>> >that have been made here recently, in an obsessively incessant manner, by
>>> >various kooks.)
>>>
>>> You are only one person. Your claim of various kooks can't be
>>> accurate.
>>
>> That was a lame IKYABWAI, kook.
>>
>>> >Says the kiddy diddler that can't even spell.
>>>
>>> accurate.
>>
>> That was a lame IKYABWAI, kook.
>>
>>> >Says the kiddy diddler that can't even spell.
>>>
>>> BTW, kissing a 17 year old isn't, to the mentally sound, the same
>>> as being a kiddy diddler.
>>
>> He was convicted of child molestation by a court of law, or hadn't you
>> heard?
>>
>>> >>> and lacks a domain name if that owner is an individual without much
>>> >>> means and has one if it's a business entity.
>>>
>>> >> Domain names cost 12 bucks a year with privacy settings, DumbNads. You
>>> as being a kiddy diddler.
>>
>> He was convicted of child molestation by a court of law, or hadn't you
>> heard?
>>
>>> >>> and lacks a domain name if that owner is an individual without much
>>> >>> means and has one if it's a business entity.
>>>
>>> >> that poor?
>>>
>>> >No, but apparently Derbyshire is, or why does his web site's URL lack one?
>>>
>>> http://nahee.com/Derbyshire/index.html
>>>
>>>
>>> >No, but apparently Derbyshire is, or why does his web site's URL lack one?
>>>
>>> http://nahee.com/Derbyshire/index.html
>>>
>>> You're stupid.
>>
>> She was going by the information you kooks had previously posted. If
>> you kooks had gotten it wrong, that's hardly her fault.
>>
>>> >doesn't mean he's self-
>>> >hosting, because anyone with loads of money can afford as many IPs as he
>>> >wants?
>>>
>>
>> She was going by the information you kooks had previously posted. If
>> you kooks had gotten it wrong, that's hardly her fault.
>>
>>> >doesn't mean he's self-
>>> >hosting, because anyone with loads of money can afford as many IPs as he
>>> >wants?
>>>
>>> Anyone with loads of money can.
>>
>> But some of you kooks have klaimed that he *doesn't* have loads of
>> money. Now, it seems, you can't make up your minds! Is this phantom of
>> yours rich or poor? Come on, decide already!
>>
>>> >Derbyshire can't afford a 12 dollar a year domain name but can
>>>
>>> Interesting.
>>
>> But some of you kooks have klaimed that he *doesn't* have loads of
>> money. Now, it seems, you can't make up your minds! Is this phantom of
>> yours rich or poor? Come on, decide already!
>>
>>> >Derbyshire can't afford a 12 dollar a year domain name but can
>>>
>>> Gary's question was about YOU being able to afford it.
>>
>> Gary's question was irrelevant, since it isn't Nadegda's web site. His
>> statement about the price of a domain name, on the other hand, was
>> relevant. She was referring to that and not to Gary's subsequent and
>> irrelevant question, which would be clear if you actually possessed
>> decent reading comprehension skills.
>>
>>> Here you claim it's about Paul. Either you've just slipped and admitted you are
>>> Paul, or you've been deceptive.
>>
>> Gary's question was irrelevant, since it isn't Nadegda's web site. His
>> statement about the price of a domain name, on the other hand, was
>> relevant. She was referring to that and not to Gary's subsequent and
>> irrelevant question, which would be clear if you actually possessed
>> decent reading comprehension skills.
>>
>>> Here you claim it's about Paul. Either you've just slipped and admitted you are
>>> Paul, or you've been deceptive.
>>> If you see an option I don't, please offer it.
>>
>> The web site in question is clearly Paul's. If it had lacked a domain
>> name (and it had appeared to do so, until now), then it would have
>> suggested that Paul could not possibly have afforded fancy hosting
>> rather than the cheap, bulk kind sites like Dreamhost (apparently)
>> provide. Gary irrelevantly asked whether Nadegda could afford the
>> domain name, which question she ignored because the site isn't hers.
>>
>> Still confused? If so, get your head examined. Maybe you'll be lucky
>> and it'll turn out that the stupidity is from something you can take a
>> pill to fix. You never know until you try it.
>>
>>> >afford a webhost expensive enough to be dedicating individual IPs to
>>> >individual sites instead of virtual hosting? Say what? That's insane
>>> >troll logic right there.
>>>
>>
>> The web site in question is clearly Paul's. If it had lacked a domain
>> name (and it had appeared to do so, until now), then it would have
>> suggested that Paul could not possibly have afforded fancy hosting
>> rather than the cheap, bulk kind sites like Dreamhost (apparently)
>> provide. Gary irrelevantly asked whether Nadegda could afford the
>> domain name, which question she ignored because the site isn't hers.
>>
>> Still confused? If so, get your head examined. Maybe you'll be lucky
>> and it'll turn out that the stupidity is from something you can take a
>> pill to fix. You never know until you try it.
>>
>>> >afford a webhost expensive enough to be dedicating individual IPs to
>>> >individual sites instead of virtual hosting? Say what? That's insane
>>> >troll logic right there.
>>>
And Kunt's a lightweight, he's already avoiding me after I used his
own words to force him to argue against himself. I never lose,
especially against Kunt, because he's just not too bright.
SPANKY-SPANKY!1!
<snicker>
--
/\ Properly known as Bill
\ /\ The Monster You Kooks Can't Handle
\ / \ THERE IS NO CABAL - LONG LIVE THE NEW CABAL
\/ The AUK coup is complete. The Old Cabal is no more.
Kook Awards Official Voting Ballot:
Message-ID: <k6smlo$psr$1...@newsfeed.x-privat.org>
http://narkive.com/Vnz0zZNK#post1
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=135173672500
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.usenet.kooks/msg/7c4b3cb3ad89b8f8
Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler {One Of Four}
Nov 1, 2012, 11:16:29 PM11/1/12
to
Time to spin up the kooks again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
Gary L Burnore, in <news:k6u9tq$j5n$3...@reader1.panix.com> did thusly
write:
> In alt.usenet.kooks Andrew Wilson <awils...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 1, 9:31?am, K Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 06:04:32 +0000 (UTC), Nadegda
>>> <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>> >(And if his one lonely IP is static, it's more
>>>
>>> ? ? ?I'm not sure I'm following you here.
>>> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 06:04:32 +0000 (UTC), Nadegda
>>> <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>> >(And if his one lonely IP is static, it's more
>>>
>>
>> That's because you're stupid. What she wrote is perfectly clear to
>> anyone of normal intelligence.
>>
>>> ? ? ?Are you claiming web sites will typically have dynamic IPs?
>> That's because you're stupid. What she wrote is perfectly clear to
>> anyone of normal intelligence.
>>
>>
>> No, dolt, she's claiming home computers will sometimes have dynamic
>> IPs and sometimes not,
>
> That's not what you ^H^H^H she said.
>> No, dolt, she's claiming home computers will sometimes have dynamic
>> IPs and sometimes not,
>
>
>> so in the context of the theory that the site's
>> on his own computer, given that it has a static IP and Nadegda herself
>> has a dynamic one it proves they aren't the same person.
>
> Nice try.
>> so in the context of the theory that the site's
>> on his own computer, given that it has a static IP and Nadegda herself
>> has a dynamic one it proves they aren't the same person.
>
>
>>> >proof that he's not the same person as myself or kensi or any other
>>> >person that demonstrably has a dynamic IP,
>>>
>>> ? ? ?I've never checked your posting IP with anyone else's. That
>>> >proof that he's not the same person as myself or kensi or any other
>>> >person that demonstrably has a dynamic IP,
>>>
>>> aside, to think a web site's IP must be the same as the IP used when
>>> posting to Usenet is laughable.
>>
>> If the web site was on Paul's home computer, then the IP *would* be
>> the same as used when he posted to Usenet. Of course, he doesn't post
>> to Usenet anymore, according to some other evidence, so that's moot.
>
> Not necessarily, dumbass. You DO know that even with the cheapest of DSL or Cable lines you can get more than one IP,
>>> posting to Usenet is laughable.
>>
>> If the web site was on Paul's home computer, then the IP *would* be
>> the same as used when he posted to Usenet. Of course, he doesn't post
>> to Usenet anymore, according to some other evidence, so that's moot.
>
> right? Nah, you likely don't.
>
>>
>>> >contrary to various k'lames
>>> >that have been made here recently, in an obsessively incessant manner, by
>>> >various kooks.)
>>>
>>> ? ? ?You are only one person. Your claim of various kooks can't be
>>
>>> >contrary to various k'lames
>>> >that have been made here recently, in an obsessively incessant manner, by
>>> >various kooks.)
>>>
>>> accurate.
>>
>> That was a lame IKYABWAI, kook.
>>
>>> >Says the kiddy diddler that can't even spell.
>>>
>>> ? ? ?BTW, kissing a 17 year old isn't, to the mentally sound, the same
>>
>> That was a lame IKYABWAI, kook.
>>
>>> >Says the kiddy diddler that can't even spell.
>>>
>>> as being a kiddy diddler.
>>
>> He was convicted of child molestation by a court of law, or hadn't you
>> heard?
>
> Proof? Lemme guess, fake docs on an offshore site (because the dolt who forged them had to take them down)
>>
>> He was convicted of child molestation by a court of law, or hadn't you
>> heard?
>
Here you go... the proof you can't refute. If you'll remember, I
called you out 61 times at the end of last year / beginning of this
year, challenging you to refute the below proof, which you
consistently ran from. I expect you'll do the same now, you being a
lying coward:
=========================
Gary Lee Burnore was convicted of sexually molesting a minor in 1997
in California.
Police Narrative Pages 1-7
http://bayimg.com/haNigAaBd
http://bayimg.com/hanIIaaBd
http://bayimg.com/HaNIlAabd
http://bayimg.com/hAnimaaBD
http://bayimg.com/IANIaaAbD
http://bayimg.com/iaNicaabd
http://bayimg.com/iAnidaabd
Gary Lee Burnore's police confession:
http://bayimg.com/PANCHAaBd
His conviction brought with it the requirement that he register for
life as a sexual offender in any state he resided in:
Gary Lee Burnore's signed Sexual Offender Registration form:
http://bayimg.com/nanioAAbD
The above, zoomed in:
http://bayimg.com/OANiMAABD
Rather than face what he'd done, Gary Lee Burnore violated his
probation to avoid the consequences of his sexual offender
conviction and its lifetime registration requirement. He secretly
absconded from CA to NC; attempted to evade his probation officer;
failed to register as a convicted sexual offender; failed to
attend court-ordered psychological counseling; and tried to evade
paying victim restitution. For his efforts, CA hauled him back
into court and petitioned to revoke his probation:
Petition To Revoke Probation Pages 1-3
http://bayimg.com/LaNihAaBd
http://bayimg.com/laniLAABd
http://bayimg.com/LANiOAabd
Because of a misclarification in the legalese between the California
Interstate Compact for Adult Offender Supervision (CA ICAOS) board and
the NC ICAOS board, Gary Lee Burnore was able to get his conviction
pleaded down to "Assault On Female" in North Carolina (except for
that, he'd be listed on the NC Department of Public Safety website as
a Convicted Sexual Offender, registered for life as a sexual
predator):
North Carolina Department Of Public Safety (NC DPS):
http://webapps6.doc.state.nc.us/opi/viewoffender.do?method=view&offenderID=0594483
Short URL:
http://goo.gl/FSN0W
You'll notice on the website directly above that Gary Lee Burnore is
listed as a "California Interstate Compact Offender".
There are only three ways to get listed on the CA ICAOS list:
Narcotics Offender
Arson Offender
Sexual Offender
Gary Lee Burnore, despite his denials, is a convicted sexual offender,
and we know this from the scanned documents above, and because he
REMAINS on the NC Department of Public Safety website as a California
Interstate Compact Offender. If he were either of the other two types
of offender (Narcotics, Arson), he'd have aged off the CA ICAOS
list by now, but convicted sexual offenders are listed for life.
Gary Lee Burnore's PGP-signed confessional post:
http://www.shmoo.com/mail/cypherpunks/jun99/msg00146.html
Gary Lee Burnore now disavows having made that confessional PGP-signed
post, and has for years asserted that the child he was convicted of
molesting either seduced him into doing what he did, or sexually
assaulted him as he slept (he's made both claims), as well as claiming
that _none_ of it happened, that it was all a plot by someone he'd
harassed online, that he'd never spent any time in prison... except
he forgets his NC DPS record, and the CA ICAOS listing reflected
therein.
