|
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
miguel wrote in
: Kali wrote: miguel said: : Kadaitcha Gimp Retard He-Bitch wrote: : Translation: even though all kookologists agree that taking usenet : to real life is prime kooksign, that's what I'm trying to : accomplish. : Good job there kOOk. : miguel So, what are your plans for Steve Cheney? If I ever meet him, I will put him in the hospital. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^ This is not a flame; this is a clear threat of physical violence. This is something we'd expect from Richard "the St00pid" Bullis, or from Edmond Heinz Wollmann - not the words of a 'marginal kook', or from someone who is merely involved in a Usenet flamewar. This snippet of evidence not only justifies the open KotM nomination of Michael Cranston attorney, but it also qualifies him for the Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - AUK's highest lifetime-achievement award for stupidity. From - http://www.caballista.org/auk/awards.html "Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - The spoonerism for "dumb ****", for those who've lost more marbles than a Chinese Checker factory will ever make." I hereby nominate "Michael Cranston attorney"/Miguel to become Bolo Bullis Foam Duck #27. Seconds, anyone? Note - To those who will want to make the k'laim that this nomination is based on 'revenge' due to some coincidental flamewar in which I've never participated, let it be known that there have been many flamewars in which individual AUKers have participated where not a single nomination was ever made. Such k'laims are ludicrous, unfounded, and based on ignorance (and quite possibly, based on cluelessness) as opposed to being based on rational thought. Let's see if you have a sufficient number of neurons firing today to comprehend a fairly simple argument. First (not firstly, that's semi-literate), you kookologists universally disdain taking usenet to real life. "Real life" is fairly understood to mean consequences in meatspace. I think that standard of behavior is stupid and cowardly. I think if somebody types some nasty **** safely from under his bed in momma's basement he ought to possess enough character or courage to say it to somebody's face. If said nasty **** has real world consequences, even moreso. Perhaps there is one or two of you kookologists who possess the character and courage to abide that standard. I think I've read about one of you who does MMA training at one point or another. The rest of you hide behind your self-serving rule of conduct that serves only to insulate you from any consequences for your bad behavior. Second, since you kookologists hold universal disdain for taking usenet to real life, one might expect you to refrain from doing so, and that when one of your number elects out of desperation to do so, others of you might be intellectually honest enough to point out the hypocrisy. I expect I'll be waiting a long time to see any display of that. It's the same sort of hypocrisy I pointed out to you about your netkopping post. Are you too emotionally overwrought to be objective about this? miguel -- Official FAQ for Alt.Usenet.Kooks: http://www.caballista.org/auk COOSN-266-06-58907 Hammer of Thor - August 2005 Pierre Salinger Memorial "Hook, Line & Sinker" awards - March 2005, July 2005, August 2005, August 2006, February 2007 [Co]Friendly Neighbourhood Vote Wrangler |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
"Sean Monaghan" wrote in message
miguel wrote in : Kali wrote: miguel said: Kadaitcha Gimp Retard He-Bitch wrote: Translation: even though all kookologists agree that taking usenet to real life is prime kooksign, that's what I'm trying to accomplish. Good job there kOOk. miguel So, what are your plans for Steve Cheney? If I ever meet him, I will put him in the hospital. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^ This is not a flame; this is a clear threat of physical violence. This is something we'd expect from Richard "the St00pid" Bullis, or from Edmond Heinz Wollmann - not the words of a 'marginal kook', or from someone who is merely involved in a Usenet flamewar. This snippet of evidence not only justifies the open KotM nomination of Michael Cranston attorney, but it also qualifies him for the Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - AUK's highest lifetime-achievement award for stupidity. From - http://www.caballista.org/auk/awards.html "Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - The spoonerism for "dumb ****", for those who've lost more marbles than a Chinese Checker factory will ever make." I hereby nominate "Michael Cranston attorney"/Miguel to become Bolo Bullis Foam Duck #27. Seconds, anyone? The nomination is ridiculous. Note - To those That would be my cue. who will want to make the k'laim that this nomination is based on 'revenge' due to some coincidental flamewar in which I've never participated, let it be known that there have been many flamewars in which individual AUKers have participated where not a single nomination was ever made. Such k'laims are ludicrous, unfounded, and based on ignorance (and quite possibly, based on cluelessness) Precisely the opposite. Unfortunately, I'm still working with the very same hand tied behind my back. as opposed to being based on rational thought. Honor is rational. Without it, civilization would not survive. If I had no honor, this would be a different argument entirely. Let's see if you have a sufficient number of neurons firing today to comprehend a fairly simple argument. First (not firstly, that's semi-literate), you kookologists universally disdain taking usenet to real life. "Real life" is fairly understood to mean consequences in meatspace. I think that standard of behavior is stupid and cowardly. I think if somebody types some nasty **** safely from under his bed in momma's basement he ought to possess enough character or courage to say it to somebody's face. If said nasty **** has real world consequences, even moreso. Perhaps there is one or two of you kookologists who possess the character and courage to abide that standard. I think I've read about one of you who does MMA training at one point or another. The rest of you hide behind your self-serving rule of conduct that serves only to insulate you from any consequences for your bad behavior. Second, since you kookologists hold universal disdain for taking usenet to real life, one might expect you to refrain from doing so, and that when one of your number elects out of desperation to do so, others of you might be intellectually honest enough to point out the hypocrisy. I expect I'll be waiting a long time to see any display of that. It's the same sort of hypocrisy I pointed out to you about your netkopping post. Are you too emotionally overwrought to be objective about this? miguel -- Rhonda Lea Kirk Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is willing to inflict on others. Phèdre nó Delaunay |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
"Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote in
: "Sean Monaghan" wrote in message miguel wrote in : Kali wrote: miguel said: Kadaitcha Gimp Retard He-Bitch wrote: Translation: even though all kookologists agree that taking usenet to real life is prime kooksign, that's what I'm trying to accomplish. Good job there kOOk. miguel So, what are your plans for Steve Cheney? If I ever meet him, I will put him in the hospital. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^ This is not a flame; this is a clear threat of physical violence. This is something we'd expect from Richard "the St00pid" Bullis, or from Edmond Heinz Wollmann - not the words of a 'marginal kook', or from someone who is merely involved in a Usenet flamewar. This snippet of evidence not only justifies the open KotM nomination of Michael Cranston attorney, but it also qualifies him for the Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - AUK's highest lifetime-achievement award for stupidity. From - http://www.caballista.org/auk/awards.html "Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - The spoonerism for "dumb ****", for those who've lost more marbles than a Chinese Checker factory will ever make." I hereby nominate "Michael Cranston attorney"/Miguel to become Bolo Bullis Foam Duck #27. Seconds, anyone? The nomination is ridiculous. It's interesting how say that this *nomination* is ridiculous - not Cranston's threat. Note - To those That would be my cue. Paranoid much? I was referring to the nominee. who will want to make the k'laim that this nomination is based on 'revenge' due to some coincidental flamewar in which I've never participated, let it be known that there have been many flamewars in which individual AUKers have participated where not a single nomination was ever made. Such k'laims are ludicrous, unfounded, and based on ignorance (and quite possibly, based on cluelessness) Precisely the opposite. Unfortunately, I'm still working with the very same hand tied behind my back. as opposed to being based on rational thought. Honor is rational. Without it, civilization would not survive. If I had no honor, this would be a different argument entirely. You take the awards' programme *far* too seriously. *whoosh* Let's see if you have a sufficient number of neurons firing today to comprehend a fairly simple argument. First (not firstly, that's semi-literate), you kookologists universally disdain taking usenet to real life. "Real life" is fairly understood to mean consequences