"Kali" wrote in message

In , miguel mjc101
@gmail.com said:
Dumbarse Git wrote:
miguel:

Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside:

You bitched about KM repeating your purported occupation (which you
admit to in another thread),

You're a liar. I've never bitched about KM repeating my
occupation.

yet it falls within your code of ethics to post the
(alleged) institution and precise location of someone else.

I'm reading a lecture on ethics from Sean Monaghan, who moments ago
said that it's all about the entertainment. Will somebody please
nominate you for some steaming pile of hypocrisy award? I'm
beginning to think that your intellectual prowess is about the
equivalent of ****stain's, which would be your only defense to said
award.

If Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department
of Psychology is going to associate my name and occupation with the
word "dog****er," given that she stated she has no trouble with
somebody's name being associated with their posts on usenet, then
where's the problem? Of course, all she needs to do to avoid this is
cease her participation in the google stacking. If you are her
friend, you might think about stopping yourself.

Thank you for this very telling campaign speech.

You are a dolt. In part, though, she has you to thank for this, what
with the fanboi page you did for me. ****stain, too. If you all want
to stop the RL stuff, I'm happy to stop too. Your choice.

The question is - will your public defender find this behaviour to
be acceptable, or will that person continue to rationalise on your
behalf?

It's sad that you dismiss it as rationalization.

miguel

Please do continue to defend this nasty, filthy creature, and
let him drag you into the pits of hell as you become his
unwitting proxy in his kooky mission against AUK. I'm sorry,
I've tried to be reasonable for your sake. But it's way past
pillory time for him - he's been at this a lot longer than I had
realized. Intelligent, non-kooky people don't parade their
kookiness in AUK, or take baseball bats to wasp's nests.

Now feel free to call me a hypocrite and any nominating or
voting I do for him "revenge" motivated. I call it making
entertainment out of a bully.

And really, I am sorry about all this, as it probably does
affect our friendship (miguel has no respect for it, in case you
hadn't noticed). All I can do today is shake my head at your
defense of him and wish you'd stop.

Kali

I see that we're all aware of the misattribution of up above.

As to most of the rest, I addressed it in a different post, before I saw
this one.

As to my "defense of him," it's more a statement of my ethics. I already
told him quite clearly--publicly--about my disagreement with him over
his flaming of you. For the record, however, I object far more adamantly
to:

Calling him a "dog****er."
The google-stacking.
The revenge froup.
The web page.
The nominations.
The double standards--one for him and one for auk.

scratches head I think something is missing, but that's way more than
enough.

As much as I hate all of this, if you want me to hold him accountable
for retaliating, then accountability will also extend to those acts that
brought about the need to retaliate.

For the record, he has never asked me to take you to task for behavior
he doesn't like, he has not withdrawn his friendship from me because I
was critical of him, he has never intimated to me that you are not my
friend, and he has never accused you of manipulating me.

--
Rhonda Lea Kirk

Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is
willing to inflict on others. Phèdre nó Delaunay