=========================
Gonna try to tell us all again that the North Carolina Department of
Public Safety is a fake site, or that they're lying, Gaaaayyry?
http://bayimg.com/haNigAaBd
=========================
"On 11-19-96, I received a phone call from a Paul Nguyen (phone
number: 288-9224). Paul stated that he was an attorney representing
suspect Gary Burnore.
He wanted to speak with me about a sexual assault type investigation
in which he desired my assistance with in interviewing the victim and
suspect who is his client.
On 11-19-96, at 1525 hours, I called and spoke personally with
Attorney Paul Nguyen. He provided me with the name of the victim,
Rachel, her mother Nancy, and the person who he represents as his
client which is Gary Burnore.
Paul told me that this involves a sexual assault complaint.
I asked Paul if his client was involved in a sexual assault against
Rachel. Paul told me his client is responsible for the sexual assault.
Sgt. B. Lane"
=========================
If the documents are forged, Gary, how is it that the alleged forger
got your Social Security Number correct (keeping in mind that it's
already been verified to be correct)?
If the documents are forged, Gary, why do they correspond to the NC
DPS website, listing your CA ICAOS entry?
Are you calling Sgt. Brian Lane of the Santa Clara Police Department a
liar, Gaayyyry?
SPNAK!
Go on, Gaayyyry, tell us your lies. There's plenty more spankage in
store for you.
<snicker>
> Even SPammer jamie baillie was forced to face up to that fact when he wrote the Sheriff who told him not only was he
> wrong, but to stop writing.
Liar. The Sheriff told Jamie Baillie that you didn't live in his
county, and therefore he had no way of knowing anything about you.
Continue your lies, Gaaayyyry, the truth will come out every single
time to spank you silly.
SPNAK!
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Nadegda
Nov 2, 2012, 1:46:58 AM11/2/12
to
On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 01:12:23 -0400, CastAlone (Pie Gurl) P...@yahoo.calm
WINNER - KOTM July 2012 wrote:
> Andrew Wilson-(Paula) G Derbyshire <::---twist...@gmail.com
> WINNER - KOTM July 2012 posted as news in
> <ec9035ec-9a72-4e80...@10g2000vbu.googlegroups.com>
> and as - "PAUL G. "TWO-SOCKS" DERBYSHIRE!"
> http://blackhelicopternews.blogspot.com/2012/09/winners-usenet-kook-
awards-august-2012.html
> quite plain it is _your wall_ of phlegm, paula.
> blocks of shoddy contradiction sparingly stuck together
> with well aerated spittle, ejected noisily.. like
>
> WAAAAAAAAhhh WAAAAAAAAAAAA WAAAAAAAAAAH
> M O M H E L P
>
> it is all falling over for you paula... hey!
> do get busy loading the coalbox in that winnebago... heh heh
> you are in for a long lonely winterin' like :------------------D
Nice foamy rant, kooky. Do it again! But this time don't sneck AUK, you
coward.
>> Or is he in some weird quantum Shrodinger(sp?) state of being
>> simultaneously poor and rich, and simultaneously in Pembroke, Ottawa,
>> Toronto, Pittsburgh, and Chicago?
>>
> hah...!..paula!
> admission your fucking around with anonymity engines (various) has
proved
> your undoing as you are fucking hopeless at that skill also!
>
> ROTFLMAO@ewe-paula
Meet Murphy, our resident gibbering loon. He prances around cackling at
jokes only he can hear, no amount of medication suffices to sedate him,
and he often foams at the mouth like a rabid dog.
Oh, and he seems to think that Andrew's use of Tor somehow invalidates
Andrew's observation of Murphy's contradictory claims that various people
NOT using Tor were all Derbyshire despite posting from three or four
different ISPs located in three or four different cities.
Unsurprisingly, the Murphy kook is a multiple winner of the Loony Maroon
Award, as well as one each of Kook of the Month and Foam Duck.
>> <cackle><--------sounds of sickness. i saw the video. yer one sick
puppy derbyshire.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0&feature=youtu.be
THAT lame prank again? You silly kook.
WINNER - KOTM July 2012 wrote:
> Andrew Wilson-(Paula) G Derbyshire <::---twist...@gmail.com
> WINNER - KOTM July 2012 posted as news in
> <ec9035ec-9a72-4e80...@10g2000vbu.googlegroups.com>
> and as - "PAUL G. "TWO-SOCKS" DERBYSHIRE!"
> http://blackhelicopternews.blogspot.com/2012/09/winners-usenet-kook-
awards-august-2012.html
> blocks of shoddy contradiction sparingly stuck together
> with well aerated spittle, ejected noisily.. like
>
> WAAAAAAAAhhh WAAAAAAAAAAAA WAAAAAAAAAAH
> M O M H E L P
>
> it is all falling over for you paula... hey!
> do get busy loading the coalbox in that winnebago... heh heh
> you are in for a long lonely winterin' like :------------------D
Nice foamy rant, kooky. Do it again! But this time don't sneck AUK, you
coward.
>> Or is he in some weird quantum Shrodinger(sp?) state of being
>> simultaneously poor and rich, and simultaneously in Pembroke, Ottawa,
>> Toronto, Pittsburgh, and Chicago?
>>
> admission your fucking around with anonymity engines (various) has
proved
> your undoing as you are fucking hopeless at that skill also!
>
> ROTFLMAO@ewe-paula
Meet Murphy, our resident gibbering loon. He prances around cackling at
jokes only he can hear, no amount of medication suffices to sedate him,
and he often foams at the mouth like a rabid dog.
Oh, and he seems to think that Andrew's use of Tor somehow invalidates
Andrew's observation of Murphy's contradictory claims that various people
NOT using Tor were all Derbyshire despite posting from three or four
different ISPs located in three or four different cities.
Unsurprisingly, the Murphy kook is a multiple winner of the Loony Maroon
Award, as well as one each of Kook of the Month and Foam Duck.
>> <cackle><--------sounds of sickness. i saw the video. yer one sick
puppy derbyshire.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0&feature=youtu.be
THAT lame prank again? You silly kook.
Checkmate
Nov 2, 2012, 2:02:49 AM11/2/12
to
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
Checkmate!
First, check out what Nadegda said:
Checkmate!
> cackling
Who else cackles a lot?
This account has been banned because it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use
Nov 2, 2012, 2:07:57 AM11/2/12
to
CastAlone <c...@ca.org.example> wrote:
> AB <laug...@u.kook> posted as news in
> <62rr7k....@news.alt.net>:
> of the construction by the crawler, possibly the URL (host) found at the
> time the page was scanned and archived.
> i really do not know, i am trying to recall what i read as general information
> posted by a number of people all joining the derbyshire dots.
Do you have a complete list of Pauldelbrot's Eternal-September socks?
I have about 200 of Paul's aioe.org socks and frogeries, and it's still
growing. I also have about 10 of Paul's Mixmin socks (so far) and about
40 Google Groups socks.
> the links are on the wayback machine, and do take some fussin' to dredge
> up. but the whole site is there... as much as paula does not want to hear that!
> [EFG]
> a similar occurrence of linkage is this one:
> http://web.archive.org/web/20070624192139/http://www.caballista.org/auk/index.html
> note this one uses a domain name.
> during his early trolling days in which he stupidly posted reference to _his_ work
> as "proof" of _his socky_ claim.
Yes - including a URL to his Yahoo Photos page which he set up with his
rogers.com account. See MID <-YGdnQuSz4h...@rogers.com>
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.roguelike.misc/browse_frm/thread/7615b47e8562587e
is another amusing thread - Pauldelbrot gets another spanking.
> the URL's have "derbyshire.html" in the links..!...FFS!
> [snarf]
Not quite; it reappears on aioe.org and rec.arts.tv at the mention of 'Seamus'.
But Pauldelbrot hasn't used the 'thoolen' Google Groups account after I spanked
him - the IP addresses used in the 'thoolen' posts led back to his aioe.org socks.
>>>> But I expect your "Andrew Wilson" sock will be along shortly [....]
>>
>><chortle>
>>
> [snuckles]
> AB <laug...@u.kook> posted as news in
> <62rr7k....@news.alt.net>:
>>AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA Andrew Wilson
>><awils...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Nov 1, 6:58 am, This account has been banned because it violated
>>> the Google Groups Terms Of Use <laugh...@u.kook> wrote:
>>
>>>> AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA
>>>> Nadegda<<nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> P<auto-SPANK #3>
>>>
>>>> >> Domain names cost 12 bucks a year with privacy settings, DumbNads.
>>>> >> You that poor?
>>>>
>>>> > No, but apparently Derbyshire is, or why does his web site's URL lack
>>>> > one?
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't, Paul.
>>>>
>>>> http://nahee.com/Derbyshire/index.html
>>>
>>> That's odd, since apparently it did before. Or else why was it first
>>> posted with an IP address?
>>
>>Ask whoever first posted it, Paul - and 66.39.71.195 has hosted nahee.com
>>for a very long time, you stupid cunt.
>>
> i have been told (on asking) that as the pages are all archived the URL is
>><awils...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Nov 1, 6:58 am, This account has been banned because it violated
>>> the Google Groups Terms Of Use <laugh...@u.kook> wrote:
>>
>>>> AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA
>>>> Nadegda<<nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> P<auto-SPANK #3>
>>>
>>>> >> Domain names cost 12 bucks a year with privacy settings, DumbNads.
>>>> >> You that poor?
>>>>
>>>> > No, but apparently Derbyshire is, or why does his web site's URL lack
>>>> > one?
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't, Paul.
>>>>
>>>> http://nahee.com/Derbyshire/index.html
>>>
>>> That's odd, since apparently it did before. Or else why was it first
>>> posted with an IP address?
>>
>>Ask whoever first posted it, Paul - and 66.39.71.195 has hosted nahee.com
>>for a very long time, you stupid cunt.
>>
> of the construction by the crawler, possibly the URL (host) found at the
> time the page was scanned and archived.
> i really do not know, i am trying to recall what i read as general information
> posted by a number of people all joining the derbyshire dots.
Do you have a complete list of Pauldelbrot's Eternal-September socks?
I have about 200 of Paul's aioe.org socks and frogeries, and it's still
growing. I also have about 10 of Paul's Mixmin socks (so far) and about
40 Google Groups socks.
> the links are on the wayback machine, and do take some fussin' to dredge
> up. but the whole site is there... as much as paula does not want to hear that!
> [EFG]
> a similar occurrence of linkage is this one:
> http://web.archive.org/web/20070624192139/http://www.caballista.org/auk/index.html
> note this one uses a domain name.
>
>>Paul, you've known the domain name owner, Paul Lee, from the fractals
>>forums for a long time - and you also know Mr Lee also hosts several other
>>factals pages for its members, which is clear from this URL you snipped.
>>
>>http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Anahee.com
>>
> again, from recall... there are scatterings of links posted by paula in socky mode
>>Paul, you've known the domain name owner, Paul Lee, from the fractals
>>forums for a long time - and you also know Mr Lee also hosts several other
>>factals pages for its members, which is clear from this URL you snipped.
>>
>>http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Anahee.com
>>
> during his early trolling days in which he stupidly posted reference to _his_ work
> as "proof" of _his socky_ claim.
Yes - including a URL to his Yahoo Photos page which he set up with his
rogers.com account. See MID <-YGdnQuSz4h...@rogers.com>
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.roguelike.misc/browse_frm/thread/7615b47e8562587e
is another amusing thread - Pauldelbrot gets another spanking.
> the URL's have "derbyshire.html" in the links..!...FFS!
> [snarf]
>
>>You're a deceptive and stupid cunt, Paul.
>>
> pathologically so... a hopeless psychotic with a rather nasty bent.
>>You're a deceptive and stupid cunt, Paul.
>>
>
>>>> "/Derbyshire" is a subdirectory of nahee.com, Paul, and so your kooky
>>>> website isn't the only page hosted at that IP address, you stupid cunt.
>>>
>>> First of all, you're not replying to Derbyshire.