in meatspace. I think that standard of behavior is stupid and cowardly. I think if somebody types some nasty **** safely from under his bed in momma's basement he ought to possess enough character or courage to say it to somebody's face. If said nasty **** has real world consequences, even moreso. Perhaps there is one or two of you kookologists who possess the character and courage to abide that standard. I think I've read about one of you who does MMA training at one point or another. The rest of you hide behind your self-serving rule of conduct that serves only to insulate you from any consequences for your bad behavior. Second, since you kookologists hold universal disdain for taking usenet to real life, one might expect you to refrain from doing so, and that when one of your number elects out of desperation to do so, others of you might be intellectually honest enough to point out the hypocrisy. I expect I'll be waiting a long time to see any display of that. It's the same sort of hypocrisy I pointed out to you about your netkopping post. Are you too emotionally overwrought to be objective about this? miguel -- Official FAQ for Alt.Usenet.Kooks: http://www.caballista.org/auk COOSN-266-06-58907 Hammer of Thor - August 2005 Pierre Salinger Memorial "Hook, Line & Sinker" awards - March 2005, July 2005, August 2005, August 2006, February 2007 [Co]Friendly Neighbourhood Vote Wrangler |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 {NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
Sean Monaghan wrote:
miguel wrote in : Kali wrote: miguel said: : Kadaitcha Gimp Retard He-Bitch wrote: : Translation: even though all kookologists agree that taking usenet : to real life is prime kooksign, that's what I'm trying to : accomplish. : Good job there kOOk. : miguel So, what are your plans for Steve Cheney? If I ever meet him, I will put him in the hospital. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^ This is not a flame; this is a clear threat of physical violence. This is something we'd expect from Richard "the St00pid" Bullis, or from Edmond Heinz Wollmann - not the words of a 'marginal kook', or from someone who is merely involved in a Usenet flamewar. Sean, Kali recently stated that she was considered the most reasonable and judicious of the kookologists. If by that she is contrasting herself with you, K-Bitch and ****stain, you can imagine the difficulty I or anybody else might have in giving her any points for that claim. You have no idea of the extent to which Steve Chaney has taken matters to RL over the past 12 years wrt me, and you have no idea of the extent to which his raging insanity has caused him to make unspeakably nasty claims about my children and my grandchild. Charlotte, on the other hand, does. If you have any questions about whether Chaney deserves to have his ass kicked, feel free to direct them to her. Now, onto the unarticulated premise of your post, viz: there is never any cause for threatening violence over a usenet post. Suppose Chaney says to your face about your 13 year old daughter, "Sean, are you bringing your 13 year old daughter in for the 1000 man **** tonight?" Do you put him on the ground and kick him, or do you play your usenet tard games? You do the latter if you're a coward. Why should the result be any different if he says it on usenet instead of to your face, particularly when part of his game is to say it often enough, and to use your daughter's actual name, so that she gets google stacked? miguel |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 {NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
Sean Monaghan wrote:
"Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote in : "Sean Monaghan" wrote in message miguel wrote in : Kali wrote: miguel said: Kadaitcha Gimp Retard He-Bitch wrote: Translation: even though all kookologists agree that taking usenet to real life is prime kooksign, that's what I'm trying to accomplish. Good job there kOOk. miguel So, what are your plans for Steve Cheney? If I ever meet him, I will put him in the hospital. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^ This is not a flame; this is a clear threat of physical violence. This is something we'd expect from Richard "the St00pid" Bullis, or from Edmond Heinz Wollmann - not the words of a 'marginal kook', or from someone who is merely involved in a Usenet flamewar. This snippet of evidence not only justifies the open KotM nomination of Michael Cranston attorney, but it also qualifies him for the Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - AUK's highest lifetime-achievement award for stupidity. From - http://www.caballista.org/auk/awards.html "Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - The spoonerism for "dumb ****", for those who've lost more marbles than a Chinese Checker factory will ever make." I hereby nominate "Michael Cranston attorney"/Miguel to become Bolo Bullis Foam Duck #27. Seconds, anyone? The nomination is ridiculous. It's interesting how say that this *nomination* is ridiculous - not Cranston's threat. How can you know whether the threat is ridiculous without knowing what predicated it? |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
miguel wrote in
: Sean Monaghan wrote: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote in : "Sean Monaghan" wrote in message miguel wrote in : Kali wrote: miguel said: Kadaitcha Gimp Retard He-Bitch wrote: Translation: even though all kookologists agree that taking usenet to real life is prime kooksign, that's what I'm trying to accomplish. Good job there kOOk. miguel So, what are your plans for Steve Cheney? If I ever meet him, I will put him in the hospital. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^ This is not a flame; this is a clear threat of physical violence. This is something we'd expect from Richard "the St00pid" Bullis, or from Edmond Heinz Wollmann - not the words of a 'marginal kook', or from someone who is merely involved in a Usenet flamewar. This snippet of evidence not only justifies the open KotM nomination of Michael Cranston attorney, but it also qualifies him for the Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - AUK's highest lifetime-achievement award for stupidity. From - http://www.caballista.org/auk/awards.html "Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - The spoonerism for "dumb ****", for those who've lost more marbles than a Chinese Checker factory will ever make." I hereby nominate "Michael Cranston attorney"/Miguel to become Bolo Bullis Foam Duck #27. Seconds, anyone? The nomination is ridiculous. It's interesting how say that this *nomination* is ridiculous - not Cranston's threat. How can you know whether the threat is ridiculous without knowing what predicated it? Irrelevant. The actions of one net.kook never make it okay for another to make (utterly stupid) life-threatening statements on Usenet. -- Official FAQ for Alt.Usenet.Kooks: http://www.caballista.org/auk COOSN-266-06-58907 Hammer of Thor - August 2005 Pierre Salinger Memorial "Hook, Line & Sinker" awards - March 2005, July 2005, August 2005, August 2006, February 2007 [Co]Friendly Neighbourhood Vote Wrangler |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
"Sean Monaghan" wrote in message
"Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote in : "Sean Monaghan" wrote in message miguel wrote in : Kali wrote: miguel said: Kadaitcha Gimp Retard He-Bitch wrote: Translation: even though all kookologists agree that taking usenet to real life is prime kooksign, that's what I'm trying to accomplish. Good job there kOOk. miguel So, what are your plans for Steve Cheney? If I ever meet him, I will put him in the hospital. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^ This is not a flame; this is a clear threat of physical violence. This is something we'd expect from Richard "the St00pid" Bullis, or from Edmond Heinz Wollmann - not the words of a 'marginal kook', or from someone who is merely involved in a Usenet flamewar. This snippet of evidence not only justifies the open KotM nomination of Michael Cranston attorney, but it also qualifies him for the Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - AUK's highest lifetime-achievement award for stupidity. From - http://www.caballista.org/auk/awards.html "Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - The spoonerism for "dumb ****", for those who've lost more marbles than a Chinese Checker factory will ever make." I hereby nominate "Michael Cranston attorney"/Miguel to become Bolo Bullis Foam Duck #27. Seconds, anyone? The nomination is ridiculous. It's interesting how say that this *nomination* is ridiculous - not Cranston's threat. In the more than...I saw something from a 2004 post that indicated it was 12 years then, so that would make it 15 years that Chaney has been acting like a psychopath online...Mike has made absolutely no effort to seek out Chaney and "put him in the hospital." That would lead me to the conclusion that someone is overreacting to words on the screen, and I don't mean Mike. Note - To those That would be my cue. Paranoid much? I was referring to the nominee. I'm the only person who has ever made the claim that any of these nominations of Mike are revenge nominations, so it follows that I would be the most likely person to do so for this nomination too. That's logic, not paranoia. who will want to make the k'laim that this nomination is based on 'revenge' due to some coincidental flamewar in which I've never participated, let