Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #412359
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy |
| Subject | Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today |
| Date | 2017-05-01 11:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D52CD127.A2E41%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <JgNMA.39683$Tn5.419@fx12.iad> <D528EF6A.A229F%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <sandman-522e86b6cf790a3db002d255520a0db2@individual.net> <D52C9E28.A2DC2%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <sandman-c13b20de378af5c7272a48d1c863befc@individual.net> |
On 5/1/17, 11:06 AM, in article sandman-c13b20de378af5c7272a48d1c863befc@individual.net, "Sandman" <mr@sandman.net> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > In article <D52C9E28.A2DC2%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>, Snit wrote: > >> Why change the topic from the bizarre obsession you and others have >> to response rates? > > Both responses and mentions. You changed the topic. You lied. And then denied. What a shock! LOL! > Again, when you first said Greycloud was "obsessed" with you. Or rather, when > I first questioned it after you had said he was obsessed with you - it was > after he *responded* to you. Which is not a relevant piece of information, just your own twisting. > So naturally, I assumed it was responses that was your metric for being > "obsessed". Ah, so based on your own twisting and dishonesty you made absurd assumptions to push even more of your lies. Yeah, pretty much par for course for you. > So my first data only measured responses. Then you said that no, > someone "obsessed" is someone that mentions someone else a specific number of > times. It is not just that... and I keep giving you examples such as the lies you and the stalker push, Slimer's .sig, Peter's headers, etc. But you lie and say I have shown you no evidence because, well, you are dishonest and it does not fit your agenda. > so I added that. That's why my data has both responses *AND* mentions > to show that by both metrics, you're very obsessed: You ignore mentions which do not include a name or where he name is in the .sig or headers and otherwise manipulate things to fit your agenda. And who cares how much someone is mentioned? CONTEXT matters. But context goes outside your agenda. > Regular | R | % | M | % > - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > owl | 77 | 14% | 42 | 8% > Sandman | 41 | 7% | 136 | 25% > DFS | 58 | 11% | 30 | 5% > Marek Novotny | 99 | 18% | 61 | 11% > vallor | 7 | 1% | 0 | 0% > Steve Caroll | 0 | 0% | 68 | 12% > chrisv | 21 | 4% | 1 | 0% > Peter Kohlmann | 13 | 2% | 18 | 3% > Chris Ahlstrom | 9 | 2% | 0 | 0% > robert | 0 | 0% | 1 | 0% > Desk Rabbit | 16 | 3% | 1 | 0% > RonB | 21 | 4% | 6 | 1% > Silver Slimer | 23 | 4% | 4 | 1% > GreyCloud | 0 | 0% | 1 | 0% > - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Total posts between 2017-04-05 - 2017-05-01: 547 > Percentage (R)esponses to regulars: 70% > Percentage (M)entioning regulars: 66% > > *Mentions* here are the number of posts where you've talked *ABOUT* a > regular in a post not directed *AT* that regular. So it can't be both a > response *AND* a mention. Which ignores context and fits your agenda. OK. >> It is clearly dishonest of you. > > Ironic of you to say that your misrepresentation of my data is "dishonest" > :-D Nothing ironic about me noting how dishonest you are. >> Look at Slimer's .sig. > > So, the text in someones sig is a sign of obsession, huh? Depending on context it can be. > Your mention of "trolls" and "the herd" in your posts and in your sig should > count as a mention/obsesssion for *ALL* regulars then, wouldn't it? Good > point, maybe I'll add it! In a forum where there are so many "herd" members speaking of the herd makes sense. But to post fantasizes about my life, as you and others who troll COLA do so often, is a sign of obsession (and dishonesty). But those are facts which do not fit your agenda. >> Look at Peter's headers. > > So, we've moved from "responses" (my interpretation) to "mentions" (your > specific claim) and are now at "signatures" and "headers"? What's next? MAC > addresses? :-D Keep in mind you are the one moving goal posts... I am noting specific examples and you try to generalize from them AS you ignore context to fit your dishonest agenda. >> Look at how often you and others who >> troll COLA spew nonsense fantasizes about me. > > I can not look at something that doesn't exist. I have shown many examples. Heck, the stories on your site of me are GREAT examples of that. YOU have written all sorts of stories to falsely attribute the words of others to me. You lie to fit your agenda. And you will deny. >> THAT is the topic. Not response rates. But you lie. Repeatedly. It >> is just what you do. > > So you say that your own misrepresentation of my post is a lie? Well, I > agree. :) I am noting your lies, giving specific examples. And you deny. Gee, what a shock. But enough attention for you on this. It is not like you are EVER going to be honest. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Snit hitting the glue bag early today Charlie <pipedroner3@kismet45.org> - 2017-04-28 13:18 -0400
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Silver Slimer <sl@im.er> - 2017-04-28 16:06 -0400
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-28 13:08 -0700
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-01 07:10 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 07:17 -0700
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Glenn Harrison <glannharrison0@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 16:24 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-01 09:38 -0700
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-01 21:51 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-01 15:14 -0700
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2017-05-01 22:53 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-01 16:34 -0700
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-01 18:00 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2017-05-01 18:35 -0400
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-05-02 02:23 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2017-05-02 11:26 -0400
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-05-02 22:12 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2017-05-03 09:22 -0400
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-05-03 14:07 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2017-05-04 09:29 -0400
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-04 16:42 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2017-05-01 14:44 -0400
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-01 11:50 -0700
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 12:12 -0700
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2017-05-01 17:37 -0400
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-01 22:06 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2017-05-02 08:08 -0500
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2017-05-02 11:26 -0400
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Silver Slimer <sl@im.er> - 2017-05-02 12:25 -0400
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-02 09:52 -0700
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-02 19:39 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-02 14:14 -0700
Snit digest 432 / 2017-05-02 Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-02 21:37 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today "Alistair Fitzpatrick" <fitz@gmail.com> - 2017-05-03 09:32 -0400
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2017-05-03 08:55 -0500
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2017-05-03 10:20 -0400
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2017-05-03 15:22 +0100
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2017-05-02 10:28 -0400
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Silver Slimer <sl@im.er> - 2017-05-01 19:25 -0400
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-01 21:50 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-01 08:11 -0700
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-01 18:06 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-01 11:48 -0700
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-01 19:20 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-01 12:31 -0700
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-01 21:37 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-01 15:14 -0700
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-02 06:28 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-02 06:47 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2017-05-02 06:53 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-02 07:10 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-02 09:52 -0700
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-02 19:37 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-02 14:12 -0700
Snit digest 431 / 2017-05-02 Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-02 21:34 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2017-05-02 11:27 -0400
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-02 09:49 -0700
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-02 19:36 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-02 14:11 -0700
Snit digest 430 / 2017-05-02 Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-02 21:33 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-02 19:23 +0000
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-02 14:09 -0700
Snit digest 429 / 2017-05-02 Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-02 21:32 +0000
Re: Snit digest 429 / 2017-05-02 chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2017-05-03 07:31 -0500
Re: Snit digest 429 / 2017-05-02 Silver Slimer <sl@im.er> - 2017-05-03 10:16 -0400
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-02 09:48 -0700
Re: Snit hitting the glue bag early today Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2017-05-02 19:33 +0000
csiph-web