Re: simple question for a beginner

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by Phineas P. Hornswaggle, Aug 5, 2003.

  1. On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 02:46:36 +0100, Monsignor Larville Jones MD
    <> said:

    >"@}-}-------Rosee" <!!GigAntiCBoSomS!!@Nip..com> wrote:
    >
    >>"zarathustra" <> chiseled in stone, the following words
    >>news::
    >>
    >>> trout doodled:

    >>
    >>>> zarathustra wrote:

    >>
    >>>>> -= Hawk =- doodled:

    >>
    >>>>>> On Sun, 08 Jun 2003 11:28:30 -0400, SgtMinor scribbled:
    >>>>>>> I noted three responses to your post in 24HSHD that were
    >>>>>>> crossposted. Let's say that you had posted separately to four
    >>>>>>> groups and got three responses in each group. Total posts in
    >>>>>>> response: 12. Now consider the present case, where you
    >>>>>>> crossposted, and again assume three responses from each group.
    >>>>>>> Each response is crossposted also.
    >>>>>>> Total posts in reponse: 48. This is a waste of resources and
    >>>>>>> qualifies as abuse in my book.

    >>
    >>>>>> A crossposted message whether to one group or five hundred
    >>>>>> create a single instance of the message on the server. Sell your
    >>>>>> book, it's worse than worthless.

    >>
    >>>>> Did you enjoy the ruck, though? I did. The initial indignation, then
    >>>>> the reddened faces, followed swiftly by the desperate scrabbling for
    >>>>> URLs to back up the faux-pas. Excellent entertainment.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> <stampede>
    >>>>> "Pile on!!!!1!"
    >>>>> </stampede>

    >>
    >>>> "Reddened faces"? Total crap. *One* poster made an error, and then
    >>>> acknowledged it. The point remains.

    >>
    >>> So wear a hat.

    >>
    >>>> Excessive cross-posting is rude and stupid. When a newbie does it.
    >>>> When *you* do it.

    >>
    >>> "Rude and stupid"? Are you the moDuhrator now, old chap? Well, allow me
    >>> to retort. On several occasions, you've needlessly bitched about my
    >>> subscription to other froups, yet it seems you've hardly ventured out of
    >>> this one. You get upset about my responding to troles, then go and do
    >>> exactly the fucking same. You've been on Usenet, how long? There is no
    >>> 'dark underbelly', as you so humorously imagine (unless you count the
    >>> froups st00pid visits which, btw, I don't).
    >>>
    >>> Rearrange the following into a well-known phrase: houses throw people
    >>> shouldn't glass in stones.

    >>
    >>> --
    >>> "You are much too easily entertained."

    >>
    >>> That shit's below you, trout. Had a bad day?

    >>
    >>It's most assuredly below trout, but well ABOVE yours and BC's behavior,
    >>but I'll NOT argue with you.
    >>
    >>See ya later, Z and BC.....{:-(

    >
    >You're way too late for tehSTAPMPEDE, Rosee, though I enjoyed reading
    >your semi-literate babble: "It's most assuredly below trout, but well
    >ABOVE yours and BC's behavior," - whatever _that_ means...


    Tis a shot at me, a very real threat to post my name.

    **** the bitch.

    >
    >Buh-bye.


    --

    Armed with that knowledge, I am well qualified to tell you that if you
    have taken the time to research me, you have practicaly no life.
    Bill Kooks in 24hoursupport.helpdesk
    Phineas P. Hornswaggle, Aug 5, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Phineas P. Hornswaggle <> wrote:

    >On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 17:46:56 +0100, Monsignor Larville Jones MD
    ><> said:
    >
    >>Phineas P. Hornswaggle <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 02:46:36 +0100, Monsignor Larville Jones MD
    >>><> said:
    >>>
    >>>>"@}-}-------Rosee" <!!GigAntiCBoSomS!!@Nip..com> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>"zarathustra" <> chiseled in stone, the following words
    >>>>>news::
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> trout doodled:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>> zarathustra wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>> -= Hawk =- doodled:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> On Sun, 08 Jun 2003 11:28:30 -0400, SgtMinor scribbled:
    >>>>>>>>>> I noted three responses to your post in 24HSHD that were
    >>>>>>>>>> crossposted. Let's say that you had posted separately to four
    >>>>>>>>>> groups and got three responses in each group. Total posts in
    >>>>>>>>>> response: 12. Now consider the present case, where you
    >>>>>>>>>> crossposted, and again assume three responses from each group.
    >>>>>>>>>> Each response is crossposted also.
    >>>>>>>>>> Total posts in reponse: 48. This is a waste of resources and
    >>>>>>>>>> qualifies as abuse in my book.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> A crossposted message whether to one group or five hundred
    >>>>>>>>> create a single instance of the message on the server. Sell your
    >>>>>>>>> book, it's worse than worthless.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Did you enjoy the ruck, though? I did. The initial indignation, then
    >>>>>>>> the reddened faces, followed swiftly by the desperate scrabbling for
    >>>>>>>> URLs to back up the faux-pas. Excellent entertainment.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> <stampede>
    >>>>>>>> "Pile on!!!!1!"
    >>>>>>>> </stampede>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>> "Reddened faces"? Total crap. *One* poster made an error, and then
    >>>>>>> acknowledged it. The point remains.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> So wear a hat.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>> Excessive cross-posting is rude and stupid. When a newbie does it.
    >>>>>>> When *you* do it.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> "Rude and stupid"? Are you the moDuhrator now, old chap? Well, allow me
    >>>>>> to retort. On several occasions, you've needlessly bitched about my
    >>>>>> subscription to other froups, yet it seems you've hardly ventured out of
    >>>>>> this one. You get upset about my responding to troles, then go and do
    >>>>>> exactly the fucking same. You've been on Usenet, how long? There is no
    >>>>>> 'dark underbelly', as you so humorously imagine (unless you count the
    >>>>>> froups st00pid visits which, btw, I don't).
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Rearrange the following into a well-known phrase: houses throw people
    >>>>>> shouldn't glass in stones.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> --
    >>>>>> "You are much too easily entertained."
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> That shit's below you, trout. Had a bad day?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>It's most assuredly below trout, but well ABOVE yours and BC's behavior,
    >>>>>but I'll NOT argue with you.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>See ya later, Z and BC.....{:-(
    >>>>
    >>>>You're way too late for tehSTAPMPEDE, Rosee, though I enjoyed reading
    >>>>your semi-literate babble: "It's most assuredly below trout, but well
    >>>>ABOVE yours and BC's behavior," - whatever _that_ means...
    >>>
    >>>Tis a shot at me, a very real threat to post my name.

    >>
    >>I've never had a problem with Rosee, and she's never had a problem
    >>with me - until now. I cannot understand why, out of the blue, she's
    >>dredged up a weeks-old post and decided to turn against me/you/us/the
    >>collective. It's not as if she has anything whatsoever to do with the
    >>'dispute'.

    >
    >Rosee will side with Mara


    I haven't seen any posts from Mara regarding this bullshit, so
    can't/won't comment on any involvement on her part. Since 'leaving'
    The Forest, though, I couldn't say _what's_ going on behind the
    scenes, IYKWIM...

    >and Trout,


    I've noted that since my unilateral 'disarmament', I'm still being
    sniped at from BtKF. I can be all smug now from my moral high ground.
    ;o)

    > I hope she will be able to sit
    >long enough to sift through th BS and see the kernel at the center of
    >this dispute.