it be known that there have been many flamewars in which individual AUKers have participated where not a single nomination was ever made. Such k'laims are ludicrous, unfounded, and based on ignorance (and quite possibly, based on cluelessness) Precisely the opposite. Unfortunately, I'm still working with the very same hand tied behind my back. as opposed to being based on rational thought. Honor is rational. Without it, civilization would not survive. If I had no honor, this would be a different argument entirely. You take the awards' programme *far* too seriously. Oh, I'm pretty sure it's not *me* who takes the awards' programme far too seriously. *whoosh* Right. It's like being back in fifth grade. No one had a clue then either. Let's see if you have a sufficient number of neurons firing today to comprehend a fairly simple argument. First (not firstly, that's semi-literate), you kookologists universally disdain taking usenet to real life. "Real life" is fairly understood to mean consequences in meatspace. I think that standard of behavior is stupid and cowardly. I think if somebody types some nasty **** safely from under his bed in momma's basement he ought to possess enough character or courage to say it to somebody's face. If said nasty **** has real world consequences, even moreso. Perhaps there is one or two of you kookologists who possess the character and courage to abide that standard. I think I've read about one of you who does MMA training at one point or another. The rest of you hide behind your self-serving rule of conduct that serves only to insulate you from any consequences for your bad behavior. Second, since you kookologists hold universal disdain for taking usenet to real life, one might expect you to refrain from doing so, and that when one of your number elects out of desperation to do so, others of you might be intellectually honest enough to point out the hypocrisy. I expect I'll be waiting a long time to see any display of that. It's the same sort of hypocrisy I pointed out to you about your netkopping post. Are you too emotionally overwrought to be objective about this? miguel -- Rhonda Lea Kirk Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is willing to inflict on others. Phèdre nó Delaunay |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
"Sean Monaghan" wrote in message
miguel wrote in : Sean Monaghan wrote: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote in : "Sean Monaghan" wrote in message miguel wrote in : Kali wrote: miguel said: Kadaitcha Gimp Retard He-Bitch wrote: Translation: even though all kookologists agree that taking usenet to real life is prime kooksign, that's what I'm trying to accomplish. Good job there kOOk. miguel So, what are your plans for Steve Cheney? If I ever meet him, I will put him in the hospital. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^ This is not a flame; this is a clear threat of physical violence. This is something we'd expect from Richard "the St00pid" Bullis, or from Edmond Heinz Wollmann - not the words of a 'marginal kook', or from someone who is merely involved in a Usenet flamewar. This snippet of evidence not only justifies the open KotM nomination of Michael Cranston attorney, but it also qualifies him for the Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - AUK's highest lifetime-achievement award for stupidity. From - http://www.caballista.org/auk/awards.html "Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - The spoonerism for "dumb ****", for those who've lost more marbles than a Chinese Checker factory will ever make." I hereby nominate "Michael Cranston attorney"/Miguel to become Bolo Bullis Foam Duck #27. Seconds, anyone? The nomination is ridiculous. It's interesting how say that this *nomination* is ridiculous - not Cranston's threat. How can you know whether the threat is ridiculous without knowing what predicated it? Irrelevant. The actions of one net.kook never make it okay for another to make (utterly stupid) life-threatening statements on Usenet. Life-threatening? -- Rhonda Lea Kirk Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is willing to inflict on others. Phèdre nó Delaunay |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
"Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote in
: "Sean Monaghan" wrote in message "Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote in : "Sean Monaghan" wrote in message miguel wrote in : Kali wrote: miguel said: Kadaitcha Gimp Retard He-Bitch wrote: Translation: even though all kookologists agree that taking usenet to real life is prime kooksign, that's what I'm trying to accomplish. Good job there kOOk. miguel So, what are your plans for Steve Cheney? If I ever meet him, I will put him in the hospital. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^ This is not a flame; this is a clear threat of physical violence. This is something we'd expect from Richard "the St00pid" Bullis, or from Edmond Heinz Wollmann - not the words of a 'marginal kook', or from someone who is merely involved in a Usenet flamewar. This snippet of evidence not only justifies the open KotM nomination of Michael Cranston attorney, but it also qualifies him for the Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - AUK's highest lifetime-achievement award for stupidity. From - http://www.caballista.org/auk/awards.html "Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - The spoonerism for "dumb ****", for those who've lost more marbles than a Chinese Checker factory will ever make." I hereby nominate "Michael Cranston attorney"/Miguel to become Bolo Bullis Foam Duck #27. Seconds, anyone? The nomination is ridiculous. It's interesting how say that this *nomination* is ridiculous - not Cranston's threat. In the more than...I saw something from a 2004 post that indicated it was 12 years then, so that would make it 15 years that Chaney has been acting like a psychopath online...Mike has made absolutely no effort to seek out Chaney and "put him in the hospital." That would lead me to the conclusion that someone is overreacting to words on the screen, and I don't mean Mike. See http://www.caballista.org/auk/faq.html#question27 Note - To those That would be my cue. Paranoid much? I was referring to the nominee. I'm the only person who has ever made the claim that any of these nominations of Mike are revenge nominations, so it follows that I would be the most likely person to do so for this nomination too. That's logic, not paranoia. 1. You assumed. 2. You came to an inaccurate conclusion. 3. Your 'logic' failed you. who will want to make the k'laim that this nomination is based on 'revenge' due to some coincidental flamewar in which I've never participated, let it be known that there have been many flamewars in which individual AUKers have participated where not a single nomination was ever made. Such k'laims are ludicrous, unfounded, and based on ignorance (and quite possibly, based on cluelessness) Precisely the opposite. Unfortunately, I'm still working with the very same hand tied behind my back. as opposed to being based on rational thought. Honor is rational. Without it, civilization would not survive. If I had no honor, this would be a different argument entirely. You take the awards' programme *far* too seriously. Oh, I'm pretty sure it's not *me* who takes the awards' programme far too seriously. Says the person who is post-humping my nominations. *whoosh* Right. It's like being back in fifth grade. No one had a clue then either. Let's see if you have a sufficient number of neurons firing today to comprehend a fairly simple argument. First (not firstly, that's semi-literate), you kookologists universally disdain taking usenet to real life. "Real life" is fairly understood to mean consequences in meatspace. I think that standard of behavior is stupid and cowardly. I think if somebody types some nasty **** safely from under his bed in momma's basement he ought to possess enough character or courage to say it to somebody's face. If said nasty **** has real world consequences, even moreso. Perhaps there is one or two of you kookologists who possess the character and courage to abide that standard. I think I've read about one of you who does MMA training at one point or another. The rest of you hide behind your self-serving rule of conduct that serves only to insulate you from any consequences for your bad behavior. Second, since you kookologists hold universal disdain for taking usenet to real life, one might expect you to refrain from doing so, and that when one of your number elects out of desperation to do so, others of you might be intellectually honest enough to point out the hypocrisy. I expect I'll be waiting a long time to see any display of that. It's the same sort of hypocrisy I pointed out to you about your netkopping post. Are you too emotionally overwrought to be objective about this? miguel -- Official FAQ for Alt.Usenet.Kooks: http://www.caballista.org/auk COOSN-266-06-58907 Hammer of Thor - August 2005 Pierre Salinger Memorial "Hook, Line & Sinker" awards - March 2005, July 2005, August 2005, August 2006, February 2007 [Co]Friendly Neighbourhood Vote Wrangler |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
"Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote in
