On 1/6/15 7:45 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 06 Jan 2015 19:11:47 -0500, Geezer Snoöze
wrote:


Yet another political troll.



Why is it a troll?

I doubt anyone here is a fan of Gohmert. He's just a laughable pol, like
Michele Bachmann.

Oh, and unlike you, my posts don't insult or make insinuating remarks
about other posters *here*. What you and several others here are doing
with those sorts of posts is *real* trolling.

Here's a suggestion. If you don't like a post, just ignore it. That's
what I do with posts from the insulters.

Have nice night.

On 1/6/15 10:58 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 06 Jan 2015 19:52:33 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/6/15 7:45 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 06 Jan 2015 19:11:47 -0500, Geezer Snoöze
wrote:


Yet another political troll.



Why is it a troll?

I doubt anyone here is a fan of Gohmert. He's just a laughable pol, like
Michele Bachmann.

Oh, and unlike you, my posts don't insult or make insinuating remarks
about other posters *here*. What you and several others here are doing
with those sorts of posts is *real* trolling.

Here's a suggestion. If you don't like a post, just ignore it. That's
what I do with posts from the insulters.

Have nice night.


The real reason you are disappointed is that the power of the tea
party is further blunted.


Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot
of fun as speaker.

On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot
of fun as speaker.

===

Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country?

You should try it.

On 1/7/15 4:26 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot
of fun as speaker.

===

Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country?

You should try it.



1. Yes.

2. I have.

You and several of your buds seem determined to set a negative tone here
and to see if you can "bait." Have fun with that.

On 1/7/2015 4:48 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 1/7/15 4:26 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot
of fun as speaker.

===

Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country?

You should try it.



1. Yes.

2. I have.

You and several of your buds seem determined to set a negative tone here
and to see if you can "bait." Have fun with that.


Well, with all due respect it would be nice to hear from you why you
acted like you did for so many years, and why now all the change all of
a sudden?

On 1/7/15 4:56 PM, KC wrote:
On 1/7/2015 4:48 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 1/7/15 4:26 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot
of fun as speaker.

===

Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country?

You should try it.



1. Yes.

2. I have.

You and several of your buds seem determined to set a negative tone here
and to see if you can "bait." Have fun with that.


Well, with all due respect it would be nice to hear from you why you
acted like you did for so many years, and why now all the change all of
a sudden?

I'll be glad to at least partially respond.

I mentioned a couple of times here my college minor was sociology,
which, briefly, can involve the study of group behavior. I'm still a
student of sociology.

Over the years, *I* have been accused of being responsible for the
"snarliness" in this newsgroup. I thought the reality was that there
were many posters here who acted snarly.

So, as part of an experiment, I decided to stop making snarly posts
about other posters here. I implemented that decision what, three weeks
to a month ago? I forgot.

Another part of the experiment was to see if I could predict which
posters here would remain snarly in the absence of snarliness from me. I
predicted five or six would continue to make snarly remarks about other
posters. So far, my prediction has come true.

I've stated many times that posters here are solely responsible for what
they post and that they cannot blame others for their behavior. That was
my hypothesis. That the snarliness here continues in the absence of such
behavior from me seems to prove my hypothesis was correct.

On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 17:26:22 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/7/15 4:56 PM, KC wrote:
On 1/7/2015 4:48 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 1/7/15 4:26 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot
of fun as speaker.

===

Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country?

You should try it.



1. Yes.

2. I have.

You and several of your buds seem determined to set a negative tone here
and to see if you can "bait." Have fun with that.


Well, with all due respect it would be nice to hear from you why you
acted like you did for so many years, and why now all the change all of
a sudden?

I'll be glad to at least partially respond.

I mentioned a couple of times here my college minor was sociology,
which, briefly, can involve the study of group behavior. I'm still a
student of sociology.

Over the years, *I* have been accused of being responsible for the
"snarliness" in this newsgroup. I thought the reality was that there
were many posters here who acted snarly.

So, as part of an experiment, I decided to stop making snarly posts
about other posters here. I implemented that decision what, three weeks
to a month ago? I forgot.

Another part of the experiment was to see if I could predict which
posters here would remain snarly in the absence of snarliness from me. I
predicted five or six would continue to make snarly remarks about other
posters. So far, my prediction has come true.

I've stated many times that posters here are solely responsible for what
they post and that they cannot blame others for their behavior. That was
my hypothesis. That the snarliness here continues in the absence of such
behavior from me seems to prove my hypothesis was correct.


And I'll bet your buddies will eat that right up!

Talk about cunning linguists!

On 1/7/2015 5:26 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 1/7/15 4:56 PM, KC wrote:
On 1/7/2015 4:48 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 1/7/15 4:26 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a
lot
of fun as speaker.

===

Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country?

You should try it.



1. Yes.

2. I have.

You and several of your buds seem determined to set a negative tone here
and to see if you can "bait." Have fun with that.


Well, with all due respect it would be nice to hear from you why you
acted like you did for so many years, and why now all the change all of
a sudden?

I'll be glad to at least partially respond.

I mentioned a couple of times here my college minor was sociology,
which, briefly, can involve the study of group behavior. I'm still a
student of sociology.

Over the years, *I* have been accused of being responsible for the
"snarliness" in this newsgroup. I thought the reality was that there
were many posters here who acted snarly.

So, as part of an experiment, I decided to stop making snarly posts
about other posters here. I implemented that decision what, three weeks
to a month ago? I forgot.

Another part of the experiment was to see if I could predict which
posters here would remain snarly in the absence of snarliness from me. I
predicted five or six would continue to make snarly remarks about other
posters. So far, my prediction has come true.

I've stated many times that posters here are solely responsible for what
they post and that they cannot blame others for their behavior. That was
my hypothesis. That the snarliness here continues in the absence of such
behavior from me seems to prove my hypothesis was correct.



Well, if you are really doing science you have to take into
consideration that those 6 probably hate you becasue you have acted like
such an asshole for so long, stalked, threatened, and blackmailed
posters here for over a decade? Did you take all of that into consideration?

On Wednesday, January 7, 2015 at 4:56:54 PM UTC-5, KC wrote:

Well, with all due respect it would be nice to hear from you why you
acted like you did for so many years, and why now all the change all of
a sudden?

Hopefully, he's dying.

On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:26:39 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot
of fun as speaker.

===

Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country?

You should try it.

===

PS, I don't consider that post to be even the slightest bit snarly. In
light of your stated desire to have a lunatic as speaker just because
you'd consider it funny, I think it's a perfectly legitimate question.
Back up from your keyboard and read your own posts.