>>
> lying kunt
>>>> "/Derbyshire" is a subdirectory of nahee.com, Paul, and so your kooky
>>>> website isn't the only page hosted at that IP address, you stupid cunt.
>>>
>>> First of all, you're not replying to Derbyshire.
>>
>
>>
>>Liar.
>>
>>> Second<SPANK>
>>
>>You're a predictable, stupid cunt, Paul -
>>
> note his th00lenbot routine vaporized.
>>
>>Liar.
>>
>>> Second<SPANK>
>>
>>You're a predictable, stupid cunt, Paul -
>>
Not quite; it reappears on aioe.org and rec.arts.tv at the mention of 'Seamus'.
But Pauldelbrot hasn't used the 'thoolen' Google Groups account after I spanked
him - the IP addresses used in the 'thoolen' posts led back to his aioe.org socks.
>>>> But I expect your "Andrew Wilson" sock will be along shortly [....]
>>
>><chortle>
>>
This account has been banned because it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use
Nov 2, 2012, 2:10:26 AM11/2/12
to
AUK's July Kook Of The Month, Paul G. Derbyshire AKA Nadegda
<nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> Murphy
Owns you, Paul. You are such a stupid cunt.
Message has been deleted
Checkmate
Nov 2, 2012, 2:25:59 AM11/2/12
to
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
Checkmate!
First, check out what Nadegda said:
Checkmate!
First, check out what Nadegda said:
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0&feature=youtu.be
>
> THAT lame prank again? You silly kook.
>
It's a classic, Paul... like Gone With the Wind.
>
> THAT lame prank again? You silly kook.
>
--
Checkmate
KotAGoR XXXIV
AUK Hammer of Thor award, Feb. 2012
co-winner, Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker award, May 2001
Copyright ￜ 2012
all rights reserved
I'm Checkmate, and I approve this message...
all rights reserved
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpZhZAr1cQU
Read what others are saying about Checkmate!
_____________________________________________________________________
"I keep forgetting you've been doing this for so long that it's easy
for you. I can't wait to piss on your grave."
Uncle Steve
Message-ID: <b18ab6cb2c...@gmail.com>
_____________________________________________________________________
"Did... did you just tell someone to attempt to ROT-13 *numbers*, you
Clueless Newbie of the Month candidate?"
Paul Derbyshire, socked-up as [tor] Phoenix
Message-ID: <k3ae35$prb$1...@news.mixmin.net>
_____________________________________________________________________
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
Paul Derbyshire, socked up as Andrew Wilson
Message-ID: <9870030e-6c49-4f16-af9e-
070a57...@g18g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>
_____________________________________________________________________
"You can sit there all you want and spit out all the denial you can
Read what others are saying about Checkmate!
_____________________________________________________________________
"I keep forgetting you've been doing this for so long that it's easy
for you. I can't wait to piss on your grave."
Uncle Steve
Message-ID: <b18ab6cb2c...@gmail.com>
_____________________________________________________________________
"Did... did you just tell someone to attempt to ROT-13 *numbers*, you
Clueless Newbie of the Month candidate?"
Paul Derbyshire, socked-up as [tor] Phoenix
Message-ID: <k3ae35$prb$1...@news.mixmin.net>
_____________________________________________________________________
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
Paul Derbyshire, socked up as Andrew Wilson
Message-ID: <9870030e-6c49-4f16-af9e-
070a57...@g18g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>
_____________________________________________________________________
muster, it still doesn't change the fact that you are the current
king shit of the puppeteers in this group."
-Ragnar
_____________________________________________________________________
"You have got to be the biggest butt fucking moron in this place.
You use socks and then admit to it? What the fuck is the point?"
-Ragnar, socked-up as "Wildhare"
_____________________________________________________________________
Nadegda
Nov 2, 2012, 3:00:12 AM11/2/12
to
On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 01:14:51 -0400, November Kook of the Month hopeful
email.me> and didn't sneck AUK this time! Now there's a good kook!
But what does any of your foamage have to do with the topic? Nobody had
posted a Wayback Machine archive link, so once again your post seems to
be completely disconnected from reality.
> again, from recall... there are scatterings of links posted by paula in
> socky mode during his early trolling days in which he stupidly posted
> reference to _his_ work as "proof" of _his socky_ claim.
Andrew, or anyone else you've accused of being Derbyshire? And what the
hell is a "Pauldelbrot"? You just get kookier and kookier with every
post, don't you?
>>You're a deceptive and stupid cunt, Paul.
>>
Jerks.
>>>> "/Derbyshire" is a subdirectory of nahee.com, Paul, and so your kooky
>>>> website isn't the only page hosted at that IP address, you stupid
>>>> cunt.
>>>
>>> First of all, you're not replying to Derbyshire.
>>
> lying kunt
Proof?
> note his th00lenbot routine vaporized.
*Now* what are you screeding about?
> [snuckles]
Ewww. Keep that nasty shit to yourself, pervert.
<snicker>
CastAlone (Pie Gurl) P...@yahoo.calm WINNER - KOTM July 2012 wrote:
> i have been told (on asking) that as the pages are all archived the URL
> is of the construction by the crawler, possibly the URL (host) found at
> the time the page was scanned and archived. i really do not know, i am
> trying to recall what i read as general information posted by a number
> of people all joining the derbyshire dots. the links are on the wayback
> is of the construction by the crawler, possibly the URL (host) found at
> the time the page was scanned and archived. i really do not know, i am
> trying to recall what i read as general information posted by a number
> machine, and do take some fussin' to dredge up. but the whole site is
> there... as much as paula does not want to hear that!
> [EFG]
Nice foamage. And you followed my instructions in <k6vmoh$r96$2@dont-
> there... as much as paula does not want to hear that!
> [EFG]
email.me> and didn't sneck AUK this time! Now there's a good kook!
But what does any of your foamage have to do with the topic? Nobody had
posted a Wayback Machine archive link, so once again your post seems to
be completely disconnected from reality.
> again, from recall... there are scatterings of links posted by paula in
> socky mode during his early trolling days in which he stupidly posted
> reference to _his_ work as "proof" of _his socky_ claim.
> the URL's have "derbyshire.html" in the links..!...FFS!
> [snarf]
Where are these alleged links? And what ties them to kensi, myself,
> [snarf]
Andrew, or anyone else you've accused of being Derbyshire? And what the
hell is a "Pauldelbrot"? You just get kookier and kookier with every
post, don't you?
>>You're a deceptive and stupid cunt, Paul.
>>
> pathologically so... a hopeless psychotic with a rather nasty bent.
And you two wonder why you're co-incumbents in the Ministry of Circle
Jerks.
>>>> "/Derbyshire" is a subdirectory of nahee.com, Paul, and so your kooky
>>>> website isn't the only page hosted at that IP address, you stupid
>>>> cunt.
>>>
>>> First of all, you're not replying to Derbyshire.
>>
Proof?
> note his th00lenbot routine vaporized.
> [snuckles]
Ewww. Keep that nasty shit to yourself, pervert.
<snicker>
Nadegda
Nov 2, 2012, 3:01:58 AM11/2/12
to
On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 23:02:49 -0700, Stalemate wrote:
> Warning! Always make ANSI approved safety giggles when reading posts by
> Stalemate!
<snicker>
> Warning! Always make ANSI approved safety giggles when reading posts by
> Stalemate!
>
> First, check out what Nadegda said:
>
>
> First, check out what Nadegda said:
>
>
>> Meet Murphy, our resident gibbering loon. He prances around cackling
>> at jokes only he can hear, no amount of medication suffices to sedate
>> him, and he often foams at the mouth like a rabid dog.
>
>> at jokes only he can hear, no amount of medication suffices to sedate
>> him, and he often foams at the mouth like a rabid dog.
>
> Who else cackles a lot?
Did ... did you just suggest that Murphy is an Andrew Wilson sock?
<snicker>
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Nadegda
Nov 2, 2012, 4:29:10 AM11/2/12
to
On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:54:09 +0000, convicted pedophile Gary L Burnore
"deny" it when he's nominated for a kook award.
More evidence that that particular award, a Loony Maroon Award, is richly
deserved by you, kooky.
wrote:
> In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>> NOMINATION: Gary L. Burnore
>
> Denied of course.
Hahahahahahaha, the stupid kooky convict Burnore thinks he can just
> In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>> NOMINATION: Gary L. Burnore
>
> Denied of course.
"deny" it when he's nominated for a kook award.
More evidence that that particular award, a Loony Maroon Award, is richly
deserved by you, kooky.
Message has been deleted
Andrew Wilson
Nov 2, 2012, 4:59:35 AM11/2/12
to
Andrew Wilson
Nov 2, 2012, 5:02:24 AM11/2/12
to
On Nov 2, 8:29 am, Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:54:09 +0000, convicted pedophile Gary L Burnore
> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:54:09 +0000, convicted pedophile Gary L Burnore
> wrote:
>
> > In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> >> NOMINATION: Gary L. Burnore
>
> > Denied of course.
>
> Hahahahahahaha, the stupid kooky convict Burnore thinks he can just
> "deny" it when he's nominated for a kook award.
>
> More evidence that that particular award, a Loony Maroon Award, is richly
> deserved by you, kooky.
If that nomination's still unseconded, and according to my files it
> >> NOMINATION: Gary L. Burnore
>
> > Denied of course.
>
> Hahahahahahaha, the stupid kooky convict Burnore thinks he can just
> "deny" it when he's nominated for a kook award.
>
> More evidence that that particular award, a Loony Maroon Award, is richly
> deserved by you, kooky.
is, I hereby second it. What a GOOFBALL.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Andrew Wilson
Nov 2, 2012, 6:08:21 AM11/2/12
to
On Nov 2, 9:08 am, Kook Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 05:12:17 -0700 (PDT), Andrew Wilson
> <awils984...@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
You'll pardon me if I respond only selectively to your 417-line-long,
moderately-repetitive screed. In particular, the ad homs and other
lame parts where you made no cogent arguments will be elided.
> Whereas it has already been proved that the site is not on your,
> sorry, Paul's personal computer, your claim fails.
How has that been "proved", kook? Because it has a domain name after
all? Personal computers can and sometimes do have domain names, kooky.
> >If the web site was on Paul's home computer, then the IP *would* be
> >the same as used when he posted to Usenet.
>
> Sure, IF. Since it's not, your claim fails.
See above.
> >Of course, he doesn't post
> >to Usenet anymore, according to some other evidence, so that's moot.
>
> All the evidence I've seen shows you, er, he is.
> You are, of course, free to present any counter evidence
> available.
The burden of proof is on those who claim he *is* posting to prove it,
given his apparent absence.
> >> >Says the kiddy diddler that can't even spell.
>
> >> BTW, kissing a 17 year old isn't, to the mentally sound, the same
> >> as being a kiddy diddler.
>
> >He was convicted of child molestation by a court of law, or hadn't you
> >heard?
>
> Annoying is child molestation?
> I await your dissertation explaining how the two are the same.
> And please don't waste your time and mine, and anyone else who is
> reading, posting links to items long ago proved to be forgeries. Doing
> so will only server to prove your lack oh honesty in this matter.
Phoenix posted the proof in <k6vduc$9fm$6...@newsfeed.x-privat.org>,
which includes unforgeable evidence such as the contents of the
California
Interstate Compact Offender list:
: Gary Lee Burnore, despite his denials, is a convicted sexual
offender,
: and we know this ... because he REMAINS on the NC Department of
: Public Safety website as a California Interstate Compact Offender.
If
: he were either of the other two types of offender (Narcotics,
Arson),
: he'd have aged off the CA ICAOS list by now, but convicted sexual
: offenders are listed for life.
Now I'd like to ask you why you are defending a convicted pedophile,
kook. Could it be that you feel some sympathy for the pervert, and
that that's a TRUTH from which you will keep trying to HIDE?
<cackle>
> >But some of you kooks have klaimed that he *doesn't* have loads of
> >money. Now, it seems, you can't make up your minds! Is this phantom of
> >yours rich or poor? Come on, decide already!
>
> I've made no claim either way, d<SLAP!>
Of course not, because either way you'd be contradicting some of the
evidence and/or your fellow kooks. So, like a coward, you just sit on
the fence and refuse to make a clear statement either way.
> >> Here you claim it's about Paul. Either you've just slipped and admitted you are
> >> Paul, or you've been deceptive.