: "Sean Monaghan" wrote in message miguel wrote in : Sean Monaghan wrote: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote in : "Sean Monaghan" wrote in message miguel wrote in : Kali wrote: miguel said: Kadaitcha Gimp Retard He-Bitch wrote: Translation: even though all kookologists agree that taking usenet to real life is prime kooksign, that's what I'm trying to accomplish. Good job there kOOk. miguel So, what are your plans for Steve Cheney? If I ever meet him, I will put him in the hospital. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^ This is not a flame; this is a clear threat of physical violence. This is something we'd expect from Richard "the St00pid" Bullis, or from Edmond Heinz Wollmann - not the words of a 'marginal kook', or from someone who is merely involved in a Usenet flamewar. This snippet of evidence not only justifies the open KotM nomination of Michael Cranston attorney, but it also qualifies him for the Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - AUK's highest lifetime-achievement award for stupidity. From - http://www.caballista.org/auk/awards.html "Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - The spoonerism for "dumb ****", for those who've lost more marbles than a Chinese Checker factory will ever make." I hereby nominate "Michael Cranston attorney"/Miguel to become Bolo Bullis Foam Duck #27. Seconds, anyone? The nomination is ridiculous. It's interesting how say that this *nomination* is ridiculous - not Cranston's threat. How can you know whether the threat is ridiculous without knowing what predicated it? Irrelevant. The actions of one net.kook never make it okay for another to make (utterly stupid) life-threatening statements on Usenet. Life-threatening? Any type of a beating that requires hospitalisation is potentially life-threatening. -- Official FAQ for Alt.Usenet.Kooks: http://www.caballista.org/auk COOSN-266-06-58907 Hammer of Thor - August 2005 Pierre Salinger Memorial "Hook, Line & Sinker" awards - March 2005, July 2005, August 2005, August 2006, February 2007 [Co]Friendly Neighbourhood Vote Wrangler |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 {NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
Sean Monaghan wrote:
miguel wrote: Sean Monaghan wrote: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote: "Sean Monaghan" wrote: Seconds, anyone? The nomination is ridiculous. It's interesting how say that this *nomination* is ridiculous - not Cranston's threat. How can you know whether the threat is ridiculous without knowing what predicated it? Irrelevant. The actions of one net.kook never make it okay for another to make (utterly stupid) life-threatening statements on Usenet. That rule is utterly stupid. First, it's mainly a shield for coward phony****s. Second, I'm probably as aware as anybody about the nature of any legal jeopardy arising from such a statement, and can measure the risk for myself. If you have some other justification for your absolute standard, it'd be interesting to hear. miguel |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 {NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
Sean Monaghan wrote:
"Rhonda Lea Kirk": That would lead me to the conclusion that someone is overreacting to words on the screen, and I don't mean Mike. See http://www.caballista.org/auk/faq.html#question27 "27. Can I really be thrown in jail for posting threatening messages? Yes. People have been tried and convicted for sending threatening or harassing Email or Usenet posts. We do NOT support censorship of the Internet; however, posting a message stating you are going to cause virtual or unvirtual harm to someone will probably gain you a visit from your Friendly Neighborhood FBI Agent." "Probably" gain you a visit from your Friendly Neighborhood FBI Agent? That's plain stupid. If Chaney wants to call the FBI and complain, more power to him. miguel |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
"Sean Monaghan" wrote in message
"Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote in : "Sean Monaghan" wrote in message "Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote in : "Sean Monaghan" wrote in message miguel wrote in : Kali wrote: miguel said: Kadaitcha Gimp Retard He-Bitch wrote: Translation: even though all kookologists agree that taking usenet to real life is prime kooksign, that's what I'm trying to accomplish. Good job there kOOk. miguel So, what are your plans for Steve Cheney? If I ever meet him, I will put him in the hospital. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^ This is not a flame; this is a clear threat of physical violence. This is something we'd expect from Richard "the St00pid" Bullis, or from Edmond Heinz Wollmann - not the words of a 'marginal kook', or from someone who is merely involved in a Usenet flamewar. This snippet of evidence not only justifies the open KotM nomination of Michael Cranston attorney, but it also qualifies him for the Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - AUK's highest lifetime-achievement award for stupidity. From - http://www.caballista.org/auk/awards.html "Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - The spoonerism for "dumb ****", for those who've lost more marbles than a Chinese Checker factory will ever make." I hereby nominate "Michael Cranston attorney"/Miguel to become Bolo Bullis Foam Duck #27. Seconds, anyone? The nomination is ridiculous. It's interesting how say that this *nomination* is ridiculous - not Cranston's threat. In the more than...I saw something from a 2004 post that indicated it was 12 years then, so that would make it 15 years that Chaney has been acting like a psychopath online...Mike has made absolutely no effort to seek out Chaney and "put him in the hospital." That would lead me to the conclusion that someone is overreacting to words on the screen, and I don't mean Mike. See http://www.caballista.org/auk/faq.html#question27 I'm not a lawyer, but I have 20 years in the legal profession, three-quarters of that in practices that handled criminal matters, including one firm that handled capital murder cases. With that in mind, I'm not concerned that Mike will be doing any jail time. Note - To those That would be my cue. Paranoid much? I was referring to the nominee. I'm the only person who has ever made the claim that any of these nominations of Mike are revenge nominations, so it follows that I would be the most likely person to do so for this nomination too. That's logic, not paranoia. 1. You assumed. 2. You came to an inaccurate conclusion. 3. Your 'logic' failed you. shrug If you say so. who will want to make the k'laim that this nomination is based on 'revenge' due to some coincidental flamewar in which I've never participated, let it be known that there have been many flamewars in which individual AUKers have participated where not a single nomination was ever made. Such k'laims are ludicrous, unfounded, and based on ignorance (and quite possibly, based on cluelessness) Precisely the opposite. Unfortunately, I'm still working with the very same hand tied behind my back. as opposed to being based on rational thought. Honor is rational. Without it, civilization would not survive. If I had no honor, this would be a different argument entirely. You take the awards' programme *far* too seriously. Oh, I'm pretty sure it's not *me* who takes the awards' programme far too seriously. Says the person who is post-humping my nominations. We only call it post-humping when it's disagreeable. The rest of the time, it's the natural order of usenet. *whoosh* Right. It's like being back in fifth grade. No one had a clue then either. Let's see if you have a sufficient number of neurons firing today to comprehend a fairly simple argument. First (not firstly, that's semi-literate), you kookologists universally disdain taking usenet to real life. "Real life" is fairly understood to mean consequences in meatspace. I think that standard of behavior is stupid and cowardly. I think if somebody types some nasty **** safely from under his bed in momma's basement he ought to possess enough character or courage to say it to somebody's face. If said nasty **** has real world consequences, even moreso. Perhaps there is one or two of you kookologists who possess the character and courage to abide that standard. I think I've read about one of you who does MMA training at one point or another. The rest of you hide behind your self-serving rule of conduct that serves only to insulate you from any consequences for your bad behavior. Second, since you kookologists hold universal disdain for taking usenet to real life, one might expect you to refrain from doing so, and that when one of your number elects out of desperation to do so, others of you might be intellectually honest enough to point out the hypocrisy. I expect I'll be waiting a long time to see any display of that. It's the same sort of hypocrisy I pointed out to you about your netkopping post. Are you too emotionally overwrought to be objective about this? miguel -- Rhonda Lea Kirk Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is willing to inflict on others. Phèdre nó Delaunay |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
miguel wrote in