    Ya think?

    >>Yet another case of 'irrespective of the facts, I'm gonna side with
    >>the majority 'cos it's safer to do so - I daren't jeopardise my degree
    >>of popularity in teh froup'. As for the 'threat', well, that's a great
    >>example of what's "below" one's behaviour.
    >>

    >
    >I have hope that she will be able to "take it to email" with me first


    IMO, it's a little too late for that, Phin. Nevertheless, 'bon
    chance'. ;o)

    >
    >so she can see there are allways 2 sides to any fight. I think she is
    >smart enough to realize that she aint around enough to be up on the
    >whole story by this time.


    You're alone on that one, old boy.

    >
    >>>
    >>>**** the bitch.

    >>
    >>Couldn't agree more. ;o)

    >
    >;?)
    >
    >>
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>Buh-bye.


    --
    zar 2k3 - ULC Reverend
    Certified Word Police Officer - Details Detail
    http://www.geocities.com/spamresources/spambots.htm
    http://www.drcnet.org/ http://www.abovegod.com/
    NuMbEr Tr3#3!!!!11! on a lits...

    "A man, a plan, a canoe, pasta, heros, rajahs,
    a coloratura, maps, snipe, percale, macaroni,
    a gag, a banana bag, a tan, a tag, a banana bag
    again (or a camel), a crepe, pins, Spam, a rut,
    a Rolo, cash, a jar, sore hats, a peon, a canal
    - Panama!"

    - Guy Steele Jr., CLTL2
    Monsignor Larville Jones MD, Aug 5, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 23:45:39 +0100, Monsignor Larville Jones MD
    <> said:

    >Phineas P. Hornswaggle <> wrote:
    >
    >>On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 17:46:56 +0100, Monsignor Larville Jones MD
    >><> said:
    >>
    >>>Phineas P. Hornswaggle <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 02:46:36 +0100, Monsignor Larville Jones MD
    >>>><> said:
    >>>>
    >>>>>"@}-}-------Rosee" <!!GigAntiCBoSomS!!@Nip..com> wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>"zarathustra" <> chiseled in stone, the following words
    >>>>>>news::
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> trout doodled:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> zarathustra wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> -= Hawk =- doodled:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 08 Jun 2003 11:28:30 -0400, SgtMinor scribbled:
    >>>>>>>>>>> I noted three responses to your post in 24HSHD that were
    >>>>>>>>>>> crossposted. Let's say that you had posted separately to four
    >>>>>>>>>>> groups and got three responses in each group. Total posts in
    >>>>>>>>>>> response: 12. Now consider the present case, where you
    >>>>>>>>>>> crossposted, and again assume three responses from each group.
    >>>>>>>>>>> Each response is crossposted also.
    >>>>>>>>>>> Total posts in reponse: 48. This is a waste of resources and
    >>>>>>>>>>> qualifies as abuse in my book.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> A crossposted message whether to one group or five hundred
    >>>>>>>>>> create a single instance of the message on the server. Sell your
    >>>>>>>>>> book, it's worse than worthless.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Did you enjoy the ruck, though? I did. The initial indignation, then
    >>>>>>>>> the reddened faces, followed swiftly by the desperate scrabbling for
    >>>>>>>>> URLs to back up the faux-pas. Excellent entertainment.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> <stampede>
    >>>>>>>>> "Pile on!!!!1!"
    >>>>>>>>> </stampede>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> "Reddened faces"? Total crap. *One* poster made an error, and then
    >>>>>>>> acknowledged it. The point remains.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> So wear a hat.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Excessive cross-posting is rude and stupid. When a newbie does it.
    >>>>>>>> When *you* do it.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> "Rude and stupid"? Are you the moDuhrator now, old chap? Well, allow me
    >>>>>>> to retort. On several occasions, you've needlessly bitched about my
    >>>>>>> subscription to other froups, yet it seems you've hardly ventured out of
    >>>>>>> this one. You get upset about my responding to troles, then go and do
    >>>>>>> exactly the fucking same. You've been on Usenet, how long? There is no
    >>>>>>> 'dark underbelly', as you so humorously imagine (unless you count the
    >>>>>>> froups st00pid visits which, btw, I don't).
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Rearrange the following into a well-known phrase: houses throw people
    >>>>>>> shouldn't glass in stones.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> --
    >>>>>>> "You are much too easily entertained."
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> That shit's below you, trout. Had a bad day?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>It's most assuredly below trout, but well ABOVE yours and BC's behavior,
    >>>>>>but I'll NOT argue with you.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>See ya later, Z and BC.....{:-(
    >>>>>
    >>>>>You're way too late for tehSTAPMPEDE, Rosee, though I enjoyed reading
    >>>>>your semi-literate babble: "It's most assuredly below trout, but well
    >>>>>ABOVE yours and BC's behavior," - whatever _that_ means...
    >>>>
    >>>>Tis a shot at me, a very real threat to post my name.
    >>>
    >>>I've never had a problem with Rosee, and she's never had a problem
    >>>with me - until now. I cannot understand why, out of the blue, she's
    >>>dredged up a weeks-old post and decided to turn against me/you/us/the
    >>>collective. It's not as if she has anything whatsoever to do with the
    >>>'dispute'.

    >>
    >>Rosee will side with Mara

    >
    >I haven't seen any posts from Mara regarding this bullshit, so
    >can't/won't comment on any involvement on her part. Since 'leaving'
    >The Forest, though, I couldn't say _what's_ going on behind the
    >scenes, IYKWIM...


    Aye, Horatio, there's the rub.

    >
    >>and Trout,

    >
    >I've noted that since my unilateral 'disarmament', I'm still being
    >sniped at from BtKF. I can be all smug now from my moral high ground.
    >;o)


    You forgot your Slumpy's <lofty highground> formating.

    >
    >> I hope she will be able to sit
    >>long enough to sift through th BS and see the kernel at the center of
    >>this dispute.

    >
    >Ya think?


    Somtimes. <lol>

    >
    >>>Yet another case of 'irrespective of the facts, I'm gonna side with
    >>>the majority 'cos it's safer to do so - I daren't jeopardise my degree
    >>>of popularity in teh froup'. As for the 'threat', well, that's a great
    >>>example of what's "below" one's behaviour.
    >>>

    >>
    >>I have hope that she will be able to "take it to email" with me first

    >
    >IMO, it's a little too late for that, Phin. Nevertheless, 'bon
    >chance'. ;o)


    Thenk yew!

    >
    >>
    >>so she can see there are allways 2 sides to any fight. I think she is
    >>smart enough to realize that she aint around enough to be up on the
    >>whole story by this time.

    >
    >You're alone on that one, old boy.


    I think I can handle one little old lady on my own now Oh-My-Mentor.
    <Trout and Brain will say " aha! He *is* being taught by Z"!>

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAetc.

    >
    >>
    >>>>
    >>>>**** the bitch.
    >>>
    >>>Couldn't agree more. ;o)

    >>
    >>;?)
    >>
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Buh-bye.