> >> If you see an option I don't, please offer it.
>
> >The web site in question is clearly Paul's. If it had lacked a domain
> >name (and it had appeared to do so, until now),
>
> It would have had a name the whole time.
That does not contradict whether it had APPEARED to do so. If it has a
name but nobody mentions it for a while then for that time it seems as
if it lacks one. Is that difficult for you to understand because
you're a dullard, kook? Or are you just being dishonest?
> >OK. The way I see it, based on what Nadegda said and my own somewhat
> >weaker knowledge of how the intertubes are run, there are four sorts
> >of web hosting.
>
> >1. You host on your own computer. Cheap. You may or may not have a
> >domain name. You may or may not have a static IP. Your IP will be your
> >own ISP's. Loading the web page by IP will work.
>
> While it could be one's own ISP, the cost would be prohibitive
> for most.
Why? There is free web server software out there, and if the site
draws very little traffic (as I imagine is the case for Derbyshire's
alleged site) the traffic wouldn't cause overage fees to rack up.
> >2. Your ISP provides cheap space. Cheap. You will have a domain name,
> >but it'll be your ISPs and you'll be athttp://isp.com/username/...
> >The web site will have a static IP. It will be your ISP's. Loading the
> >web page by IP will work.
>
> This is the most common means for people to offer a personal web
> site/page. And while nahee.com isn't an ISP,
Proof? It seems to host personal pages, including, allegedly, the
personal page of someone allegedly too poor to afford a separate fee
for web hosting. Of course it could be a cheap web host that some ISP
outsources to to supply their customers with a bit of web space.
> >3. You have cheap, bulk, consumer webhosting. It will be virtual
> >hosting. You will have a domain name, which may be
> >yourname.dreamhost.com or similarly or, a bit more expensive, may be
> >yourname.com. The web site will have a static IP. It won't be your
> >ISP's. Loading the web page by IP won't work.
>
> You can load any web site by either it's numerical or
> alphabetical value.
http://www.accursedfarms.com/
: Accursed Farms
: Home to Civil Protection and Freeman's Mind
:
: Home Forums Movies Subtitles FAQ Contact Donations
:
: 2012 10.18 Animation help needed maybe
...
Non-authoritative answer:
Name: www.accursedfarms.com
Address: 87.106.228.228
http://87.106.228.228/
: Not Found
:
: The requested URL / was not found on this server.
:
: Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to
use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.
SPNAK!
> Loading by numeric value will work.
http://87.106.228.228/
: Not Found
SPNAK!!
> It's not going to be common,
> since few are able to memorize the numbers as easily as the letters.
> By way of example:
> Years ago I had a vanity site, compuelf.org. When I mentioned the
> site, either verbally or via text, I used compuelf.org. I didn't
> actually know it's numeric value, but I could have found out and used
> it.
> In text it wouldn't have mattered much, since C&P could be
> employed to get to the site. However, when verbal, compuelf.org would
> be more easy for most people.
> As for Paul's site, which of the following would be the easiest
> for the general public to remember?
>
> http://<SPANK>
Nice foamy rant, but you're STILL WRONG, KOOK!
> >Now, the web page in question loads by IP,
>
> As any site can.
http://87.106.228.228/
: Not Found
SPNAK!!!
> >so it's either option 2 or
> >the most expensive case of option 4. If it's option 2, that IP is
> >still Derbyshire's ISP's and he's in Pittsburgh,
>
> There is nothing to show it is his ISP.
True; option 4 could be the correct one. In which case the k'lames of
Derbyshire being a pauper are wrong.
SPNAK!!!!
> What this proves is that the IP of a server has no assured
> relation to the location of a person. Keep in mine, nahee is in Dallas
> while the server is in Pittsburgh.
Nahee IS the server. It's nahee.com, and its IP is dedicated to
nahee.com, remember? So where are you getting this "nahee is in
Dallas" from, kook?
> >while you kooks have
> >previously klaimed no fewer than four OTHER cities of residence for
> >him.
>
> I've made no such claim.
"You kooks" have made such claims. You are only one of "you kooks".
When did you start thinking of yourself as plural, retard, and have
you discussed these thoughts with your shrink yet?
> Your move.
I bet you're regretting saying that, now that you've been spanked to
BLISTERS.
<cackle>
> >Of course, there IS one ADDITIONAL possibility that's being overlooked
> >here, and that is that it isn't actually Derbyshire's web site at all,
> >but rather one someone else created in his name.
>
> This is possible. Seems like a lot of work if, as you claim, he
> no longer posts.
There are several kooks here who are EASILY obsessed enough to do
something like that because of their obsession with someone who no
longer posts. Murphy's been chasing this ghost for years and writing
multi-hundred-line screeds weekly about him to anyone who'll listen
(which amounts to a handful of fellow kooks, a handful of kookologists
that listen and then laugh out loud at his antics, and nobody else),
and Account Banned is obsessed enough to have actually custom-created
a fanfic VIDEO about the dude. (Which has been up on YouTube for
months now, and after all that time only has a low-three-digit number
of views. As wanna-be viral videos go, it was, predictably, a box-
office bomb par excellence.)
> It's also possible that I'll have a steak for supper tonight. My
> being a vegetarian makes this equally unlikely.
Says the whale meat eater. You'll forgive me, then, if I consider you
to lack credibility on this score.
> >In that case, the
> >whole thing is likely a sham by one of you kooks. Then it proves
> >nothing about Derbyshire's location OR his financial status, BUT its
> >very existence then proves the depths of depravity and creepy stalker
> >behavior you kooks are willing to sink to in your kooky quest to
> >harass the phantom.
>
> Whereas I have no such quest, kooky or not, your lie fails.
Despite your claim, you keep insinuating that you think Nadegda and I
are Derbyshire. You HAVE adopted the others' kooky quest, then, which
is a TRUTH that you are now DESPERATELY running from with your above
remark. Why are you compelled to LIE about that, kook?
> >Now, is any one of you kooks going to tell us which it is? Is
> >Derbyshire rich? Or is Derbyshire in Pittsburgh?
>
> Because only the poor can live in Pittsburgh?
Even a dullard like you should have been able to follow the argument
that, since his web page is on a server in Pittsburgh and has a
dedicated IP, either he's wealthy enough to be able to afford fairly
classy web-hosting, or else he's self-hosting in which case he's in
Pittsburgh. So either you're even STUPIDER than I first thought or
you're LYING. Which is it, kook?
> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 05:12:17 -0700 (PDT), Andrew Wilson
> <awils984...@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
You'll pardon me if I respond only selectively to your 417-line-long,
moderately-repetitive screed. In particular, the ad homs and other
lame parts where you made no cogent arguments will be elided.
> Whereas it has already been proved that the site is not on your,
> sorry, Paul's personal computer, your claim fails.
How has that been "proved", kook? Because it has a domain name after
all? Personal computers can and sometimes do have domain names, kooky.
> >If the web site was on Paul's home computer, then the IP *would* be
> >the same as used when he posted to Usenet.
>
> Sure, IF. Since it's not, your claim fails.
See above.
> >Of course, he doesn't post
> >to Usenet anymore, according to some other evidence, so that's moot.
>
> All the evidence I've seen shows you, er, he is.
> You are, of course, free to present any counter evidence
> available.
The burden of proof is on those who claim he *is* posting to prove it,
given his apparent absence.
> >> >Says the kiddy diddler that can't even spell.
>
> >> BTW, kissing a 17 year old isn't, to the mentally sound, the same
> >> as being a kiddy diddler.
>
> >He was convicted of child molestation by a court of law, or hadn't you
> >heard?
>
> Annoying is child molestation?
> I await your dissertation explaining how the two are the same.
> And please don't waste your time and mine, and anyone else who is
> reading, posting links to items long ago proved to be forgeries. Doing
> so will only server to prove your lack oh honesty in this matter.
Phoenix posted the proof in <k6vduc$9fm$6...@newsfeed.x-privat.org>,
which includes unforgeable evidence such as the contents of the
California
Interstate Compact Offender list:
: Gary Lee Burnore, despite his denials, is a convicted sexual
offender,
: and we know this ... because he REMAINS on the NC Department of
: Public Safety website as a California Interstate Compact Offender.
If
: he were either of the other two types of offender (Narcotics,
Arson),
: he'd have aged off the CA ICAOS list by now, but convicted sexual
: offenders are listed for life.
Now I'd like to ask you why you are defending a convicted pedophile,
kook. Could it be that you feel some sympathy for the pervert, and
that that's a TRUTH from which you will keep trying to HIDE?
<cackle>
> >But some of you kooks have klaimed that he *doesn't* have loads of
> >money. Now, it seems, you can't make up your minds! Is this phantom of
> >yours rich or poor? Come on, decide already!
>
> I've made no claim either way, d<SLAP!>
Of course not, because either way you'd be contradicting some of the
evidence and/or your fellow kooks. So, like a coward, you just sit on
the fence and refuse to make a clear statement either way.
> >> Here you claim it's about Paul. Either you've just slipped and admitted you are
> >> Paul, or you've been deceptive.
> >> If you see an option I don't, please offer it.
>
> >The web site in question is clearly Paul's. If it had lacked a domain
> >name (and it had appeared to do so, until now),
>
> It would have had a name the whole time.
That does not contradict whether it had APPEARED to do so. If it has a
name but nobody mentions it for a while then for that time it seems as
if it lacks one. Is that difficult for you to understand because
you're a dullard, kook? Or are you just being dishonest?
> >OK. The way I see it, based on what Nadegda said and my own somewhat
> >weaker knowledge of how the intertubes are run, there are four sorts
> >of web hosting.
>
> >1. You host on your own computer. Cheap. You may or may not have a
> >domain name. You may or may not have a static IP. Your IP will be your
> >own ISP's. Loading the web page by IP will work.
>
> While it could be one's own ISP, the cost would be prohibitive
> for most.
Why? There is free web server software out there, and if the site
draws very little traffic (as I imagine is the case for Derbyshire's
alleged site) the traffic wouldn't cause overage fees to rack up.
> >2. Your ISP provides cheap space. Cheap. You will have a domain name,
> >but it'll be your ISPs and you'll be athttp://isp.com/username/...
> >The web site will have a static IP. It will be your ISP's. Loading the
> >web page by IP will work.
>
> This is the most common means for people to offer a personal web
> site/page. And while nahee.com isn't an ISP,
Proof? It seems to host personal pages, including, allegedly, the
personal page of someone allegedly too poor to afford a separate fee
for web hosting. Of course it could be a cheap web host that some ISP
outsources to to supply their customers with a bit of web space.
> >3. You have cheap, bulk, consumer webhosting. It will be virtual
> >hosting. You will have a domain name, which may be
> >yourname.dreamhost.com or similarly or, a bit more expensive, may be
> >yourname.com. The web site will have a static IP. It won't be your
> >ISP's. Loading the web page by IP won't work.
>
> You can load any web site by either it's numerical or
> alphabetical value.
http://www.accursedfarms.com/
: Accursed Farms
: Home to Civil Protection and Freeman's Mind
:
: Home Forums Movies Subtitles FAQ Contact Donations
:
: 2012 10.18 Animation help needed maybe
...
Non-authoritative answer:
Name: www.accursedfarms.com
Address: 87.106.228.228
http://87.106.228.228/
: Not Found
:
: The requested URL / was not found on this server.
:
: Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to
use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.
SPNAK!
> Loading by numeric value will work.
http://87.106.228.228/
: Not Found
SPNAK!!
> It's not going to be common,
> since few are able to memorize the numbers as easily as the letters.
> By way of example:
> Years ago I had a vanity site, compuelf.org. When I mentioned the
> site, either verbally or via text, I used compuelf.org. I didn't
> actually know it's numeric value, but I could have found out and used
> it.
> In text it wouldn't have mattered much, since C&P could be
> employed to get to the site. However, when verbal, compuelf.org would
> be more easy for most people.
> As for Paul's site, which of the following would be the easiest
> for the general public to remember?
>
> http://<SPANK>
Nice foamy rant, but you're STILL WRONG, KOOK!
> >Now, the web page in question loads by IP,
>
> As any site can.
http://87.106.228.228/
: Not Found
SPNAK!!!