: Sean Monaghan wrote: "Rhonda Lea Kirk": That would lead me to the conclusion that someone is overreacting to words on the screen, and I don't mean Mike. See http://www.caballista.org/auk/faq.html#question27 "27. Can I really be thrown in jail for posting threatening messages? Yes. People have been tried and convicted for sending threatening or harassing Email or Usenet posts. We do NOT support censorship of the Internet; however, posting a message stating you are going to cause virtual or unvirtual harm to someone will probably gain you a visit from your Friendly Neighborhood FBI Agent." "Probably" gain you a visit from your Friendly Neighborhood FBI Agent? That's plain stupid. If Chaney wants to call the FBI and complain, more power to him. That would be one of the most hilarious things to happen 'round these parts in a while. It would be quite entertaining. That's the bit that you and your public defender are missing - AUK is *all* about entertainment. Always. No exceptions. Period. -- Official FAQ for Alt.Usenet.Kooks: http://www.caballista.org/auk COOSN-266-06-58907 Hammer of Thor - August 2005 Pierre Salinger Memorial "Hook, Line & Sinker" awards - March 2005, July 2005, August 2005, August 2006, February 2007 [Co]Friendly Neighbourhood Vote Wrangler |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
"Sean Monaghan" wrote in message
"Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote in : "Sean Monaghan" wrote in message miguel wrote in : Sean Monaghan wrote: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote in : "Sean Monaghan" wrote in message miguel wrote in : Kali wrote: miguel said: Kadaitcha Gimp Retard He-Bitch wrote: Translation: even though all kookologists agree that taking usenet to real life is prime kooksign, that's what I'm trying to accomplish. Good job there kOOk. miguel So, what are your plans for Steve Cheney? If I ever meet him, I will put him in the hospital. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^ This is not a flame; this is a clear threat of physical violence. This is something we'd expect from Richard "the St00pid" Bullis, or from Edmond Heinz Wollmann - not the words of a 'marginal kook', or from someone who is merely involved in a Usenet flamewar. This snippet of evidence not only justifies the open KotM nomination of Michael Cranston attorney, but it also qualifies him for the Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - AUK's highest lifetime-achievement award for stupidity. From - http://www.caballista.org/auk/awards.html "Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - The spoonerism for "dumb ****", for those who've lost more marbles than a Chinese Checker factory will ever make." I hereby nominate "Michael Cranston attorney"/Miguel to become Bolo Bullis Foam Duck #27. Seconds, anyone? The nomination is ridiculous. It's interesting how say that this *nomination* is ridiculous - not Cranston's threat. How can you know whether the threat is ridiculous without knowing what predicated it? Irrelevant. The actions of one net.kook never make it okay for another to make (utterly stupid) life-threatening statements on Usenet. Life-threatening? Any type of a beating that requires hospitalisation is potentially life-threatening. Beating? Okay, I'm not going to keep this up. You tried to bat me around in the other part of the thread about making assumptions, but you've made an incredible leap--"Evel does the Snake River Canyon" comes to mind--that I can't even keep my eye on your rocket. You can--and will, I'm sure--continue with the hyperbole. I've voiced my objections, and I find it contemptible. But there's not a lot to be gained beating my head against the wall over childish bullying either. -- Rhonda Lea Kirk Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is willing to inflict on others. Phèdre nó Delaunay |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 {NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
Sean Monaghan wrote:
miguel wrote: Sean Monaghan wrote: "Rhonda Lea Kirk": That would lead me to the conclusion that someone is overreacting to words on the screen, and I don't mean Mike. See http://www.caballista.org/auk/faq.html#question27 "27. Can I really be thrown in jail for posting threatening messages? Yes. People have been tried and convicted for sending threatening or harassing Email or Usenet posts. We do NOT support censorship of the Internet; however, posting a message stating you are going to cause virtual or unvirtual harm to someone will probably gain you a visit from your Friendly Neighborhood FBI Agent." "Probably" gain you a visit from your Friendly Neighborhood FBI Agent? That's plain stupid. If Chaney wants to call the FBI and complain, more power to him. That would be one of the most hilarious things to happen 'round these parts in a while. It would be quite entertaining. I'll be sure and let you know if they knock on my door. Don't hold your breath though. That's the bit that you and your public defender are missing - AUK is *all* about entertainment. Always. No exceptions. Period. That was a pretty stupid thing to say, in that (1) neither my PD nor I is unaware of this and (2) it's obvious what she is complaining about is that the hypocrisy of what you are doing is in part what makes it unentertaining for her. It's like somebody who is a narcissistic sociopath calling her humor deficient. Precisely who would be entertained by that? miguel |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
"Sean Monaghan" wrote in message
miguel wrote in : Sean Monaghan wrote: "Rhonda Lea Kirk": That would lead me to the conclusion that someone is overreacting to words on the screen, and I don't mean Mike. See http://www.caballista.org/auk/faq.html#question27 "27. Can I really be thrown in jail for posting threatening messages? Yes. People have been tried and convicted for sending threatening or harassing Email or Usenet posts. We do NOT support censorship of the Internet; however, posting a message stating you are going to cause virtual or unvirtual harm to someone will probably gain you a visit from your Friendly Neighborhood FBI Agent." "Probably" gain you a visit from your Friendly Neighborhood FBI Agent? That's plain stupid. If Chaney wants to call the FBI and complain, more power to him. That would be one of the most hilarious things to happen 'round these parts in a while. It would be quite entertaining. That's the bit that you and your public defender are missing - AUK is *all* about entertainment. Always. No exceptions. Period. There is nothing entertaining for me in watching people that I used to like and respect fall and shatter their feet of clay. -- Rhonda Lea Kirk Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is willing to inflict on others. Phèdre nó Delaunay |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
In , Sean Monaghan
said: : miguel wrote in : : : : Sean Monaghan wrote: : "Rhonda Lea Kirk": : : That would lead me to the conclusion that someone is overreacting to : words on the screen, and I don't mean Mike. : : See http://www.caballista.org/auk/faq.html#question27 : : "27. Can I really be thrown in jail for posting threatening messages? : : Yes. People have been tried and convicted for sending threatening or : harassing Email or Usenet posts. We do NOT support censorship of the : Internet; however, posting a message stating you are going to cause : virtual or unvirtual harm to someone will probably gain you a visit : from your Friendly Neighborhood FBI Agent." : : "Probably" gain you a visit from your Friendly Neighborhood FBI Agent? : : That's plain stupid. : : If Chaney wants to call the FBI and complain, more power to him. : : That would be one of the most hilarious things to happen 'round these : parts in a while. It would be quite entertaining. : : That's the bit that you and your public defender are missing - AUK is : *all* about entertainment. Always. No exceptions. Period. That would be almost as entertaining as Cranston filing a civil suit over having had his name and "dog****er" listed together in the Google archives. You see, Sean, on Usenet it's not ok to call Cranston a "dog****er", but it is ok for him to make kooky death threats. Get it? lol Kali -- "If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?" - Albert Einstein |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 {NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
Kali wrote:
Sean Monaghan said: miguel wrote: Sean Monaghan wrote: "Rhonda Lea Kirk": That would lead me to the conclusion that someone is overreacting to words on the screen, and I don't mean Mike. See http://www.caballista.org/auk/faq.html#question27 "27. Can I really be thrown in jail for posting threatening messages? Yes. People have been tried and convicted for sending threatening or harassing Email or Usenet posts. We do NOT support censorship of the Internet; however, posting a message stating you are going to cause virtual or unvirtual harm to someone will probably gain you a visit from your Friendly Neighborhood FBI Agent." "Probably" gain you a visit from your Friendly Neighborhood FBI Agent? That's plain stupid. If Chaney wants to call the FBI and complain, more power to him. That would be one of the most hilarious things to happen 'round these parts in a while. It would be quite entertaining. That's the bit that you and your public defender are missing - AUK is *all* about entertainment. Always. No exceptions. Period. That would be almost as entertaining as [name] filing a civil suit over having had his name and "dog****er" listed together in the Google archives. You are now participating in the google stacking effort yourself? That seems odd, as you acknowledged you've been a victim of it too. You see, Sean, on Usenet it's not ok to call [name] a "dog****er", but it is ok for him to make kooky death threats. Get it? lol Charlotte was right about me. I'm sorry you weren't more resilient. miguel |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
In , miguel mjc101
