*JimH* wrote:
"PocoLoco" wrote in message
...
On 2 Oct 2005 16:30:07 -0700, wrote:
Skipper wrote:
*JimH* wrote:
Chuck took the gloves off several days ago when he came up with this
ridiculous allegation.
Let's see how long it takes Chuck to apologize to me for his whopper
of a
lie.
You really need to have personal dealings with this blowhard to KNOW
he's a charlatan. Must be his used car salesman training. Believe me,
Chucky IS a charlatan. You will only get an apology AFTER the cows have
come home. He KNOWS you are correct now.
--
Skipper
More evidence the sock puppet isn't the real Skipper. Here's a post
from the real Skipper from back in 2001:
Quote:
Chuck Gould does not spam the NG. Your comments should go to spammers
Lee and Low Blow.
Chuck is an honest broker. Had I used him as my representative for a
boat I'd seen before contacting him, he would have saved us a lot of
grief by an unethical listing broker. I felt an obligation to the
listing broker who had originally shown us the boat. That was a
mistake.
If you meet Chuck, I think you'd offer him a apology for your
unfortunate condemnation.
End quote:
If this were the real Skipper, one would have to ask the following
question:
"Were you a lying sack of crap in 2001, or are you a lying sack of crap
now?"
Fortunately, it's a goofy sock puppet. Either that or the meds aren't
working anymore. I can't believe Dave woujld undergo such a radical
change in personality, and show up here gunning for people with no
provocation whatsoever. Gotta be a sock puppet, a conclusion I continue
to support based on an analysis of posting style.
The issue is whether or not JimH is the sock puppet, as you said. He's
shown
some evidence which sure seems to indicate he isn't.
What say you?
--
John H.
"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to
resolve it."
Rene Descartes
*Some* evidence? I would say pretty convincing evidence John.
And I notice that the Chuckster is not man enough to post to the thread I
pinged him on and not man enough to apologize to me.
Sorry, Jimh, but while you were over here attacking me, I was already
over there
replying to your "ping" post.
I guess we'll now need to see if you're man enough to apologize for
your great big lie that I'm not man enough to reply to your "ping"
post.......or we can just let it go.
Funy, but the last time I remember you posting a string of incessant
demands for an apology it was associated with the Moped Army thread.
Remember that one?
You kept insisting that I posted an old ad with your address and phone
number in it, and repeatedly demanded an apology for doing so. I kept
refusing, as I had not committed the act you claimed. I trust you
remember how that incident turned out?