    --

    Armed with that knowledge, I am well qualified to tell you that if you
    have taken the time to research me, you have practicaly no life.
    Bill Kooks in 24hoursupport.helpdesk
    Phineas P. Hornswaggle, Aug 6, 2003
    #3
  4. Phineas P. Hornswaggle

    gangle Guest

    "Monsignor Larville Jones MD" wrote

    <Snipped>

    > I haven't seen any posts from Mara regarding this bullshit, so
    > can't/won't comment on any involvement on her part. Since 'leaving'
    > The Forest, though, I couldn't say _what's_ going on behind the
    > scenes, IYKWIM...


    The answer to that is: nothing whatsoever is going on "behind
    the scenes." I don't even know what this thread is really about
    at this point, much less have any access to backgound information.
    It's become so confusing, with the long, unsnipped re: posts, I don't
    know what "this bullshit" is even referring to, or why you are insulting
    Rosee or why she is insulting you. If I am confused, can you imagine
    how incoherent this must appear to other, more casual readers of
    this NG?

    Would someone involved with this thread please make an attempt to
    summarize what the **** is going on?
    gangle, Aug 6, 2003
    #4
  5. "gangle" <> wrote:

    >"Monsignor Larville Jones MD" wrote
    >
    > <Snipped>
    >
    >> I haven't seen any posts from Mara regarding this bullshit, so
    >> can't/won't comment on any involvement on her part. Since 'leaving'
    >> The Forest, though, I couldn't say _what's_ going on behind the
    >> scenes, IYKWIM...

    >
    >The answer to that is: nothing whatsoever is going on "behind
    >the scenes."


    You forget; I've experience of 'what goes on'. Do not fret, glurd -
    whatever I _have_ been accused of, perfidy is not a quality I possess.
    Those of a lesser calibre may threaten to 'out' posters' RL
    information, etc. - I cannot.

    >I don't even know what this thread is really about
    >at this point, much less have any access to backgound information.
    >It's become so confusing, with the long, unsnipped re: posts, I don't
    >know what "this bullshit" is even referring to, or why you are insulting
    >Rosee or why she is insulting you.


    From out of nowhere, Rosee dragged up the original (weeks-old) thread,
    in which Sgt. Minor had a pop at me about RtS, and in which 'others'
    rallied to his cause. I have never crossed swords with Rosee prior to
    this - in fact, I considered her a friend. I can only presume,
    therefore, that she has, in her 'wisdom', decided that there exist
    factions that must be collaborated with/against.

    > If I am confused, can you imagine
    >how incoherent this must appear to other, more casual readers of
    >this NG?


    I'm sure you're much less confused than you seem. I have deliberately
    refrained from taking this to email with Phineas for the purposes of
    transparency.

    >
    >Would someone involved with this thread please make an attempt to
    >summarize what the **** is going on?


    See para. two.

    --
    zar 2k3 - ULC Reverend
    Certified Word Police Officer - Details Detail
    http://www.geocities.com/spamresources/spambots.htm
    http://www.drcnet.org/ http://www.abovegod.com/
    NuMbEr Tr3#3!!!!11! on a lits...

    "A man, a plan, a canoe, pasta, heros, rajahs,
    a coloratura, maps, snipe, percale, macaroni,
    a gag, a banana bag, a tan, a tag, a banana bag
    again (or a camel), a crepe, pins, Spam, a rut,
    a Rolo, cash, a jar, sore hats, a peon, a canal
    - Panama!"

    - Guy Steele Jr., CLTL2
    Monsignor Larville Jones MD, Aug 7, 2003
    #5
  6. On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 01:09:42 +0100, Monsignor Larville Jones MD
    <> said:

    >"gangle" <> wrote:
    >
    >>"Monsignor Larville Jones MD" wrote
    >>
    >> <Snipped>
    >>
    >>> I haven't seen any posts from Mara regarding this bullshit, so
    >>> can't/won't comment on any involvement on her part. Since 'leaving'
    >>> The Forest, though, I couldn't say _what's_ going on behind the
    >>> scenes, IYKWIM...

    >>
    >>The answer to that is: nothing whatsoever is going on "behind
    >>the scenes."

    >
    >You forget; I've experience of 'what goes on'. Do not fret, glurd -
    >whatever I _have_ been accused of, perfidy is not a quality I possess.
    >Those of a lesser calibre may threaten to 'out' posters' RL
    >information, etc. - I cannot.


    This is the "real" operation I feel. What carries on here in this
    group is only a small part of the overall flux and flow of "the
    regulars" as evidenced by the change in positions of zarathustra and I
    after leaving "the accepted way".

    >
    >>I don't even know what this thread is really about
    >>at this point, much less have any access to backgound information.
    >>It's become so confusing, with the long, unsnipped re: posts, I don't
    >>know what "this bullshit" is even referring to, or why you are insulting
    >>Rosee or why she is insulting you.

    >
    >From out of nowhere, Rosee dragged up the original (weeks-old) thread,
    >in which Sgt. Minor had a pop at me about RtS, and in which 'others'
    >rallied to his cause. I have never crossed swords with Rosee prior to
    >this - in fact, I considered her a friend. I can only presume,
    >therefore, that she has, in her 'wisdom', decided that there exist
    >factions that must be collaborated with/against.


    It's almost like a cult ... Heh!

    >
    >> If I am confused, can you imagine
    >>how incoherent this must appear to other, more casual readers of
    >>this NG?

    >
    >I'm sure you're much less confused than you seem. I have deliberately
    >refrained from taking this to email with Phineas for the purposes of
    >transparency.


    This is the truth. There has been NO email between zarathustra and I
    about the goings on here since the begingings of the stampede. I have
    asked him a question or 2 about other things however.

    >
    >>
    >>Would someone involved with this thread please make an attempt to
    >>summarize what the **** is going on?


    Summary: zara and I get in battle with trout and brian h. others in
    group <both here and the forest> pile on and after multiple Plonkings
    and Me Tooings, zara and I are labled trolls and Stalkers.

    Rosee arrives late to the party and attempts to pile on with the rest
    only to have zara tell her the party is long over and everybody else
    is passed out in pools of their own vomit. Rosee responds with a not
    so veiled threat to out me and to add her PLONK and troll naming to
    zara.

    We are now sitting on the moral high ground and awaiting the next
    assault on castle zarphinathustra.

    Clear?

    >
    >See para. two.


    --

    Armed with that knowledge, I am well qualified to tell you that if you
    have taken the time to research me, you have practicaly no life.
    Bill Kooks in 24hoursupport.helpdesk
    Phineas P. Hornswaggle, Aug 7, 2003
    #6
  7. Phineas P. Hornswaggle

    gangle Guest

    "Monsignor Larville Jones MD" wrote
    > "gangle" wrote:
    >
    > >"Monsignor Larville Jones MD" wrote
    > >
    > > <Snipped>
    > >
    > >> I haven't seen any posts from Mara regarding this bullshit, so
    > >> can't/won't comment on any involvement on her part. Since 'leaving'
    > >> The Forest, though, I couldn't say _what's_ going on behind the
    > >> scenes, IYKWIM...

    > >
    > >The answer to that is: nothing whatsoever is going on "behind
    > >the scenes."

    >
    > You forget; I've experience of 'what goes on'. Do not fret, glurd -
    > whatever I _have_ been accused of, perfidy is not a quality I possess.
    > Those of a lesser calibre may threaten to 'out' posters' RL
    > information, etc. - I cannot.