@gmail.com said: : Kali wrote: : Sean Monaghan said: : miguel wrote: : Sean Monaghan wrote: : "Rhonda Lea Kirk": : : That would lead me to the conclusion that someone is overreacting to : words on the screen, and I don't mean Mike. : : See http://www.caballista.org/auk/faq.html#question27 : : "27. Can I really be thrown in jail for posting threatening messages? : : Yes. People have been tried and convicted for sending threatening or : harassing Email or Usenet posts. We do NOT support censorship of the : Internet; however, posting a message stating you are going to cause : virtual or unvirtual harm to someone will probably gain you a visit : from your Friendly Neighborhood FBI Agent." : : "Probably" gain you a visit from your Friendly Neighborhood FBI Agent? : : That's plain stupid. : : If Chaney wants to call the FBI and complain, more power to him. : : That would be one of the most hilarious things to happen 'round these : parts in a while. It would be quite entertaining. : : That's the bit that you and your public defender are missing - AUK is : *all* about entertainment. Always. No exceptions. Period. : : That would be almost as entertaining as [name] filing a civil : suit over having had his name and "dog****er" listed together in : the Google archives. : : You are now participating in the google stacking effort yourself? That : seems odd, as you acknowledged you've been a victim of it too. Hardly, clown. : You see, Sean, on Usenet it's not ok to call [name] a : "dog****er", but it is ok for him to make kooky death threats. : Get it? lol : : Charlotte was right about me. I'm sorry you weren't more resilient. All I see is kook. You're not as kooky as some, but still, you are a kook. It's amusing how you invoke the favor of Charlotte and Rhonda whenever you're called out. One of these days you'll use up all your free passes. Oh, wait, it would appear that you already have. : miguel : Kali -- "If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?" - Albert Einstein |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 {NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin (Parkside) wrote:
miguel said: Kali wrote: Sean Monaghan said: miguel wrote: Sean Monaghan wrote: "Rhonda Lea Kirk": That would lead me to the conclusion that someone is overreacting to words on the screen, and I don't mean Mike. See http://www.caballista.org/auk/faq.html#question27 "27. Can I really be thrown in jail for posting threatening messages? Yes. People have been tried and convicted for sending threatening or harassing Email or Usenet posts. We do NOT support censorship of the Internet; however, posting a message stating you are going to cause virtual or unvirtual harm to someone will probably gain you a visit from your Friendly Neighborhood FBI Agent." "Probably" gain you a visit from your Friendly Neighborhood FBI Agent? That's plain stupid. If Chaney wants to call the FBI and complain, more power to him. That would be one of the most hilarious things to happen 'round these parts in a while. It would be quite entertaining. That's the bit that you and your public defender are missing - AUK is *all* about entertainment. Always. No exceptions. Period. That would be almost as entertaining as [name] filing a civil suit over having had his name and "dog****er" listed together in the Google archives. You are now participating in the google stacking effort yourself? That seems odd, as you acknowledged you've been a victim of it too. Hardly, clown. Yet you know it has that effect, and you did it again in another post. Why? You see, Sean, on Usenet it's not ok to call [name] a "dog****er", but it is ok for him to make kooky death threats. Get it? lol Charlotte was right about me. I'm sorry you weren't more resilient. All I see is kook. You're not as kooky as some, but still, you are a kook. It's amusing how you invoke the favor of Charlotte and Rhonda whenever you're called out. That's not true, Kimberly K. Barnard. I've invoked Charlotte precisely once, I believe, and only in connection with Sean's claim about my threat to put Chaney in the hospital. I don't believe I've ever invoked the favor of Rhonda. What they offer is their own affair. One of these days you'll use up all your free passes. Oh, wait, it would appear that you already have. If I had to choose between a friendship with Rhonda or a friendship with ****stain, I know who I'd chose. How about you? miguel |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
miguel wrote in news:o-
: Ki[*BIG *SNIP*] You bitched about KM repeating your purported occupation (which you admit to in another thread), yet it falls within your code of ethics to post the (alleged) institution and precise location of someone else. Thank you for this very telling campaign speech. The question is - will your public defender find this behaviour to be acceptable, or will that person continue to rationalise on your behalf? -- Official FAQ for Alt.Usenet.Kooks: http://www.caballista.org/auk COOSN-266-06-58907 Hammer of Thor - August 2005 Pierre Salinger Memorial "Hook, Line & Sinker" awards - March 2005, July 2005, August 2005, August 2006, February 2007 [Co]Friendly Neighbourhood Vote Wrangler |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 {NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
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), 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 |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
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), 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 I didn't mention your full name or your occupation (let alone your work location), you filthy kook. You have serious reading comprehension problems. I've explained my position on this very well, and I maintain that position. I merely cited an example to make a point. You, being the kooky bully you are, saw a threat in it and decided you were going to do the same thing, only turn it up a notch. That's what narcissistic kooks do. The more you write, the kookier you seem. You're so bent on your kooky mission that you're willing to drag Rhonda through hell for it. Say what you want, and have Rhonda try to defend you, but kooky is as kooky does. This post is just another example. Kali -- "If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?" - Albert Einstein |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
"Sean Monaghan" wrote in message
miguel wrote in news:o- : Ki[*BIG *SNIP*] You bitched about KM repeating your purported occupation (which you admit to in another thread), yet it falls within your code of ethics to post the (alleged) institution and precise location of someone else. Thank you for this very telling campaign speech. If that was his campaign speech, then repeatedly posting "dog****er" with his name and profession--along with the creation of that offensive web site and the revenge froup--can be yours. The question is - will your public defender find this behaviour to be acceptable, or will that person continue to rationalise on your behalf? I don't find *either* acceptable, but (and it's a big "but") I will not be critical of him for following the standard of behavior you've set as acceptable. What part of "you started it" escapes your attention? shakes head Personally identifiable information is personally identifiable information. You want to say that what you're doing to him doesn't identify him as clearly as what he's doing to Kali. I say you can't split that hair, because it does. I have no doubt that if you stop, he'll stop. But your apparent idea that he should stop while you continue is, at best, egocentric. (The use of the word "you" in this post should be construed collectively, and not as directed at you, specifically, Sean, except to the extent that you, specifically, have engaged in the named behavior.) -- Rhonda Lea Kirk Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is willing to inflict on others. Phèdre nó Delaunay |
PING Rhonda... [threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
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 -- "If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?" - Albert Einstein |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
"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), 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 I didn't mention your full name or your occupation (let alone your work location), you filthy kook. You have serious reading comprehension problems. I've explained my position on this very well, and I maintain that position. I merely cited an example to make a point. You, being the kooky bully you are, saw a threat in it and decided you were going to do the same thing, only turn it up a notch. That's what narcissistic kooks do. The more you write, the kookier you seem. You're so bent on your kooky mission that you're willing to drag Rhonda through hell for it. Say what you want, and have Rhonda try to defend you, but kooky is as kooky does. This post is just another example. He's not responsible for my choices. You can be sure that I have given careful consideration to all the consequences of the position I've taken. More important to me than any single person or group of people in this dogfight is whether I will be able to look myself in the mirror when I'm done. Dustin (remember him?) had too little faith in my ability to keep his confidence when I refused to choose between him and KMonster. In the face of his direct attack on me, I defended myself, but up to that point, most of what I said was in Dustin's favor, because in my opinion, the tactics being used on him weren't fair or right. It's not like I'm not consistent, Kali. If I had to bend myself like a pretzel over this, I wouldn't do it. Loyalty to a friend is keeping confidences and offering support in hard times, not defending the indefensible. -- Rhonda Lea Kirk Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is willing to inflict on others. Phèdre nó Delaunay |