> >so it's either option 2 or
> >the most expensive case of option 4. If it's option 2, that IP is
> >still Derbyshire's ISP's and he's in Pittsburgh,
>
> There is nothing to show it is his ISP.
True; option 4 could be the correct one. In which case the k'lames of
Derbyshire being a pauper are wrong.
SPNAK!!!!
> What this proves is that the IP of a server has no assured
> relation to the location of a person. Keep in mine, nahee is in Dallas
> while the server is in Pittsburgh.
Nahee IS the server. It's nahee.com, and its IP is dedicated to
nahee.com, remember? So where are you getting this "nahee is in
Dallas" from, kook?
> >while you kooks have
> >previously klaimed no fewer than four OTHER cities of residence for
> >him.
>
> I've made no such claim.
"You kooks" have made such claims. You are only one of "you kooks".
When did you start thinking of yourself as plural, retard, and have
you discussed these thoughts with your shrink yet?
> Your move.
I bet you're regretting saying that, now that you've been spanked to
BLISTERS.
<cackle>
> >Of course, there IS one ADDITIONAL possibility that's being overlooked
> >here, and that is that it isn't actually Derbyshire's web site at all,
> >but rather one someone else created in his name.
>
> This is possible. Seems like a lot of work if, as you claim, he
> no longer posts.
There are several kooks here who are EASILY obsessed enough to do
something like that because of their obsession with someone who no
longer posts. Murphy's been chasing this ghost for years and writing
multi-hundred-line screeds weekly about him to anyone who'll listen
(which amounts to a handful of fellow kooks, a handful of kookologists
that listen and then laugh out loud at his antics, and nobody else),
and Account Banned is obsessed enough to have actually custom-created
a fanfic VIDEO about the dude. (Which has been up on YouTube for
months now, and after all that time only has a low-three-digit number
of views. As wanna-be viral videos go, it was, predictably, a box-
office bomb par excellence.)
> It's also possible that I'll have a steak for supper tonight. My
> being a vegetarian makes this equally unlikely.
Says the whale meat eater. You'll forgive me, then, if I consider you
to lack credibility on this score.
> >In that case, the
> >whole thing is likely a sham by one of you kooks. Then it proves
> >nothing about Derbyshire's location OR his financial status, BUT its
> >very existence then proves the depths of depravity and creepy stalker
> >behavior you kooks are willing to sink to in your kooky quest to
> >harass the phantom.
>
> Whereas I have no such quest, kooky or not, your lie fails.
Despite your claim, you keep insinuating that you think Nadegda and I
are Derbyshire. You HAVE adopted the others' kooky quest, then, which
is a TRUTH that you are now DESPERATELY running from with your above
remark. Why are you compelled to LIE about that, kook?
> >Now, is any one of you kooks going to tell us which it is? Is
> >Derbyshire rich? Or is Derbyshire in Pittsburgh?
>
> Because only the poor can live in Pittsburgh?
Even a dullard like you should have been able to follow the argument
that, since his web page is on a server in Pittsburgh and has a
dedicated IP, either he's wealthy enough to be able to afford fairly
classy web-hosting, or else he's self-hosting in which case he's in
Pittsburgh. So either you're even STUPIDER than I first thought or
you're LYING. Which is it, kook?
Message has been deleted
Andrew Wilson
Nov 2, 2012, 6:17:45 AM11/2/12
to
On Nov 2, 9:09 am, K Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 03:15:39 +0000 (UTC), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
> Wrangler {One Of Four} <F...@altusenetkooks.co> wrote:
>
> >Seems to me that Andrew Wilson spanked Kunt pretty soundly.
>
> >And Kunt's a lightweight, he's already avoiding me after I used his
> >own words to force him to argue against himself. I never lose,
> >especially against Kunt, because he's just not too bright.
>
> You ran away after being PROVED the kook you are. I would be
> surprised if I alone noticed this truth.
You're the one who stopped replying first, but he's the one who "ran
away"? Interesting dictionary you're using there, kooky.
> On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 03:15:39 +0000 (UTC), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
> Wrangler {One Of Four} <F...@altusenetkooks.co> wrote:
>
> >Seems to me that Andrew Wilson spanked Kunt pretty soundly.
>
> >And Kunt's a lightweight, he's already avoiding me after I used his
> >own words to force him to argue against himself. I never lose,
> >especially against Kunt, because he's just not too bright.
>
> You ran away after being PROVED the kook you are. I would be
> surprised if I alone noticed this truth.
You're the one who stopped replying first, but he's the one who "ran
away"? Interesting dictionary you're using there, kooky.
Checkmate
Nov 2, 2012, 6:22:50 AM11/2/12
to
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
Checkmate!
Checkmate!
--
Checkmate
KotAGoR XXXIV
AUK Hammer of Thor award, Feb. 2012
co-winner, Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker award, May 2001
Copyright © 2012
all rights reserved
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpZhZAr1cQU
Read what others are saying about Checkmate!
_____________________________________________________________________
"I keep forgetting you've been doing this for so long that it's easy
for you. I can't wait to piss on your grave."
Uncle Steve
Message-ID: <b18ab6cb2c...@gmail.com>
_____________________________________________________________________
"Did... did you just tell someone to attempt to ROT-13 *numbers*, you
Clueless Newbie of the Month candidate?"
Paul Derbyshire, socked-up as [tor] Phoenix
Message-ID: <k3ae35$prb$1...@news.mixmin.net>
_____________________________________________________________________
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
Paul Derbyshire, socked up as Andrew Wilson
Message-ID: <9870030e-6c49-4f16-af9e-
070a57...@g18g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>
_____________________________________________________________________
Read what others are saying about Checkmate!
_____________________________________________________________________
"I keep forgetting you've been doing this for so long that it's easy
for you. I can't wait to piss on your grave."
Uncle Steve
Message-ID: <b18ab6cb2c...@gmail.com>
_____________________________________________________________________
"Did... did you just tell someone to attempt to ROT-13 *numbers*, you
Clueless Newbie of the Month candidate?"
Paul Derbyshire, socked-up as [tor] Phoenix
Message-ID: <k3ae35$prb$1...@news.mixmin.net>
_____________________________________________________________________
"Nov. 1 can't come quickly enough for me. I really, REALLY want to put
that little + in the box for your Creepy Candy Coating on the ballot,
so badly my hand is twitching. And I'm sorely tempted to rustle up a
couple dozen sockpuppets and stuff the ballot box just to make
absolutely sure you "win" it, you fucking lech!"
Paul Derbyshire, socked up as Andrew Wilson
Message-ID: <9870030e-6c49-4f16-af9e-
070a57...@g18g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>
_____________________________________________________________________
Message has been deleted
Checkmate
Nov 2, 2012, 6:27:21 AM11/2/12
to
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
Checkmate!
First, check out what Andrew Wilson said:
>
Checkmate!
First, check out what Andrew Wilson said:
>
just used it a few hours ago. Munky see, munky do!
Checkmate
Nov 2, 2012, 6:28:31 AM11/2/12
to
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
Checkmate!
First, check out what K Wills said:
Checkmate!
> Odd that.
Checkmate
Nov 2, 2012, 6:29:22 AM11/2/12
to
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
Checkmate!
First, check out what I M Poster said:
Checkmate!
> I like the bit about the frisky goats.
"We were WINNING, for fuck's sake!"
Checkmate
Nov 2, 2012, 6:30:12 AM11/2/12
to
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
Checkmate!
First, check out what K Wills said:
Checkmate!
>
> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 19:06:57 -0700, Checkmate <Lunati...@The.Edge>
> wrote:
>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > NOMINATION: Gary L. Burnore
> >> >>
> >> >> Denied of course.
> >> >
> >> > Denial seconded, of course.
>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > NOMINATION: Gary L. Burnore
> >> >>
> >> >> Denied of course.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> Where did you find this particular poodle?
> >
> >It just latched onto my leg one day. It whimpers a lot, and I felt sorry
> >for it.
>
> Now you see what happens when you bring in strays. :)
Once you toss them a bone, they just love you forever.
Checkmate
Nov 2, 2012, 6:33:13 AM11/2/12
to
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
Checkmate!
First, check out what I M Poster said:
Checkmate!
>
> Checkmate <Lunati...@The.Edge> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > > > First, check out what Nadegda said:
> > > >
> > > > >> Meet Murphy, our resident gibbering loon. He prances around cackling
> > > > >> at jokes only he can hear, no amount of medication suffices to sedate
> > > > >> him, and he often foams at the mouth like a rabid dog.
> > > >
> > > > > Who else cackles a lot?
> > > >
> > > > Did ... did you just suggest that Murphy is an Andrew Wilson sock?
> > > >
> > > > <snicker>
> > >
> > > <chortle>
> >
> > You're supposed to cackle like a hen again, Andrew.
>
> [catches duck egg]
> > > > > First, check out what Nadegda said:
> > > >
> > > > >> Meet Murphy, our resident gibbering loon. He prances around cackling
> > > > >> at jokes only he can hear, no amount of medication suffices to sedate
> > > > >> him, and he often foams at the mouth like a rabid dog.
> > > >
> > > > > Who else cackles a lot?
> > > >
> > > > Did ... did you just suggest that Murphy is an Andrew Wilson sock?
> > > >
> > > > <snicker>
> > >
> > > <chortle>
> >
> > You're supposed to cackle like a hen again, Andrew.
>
AFLAC!
Andrew Wilson
Nov 2, 2012, 6:39:53 AM11/2/12
to
On Nov 2, 10:27 am, Checkmate <LunaticFri...@The.Edge> wrote:
> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
> Checkmate!
>
> First, check out what Andrew Wilson said:
>
> > On Nov 2, 8:29 am, Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:54:09 +0000, convicted pedophile Gary L Burnore
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> > > >> NOMINATION: Gary L. Burnore
>
> > > > Denied of course.
>
> > > Hahahahahahaha, the stupid kooky convict Burnore thinks he can just
> > > "deny" it when he's nominated for a kook award.
>
> > > More evidence that that particular award, a Loony Maroon Award, is richly
> > > deserved by you, kooky.
>
> > If that nomination's still unseconded, and according to my files it
> > is, I hereby second it. What a GOOFBALL.
>
> "Goofball"? I haven't heard that word around here since... oh, yeah... I
> just used it a few hours ago.
Then you haven't been paying attention, even to replies to your own
> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
> Checkmate!
>
> First, check out what Andrew Wilson said:
>
> > On Nov 2, 8:29 am, Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:54:09 +0000, convicted pedophile Gary L Burnore
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> > > >> NOMINATION: Gary L. Burnore
>
> > > > Denied of course.
>
> > > Hahahahahahaha, the stupid kooky convict Burnore thinks he can just
> > > "deny" it when he's nominated for a kook award.
>
> > > More evidence that that particular award, a Loony Maroon Award, is richly
> > > deserved by you, kooky.
>
> > If that nomination's still unseconded, and according to my files it
> > is, I hereby second it. What a GOOFBALL.
>
> "Goofball"? I haven't heard that word around here since... oh, yeah... I
> just used it a few hours ago.
posts:
<k6ntaf$12q$5...@dont-email.me>
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=135185627600
: On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 23:16:37 -0700, Stalemate wrote:
:
:> Warning! Always make ANSI approved safety giggles when reading
posts by
:> Stalemate!
:>
:>
:>
:>
:>> On 29/10/2012 10:48 PM, Checkmate wrote:
:>> > I can just picture you hanging onto a lamppost for dear life,
flying
:>> > like a flag, yet dutifully posting your daily quota of c<FOOM!>
:>>
:>> I'm indoors, you fucking moron. :P ~<postedit denied, kooky>
:>
:>
:> Proof?
:
: Where the fuck do you *think* she'd be in *that* weather, goofball?
SPNAK!
> Mu<SLAP!>
Shaddup, kook!
Checkmate
Nov 2, 2012, 6:57:55 AM11/2/12
to
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
Checkmate!
First, check out what Andrew Wilson said:
>
Checkmate!
First, check out what Andrew Wilson said:
>
sake.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler {One Of Four}
Nov 2, 2012, 8:41:21 AM11/2/12
to
Time to spin up the kooks again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
K Wills, in <news:tc3798hso6nj43kmf...@4ax.com> did
<snicker>
--
/\ Properly known as Bill
\ /\ The Monster You Kooks Can't Handle
\ / \ THERE IS NO CABAL - LONG LIVE THE NEW CABAL
\/ The AUK coup is complete. The Old Cabal is no more.