    I appreciate that. But I'm saying that nothing of consequence
    has been said about you (on the list you mentioned) since you left,
    so nothing specific has "gone on" to help me understand what
    is currently happening.

    > >I don't even know what this thread is really about
    > >at this point, much less have any access to backgound information.
    > >It's become so confusing, with the long, unsnipped re: posts, I don't
    > >know what "this bullshit" is even referring to, or why you are insulting
    > >Rosee or why she is insulting you.

    >
    > From out of nowhere, Rosee dragged up the original (weeks-old) thread,
    > in which Sgt. Minor had a pop at me about RtS, and in which 'others'
    > rallied to his cause. I have never crossed swords with Rosee prior to
    > this - in fact, I considered her a friend. I can only presume,
    > therefore, that she has, in her 'wisdom', decided that there exist
    > factions that must be collaborated with/against.


    I either didn't see or remember this Sgt. Minor business. Like
    a lot of people, I don't read absolutely every post, and I often
    don't remember intricate details of threads, especially if they
    get long, are poorly snipped, take days/weeks, and are not
    of intially of great pith and moment to me. This is largely due to
    three things: the problems of aging, worsening health, and
    the persistent itching and burning of hemorrhoids.

    > > If I am confused, can you imagine
    > >how incoherent this must appear to other, more casual readers of
    > >this NG?

    >
    > I'm sure you're much less confused than you seem. I have deliberately
    > refrained from taking this to email with Phineas for the purposes of
    > transparency.


    No, I am really confused. I mean, I know *something* is going on
    to do with how you are viewed with regard to your playing with trolls;
    but I can't comprehend any *objective* details of that *something.*
    All I can discern is a clash of personalities/styles, not major,
    black-and-white issues that are prompting people to suddenly
    and repeatedly butt heads this seemingly "expanding" way.
    I mean, you (and others) *blatantly* respond to trolls, while others
    *subtly* or *indirectly* respond to trolls. I don't like either
    "approach," even though all parties involved claim it's valid to do so;
    however, I've given up on severely attacking people for it,
    as this NG has a troll infestation and such attacks just fuel the
    personality conflicts, which just indirectly feeds the trolls.
    I'm not sure what I just wrote even really makes sense, that's
    how confused I am.

    > >Would someone involved with this thread please make an attempt to
    > >summarize what the **** is going on?

    >
    > See para. two.


    My prostate hurts, too.
    gangle, Aug 7, 2003
    #7
  8. Phineas P. Hornswaggle

    gangle Guest

    "Phineas P. Hornswaggle" wrote
    > On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 01:09:42 +0100, Monsignor Larville Jones MD

    said:
    >
    > >"gangle" wrote:
    > >
    > >>"Monsignor Larville Jones MD" wrote
    > >>
    > >> <Snipped>
    > >>
    > >>> I haven't seen any posts from Mara regarding this bullshit, so
    > >>> can't/won't comment on any involvement on her part. Since 'leaving'
    > >>> The Forest, though, I couldn't say _what's_ going on behind the
    > >>> scenes, IYKWIM...
    > >>
    > >>The answer to that is: nothing whatsoever is going on "behind
    > >>the scenes."

    > >
    > >You forget; I've experience of 'what goes on'. Do not fret, glurd -
    > >whatever I _have_ been accused of, perfidy is not a quality I possess.
    > >Those of a lesser calibre may threaten to 'out' posters' RL
    > >information, etc. - I cannot.

    >
    > This is the "real" operation I feel. What carries on here in this
    > group is only a small part of the overall flux and flow of "the
    > regulars" as evidenced by the change in positions of zarathustra and I
    > after leaving "the accepted way".


    List all of these ominous "regulars"? Explain their "power"
    -- how they enforce the "accepted way"? This smacks of
    kooky CABAL talk, and sounds ridiculous coming from you
    who should and does know better -- from you, who, in fact,
    has frequently said what I just did to people making the type
    of assertions you made above.

    > >>I don't even know what this thread is really about
    > >>at this point, much less have any access to backgound information.
    > >>It's become so confusing, with the long, unsnipped re: posts, I don't
    > >>know what "this bullshit" is even referring to, or why you are insulting
    > >>Rosee or why she is insulting you.

    > >
    > >From out of nowhere, Rosee dragged up the original (weeks-old) thread,
    > >in which Sgt. Minor had a pop at me about RtS, and in which 'others'
    > >rallied to his cause. I have never crossed swords with Rosee prior to
    > >this - in fact, I considered her a friend. I can only presume,
    > >therefore, that she has, in her 'wisdom', decided that there exist
    > >factions that must be collaborated with/against.

    >
    > It's almost like a cult ... Heh!


    If there is a cabal or cult, I have no idea how to join it, and
    no desire to do so.

    > >> If I am confused, can you imagine
    > >>how incoherent this must appear to other, more casual readers of
    > >>this NG?

    > >
    > >I'm sure you're much less confused than you seem. I have deliberately
    > >refrained from taking this to email with Phineas for the purposes of
    > >transparency.

    >
    > This is the truth. There has been NO email between zarathustra and I
    > about the goings on here since the begingings of the stampede. I have
    > asked him a question or 2 about other things however.


    What you and z do or don't do in private is beyond my scope. I don't
    know why the topic is even relevant.

    > >>Would someone involved with this thread please make an attempt to
    > >>summarize what the **** is going on?

    >
    > Summary: zara and I get in battle with trout and brian h. others in
    > group <both here and the forest> pile on and after multiple Plonkings
    > and Me Tooings, zara and I are labled trolls and Stalkers.


    This has nothing to do with my list. (You and z are not topics
    of conversation on that list). I don't agree with your
    piling-on description. People agree with each other
    more easily when they are used to each other: it's human
    nature and nothing more sinister or complicated than that.
    It's not a conspiracy. For you to state this in such a simplistic
    "us vs. them" fashion paints you as a childish newbie. As I've
    stated, there are merits to both "sides" in this thing, and
    problems on both "sides." You and z *were* acting"
    stalker-like," but, also in my view, not as true trolls. On
    the other hand, there have been denials (by way of not
    talking about it at all) of a hypocrisy that exists on the
    part of your "opposition" with regard to responding to
    trolls and responding to killfiled people.

    > Rosee arrives late to the party and attempts to pile on with the rest
    > only to have zara tell her the party is long over and everybody else
    > is passed out in pools of their own vomit. Rosee responds with a not
    > so veiled threat to out me and to add her PLONK and troll naming to
    > zara.


    This is the part I am confused about. Rosee must have her
    reasons, but, to me they were not clear. Nor do I remember
    the "outing" threat. If that's what she meant, I find it rather
    an unseemly thing to use to threaten somebody. However, the
    piling-on part is ridiculous, as what she does, good or bad, I view
    as an individual action on her part, not part of a cabal/club/group
    thing. TINU/TINW/TINC. You either believe that or you don't,
    and I thought you didn't.

    > We are now sitting on the moral high ground and awaiting the next
    > assault on castle zarphinathustra.
    >
    > Clear?