PING Rhonda... [threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis
Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of
Psychology (http://oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/psych...culty/barnard/) wrote: miguel 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. I see you caught your attribution error in your post to Dumbarse Git. If I may make a suggestion, perhaps you should wipe the froth and spittle from your screen before hitting the "send" key. 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. 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. Is this your professional opinion, Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, http://oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/psych...culty/barnard/ 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. I miss the days when I could anonymously play the dozens with people on usenet, in soc.singles, on AUK, in AFA-B, without having asshole kooks like you, Dumbarse Git Sean, K-Bitch and ****stain get all my identifying information out front and center, and in a way that will cause reputational and commercial damage to me. Perhaps soon you may miss those days too. You didn't care when the rest of them started in on me. In fact you decided to join in. So solly. miguel |
PING Rhonda... [threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
In , miguel mjc101
@gmail.com said: : Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of : Psychology (http://oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/psych...culty/barnard/) : wrote: : miguel 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. : : I see you caught your attribution error in your post to Dumbarse Git. If : I may make a suggestion, perhaps you should wipe the froth and spittle : from your screen before hitting the "send" key. : : 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. : : 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. : : Is this your professional opinion, Kimberly K. Barnard, University of : Wisconsin-Parkside, : http://oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/psych...culty/barnard/ : : 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. : : I miss the days when I could anonymously play the dozens with people on : usenet, in soc.singles, on AUK, in AFA-B, without having asshole kooks : like you, Dumbarse Git Sean, K-Bitch and ****stain get all my : identifying information out front and center, and in a way that will : cause reputational and commercial damage to me. : : Perhaps soon you may miss those days too. : : You didn't care when the rest of them started in on me. In fact you : decided to join in. So solly. : : miguel Threat noted. Kali -- "If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?" - Albert Einstein |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
|
PING Rhonda... [threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis
Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of
Psychology, wrote: miguel said: Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of Psychology (http://oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/psych...culty/barnard/) wrote: miguel 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. I see you caught your attribution error in your post to Dumbarse Git. If I may make a suggestion, perhaps you should wipe the froth and spittle from your screen before hitting the "send" key. 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. 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. Is this your professional opinion, Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, http//oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/psychology/faculty/barnard/ 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. I miss the days when I could anonymously play the dozens with people on usenet, in soc.singles, on AUK, in AFA-B, without having asshole kooks like you, Dumbarse Git Sean, K-Bitch and ****stain get all my identifying information out front and center, and in a way that will cause reputational and commercial damage to me. Perhaps soon you may miss those days too. You didn't care when the rest of them started in on me. In fact you decided to join in. So solly. Threat noted. I hope so. If you stop, and if you can persuade your friends, who are, frighteningly, even less rational than you, to stop, I'll be happy to pull the plug on this as well. The nerd gimp retard fagbois hold the keys to the kingdom, Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of Psychology. miguel |
PING Rhonda... [threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
Kali wrote in
: In , miguel mjc101 @gmail.com said: : Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of : Psychology : (http://oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/psych...culty/barnard/) wrote: : miguel 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. : : I see you caught your attribution error in your post to Dumbarse Git. : If I may make a suggestion, perhaps you should wipe the froth and : spittle from your screen before hitting the "send" key. : : 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. : : 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. : : Is this your professional opinion, Kimberly K. Barnard, University of : Wisconsin-Parkside, : http://oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/psych...culty/barnard/ : : 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. : : I miss the days when I could anonymously play the dozens with people : on usenet, in soc.singles, on AUK, in AFA-B, without having asshole : kooks like you, Dumbarse Git Sean, K-Bitch and ****stain get all my : identifying information out front and center, and in a way that will : cause reputational and commercial damage to me. : : Perhaps soon you may miss those days too. : : You didn't care when the rest of them started in on me. In fact you : decided to join in. So solly. : : miguel Threat noted. Maybe Cranston would like to threaten me next? I'm only working about two miles from the little dweeb. Scare me, mikey! |
PING Rhonda... [threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
miguel wrote in
: Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of Psychology, wrote: miguel said: Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of Psychology (http://oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/psych...culty/barnard/) wrote: miguel 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. I see you caught your attribution error in your post to Dumbarse Git. If I may make a suggestion, perhaps you should wipe the froth and spittle from your screen before hitting the "send" key. 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. 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. Is this your professional opinion, Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, http//oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/psychology/faculty/barnard/ 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. I miss the days when I could anonymously play the dozens with people on usenet, in soc.singles, on AUK, in AFA-B, without having asshole kooks like you, Dumbarse Git Sean, K-Bitch and ****stain get all my identifying information out front and center, and in a way that will cause reputational and commercial damage to me. Perhaps soon you may miss those days too. You didn't care when the rest of them started in on me. In fact you decided to join in. So solly. Threat noted. I hope so. If you stop, and if you can persuade your friends[slap!] **** off, you little coward. You like threatening women, wimp? I'll bet it compensates for the testosterone shots you don't get anymore, nadless. |
*Ping* Trippy - Bobo Pool submission { PING Rhonda... [threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}}
miguel wrote in
: Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of Psychology, wrote: miguel said: Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of Psychology (http://oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/psych...culty/barnard/) wrote: miguel 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. I see you caught your attribution error in your post to Dumbarse Git. If I may make a suggestion, perhaps you should wipe the froth and spittle from your screen before hitting the "send" key. 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. 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. Is this your professional opinion, Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, http//oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/psychology/faculty/barnard/ 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. I miss the days when I could anonymously play the dozens with people on usenet, in soc.singles, on AUK, in AFA-B, without having asshole kooks like you, Dumbarse Git Sean, K-Bitch and ****stain get all my identifying information out front and center, and in a way that will cause reputational and commercial damage to me. Perhaps soon you may miss those days too. You didn't care when the rest of them started in on me. In fact you decided to join in. So solly. Threat noted. I hope so. If you stop, and if you can persuade your friends, who are, frighteningly, even less rational than you, to stop, I'll be happy to pull the plug on this as well. The nerd gimp retard fagbois hold the keys to the kingdom, Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of Psychology. Wow. Extortion attempt. Yo, Moonbeam - we[TINW] have a new submission for the Bobo pool. Pleace to consider this frothing maniac for odds. Thanks in advance. http://www.alcatroll.com/sean/miguel -- Official FAQ for Alt.Usenet.Kooks: http://www.caballista.org/auk COOSN-266-06-58907 Hammer of Thor - August 2005 Pierre Salinger Memorial "Hook, Line & Sinker" awards - March 2005, July 2005, August 2005, August 2006, February 2007 [Co]Friendly Neighbourhood Vote Wrangler |