Kook Awards Official Voting Ballot:
Message-ID: <k6smlo$psr$1...@newsfeed.x-privat.org>
http://narkive.com/Vnz0zZNK#post1
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=135173672500
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.usenet.kooks/msg/7c4b3cb3ad89b8f8
K Wills, in <news:tc3798hso6nj43kmf...@4ax.com> did
thusly write:
> On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 03:15:39 +0000 (UTC), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
> Wrangler {One Of Four} <FN...@altusenetkooks.co> wrote:
>
>>Seems to me that Andrew Wilson spanked Kunt pretty soundly.
>>
>>And Kunt's a lightweight, he's already avoiding me after I used his
>>own words to force him to argue against himself. I never lose,
>>especially against Kunt, because he's just not too bright.
>
> You ran away after being PROVED the kook you are. I would be
> surprised if I alone noticed this truth.
Liar. Why do you continue to lie, Kunt?
> On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 03:15:39 +0000 (UTC), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
> Wrangler {One Of Four} <FN...@altusenetkooks.co> wrote:
>
>>Seems to me that Andrew Wilson spanked Kunt pretty soundly.
>>
>>And Kunt's a lightweight, he's already avoiding me after I used his
>>own words to force him to argue against himself. I never lose,
>>especially against Kunt, because he's just not too bright.
>
> You ran away after being PROVED the kook you are. I would be
> surprised if I alone noticed this truth.
<snicker>
--
/\ Properly known as Bill
\ /\ The Monster You Kooks Can't Handle
\ / \ THERE IS NO CABAL - LONG LIVE THE NEW CABAL
\/ The AUK coup is complete. The Old Cabal is no more.
Kook Awards Official Voting Ballot:
Message-ID: <k6smlo$psr$1...@newsfeed.x-privat.org>
http://narkive.com/Vnz0zZNK#post1
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=135173672500
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.usenet.kooks/msg/7c4b3cb3ad89b8f8
Highway to Hell
Nov 2, 2012, 8:55:18 AM11/2/12
to
On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 03:08:21 -0700, Andrew Wilson wrote:
...
> Even a dullard like you should have been able to follow the argument
> that, since his web page is on a server in Pittsburgh and has a
> dedicated IP, either he's wealthy enough to be able to afford fairly
> classy web-hosting, or else he's self-hosting in which case he's in
> Pittsburgh. So either you're even STUPIDER than I first thought or
> you're LYING. Which is it, kook?
Aren't the kooks missing something even more obvious here?
Namely, that if the FNVWs were really this Paul guy, and that was his web
site, they'd have already *known* about the domain name and everything?
So either the FNVWs they said are Paul aren't Paul, or the web site they
said is Paul's isn't Paul's.
What is the proper thing to say here? Spanky-spanky? :)
...
> Even a dullard like you should have been able to follow the argument
> that, since his web page is on a server in Pittsburgh and has a
> dedicated IP, either he's wealthy enough to be able to afford fairly
> classy web-hosting, or else he's self-hosting in which case he's in
> Pittsburgh. So either you're even STUPIDER than I first thought or
> you're LYING. Which is it, kook?
Namely, that if the FNVWs were really this Paul guy, and that was his web
site, they'd have already *known* about the domain name and everything?
So either the FNVWs they said are Paul aren't Paul, or the web site they
said is Paul's isn't Paul's.
What is the proper thing to say here? Spanky-spanky? :)
Message has been deleted
Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler
Nov 2, 2012, 12:35:45 PM11/2/12
to
On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 11:12:49 -0700, Checkmate <Lunati...@The.Edge>
wrote:
>Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
>Checkmate!
>
>First, check out what Gary L Burnore said:
>
>
>>
>> In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>> > On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 05:46:35 +0000, convicted sex offender Gary L Burnore
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>> >>> Bulk cheap webhosting is always virtual, because the IPv4 address
>> >>> space is running low.
>> >>
>> >> Wrong, of course. Those who can afford it can get as many IPs as they
>> >> need.
>> >
>> > That doesn't have anything to do with bulk, cheap hosting, child
>> > molester.
>>
>> You've proof of neither, nads.
>>
>> >
>> >>> and lacks a domain name if that owner is an individual without much
>> >>> means and has one if it's a business entity.
>> >>
>> >> Domain names cost 12 bucks a year with privacy settings, DumbNads. You
>> >> that poor?
>> >
>> > No, but apparently
>>
>> Means you don't know.
Denial and second of denial accepted.
--
October 2012 nominations:
http://blackhelicopternews.blogspot.com/2012/10/october-2012-nominations.html
http://blackhelicopternews.blogspot.com/p/award-winners-1994-2012.html
http://fnvw.databasix.com (awards descriptions and more)
http://blackhelicopternews.blogspot.com/p/afa-b-awards-in-exile.html
wrote:
>Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
>Checkmate!
>
>
>
>>
>> In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>> > On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 05:46:35 +0000, convicted sex offender Gary L Burnore
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>> >>> Bulk cheap webhosting is always virtual, because the IPv4 address
>> >>> space is running low.
>> >>
>> >> Wrong, of course. Those who can afford it can get as many IPs as they
>> >> need.
>> >
>> > That doesn't have anything to do with bulk, cheap hosting, child
>> > molester.
>>
>> You've proof of neither, nads.
>>
>> >
>> > Says the kiddy diddler that can't even spell.
>>
>> Speeel flames now? Hahahahahahahahaha DumbNads
>> >
>> > Says the kiddy diddler that can't even spell.
>>
>>
>> >
>> >>> and lacks a domain name if that owner is an individual without much
>> >>> means and has one if it's a business entity.
>> >>
>> >> Domain names cost 12 bucks a year with privacy settings, DumbNads. You
>> >> that poor?
>> >
>> > No, but apparently
>>
>> Means you don't know.
>> >
>> > NOMINATION: Gary L. Burnore
>>
>> Denied of course.
>
>Denial seconded, of course.
>> > NOMINATION: Gary L. Burnore
>>
>> Denied of course.
>
Denial and second of denial accepted.
--
October 2012 nominations:
http://blackhelicopternews.blogspot.com/2012/10/october-2012-nominations.html
http://blackhelicopternews.blogspot.com/p/award-winners-1994-2012.html
http://fnvw.databasix.com (awards descriptions and more)
http://blackhelicopternews.blogspot.com/p/afa-b-awards-in-exile.html
Message has been deleted
Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler {One Of Four}
Nov 2, 2012, 9:39:48 PM11/2/12
to
Time to spin up the kooks again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler {One Of Four}, in
<news:k6vduc$9fm$6...@newsfeed.x-privat.org> did thusly write:
> Time to spin up the kooks again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
> Gary L Burnore, in <news:k6u9tq$j5n$3...@reader1.panix.com> did thusly
> Time to spin up the kooks again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
> write:
>
>> In alt.usenet.kooks Andrew Wilson <awils...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Nov 1, 9:31?am, K Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 06:04:32 +0000 (UTC), Nadegda
>>>> <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >(And if his one lonely IP is static, it's more
>>>>
>>>> ? ? ?I'm not sure I'm following you here.
>>>
>>> That's because you're stupid. What she wrote is perfectly clear to
>>> anyone of normal intelligence.
>>>
>>>> ? ? ?Are you claiming web sites will typically have dynamic IPs?
>>>
>>> No, dolt, she's claiming home computers will sometimes have dynamic
>>> IPs and sometimes not,
>>
>> That's not what you ^H^H^H she said.
>>
>>> so in the context of the theory that the site's
>>> on his own computer, given that it has a static IP and Nadegda herself
>>> has a dynamic one it proves they aren't the same person.
>>
>> Nice try.
>>
>>>> >proof that he's not the same person as myself or kensi or any other
>>>> >person that demonstrably has a dynamic IP,
>>>>
>>>> ? ? ?I've never checked your posting IP with anyone else's. That
>>>> aside, to think a web site's IP must be the same as the IP used when
>>>> posting to Usenet is laughable.
>>>
>>> If the web site was on Paul's home computer, then the IP *would* be
>>> the same as used when he posted to Usenet. Of course, he doesn't post
>>> If the web site was on Paul's home computer, then the IP *would* be
>>> to Usenet anymore, according to some other evidence, so that's moot.
>>
>> Not necessarily, dumbass. You DO know that even with the cheapest of DSL or Cable lines you can get more than one IP,
>>
>> right? Nah, you likely don't.
>>
>>>
>>>> >contrary to various k'lames
>>>> >that have been made here recently, in an obsessively incessant manner, by
>>>> >various kooks.)
>>>>
>>>> ? ? ?You are only one person. Your claim of various kooks can't be
>>>> accurate.
>>>
>>> That was a lame IKYABWAI, kook.
>>>
>>>> >Says the kiddy diddler that can't even spell.
>>>>
>>>> ? ? ?BTW, kissing a 17 year old isn't, to the mentally sound, the same
>>>> >Says the kiddy diddler that can't even spell.
>>>>
>>>> as being a kiddy diddler.
>>>
>>> He was convicted of child molestation by a court of law, or hadn't you
>>> heard?
>>
>> Proof? Lemme guess, fake docs on an offshore site (because the dolt who forged them had to take them down)
>>>
>>> He was convicted of child molestation by a court of law, or hadn't you
>>> heard?
>>
>
> Here you go... the proof you can't refute. If you'll remember, I
> called you out 61 times at the end of last year / beginning of this
> year, challenging you to refute the below proof, which you
> consistently ran from. I expect you'll do the same now, you being a
> lying coward:
> =========================
> Gary Lee Burnore was convicted of sexually molesting a minor in 1997
> in California.
>
> Police Narrative Pages 1-7
> http://bayimg.com/haNigAaBd
> http://bayimg.com/hanIIaaBd
> http://bayimg.com/HaNIlAabd
> http://bayimg.com/hAnimaaBD
> http://bayimg.com/IANIaaAbD
> http://bayimg.com/iaNicaabd
> http://bayimg.com/iAnidaabd
>
> Gary Lee Burnore's police confession:
> http://bayimg.com/PANCHAaBd
>
> His conviction brought with it the requirement that he register for
> life as a sexual offender in any state he resided in:
>
> Gary Lee Burnore's signed Sexual Offender Registration form:
> http://bayimg.com/nanioAAbD
>
> The above, zoomed in:
> http://bayimg.com/OANiMAABD
>
> Rather than face what he'd done, Gary Lee Burnore violated his
> probation to avoid the consequences of his sexual offender
> conviction and its lifetime registration requirement. He secretly
> absconded from CA to NC; attempted to evade his probation officer;
> failed to register as a convicted sexual offender; failed to
> attend court-ordered psychological counseling; and tried to evade
> paying victim restitution. For his efforts, CA hauled him back
> into court and petitioned to revoke his probation:
>
> Petition To Revoke Probation Pages 1-3
> http://bayimg.com/LaNihAaBd
> http://bayimg.com/laniLAABd
> http://bayimg.com/LANiOAabd
>
> Because of a misclarification in the legalese between the California
> Interstate Compact for Adult Offender Supervision (CA ICAOS) board and
> the NC ICAOS board, Gary Lee Burnore was able to get his conviction
> pleaded down to "Assault On Female" in North Carolina (except for
> that, he'd be listed on the NC Department of Public Safety website as
> a Convicted Sexual Offender, registered for life as a sexual
> predator):
>
> North Carolina Department Of Public Safety (NC DPS):
> http://webapps6.doc.state.nc.us/opi/viewoffender.do?method=view&offenderID=0594483
>
> Short URL:
> http://goo.gl/FSN0W
>
> You'll notice on the website directly above that Gary Lee Burnore is
> listed as a "California Interstate Compact Offender".
>
> There are only three ways to get listed on the CA ICAOS list:
> Narcotics Offender
> Arson Offender
> Sexual Offender
>
> Gary Lee Burnore, despite his denials, is a convicted sexual offender,
> and we know this from the scanned documents above, and because he
> Gary Lee Burnore, despite his denials, is a convicted sexual offender,
> REMAINS on the NC Department of Public Safety website as a California
> Interstate Compact Offender. If he were either of the other two types
> of offender (Narcotics, Arson), he'd have aged off the CA ICAOS
> list by now, but convicted sexual offenders are listed for life.