    It's overall clearer to me based on your comments why there
    has been such a sudden animosity towards Rosee. It's still
    unclear to me what inspired her animosity to you and z, as
    she didn't make that plain to this goomer who was not paying
    enough strict attention to every word or wasn't grasping their
    meaning. What is more clear is that you (and others) have, as
    I have noted previously, plunged yourselves into a paranoid
    world of black-and-white, when the world is really filled with
    shades of grey. To his credit, z has openly agreed to the
    existence of the greys, and took unilaterall actions to assuage
    the bickering, and I thought you were following his lead. But
    your cabal-like complaints stated above in your attempt to
    clear things up for me only suggests that you still can't see the
    greys. In case you also haven't noticed, I am going
    to spell it out for you: I prefer not taking "sides" with anyone in
    this mess, which also puts your "cabal/regular vs. us" theory
    in the toilet. (As much as I hate the baggage that comes with
    that "regulars" term, it exists, and I must fall under its blanket,
    as do you.) It's not all or most regulars (both terms would be
    impossible to measure), it's, at worst, *some* regulars who
    just happen to agree -- hardly a conspiracy -- in fact, a
    common Usenet occurence.

    In any case, I do thank you for trying to clear things
    up for me from your perspective.

    > >See para. two.
    gangle, Aug 7, 2003
    #8
  9. On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 01:35:46 -0700, "gangle" <> said:

    >"Phineas P. Hornswaggle" wrote
    >> On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 01:09:42 +0100, Monsignor Larville Jones MD

    >said:
    >>
    >> >"gangle" wrote:
    >> >
    >> >>"Monsignor Larville Jones MD" wrote
    >> >>
    >> >> <Snipped>
    >> >>
    >> >>> I haven't seen any posts from Mara regarding this bullshit, so
    >> >>> can't/won't comment on any involvement on her part. Since 'leaving'
    >> >>> The Forest, though, I couldn't say _what's_ going on behind the
    >> >>> scenes, IYKWIM...
    >> >>
    >> >>The answer to that is: nothing whatsoever is going on "behind
    >> >>the scenes."
    >> >
    >> >You forget; I've experience of 'what goes on'. Do not fret, glurd -
    >> >whatever I _have_ been accused of, perfidy is not a quality I possess.
    >> >Those of a lesser calibre may threaten to 'out' posters' RL
    >> >information, etc. - I cannot.

    >>
    >> This is the "real" operation I feel. What carries on here in this
    >> group is only a small part of the overall flux and flow of "the
    >> regulars" as evidenced by the change in positions of zarathustra and I
    >> after leaving "the accepted way".

    >
    >List all of these ominous "regulars"? Explain their "power"
    >-- how they enforce the "accepted way"? This smacks of
    >kooky CABAL talk, and sounds ridiculous coming from you
    >who should and does know better -- from you, who, in fact,
    >has frequently said what I just did to people making the type
    >of assertions you made above.


    I know, it was really a shot at the posts from one OP who has called
    me a follower of zarathustra, It was small of me, but I took it
    anyway. I will NOT give you a list here of the regulars of whom I
    speak. I will NOT feed this any further than to continue to answer you
    below.

    >
    >> >>I don't even know what this thread is really about
    >> >>at this point, much less have any access to backgound information.
    >> >>It's become so confusing, with the long, unsnipped re: posts, I don't
    >> >>know what "this bullshit" is even referring to, or why you are insulting
    >> >>Rosee or why she is insulting you.
    >> >
    >> >From out of nowhere, Rosee dragged up the original (weeks-old) thread,
    >> >in which Sgt. Minor had a pop at me about RtS, and in which 'others'
    >> >rallied to his cause. I have never crossed swords with Rosee prior to
    >> >this - in fact, I considered her a friend. I can only presume,
    >> >therefore, that she has, in her 'wisdom', decided that there exist
    >> >factions that must be collaborated with/against.

    >>
    >> It's almost like a cult ... Heh!

    >
    >If there is a cabal or cult, I have no idea how to join it, and
    >no desire to do so.


    That was a dig at me for having to post the way I feel at this time.
    <my line above not yours>

    >
    >> >> If I am confused, can you imagine
    >> >>how incoherent this must appear to other, more casual readers of
    >> >>this NG?
    >> >
    >> >I'm sure you're much less confused than you seem. I have deliberately
    >> >refrained from taking this to email with Phineas for the purposes of
    >> >transparency.

    >>
    >> This is the truth. There has been NO email between zarathustra and I
    >> about the goings on here since the begingings of the stampede. I have
    >> asked him a question or 2 about other things however.

    >
    >What you and z do or don't do in private is beyond my scope. I don't
    >know why the topic is even relevant.


    It is relevant from the point of view that if there is a group of
    posters supporting each other in email <heh invisible billions>
    then it also stands that some posters who are not involved in this
    group on a daily basis for sometimes long periods, but who ARE in
    email contact will be comming into any pissing contests here with a
    biased point of view that may, or may not, have less than the full
    story before making a choice as to wether or not to involve themsleves
    in a battle already in progress. Zarathustra and I are already on the
    defensive/offensive over this kind of behavior from posters whom we
    have both called friendly in the past and when Rosee jumped
    Zarathustra in this thread he responded in kind.

    >
    >> >>Would someone involved with this thread please make an attempt to
    >> >>summarize what the **** is going on?

    >>
    >> Summary: zara and I get in battle with trout and brian h. others in
    >> group <both here and the forest> pile on and after multiple Plonkings
    >> and Me Tooings, zara and I are labled trolls and Stalkers.

    >
    >This has nothing to do with my list. (You and z are not topics
    >of conversation on that list). I don't agree with your
    >piling-on description. People agree with each other
    >more easily when they are used to each other: it's human
    >nature and nothing more sinister or complicated than that.
    >It's not a conspiracy. For you to state this in such a simplistic
    >"us vs. them" fashion paints you as a childish newbie. As I've
    >stated, there are merits to both "sides" in this thing, and
    >problems on both "sides." You and z *were* acting"
    >stalker-like," but, also in my view, not as true trolls. On
    >the other hand, there have been denials (by way of not
    >talking about it at all) of a hypocrisy that exists on the
    >part of your "opposition" with regard to responding to
    >trolls and responding to killfiled people.


    I know, I have piled a bunch of emotion into the description that is
    merely my frustration at not even being given the dignity of an open
    discussion as to acceptable terminology etc. gangle, you and I have
    our own history and I applaud your ability to overlook it at this
    time, I certainly apreciate your truthfullness and your ability to cut
    throught the shite in such times. I was hurt by the implication of
    some OPs that I am unable to make my own decisions on topics here,
    that I had to "follow" zarathustra. I join with him because I feel
    that there is cause for discussion and because he has again been
    pilloried for the way he deals with trolls. Zara and I have had our
    own history as well, and I certainly admire his guts in dealing with
    *all* posters equally. I know that should I get on the wrong side of a
    debate with him over an issue I can expect the same kind of treatment
    he has given to every other poster hi is in opposition to. I find that
    admirable, I find that a point of great moral strength, if find that
    to be a style of behavior that could/should be emulated more often by
    many. You also know that I cannot resist poking a great big EGO with
    sharp sticks and pointy humour in order to perhaps bring some thought
    to bear on the behaviors that get to be accepted in day to day life in
    a group <TIAG> that are maybe a bit out of the standard that the
    members of that group have shown in the past.

    >
    >> Rosee arrives late to the party and attempts to pile on with the rest
    >> only to have zara tell her the party is long over and everybody else
    >> is passed out in pools of their own vomit. Rosee responds with a not
    >> so veiled threat to out me and to add her PLONK and troll naming to
    >> zara.

    >
    >This is the part I am confused about. Rosee must have her
    >reasons, but, to me they were not clear. Nor do I remember
    >the "outing" threat. If that's what she meant, I find it rather
    >an unseemly thing to use to threaten somebody. However, the
    >piling-on part is ridiculous, as what she does, good or bad, I view
    >as an individual action on her part, not part of a cabal/club/group
    >thing. TINU/TINW/TINC. You either believe that or you don't,
    >and I thought you didn't.


    The outing threat was in this message:
    Message-ID: <Xns93CC99D3A6979roseeneener@206.127.4.10>

    here is the quote:
    >It's most assuredly below trout, but well ABOVE yours and BC's behavior,
    >but I'll NOT argue with you.
    >
    >See ya later, Z and BC.....{:-(
    >
    >--
    >@}-}--}------Rosee http://www.southerncaucus.org/hk18.htm
    > www.givemeals.com www.freedonation.com www.hungersite.com
    > "This (TINT) is whatever I want it to be you bigfooted
    > belligerent bowlegged babblative babuina."~Zigi~


    You know my conection to the Z and BC part, this was a threat that she
    knows my real name and the fact that she posted this way was to make
    sure that I knew she meant me in private. I take this threat seriously
    though I hope Rosee has had the oportunity to rethink her using it.

    Here is the link to the other thread that has been in contention
    between Rosee and I:

    Subject: Re: Microsoft Windows XP Log-On Screen!
    Message-ID: <Xns93CDE3D9550D5roseeneener@206.127.4.10>


    I have re-posted the information she needs to contact me <and any
    other poster that feels the need to "take it to email" with me, as yet
    she has not responded.

    >
    >> We are now sitting on the moral high ground and awaiting the next
    >> assault on castle zarphinathustra.
    >>
    >> Clear?

    >
    >It's overall clearer to me based on your comments why there
    >has been such a sudden animosity towards Rosee. It's still
    >unclear to me what inspired her animosity to you and z, as
    >she didn't make that plain to this goomer who was not paying
    >enough strict attention to every word or wasn't grasping their
    >meaning. What is more clear is that you (and others) have, as
    >I have noted previously, plunged yourselves into a paranoid
    >world of black-and-white, when the world is really filled with
    >shades of grey. To his credit, z has openly agreed to the
    >existence of the greys, and took unilaterall actions to assuage
    >the bickering, and I thought you were following his lead. But
    >your cabal-like complaints stated above in your attempt to
    >clear things up for me only suggests that you still can't see the
    >greys. In case you also haven't noticed, I am going
    >to spell it out for you: I prefer not taking "sides" with anyone in
    >this mess, which also puts your "cabal/regular vs. us" theory
    >in the toilet. (As much as I hate the baggage that comes with
    >that "regulars" term, it exists, and I must fall under its blanket,
    >as do you.) It's not all or most regulars (both terms would be
    >impossible to measure), it's, at worst, *some* regulars who
    >just happen to agree -- hardly a conspiracy -- in fact, a
    >common Usenet occurence.


    I do not include you in my "the regulars" digs. You are correct when
    you say that you do not involve yourself in these type of ongoing
    battles. When you dissagree with me you post your dissagreement, the
    reasons why, and then let me make my own case as I may. I respect that
    deeply. I also accept your point that I have behaved like a child over
    some of this stuff. The posters that would be included in "the list"
    have all been allies of mine and some quite good friends for a period
    of years and to have been Plonked en masse by them because I dissagree
    with one behavior set they have exhibited has left a rather bitter
    taste in my mouth as to their meaning of the word friendship. I have
    had to make hard decisions in my life that I do not appologize for,
    nor will I post them here for open discussion, if you wish an
    accounting from me I will go deeper in email with you. You can reach
    me through phineasphornswaggleATyahooDOTcom I will be entirely honest
    with you in that format.

    This invitation is open to any other "regulars" who wish to
    discuss/berate me out of this open forum format.

    >
    >In any case, I do thank you for trying to clear things
    >up for me from your perspective.


    I hope this makes it a bit clearer yet.

    >
    >> >See para. two.

    >
    >


    --

    Armed with that knowledge, I am well qualified to tell you that if you
    have taken the time to research me, you have practicaly no life.
    Bill Kooks in 24hoursupport.helpdesk
    Phineas P. Hornswaggle, Aug 7, 2003
    #9
  10. "gangle" <> wrote:

    >"Monsignor Larville Jones MD" wrote
    >> "gangle" wrote:
    >>
    >> >"Monsignor Larville Jones MD" wrote
    >> >
    >> > <Snipped>
    >> >
    >> >> I haven't seen any posts from Mara regarding this bullshit, so
    >> >> can't/won't comment on any involvement on her part. Since 'leaving'
    >> >> The Forest, though, I couldn't say _what's_ going on behind the
    >> >> scenes, IYKWIM...
    >> >
    >> >The answer to that is: nothing whatsoever is going on "behind
    >> >the scenes."

    >>
    >> You forget; I've experience of 'what goes on'. Do not fret, glurd -
    >> whatever I _have_ been accused of, perfidy is not a quality I possess.
    >> Those of a lesser calibre may threaten to 'out' posters' RL
    >> information, etc. - I cannot.

    >
    >I appreciate that. But I'm saying that nothing of consequence
    >has been said about you (on the list you mentioned) since you left,
    >so nothing specific has "gone on" to help me understand what
    >is currently happening.


    Believing glurdae to be an honourable species, I take you at your
    word, and shall cease my allusions. My point seems to have been lost
    amidst the confusion. I merely intended that I would not bear false
    witness against Mara. However she feels about me (and, believe me, I
    labour under no illusions here), she is one of the few joint- 24hsh
    'regs'/Marshmallowites to have acted with one iota of integrity.

    >> >I don't even know what this thread is really about
    >> >at this point, much less have any access to backgound information.
    >> >It's become so confusing, with the long, unsnipped re: posts, I don't
    >> >know what "this bullshit" is even referring to, or why you are insulting
    >> >Rosee or why she is insulting you.

    >>
    >> From out of nowhere, Rosee dragged up the original (weeks-old) thread,
    >> in which Sgt. Minor had a pop at me about RtS, and in which 'others'
    >> rallied to his cause. I have never crossed swords with Rosee prior to
    >> this - in fact, I considered her a friend. I can only presume,
    >> therefore, that she has, in her 'wisdom', decided that there exist
    >> factions that must be collaborated with/against.

    >
    >I either didn't see or remember this Sgt. Minor business. Like
    >a lot of people, I don't read absolutely every post, and I often
    >don't remember intricate details of threads, especially if they
    >get long, are poorly snipped, take days/weeks, and are not
    >of intially of great pith and moment to me. This is largely due to
    >three things: the problems of aging, worsening health, and
    >the persistent itching and burning of hemorrhoids.


    Having claw-like appendages must surely be a burden when the
    compulsion to scratch said 'sigmunds' reaches fever pitch...

    >
    >> > If I am confused, can you imagine
    >> >how incoherent this must appear to other, more casual readers of
    >> >this NG?

    >>
    >> I'm sure you're much less confused than you seem. I have deliberately
    >> refrained from taking this to email with Phineas for the purposes of
    >> transparency.

    >
    >No, I am really confused. I mean, I know *something* is going on
    >to do with how you are viewed with regard to your playing with trolls;
    >but I can't comprehend any *objective* details of that *something.*
    >All I can discern is a clash of personalities/styles, not major,
    >black-and-white issues that are prompting people to suddenly
    >and repeatedly butt heads this seemingly "expanding" way.
    >I mean, you (and others) *blatantly* respond to trolls, while others
    >*subtly* or *indirectly* respond to trolls. I don't like either
    >"approach," even though all parties involved claim it's valid to do so;
    >however, I've given up on severely attacking people for it,
    >as this NG has a troll infestation and such attacks just fuel the
    >personality conflicts, which just indirectly feeds the trolls.
    >I'm not sure what I just wrote even really makes sense, that's
    >how confused I am.


    What confuses me is the fact that I am publicly vilified for doing
    exactly the same thing that certain others do with impunity.

    >
    >> >Would someone involved with this thread please make an attempt to
    >> >summarize what the **** is going on?

    >>
    >> See para. two.

    >
    >My prostate hurts, too.


    Ask the glurdwife to apply a topical unguent (get her to trim those
    pincers first - *OUCH!*).

    --
    zar 2k3 - ULC Reverend
    Certified Word Police Officer - Details Detail
    http://www.geocities.com/spamresources/spambots.htm
    http://www.drcnet.org/ http://www.abovegod.com/
    NuMbEr Tr3#3!!!!11! on a lits...

    "A man, a plan, a canoe, pasta, heros, rajahs,
    a coloratura, maps, snipe, percale, macaroni,
    a gag, a banana bag, a tan, a tag, a banana bag
    again (or a camel), a crepe, pins, Spam, a rut,
    a Rolo, cash, a jar, sore hats, a peon, a canal
    - Panama!"

    - Guy Steele Jr., CLTL2
    Monsignor Larville Jones MD, Aug 8, 2003
    #10
  11. Phineas P. Hornswaggle

    gangle Guest

    "Monsignor Larville Jones MD" wrote
    > "gangle" <> wrote:
    >
    > >"Monsignor Larville Jones MD" wrote
    > >> "gangle" wrote:
    > >>
    > >> >"Monsignor Larville Jones MD" wrote
    > >> >
    > >> > <Snipped>
    > >> >
    > >> >> I haven't seen any posts from Mara regarding this bullshit, so
    > >> >> can't/won't comment on any involvement on her part. Since 'leaving'
    > >> >> The Forest, though, I couldn't say _what's_ going on behind the
    > >> >> scenes, IYKWIM...
    > >> >
    > >> >The answer to that is: nothing whatsoever is going on "behind
    > >> >the scenes."
    > >>
    > >> You forget; I've experience of 'what goes on'. Do not fret, glurd -
    > >> whatever I _have_ been accused of, perfidy is not a quality I possess.
    > >> Those of a lesser calibre may threaten to 'out' posters' RL
    > >> information, etc. - I cannot.

    > >
    > >I appreciate that. But I'm saying that nothing of consequence
    > >has been said about you (on the list you mentioned) since you left,
    > >so nothing specific has "gone on" to help me understand what
    > >is currently happening.

    >
    > Believing glurdae to be an honourable species, I take you at your
    > word, and shall cease my allusions. My point seems to have been lost
    > amidst the confusion. I merely intended that I would not bear false
    > witness against Mara. However she feels about me (and, believe me, I
    > labour under no illusions here), she is one of the few joint- 24hsh
    > 'regs'/Marshmallowites to have acted with one iota of integrity.
    >
    > >> >I don't even know what this thread is really about
    > >> >at this point, much less have any access to backgound information.
    > >> >It's become so confusing, with the long, unsnipped re: posts, I don't
    > >> >know what "this bullshit" is even referring to, or why you are insulting
    > >> >Rosee or why she is insulting you.
    > >>
    > >> From out of nowhere, Rosee dragged up the original (weeks-old) thread,
    > >> in which Sgt. Minor had a pop at me about RtS, and in which 'others'
    > >> rallied to his cause. I have never crossed swords with Rosee prior to
    > >> this - in fact, I considered her a friend. I can only presume,
    > >> therefore, that she has, in her 'wisdom', decided that there exist
    > >> factions that must be collaborated with/against.

    > >
    > >I either didn't see or remember this Sgt. Minor business. Like
    > >a lot of people, I don't read absolutely every post, and I often
    > >don't remember intricate details of threads, especially if they
    > >get long, are poorly snipped, take days/weeks, and are not
    > >of intially of great pith and moment to me. This is largely due to
    > >three things: the problems of aging, worsening health, and
    > >the persistent itching and burning of hemorrhoids.

    >
    > Having claw-like appendages must surely be a burden when the
    > compulsion to scratch said 'sigmunds' reaches fever pitch...
    >
    > >
    > >> > If I am confused, can you imagine
    > >> >how incoherent this must appear to other, more casual readers of
    > >> >this NG?
    > >>
    > >> I'm sure you're much less confused than you seem. I have deliberately
    > >> refrained from taking this to email with Phineas for the purposes of
    > >> transparency.

    > >
    > >No, I am really confused. I mean, I know *something* is going on
    > >to do with how you are viewed with regard to your playing with trolls;
    > >but I can't comprehend any *objective* details of that *something.*
    > >All I can discern is a clash of personalities/styles, not major,
    > >black-and-white issues that are prompting people to suddenly
    > >and repeatedly butt heads this seemingly "expanding" way.
    > >I mean, you (and others) *blatantly* respond to trolls, while others
    > >*subtly* or *indirectly* respond to trolls. I don't like either
    > >"approach," even though all parties involved claim it's valid to do so;
    > >however, I've given up on severely attacking people for it,
    > >as this NG has a troll infestation and such attacks just fuel the
    > >personality conflicts, which just indirectly feeds the trolls.
    > >I'm not sure what I just wrote even really makes sense, that's
    > >how confused I am.

    >
    > What confuses me is the fact that I am publicly vilified for doing
    > exactly the same thing that certain others do with impunity.


    You do have a point. BUT, I see this as a classic case
    of style obscuring substance. The simple truth of Usenet
    is that there is a pecking order: anyone who blatantly
    and frequently plays with trolls (for entertainment purposes),
    cannot and should not expect to be taken seriously on other
    topics; whereas, someone who less flamboyantly and less
    frequently replies to trolls (under the aegis of keeping
    things orderly) *will* be listened-to on other topics. With
    regard to human nature, you can't have your cake and
    eat it too. I assume, being an asstoot motherfucker, you
    know all this sweet shit; however, methinks you still cling
    to the misguided notion that you can insist that Usenet is
    a bimbo mud-wrestling venue -- where anything goes in
    the name of fun -- that it has no link to reality -- but,
    surprisingly, at the end of the day, you still expect a
    piece of the cake that was (at least partially) prepared
    and baked in the kitchen of reality.

    > >> >Would someone involved with this thread please make an attempt to
    > >> >summarize what the **** is going on?
    > >>
    > >> See para. two.

    > >
    > >My prostate hurts, too.

    >
    > Ask the glurdwife to apply a topical unguent (get her to trim those
    > pincers first - *OUCH!*).
    gangle, Aug 8, 2003
    #11
  12. "gangle" <> wrote:

    >"Monsignor Larville Jones MD" wrote
    >> "gangle" <> wrote:
    >>
    >> >"Monsignor Larville Jones MD" wrote
    >> >> "gangle" wrote:
    >> >>
    >> >> >"Monsignor Larville Jones MD" wrote
    >> >> >
    >> >> > <Snipped>
    >> >> >
    >> >> >> I haven't seen any posts from Mara regarding this bullshit, so
    >> >> >> can't/won't comment on any involvement on her part. Since 'leaving'
    >> >> >> The Forest, though, I couldn't say _what's_ going on behind the
    >> >> >> scenes, IYKWIM...
    >> >> >
    >> >> >The answer to that is: nothing whatsoever is going on "behind
    >> >> >the scenes."
    >> >>
    >> >> You forget; I've experience of 'what goes on'. Do not fret, glurd -
    >> >> whatever I _have_ been accused of, perfidy is not a quality I possess.
    >> >> Those of a lesser calibre may threaten to 'out' posters' RL
    >> >> information, etc. - I cannot.
    >> >
    >> >I appreciate that. But I'm saying that nothing of consequence
    >> >has been said about you (on the list you mentioned) since you left,
    >> >so nothing specific has "gone on" to help me understand what
    >> >is currently happening.

    >>
    >> Believing glurdae to be an honourable species, I take you at your
    >> word, and shall cease my allusions. My point seems to have been lost
    >> amidst the confusion. I merely intended that I would not bear false
    >> witness against Mara. However she feels about me (and, believe me, I
    >> labour under no illusions here), she is one of the few joint- 24hsh
    >> 'regs'/Marshmallowites to have acted with one iota of integrity.
    >>
    >> >> >I don't even know what this thread is really about
    >> >> >at this point, much less have any access to backgound information.
    >> >> >It's become so confusing, with the long, unsnipped re: posts, I don't
    >> >> >know what "this bullshit" is even referring to, or why you are insulting
    >> >> >Rosee or why she is insulting you.
    >> >>
    >> >> From out of nowhere, Rosee dragged up the original (weeks-old) thread,
    >> >> in which Sgt. Minor had a pop at me about RtS, and in which 'others'
    >> >> rallied to his cause. I have never crossed swords with Rosee prior to
    >> >> this - in fact, I considered her a friend. I can only presume,
    >> >> therefore, that she has, in her 'wisdom', decided that there exist
    >> >> factions that must be collaborated with/against.
    >> >
    >> >I either didn't see or remember this Sgt. Minor business. Like
    >> >a lot of people, I don't read absolutely every post, and I often
    >> >don't remember intricate details of threads, especially if they
    >> >get long, are poorly snipped, take days/weeks, and are not
    >> >of intially of great pith and moment to me. This is largely due to
    >> >three things: the problems of aging, worsening health, and
    >> >the persistent itching and burning of hemorrhoids.

    >>
    >> Having claw-like appendages must surely be a burden when the
    >> compulsion to scratch said 'sigmunds' reaches fever pitch...
    >>
    >> >
    >> >> > If I am confused, can you imagine
    >> >> >how incoherent this must appear to other, more casual readers of
    >> >> >this NG?
    >> >>
    >> >> I'm sure you're much less confused than you seem. I have deliberately
    >> >> refrained from taking this to email with Phineas for the purposes of
    >> >> transparency.
    >> >
    >> >No, I am really confused. I mean, I know *something* is going on
    >> >to do with how you are viewed with regard to your playing with trolls;
    >> >but I can't comprehend any *objective* details of that *something.*
    >> >All I can discern is a clash of personalities/styles, not major,
    >> >black-and-white issues that are prompting people to suddenly
    >> >and repeatedly butt heads this seemingly "expanding" way.
    >> >I mean, you (and others) *blatantly* respond to trolls, while others
    >> >*subtly* or *indirectly* respond to trolls. I don't like either
    >> >"approach," even though all parties involved claim it's valid to do so;
    >> >however, I've given up on severely attacking people for it,
    >> >as this NG has a troll infestation and such attacks just fuel the
    >> >personality conflicts, which just indirectly feeds the trolls.
    >> >I'm not sure what I just wrote even really makes sense, that's
    >> >how confused I am.

    >>
    >> What confuses me is the fact that I am publicly vilified for doing
    >> exactly the same thing that certain others do with impunity.

    >
    >You do have a point. BUT, I see this as a classic case
    >of style obscuring substance. The simple truth of Usenet
    >is that there is a pecking order: anyone who blatantly
    >and frequently plays with trolls (for entertainment purposes),
    >cannot and should not expect to be taken seriously on other
    >topics; whereas, someone who less flamboyantly and less
    >frequently replies to trolls (under the aegis of keeping
    >things orderly) *will* be listened-to on other topics. With
    >regard to human nature, you can't have your cake and
    >eat it too. I assume, being an asstoot motherfucker, you
    >know all this sweet shit; however, methinks you still cling
    >to the misguided notion that you can insist that Usenet is
    >a bimbo mud-wrestling venue -- where anything goes in
    >the name of fun -- that it has no link to reality -- but,
    >surprisingly, at the end of the day, you still expect a
    >piece of the cake that was (at least partially) prepared
    >and baked in the kitchen of reality.


    Let's tinu forget any notion of 'style' for a moment. The 'substance'
    is as plain as the arse-shaped nose on your cruelly-disfigured face -
    to wit: some certain posters are lauded for behaviours identical to
    those that others are pilloried for.

    I expect nothing more than a cake tasting of 'fair play', although I
    long since arrived at the conclusion that this, my conceit, was indeed
    very fucking far from any Usenet-inspired definition of 'reality'.

    >
    >> >> >Would someone involved with this thread please make an attempt to
    >> >> >summarize what the **** is going on?
    >> >>
    >> >> See para. two.
    >> >
    >> >My prostate hurts, too.

    >>
    >> Ask the glurdwife to apply a topical unguent (get her to trim those
    >> pincers first - *OUCH!*).

    >


    --
    zar 2k3 - ULC Reverend
    Certified Word Police Officer - Details Detail
    http://www.geocities.com/spamresources/spambots.htm
    http://www.drcnet.org/ http://www.abovegod.com/
    NuMbEr Tr3#3!!!!11! on a lits...

    "A man, a plan, a canoe, pasta, heros, rajahs,
    a coloratura, maps, snipe, percale, macaroni,
    a gag, a banana bag, a tan, a tag, a banana bag
    again (or a camel), a crepe, pins, Spam, a rut,
    a Rolo, cash, a jar, sore hats, a peon, a canal
    - Panama!"

    - Guy Steele Jr., CLTL2
    Monsignor Larville Jones MD, Aug 10, 2003
    #12
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. zarathustra

    Re: simple question for a beginner

    zarathustra, Jun 22, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    1,564
    Phineas P. Hornswaggle
    Jul 1, 2003
  2. John Haithwaite @ Blue Case Solutions

    Re: simple question for a beginner

    John Haithwaite @ Blue Case Solutions, Jun 26, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    532
    John Haithwaite @ Blue Case Solutions
    Jun 26, 2003
  3. @}-}-------Rosee

    Re: simple question for a beginner

    @}-}-------Rosee, Aug 6, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    503
    Monsignor Larville Jones MD
    Aug 8, 2003
  4. Replies:
    7
    Views:
    4,189
    Kimba W. Lion
    Jan 26, 2007
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    725
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page