PING Rhonda... [threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis
Cujo DeSockpuppet wrote:
miguel: Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of Psychology, wrote: miguel said: Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of Psychology (http://oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/psych...culty/barnard/) wrote: miguel 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. I see you caught your attribution error in your post to Dumbarse Git. If I may make a suggestion, perhaps you should wipe the froth and spittle from your screen before hitting the "send" key. 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. 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. Is this your professional opinion, Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, http//oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/psychology/faculty/barnard/ 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. I miss the days when I could anonymously play the dozens with people on usenet, in soc.singles, on AUK, in AFA-B, without having asshole kooks like you, Dumbarse Git Sean, K-Bitch and ****stain get all my identifying information out front and center, and in a way that will cause reputational and commercial damage to me. Perhaps soon you may miss those days too. You didn't care when the rest of them started in on me. In fact you decided to join in. So solly. Threat noted. I hope so. If you stop, and if you can persuade your friends[slap!] **** off, you little coward. You like threatening women, wimp? I'll bet it compensates for the testosterone shots you don't get anymore, nadless. Look at the nerd gimp retard fagboi puff his chest! miguel, bite my nuts klunt |
PING Rhonda... [threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
miguel wrote in
: Cujo DeSockpuppet wrote: miguel: Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of Psychology, wrote: miguel said: Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of Psychology (http://oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/psych...culty/barnard/) wrote: miguel 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. I see you caught your attribution error in your post to Dumbarse Git. If I may make a suggestion, perhaps you should wipe the froth and spittle from your screen before hitting the "send" key. 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. 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. Is this your professional opinion, Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, http//oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/psychology/faculty/barnard/ 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. I miss the days when I could anonymously play the dozens with people on usenet, in soc.singles, on AUK, in AFA-B, without having asshole kooks like you, Dumbarse Git Sean, K-Bitch and ****stain get all my identifying information out front and center, and in a way that will cause reputational and commercial damage to me. Perhaps soon you may miss those days too. You didn't care when the rest of them started in on me. In fact you decided to join in. So solly. Threat noted. I hope so. If you stop, and if you can persuade your friends[slap!] **** off, you little coward. You like threatening women, wimp? I'll bet it compensates for the testosterone shots you don't get anymore, nadless. Look at the nerd gimp retard fagboi puff his chest! The fag lames won't work. I'm a lesbian, st00pid. So keep trying to impress me with some more pathetic material the RSPW crowd would laugh at. I'll try not to laugh too hard[1] at you. [1] Left in to remind you what a powerless limpdick you are, douchebag. |
[threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
"Kali" wrote in message
In , Rhonda Lea Kirk said: "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), 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 I didn't mention your full name or your occupation (let alone your work location), you filthy kook. You have serious reading comprehension problems. I've explained my position on this very well, and I maintain that position. I merely cited an example to make a point. You, being the kooky bully you are, saw a threat in it and decided you were going to do the same thing, only turn it up a notch. That's what narcissistic kooks do. The more you write, the kookier you seem. You're so bent on your kooky mission that you're willing to drag Rhonda through hell for it. Say what you want, and have Rhonda try to defend you, but kooky is as kooky does. This post is just another example. He's not responsible for my choices. His transparent manipulation of you aside... He was a friend to me when I was being batted around like a cat toy, and auk was giving out an undeserved Salinger for a troll that did me a lot of emotional damage. He has not withdrawn his friendship even though I was quite critical of him with regard to his initial flaming of you. Everything he has done with regard to /me/ has been done to my benefit and advantage. If that's manipulation, I want more of it. You can be sure that I have given careful consideration to all the consequences of the position I've taken. More important to me than any single person or group of people in this dogfight is whether I will be able to look myself in the mirror when I'm done. Yes, I know this to be true about you. Dustin (remember him?) had too little faith in my ability to keep his confidence when I refused to choose between him and KMonster. In the face of his direct attack on me, I defended myself, but up to that point, most of what I said was in Dustin's favor, because in my opinion, the tactics being used on him weren't fair or right. It's not like I'm not consistent, Kali. If I had to bend myself like a pretzel over this, I wouldn't do it. Loyalty to a friend is keeping confidences and offering support in hard times, not defending the indefensible. We agree. -- Rhonda Lea Kirk Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is willing to inflict on others. Phèdre nó Delaunay |
*Ping* Trippy - Bobo Pool submission { PING Rhonda... [threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}}
"Sean Monaghan" wrote in message
miguel wrote in : Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of Psychology, wrote: miguel said: Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of Psychology (http://oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/psych...culty/barnard/) wrote: miguel 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. I see you caught your attribution error in your post to Dumbarse Git. If I may make a suggestion, perhaps you should wipe the froth and spittle from your screen before hitting the "send" key. 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. 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. Is this your professional opinion, Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, http//oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/psychology/faculty/barnard/ 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. I miss the days when I could anonymously play the dozens with people on usenet, in soc.singles, on AUK, in AFA-B, without having asshole kooks like you, Dumbarse Git Sean, K-Bitch and ****stain get all my identifying information out front and center, and in a way that will cause reputational and commercial damage to me. Perhaps soon you may miss those days too. You didn't care when the rest of them started in on me. In fact you decided to join in. So solly. Threat noted. I hope so. If you stop, and if you can persuade your friends, who are, frighteningly, even less rational than you, to stop, I'll be happy to pull the plug on this as well. The nerd gimp retard fagbois hold the keys to the kingdom, Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of Psychology. Wow. Extortion attempt. No. It's negotiation: Everyone stops. The problem is, you give every indication of holding the belief that you should be able to continue what you started and that Mike has no right to attempt to mitigate his damages. Equity is for everyone, Sean. Yo, Moonbeam - we[TINW] have a new submission for the Bobo pool. Pleace to consider this frothing maniac for odds. Thanks in advance. http://www.alcatroll.com/sean/miguel -- Rhonda Lea Kirk Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is willing to inflict on others. Phèdre nó Delaunay |
PING Rhonda... [threat] Nomination - "Miguel" for Bullis Foam Duck #27 { NOMINATION -- Kadaitcha Man for Hammer of Thor}
"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 |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:09 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com