>
> Gary Lee Burnore's PGP-signed confessional post:
> Interstate Compact Offender. If he were either of the other two types
> of offender (Narcotics, Arson), he'd have aged off the CA ICAOS
> list by now, but convicted sexual offenders are listed for life.
>
> http://www.shmoo.com/mail/cypherpunks/jun99/msg00146.html
>
> Gary Lee Burnore now disavows having made that confessional PGP-signed
> post, and has for years asserted that the child he was convicted of
> molesting either seduced him into doing what he did, or sexually
> assaulted him as he slept (he's made both claims), as well as claiming
> that _none_ of it happened, that it was all a plot by someone he'd
> harassed online, that he'd never spent any time in prison... except
> he forgets his NC DPS record, and the CA ICAOS listing reflected
> therein.
> =========================
>
> Gonna try to tell us all again that the North Carolina Department of
> Public Safety is a fake site, or that they're lying, Gaaaayyry?
>
> http://bayimg.com/haNigAaBd
> =========================
> "On 11-19-96, I received a phone call from a Paul Nguyen (phone
> number: 288-9224). Paul stated that he was an attorney representing
> suspect Gary Burnore.
>
> He wanted to speak with me about a sexual assault type investigation
> in which he desired my assistance with in interviewing the victim and
> suspect who is his client.
>
> On 11-19-96, at 1525 hours, I called and spoke personally with
> Attorney Paul Nguyen. He provided me with the name of the victim,
> Rachel, her mother Nancy, and the person who he represents as his
> client which is Gary Burnore.
>
> Paul told me that this involves a sexual assault complaint.
>
> I asked Paul if his client was involved in a sexual assault against
> Rachel. Paul told me his client is responsible for the sexual assault.
>
> Sgt. B. Lane"
> =========================
>
> If the documents are forged, Gary, how is it that the alleged forger
> got your Social Security Number correct (keeping in mind that it's
> already been verified to be correct)?
>
> If the documents are forged, Gary, why do they correspond to the NC
> DPS website, listing your CA ICAOS entry?
>
> Are you calling Sgt. Brian Lane of the Santa Clara Police Department a
> liar, Gaayyyry?
>
> SPNAK!
>
> Go on, Gaayyyry, tell us your lies. There's plenty more spankage in
> store for you.
>
> <snicker>
>
>> Even SPammer jamie baillie was forced to face up to that fact when he wrote the Sheriff who told him not only was he
>> wrong, but to stop writing.
>
> Liar. The Sheriff told Jamie Baillie that you didn't live in his
> county, and therefore he had no way of knowing anything about you.
>
> Continue your lies, Gaaayyyry, the truth will come out every single
> time to spank you silly.
>
> SPNAK!
>
> <snicker>
Still waiting for that refutation, Convict.
This'll be the 62nd time you've run away from the truth.
Tick tock, tick tock, lying coward.
Message-ID: <jcr5a7$16i$1...@nntpd.databasix.com>
Date: 20 Dec 2011
Gary L. Burnore admits his cowardice and inability to face the truth:
"Ok. You win. I'm done."
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler {One Of Four}
Nov 3, 2012, 9:11:02 PM11/3/12
to
Time to spin up the kooks again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
K Wills, in <news:ujl998dmntauvnj67...@4ax.com> did
thusly write:
> Perhaps you missed my request that you NOT (emphasis added) waste
> your time and mine, and anyone else who is reading, posting that which
> has been proved to be forgeries. True, you didn't post the forgeries
> themselves, but your cite was reduced to using them to make the claim.
> By now, I'm sure anyone with an interest has seen the forgeries.
> Those who are emotionally and mentally stable can accept that they are
> forgeries.
> You did allow an interesting slip. "...he'd have aged off the CA
> ICAOS list by now, but convicted sexual offenders are listed for
> life."
> Show me, and anyone else reading who holds an interest, where his
> life."
> name is listed on any current sex offender registry. If, as will prove
> to be the case, you are lying, you won't be able since there will be
> nothing to offer.
> Your move.
He's not on a sex offender registry. He was for a while (SRN: 001693S3
assigned 27 Aug 1997) right after his conviction, but he got his
conviction pleaded down to "Assault On Female" in North Carolina due
to an inconsistency in the legalese between the California Interstate
Compact for Adult Offender Supervision (CA ICAOS) and North Carolina
ICAOS boards, and as such was allowed to forego the registration
requirement. It was a legal loophole (since closed) that he weaseled
through in order to try to escape paying for his crime, after having
violated his probation and absconding from CA to NC.
You'll notice on the web page for the North Carolina Department of
Public Safety (NC DPS) detailing his record that Gary Lee Burnore is
listed as a California Interstate Compact Offender.
The Interstate Compact for Adult Offender Supervision (ICAOS) board is
tasked with keeping track of convicts who move from one state to
another, usually in an attempt at evading the consequences of, or
lessening the impact on their lives of, their crimes.
There are only three ways to get on the ICAOS list, which are
delineated on the ICAOS registration form Burnore signed after his
conviction:
1) Convicted drug offender
2) Convicted arson offender
3) Convicted sexual offender
The first two entries in the above list age off the ICAOS list
eventually (as is also delineated on the ICAOS registration form) if
they don't re-offend for the same offense that got them listed in the
first place, but convicted sexual offenders remain on the ICAOS list
for life. It's not a sex offender registry, but it does denote that he
is a convicted sexual offender, the purpose being that ICAOS can keep
track of him in the future.
So for all intents and purposes, Gary L. Burnore might as well have
accepted his fate and been put on the sex offender registry... the end
result is the same, he's listed and watched by ICAOS for any bad
behavior.
Given that the NC DPS website is legitimate and lists Gary Burnore as
an Interstate Compact Offender, and there are only three ways to get
on the ICAOS list, Burnore is either:
1) A convicted drug offender (who has re-offended and is thus listed
for life, otherwise he'd have aged off the ICAOS list by now)
2) A convicted arson offender (who has re-offended and is thus listed
for life, otherwise he'd have aged off the ICAOS list by now)
3) A convicted sexual offender (listed for life regardless)
Of course, Gary Lee Burnore has no drug or arson convictions (as can
be readily determined by visiting his page on the NC DPS website),
leaving the sexual offender conviction as the only other possible
option for why he would be on the ICAOS list.
The logic is quite clear, the evidence is irrefutable and
unimpeachable (unless you're also stating that ICAOS and NC DPS are
lying), easily understood by anyone who is emotionally and mentally
stable, which apparently excludes you.
You'll notice that the proof lies in sources that are proven
legitimate, not in any posted documents (although the scanned
documents that were posted are completely legitimate, as well).
So your task is to prove that the evidence presented is false, since
this is your claim. But since you cannot prove a falsehood (ie: your
claim of illegitimacy of the evidence presented) because no credible
evidence exists to back up your contention, you'll just have to be
resigned to admitting defeat.
Your continued screeding will hereby be accepted as your tacit
admission of defeat, Kunt.
Would you like your SPANK now, or after you've screeded your tacit
admission of defeat?
<snicker once>
Now, knowing you, Kunt, you'll try some lame tactic such as claiming
that the NC DPS page detailing Burnore's conviction for 'Assault on
Female' is for another person named Gary Lee Burnore... except that
our Gary has already admitted that the record on that NC DPS page is
his:
Message-ID: <jjtrbk$liq$1...@reader1.panix.com>
Gary Lee Burnore describes why he got the traffic ticket reflected in
his NC DPS record:
"I did a reverse 180 and then a rolling burnout on a bet. Naturally,
cop saw me. Google Reverse 180. THEN google 66 Newport. You'll see why
it was spectacular. Well worth three days picking up leaves. ;)"
Note that this proves (and that Gary Lee Burnore admits) that the NC
DPS record in question is his, 'Assault on Female' conviction,
Interstate Compact Offender listing, and all.
Would you like your second SPANK now, or after you've screeded your
tacit admission of defeat?
<snicker twice>
Now get to screeding, Kunt. After all, I won't accept your groveling
tacit admission of defeat without your having screeded it.
<snicker thrice>
Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler {One Of Four}
Nov 3, 2012, 9:11:10 PM11/3/12
to
Time to spin up the kooks again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
K Wills, in <news:usl9981e6fb0n6dpb...@4ax.com> did
thusly write:
> On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 12:41:21 +0000 (UTC), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
> Wrangler {One Of Four} <FN...@altusenetkooks.co> wrote:
>
>>Time to spin up the kooks again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>>
>>K Wills, in <news:tc3798hso6nj43kmf...@4ax.com> did
>>thusly write:
>>
>>> On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 03:15:39 +0000 (UTC), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
>>> Wrangler {One Of Four} <FN...@altusenetkooks.co> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Seems to me that Andrew Wilson spanked Kunt pretty soundly.
>>>>
>>>>And Kunt's a lightweight, he's already avoiding me after I used his
>>>>own words to force him to argue against himself. I never lose,
>>>>especially against Kunt, because he's just not too bright.
>>>
>>> You ran away after being PROVED the kook you are. I would be
>>> surprised if I alone noticed this truth.
>>
>>Liar. Why do you continue to lie, Kunt?
>>
>
> Present your evidence. If your claim is true, you'll do so. If it
>
>>Time to spin up the kooks again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>>
>>K Wills, in <news:tc3798hso6nj43kmf...@4ax.com> did
>>thusly write:
>>
>>> On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 03:15:39 +0000 (UTC), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
>>> Wrangler {One Of Four} <FN...@altusenetkooks.co> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Seems to me that Andrew Wilson spanked Kunt pretty soundly.
>>>>
>>>>And Kunt's a lightweight, he's already avoiding me after I used his
>>>>own words to force him to argue against himself. I never lose,
>>>>especially against Kunt, because he's just not too bright.
>>>
>>> You ran away after being PROVED the kook you are. I would be
>>> surprised if I alone noticed this truth.
>>
>>Liar. Why do you continue to lie, Kunt?
>>
>
> is a lie, you'll offer nothing in the way of evidence since there can
> be none to offer.
If a kook begs to be spanked by his intellectual superior, who am I to
say no, eh?
Message-ID: <k61uqv$b6q$5...@newsfeed.x-privat.org>
The above is my last correspondence directed at you during our prior
exchange. The post was made on 21 Oct 2012. Prior to that, you were
replying to my every post directed at you.
My above post was the post immediately after Message-ID:
<k61uqt$b6r$4...@newsfeed.x-privat.org>, in which, had you had the
testicular fortitude to reply, I would have forced you to argue
against your own words, a quandary that kooks often get themselves
into because they are intellectually dishonest. Unfortunately, you
took the coward's way out, opting to simply run away.
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.checkmate/browse_thread/thread/5dc0be0904fb7e72/83bf80d9070755b2?q=#83bf80d9070755b2
The above is the thread in which my above posts reside. You'll notice
that nowhere in that thread *after* those posts of mine do you post,
until 30 Oct 2012, and even then you didn't reply to any of my posts.
This was your 30 Oct 2012 post in that thread, replying to the kook
CastAlone (hmmm... could you have been avoiding me?):
Message-ID: <dv2v889atgjffla5f...@4ax.com>
And another reply in that thread on 30 Oct 2012, this time to kensi
(again, it's almost as if you were avoiding replying to me):
Message-ID: <613v88pj3lir0i9nn...@4ax.com>
And another reply of yours in that thread on 31 Oct 2012, again to
kensi (again, it's strange that you've stopped replying to me, eh?):
Message-ID: <mnp198lk5ndpkcne2...@4ax.com>
Your next reply to me was this one on 02 Nov 2012, replying to the
post in which I called you a lightweight for avoiding me for 12 days:
Message-ID: <tc3798hso6nj43kmf...@4ax.com>
It's almost as if you ran away for some reason...
Cowardice, perhaps?
Butthurt, perhaps?
Both. Definitely.
SPNAK!
<snicker>
> And I still don't care that you're gay. Really.
Projection noted, poofter.
Nadegda
Nov 4, 2012, 3:10:20 AM11/4/12
to
On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 11:35:45 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood Booze Wrangler
wrote:
Denial, seconding of denial, and acceptance of denial denied, Drunken
Kook Masquerading As Ex-FNVW. Burnore's nomination for the LMA stands,
and has been seconded. Burnore will be on the November ballot for that
kook award. There's nothing you can do about it but cry, you fraud.
wrote:
Kook Masquerading As Ex-FNVW. Burnore's nomination for the LMA stands,
and has been seconded. Burnore will be on the November ballot for that
kook award. There's nothing you can do about it but cry, you fraud.
Nadegda
Nov 4, 2012, 3:11:05 AM11/4/12
to
On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 14:26:29 +0000, sex offender Gary L Burnore wrote:
> In alt.usenet.kooks Andrew Wilson <awils...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 2, 8:29?am, Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> In alt.usenet.kooks Andrew Wilson <awils...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:54:09 +0000, convicted pedophile Gary L Burnore
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>> >> NOMINATION: Gary L. Burnore
>>>
>>> > Denied of course.
>>>
>>>
>>> > In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>> >> NOMINATION: Gary L. Burnore
>>>
>>> > Denied of course.
>>>
>>> Hahahahahahaha, the stupid kooky convict Burnore thinks he can just
>>> "deny" it when he's nominated for a kook award.
>>>
>>> More evidence that that particular award, a Loony Maroon Award, is
>>> richly deserved by you, kooky.
>>
>> If that nomination's still unseconded, and according to my files it is,
>> I hereby second it. What a GOOFBALL.
>
> Second summarily<SLAP!>
>>> "deny" it when he's nominated for a kook award.
>>>
>>> More evidence that that particular award, a Loony Maroon Award, is
>>> richly deserved by you, kooky.
>>
>> If that nomination's still unseconded, and according to my files it is,
>> I hereby second it. What a GOOFBALL.
>
accepted, kook.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Andrew Wilson
Nov 4, 2012, 6:20:54 AM11/4/12
to
On Nov 4, 10:46 am, K Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote:
MID, kook?
> >The first two entries in the above list age off the ICAOS list
> >eventually (as is also delineated on the ICAOS registration form) if
> >they don't re-offend for the same offense that got them listed in the
> >first place, but convicted sexual offenders remain on the ICAOS list
> >for life.
>
> But according to Andrew, Gary aged off a list that, according to
> you, he couldn't have.
Why are you compelled to LIE, kook? Your DESPERATION is showing.
Again.
<a1a35fe8-0413-413f...@kt16g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>
: Phoenix posted the proof in <k6vduc$9fm$6...@newsfeed.x-privat.org>,
: which includes unforgeable evidence such as the contents of the
: California Interstate Compact Offender list:
:
:: Gary Lee Burnore, despite his denials, is a convicted sexual
:: offender, and we know this ... because he REMAINS on the
:: NC Department of Public Safety website as a California
:: Interstate Compact Offender.
I clearly said that he REMAINS on the list, not that he aged off the
list. That is a TRUTH that you will now run from.
NOMINATION: K Wills for November's Pants on Fire Award for the above
BLATANT lie, EASILY disproved using any netnews archive, k'laiming
that I said the opposite of what I actually said.
I don't doubt someone will second this rather quickly.
<cackle>
> On Sun, 4 Nov 2012 01:11:02 +0000 (UTC), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
> Wrangler {One Of Four} <F...@altusenetkooks.co> wrote:
> >Time to spin up the kooks again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
> >K Wills, in <news:ujl998dmntauvnj67...@4ax.com> did
> >thusly write:
>
> >> Perhaps you missed my request that you NOT (emphasis added) waste
> >> your time and mine, and anyone else who is reading, posting that which
> >> has been proved to be forgeries. True, you didn't post the forgeries
> >> themselves, but your cite was reduced to using them to make the claim.
> >> By now, I'm sure anyone with an interest has seen the forgeries.
> >> Those who are emotionally and mentally stable can accept that they are
> >> forgeries.
> >> You did allow an interesting slip. "...he'd have aged off the CA
> >> ICAOS list by now, but convicted sexual offenders are listed for
> >> life."
> >> Show me, and anyone else reading who holds an interest, where his
> >> name is listed on any current sex offender registry. If, as will prove
> >> to be the case, you are lying, you won't be able since there will be
> >> nothing to offer.
> >> Your move.
>
> >He's not on a sex offender registry.
>
> So Andrew lied.
> Wrangler {One Of Four} <F...@altusenetkooks.co> wrote:
> >Time to spin up the kooks again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
> >K Wills, in <news:ujl998dmntauvnj67...@4ax.com> did
> >thusly write:
>
> >> Perhaps you missed my request that you NOT (emphasis added) waste
> >> your time and mine, and anyone else who is reading, posting that which
> >> has been proved to be forgeries. True, you didn't post the forgeries
> >> themselves, but your cite was reduced to using them to make the claim.
> >> By now, I'm sure anyone with an interest has seen the forgeries.
> >> Those who are emotionally and mentally stable can accept that they are
> >> forgeries.
> >> You did allow an interesting slip. "...he'd have aged off the CA
> >> ICAOS list by now, but convicted sexual offenders are listed for
> >> life."
> >> Show me, and anyone else reading who holds an interest, where his
> >> name is listed on any current sex offender registry. If, as will prove
> >> to be the case, you are lying, you won't be able since there will be
> >> nothing to offer.
> >> Your move.
>
> >He's not on a sex offender registry.
>
MID, kook?
> >The first two entries in the above list age off the ICAOS list
> >eventually (as is also delineated on the ICAOS registration form) if
> >they don't re-offend for the same offense that got them listed in the
> >first place, but convicted sexual offenders remain on the ICAOS list
> >for life.
>
> you, he couldn't have.
Why are you compelled to LIE, kook? Your DESPERATION is showing.
Again.
<a1a35fe8-0413-413f...@kt16g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>
: Phoenix posted the proof in <k6vduc$9fm$6...@newsfeed.x-privat.org>,
: which includes unforgeable evidence such as the contents of the
: California Interstate Compact Offender list:
:
:: Gary Lee Burnore, despite his denials, is a convicted sexual
:: offender, and we know this ... because he REMAINS on the
:: NC Department of Public Safety website as a California
:: Interstate Compact Offender.
I clearly said that he REMAINS on the list, not that he aged off the
list. That is a TRUTH that you will now run from.
NOMINATION: K Wills for November's Pants on Fire Award for the above
BLATANT lie, EASILY disproved using any netnews archive, k'laiming
that I said the opposite of what I actually said.
I don't doubt someone will second this rather quickly.
<cackle>
Gary Burnore
Nov 4, 2012, 7:28:46 AM11/4/12
to
--
gbur...@databasix.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How you look depends on where you go.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
| ?????????????????????????????????
Gary L. Burnore | ?????????????????????????????????
| ?????????????????????????????????
Black Helicopter Repair Services | ??? 3 4 1 4 2 ???? 6 9 0 6 9 ???
| Official Proof of Purchase
======================================================================
Gary Burnore
Nov 4, 2012, 7:29:39 AM11/4/12
to
In alt.usenet.kooks Guinea Pig rapist Nadegda <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 14:26:29 +0000, Gary L Burnore wrote:
>
>> In alt.usenet.kooks Andrew Wilson <awils...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Nov 2, 8:29?am, Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:54:09 +0000, convicted pedophile Gary L Burnore
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >> NOMINATION: Gary L. Burnore
>>>>
>>>> > Denied of course.
>>>>
>>>> Hahahahahahaha, the stupid kooky convict Burnore thinks he can just
>>>> "deny" it when he's nominated for a kook award.
>>>>
>>>> More evidence that that particular award, a Loony Maroon Award, is
>>>> richly deserved by you, kooky.
>>>
Yawn.
>
>> In alt.usenet.kooks Andrew Wilson <awils...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Nov 2, 8:29?am, Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:54:09 +0000, convicted pedophile Gary L Burnore
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > In alt.usenet.kooks Nadegda <nad318b...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >> NOMINATION: Gary L. Burnore
>>>>
>>>> > Denied of course.
>>>>
>>>> Hahahahahahaha, the stupid kooky convict Burnore thinks he can just
>>>> "deny" it when he's nominated for a kook award.
>>>>
>>>> More evidence that that particular award, a Loony Maroon Award, is
>>>> richly deserved by you, kooky.
>>>
Checkmate
Nov 4, 2012, 10:31:01 AM11/4/12
to
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
Checkmate!
Checkmate!
helping you with your little Asperger's problem?
"so now im making an appointment with a specialist, which will take about
6 months to get, and until then I'm going try Effexor, which is an anti-
depressant, to handle my anxiety and there's a good chance it'll reduce
my stomach problem to next to nothing. Since most of my stomach issues
come from anxiety, the worst cases at any rate. I haven't started taking
it yet but I'm going to soon, I'm a bit worried about side effects but
I'm really hoping it works. Apparently my mom and brother take it as well
and it's doing great for them so I'm confident."
http://kydaimon.livejournal.com/
Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler {One Of Four}
Nov 4, 2012, 11:48:51 AM11/4/12
to
Time to spin up the kooks again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
K Wills, in <news:prhc98ti6gl686tte...@4ax.com> did
thusly write:
> On Sun, 4 Nov 2012 01:11:10 +0000 (UTC), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
> reply from Google.
It wasn't me doing the waiting, coward. As I proved, *you* ran away
for 12 days. Projection noted, Kunt. Cowardice in using XNA noted,
Kunt.
> Don't worry. I'm sure I alone see your deception.
> On the plus side, it's good that you are still following my
> command to lie without pause or question.
Projection noted, Kunt. <snicker>
>>My above post was the post immediately after Message-ID:
>><k61uqt$b6r$4...@newsfeed.x-privat.org>, in which, had you had the
>
> mind, simpleton.
Reading comprehension problems noted, Kunt. You'll be posting proof I
ever claimed the above posted MID is your post, Kunt, or admit you're
screeding in an attempt at obfuscating your being viciously spanked.
<snicker>
>>testicular fortitude to reply, I would have forced you to argue
>>against your own words,
>
> Your DESPERATION is showing. Still.
Your reading comprehension problem is showing. Still. <snicker>
>>a quandary that kooks often get themselves
>>into because they are intellectually dishonest. Unfortunately, you
>>took the coward's way out, opting to simply run away.
>
Projection noted, Kunt. <snicker>
>>https://groups.google.com/group/alt.checkmate/browse_thread/thread/5dc0be0904fb7e72/83bf80d9070755b2?q=#83bf80d9070755b2
>>
>>The above is the thread in which my above posts reside. You'll notice
>>that nowhere in that thread *after* those posts of mine do you post,
>>until 30 Oct 2012, and even then you didn't reply to any of my posts.
>>
>
You'll present proof of the alleged lie, or it stands as your tacit
admission to lying, Kunt.
>>This was your 30 Oct 2012 post in that thread, replying to the kook
>>CastAlone (hmmm... could you have been avoiding me?):
>>Message-ID: <dv2v889atgjffla5f...@4ax.com>
>>
>
> completely. Pointing out that I've replied to others won't alter this
> TRUTH at all.
Projection noted, Kunt. I proved you ran away from me, and now you're
screeding in an attempt at obfuscating that fact.
> [snip of your proof that I've replied to other people, a charge no one
> has ever denied]
Cowardly snipping noted, Kunt.
>>It's almost as if you ran away for some reason...
>>
>
Projection noted, Kunt.
>>Cowardice, perhaps?
>>Butthurt, perhaps?
>>Both. Definitely.
>>
>>SPNAK!
>
> command as evidence of my being spanked?
> Really?
Projection noted, Kunt.
>><snicker>
>>
>>> And I still don't care that you're gay. Really.
>>
>>Projection noted, poofter.
>>
>
> your desires. So long as you realize your fantasy will never become a
> reality, it's fine. While I think you could find a much better man to
> lust after, that you want me isn't likely to cause me any harm. So
> long as you're able to accept that I will never return the feelings.
Projection noted, Kunt. This stands as your tacit admission to being
gay, Kunt, per the standards that you hold out for everyone else. Why
can't you live by your own standards, Kunt?
Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler {One Of Four}
Nov 4, 2012, 11:48:55 AM11/4/12
to
Time to spin up the kooks again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
Andrew Wilson, in
<news:38e9e2d2-eac1-489d...@c20g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>
Kunt is the world's worst liar. He's not smart enough to lie
convincingly.
<snicker>
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages