Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #352744 > unrolled thread

done

Started byowl <owl@rooftop.invalid>
First post2016-04-29 22:13 +0000
Last post2016-04-30 07:33 -0700
Articles 20 on this page of 116 — 15 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy


Contents

  done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-29 22:13 +0000
    Re: done John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 15:43 -0700
    Re: done DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-29 19:26 -0400
      Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-30 03:50 +0000
        Re: done Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-30 05:51 +0200
          Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-30 03:55 +0000
            Re: done Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-30 05:57 +0200
              Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-30 04:04 +0000
                Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-30 04:07 +0000
                  Re: done Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-30 06:08 +0200
                  Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-30 14:35 +0000
                    Re: done Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-30 17:20 +0200
                      Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-30 15:40 +0000
                        Re: done Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-30 18:11 +0200
                          Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-30 16:17 +0000
                            Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-30 17:23 +0000
                    Re: done Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-01 00:56 +0200
                      Re: done Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-01 01:30 +0200
                    Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-30 23:11 +0000
                      Re: done Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-01 08:38 +0000
                        Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-01 15:58 +0000
                          Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 11:59 -0700
                          Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 12:00 -0700
                            Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-01 19:48 +0000
                              Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 13:02 -0700
                                Re: done Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-05-01 22:04 +0200
                                  Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 13:41 -0700
                                    Re: done Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-01 13:47 -0700
                                    Re: done Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-05-02 02:21 +0200
                                      Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 18:34 -0700
                                  Re: done chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-02 08:27 -0500
                                    Re: done Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-02 15:54 +0200
                                Re: done Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-01 13:15 -0700
                                Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-01 20:16 +0000
                                  Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 13:38 -0700
                                    Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-01 20:55 +0000
                                      Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 14:17 -0700
                                        Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-01 21:35 +0000
                                          Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 14:47 -0700
                                            Re: done Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-05-01 14:56 -0700
                                              Re: done meat <meat.stretcher@linuxmail.org> - 2016-05-01 22:37 +0000
                                                Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 15:59 -0700
                                                  Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-01 23:10 +0000
                                                    Re: done meat <meat.stretcher@linuxmail.org> - 2016-05-01 23:09 +0000
                                                      Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 17:11 -0700
                                                        Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-02 00:27 +0000
                                                          Re: done meat <meat.stretcher@linuxmail.org> - 2016-05-02 00:31 +0000
                                                            Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-02 00:52 +0000
                                                              Re: done meat <meat.stretcher@linuxmail.org> - 2016-05-02 01:04 +0000
                                                                Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-02 01:47 +0000
                                                                  Re: done meat <meat.stretcher@linuxmail.org> - 2016-05-02 01:51 +0000
                                                                Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 18:44 -0700
                                                              Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 18:41 -0700
                                                              Re: done Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-01 19:43 -0700
                                                                Re: done meat <meat.stretcher@linuxmail.org> - 2016-05-02 03:36 +0000
                                                                  Re: done Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-01 21:14 -0700
                                                                    Re: done Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-01 21:43 -0700
                                                                      Re: done Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2016-05-01 22:25 -0700
                                                                  Re: done Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2016-05-01 22:27 -0700
                                                                  Re: done ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-05-02 17:45 +0000
                                                                    Re: done Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-02 20:16 +0200
                                                                      Re: done Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-02 20:46 +0200
                                                                        Re: done Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-02 12:43 -0700
                                                                    Re: done meat <meat.stretcher@linuxmail.org> - 2016-05-02 20:55 +0000
                                                            Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 18:32 -0700
                                                          Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 18:38 -0700
                                                            Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-02 01:48 +0000
                                                              Re: done meat <meat.stretcher@linuxmail.org> - 2016-05-02 01:49 +0000
                                                                Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 19:18 -0700
                                                      Re: done ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-05-02 01:02 +0000
                                                        Re: done meat <meat.stretcher@linuxmail.org> - 2016-05-02 01:10 +0000
                                                          Re: done chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-02 08:31 -0500
                                                            Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-02 07:27 -0700
                                                              Re: done Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-02 09:10 -0700
                                                              Re: done Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2016-05-02 10:45 -0700
                                                            Re: done meat <meat.stretcher@linuxmail.org> - 2016-05-02 14:51 +0000
                                                            Re: done Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-02 11:18 -0700
                                                            Re: done ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-05-02 19:13 +0000
                                                    Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 17:12 -0700
                                                      Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-02 00:27 +0000
                                                        Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-02 00:53 +0000
                                                          Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 18:42 -0700
                                                            Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-02 01:50 +0000
                                                              Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 19:17 -0700
                                                        Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 18:40 -0700
                                                          Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-02 01:49 +0000
                                                            Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 19:16 -0700
                                                Re: done ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-05-02 01:02 +0000
                                                  Re: done meat <meat.stretcher@linuxmail.org> - 2016-05-02 01:08 +0000
                                                    Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 18:33 -0700
                                                  Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 18:43 -0700
                                                  Re: done William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-05-02 09:30 +0100
                                              Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 16:02 -0700
                                              Re: done Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-01 20:36 -0700
                                                Re: done meat <meat.stretcher@linuxmail.org> - 2016-05-02 03:40 +0000
                                                  Re: done Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-01 21:14 -0700
                                            Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-01 21:58 +0000
                                              Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 15:32 -0700
                                                Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-01 22:37 +0000
                                                  Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 15:55 -0700
                                                    Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-01 23:00 +0000
                                    Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-05-01 23:33 +0000
                                      Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 17:13 -0700
                        Re: done Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-01 12:01 -0700
            Re: done DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-29 23:58 -0400
              Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-30 04:08 +0000
                Re: done Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-30 13:12 +0200
                  Re: done Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-30 14:09 +0200
                Re: done DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-30 10:02 -0400
                  Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-30 15:05 +0000
                    Re: done DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-30 11:19 -0400
                      Re: done owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-30 15:41 +0000
                        Re: done DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-30 13:19 -0400
                        Re: done Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-30 13:54 -0400
                          Re: done DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-30 19:36 -0400
                Re: done Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 07:33 -0700

Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6  Next page →


#353046

Fromowl <owl@rooftop.invalid>
Date2016-05-01 15:58 +0000
Message-ID<fhjd0tka.f311@rooftop.invalid>
In reply to#352992
Sandman <mr@sandman.net> wrote:
> In article <ghnvmfj939a.afju@rooftop.invalid>, owl wrote:
> 
>> > > > Sandman:
>> > > > I got you beat:
>> > > 
>> > > > Applications/Shell>time ./ipdecode.sh
>> > > > c5fd5ec5996a00946001a1952cc5e09b
>> > > > c5fd5ec5996a00946001a1952cc5e09b:109.72.51.248
>> > > 
>> > > > real    0m51.322s
>> > > > user    13m11.226s
>> > > > sys     0m2.687s
>> > > 
>> > > owl:
>> > > That's impressive.  Can you do these?
>> > 
>> > > 73bc0032541f55c8e8b7366f126961f0
>> > > 1ab71f9efbdd66785a8ee9e31cf301e5
>> > 
>> > > One of them I know is an ipv4 address.  The other I don't know.
>> > 
>> > Sandman:
>> > 73bc0032541f55c8e8b7366f126961f0 = 10.0.128.33
>> 
>> > 1ab71f9efbdd66785a8ee9e31cf301e5 &#8776; 199.48.241.55, known TOR
>> > proxy by Snit.
>> 
>> What was the original string on that one?  It's not a hash
>> of just "199.48.241.55"
> 
> No, hence the "&#8776;".
> 
> The host "1ab71f9efbdd66785a8ee9e31cf301e5" has been used by:
> 
> - Edward Stansfield
> - Big Fish in a Small Crotch
> - Barry H
> - anonymous
> - mike antipasto
> - Nobody
> - Omar
> - Richard King
> - Richard Bone
> 

That is why I was interested in it.  I wanted to see if it
was from NY or AZ.  I thought it might be Snit trying to
mimic flatfish. 

But the IPs I check with one exception
seem to be from NY, so I'd say that's flatfish.

I see 3 ips in this range:
199.48.240.0/21
and 7 ips in this range:
128.90.0.0/16

BTW, check these:
e7bf437cfa09cdd792a3c3d89b745b28
899e353b8d35885fa3e36ce5e19fd017
same "From:", but we have crossover between the above two network ranges. 

> And going through them, "Barry H" has also used the host 
> "a90b6fea5f35669a90d5f0ef20a40366", which is 199.48.241.55.
> 
> You can use this page to search a bit:
> 
> <http://usenet.sandman.net/misc/eternal.php>?

Nice.  How far back does your data go?  I only have access back to
late Nov 2014.

> hash=1ab71f9efbdd66785a8ee9e31cf301e5>
> 
> <http://usenet.sandman.net/misc/eternal.php?name=Barry+H>
> 
> It's not so much about what the actual host is, we all know all the gym's above 
> are Snit sock puppets. :)
> 

Nah, I think it's flatfish.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#353063

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2016-05-01 11:59 -0700
Message-ID<D34BA014.718C7%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#353046
On 5/1/16, 8:58 AM, in article fhjd0tka.f311@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

> I wanted to see if it
> was from NY or AZ.  I thought it might be Snit trying to
> mimic flatfish. 

Nope. Never. Remember the rules for figuring out if a post is from me:

1) Look to see if it says it is from "Snit" - if not it is not from me. *
2) If it says it is from Snit then you might want to check headers to see
   if someone is forging me.


* I have never posted to COLA with any name other than "Snit", in CSMA,
years ago, I posted as "Brock McNuggets" as a joke and admitted it as soon
as asked, and used things like "Şท¡ϯ" for a while in response to some heavy
trolling, and even used a couple other names in a COMPLETELY OPEN WAY when I
foolishly accepted the word of you and Carroll and others trolling me that
if I did so and admitted it you would stop trolling me. Yeah, foolish of me
to accept the word of you and Carroll and the like, but whatever. Years ago.
Move the hell on.


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#353064

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2016-05-01 12:00 -0700
Message-ID<D34BA044.718CC%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#353046
On 5/1/16, 8:58 AM, in article fhjd0tka.f311@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

> I wanted to see if it
> was from NY or AZ.  I thought it might be Snit trying to
> mimic flatfish. 

Nope. Never. Remember the rules for figuring out if a post is from me:

1) Look to see if it says it is from "Snit" - if not it is not from me. *
2) If it says it is from Snit then you might want to check headers to see
   if someone is forging me.


* I have never posted to COLA with any name other than "Snit", in CSMA,
years ago, I posted as "Brock McNuggets" as a joke and admitted it as soon
as asked, and used things like "Şท¡ϯ" for a while in response to some heavy
trolling, and even used a couple other names in a COMPLETELY OPEN WAY when I
foolishly accepted the word of Sandman and Carroll and others trolling me
that if I did so and admitted it they would stop trolling me. Yeah, foolish
of me to accept the word of Sandman and Carroll and the like, but whatever.
Years ago. Move the hell on.


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#353072

Fromowl <owl@rooftop.invalid>
Date2016-05-01 19:48 +0000
Message-ID<fhjgle903.af3@rooftop.invalid>
In reply to#353064
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 5/1/16, 8:58 AM, in article fhjd0tka.f311@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> I wanted to see if it
>> was from NY or AZ.  I thought it might be Snit trying to
>> mimic flatfish. 
> 
> Nope. Never. Remember the rules for figuring out if a post is from me:
> 
> 1) Look to see if it says it is from "Snit" - if not it is not from me. *
> 2) If it says it is from Snit then you might want to check headers to see
>    if someone is forging me.
> 
> 
> * I have never posted to COLA with any name other than "Snit", in CSMA,
> years ago, I posted as "Brock McNuggets" as a joke and admitted it as soon
> as asked, and used things like "Şท¡ϯ" for a while in response to some heavy
> trolling, and even used a couple other names in a COMPLETELY OPEN WAY when I
> foolishly accepted the word of Sandman and Carroll and others trolling me
> that if I did so and admitted it they would stop trolling me. Yeah, foolish
> of me to accept the word of Sandman and Carroll and the like, but whatever.
> Years ago. Move the hell on.
> 
 
If you don't like people accusing you of using sock puppets, you should
stop using them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#353075

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2016-05-01 13:02 -0700
Message-ID<D34BAED7.718E5%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#353072
On 5/1/16, 12:48 PM, in article fhjgle903.af3@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> On 5/1/16, 8:58 AM, in article fhjd0tka.f311@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> I wanted to see if it
>>> was from NY or AZ.  I thought it might be Snit trying to
>>> mimic flatfish.
>> 
>> Nope. Never. Remember the rules for figuring out if a post is from me:
>> 
>> 1) Look to see if it says it is from "Snit" - if not it is not from me. *
>> 2) If it says it is from Snit then you might want to check headers to see
>>    if someone is forging me.
>> 
>> 
>> * I have never posted to COLA with any name other than "Snit", in CSMA,
>> years ago, I posted as "Brock McNuggets" as a joke and admitted it as soon
>> as asked, and used things like "Şท¡ϯ" for a while in response to some heavy
>> trolling, and even used a couple other names in a COMPLETELY OPEN WAY when I
>> foolishly accepted the word of Sandman and Carroll and others trolling me
>> that if I did so and admitted it they would stop trolling me. Yeah, foolish
>> of me to accept the word of Sandman and Carroll and the like, but whatever.
>> Years ago. Move the hell on.
>> 
>  
> If you don't like people accusing you of using sock puppets, you should
> stop using them.

Your assumption that I use them is incorrect. Remember: I have NEVER posted
to COLA with any name other than Snit.

But the accusations are made over and over and over and over by those who
want to put me on the defensive to avoid speaking of Linux and technology...
and people who assume others do as they do - use socks and otherwise act
poorly. My refusal to sink to their level - and the level you often go -
leads you and others to make such unsupported accusations. Of note, you will
NEVER show anything from ME showing where I have posted to COLA with any
name other than Snit.


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#353076

FromMelzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com>
Date2016-05-01 22:04 +0200
Message-ID<20160501220424.3b33fc4c@maxa-pc>
In reply to#353075
On Sun, 01 May 2016 13:02:15 -0700
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:

> On 5/1/16, 12:48 PM, in article fhjgle903.af3@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:  
> >> On 5/1/16, 8:58 AM, in article fhjd0tka.f311@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> >> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> >>   
> >>> I wanted to see if it
> >>> was from NY or AZ.  I thought it might be Snit trying to
> >>> mimic flatfish.  
> >> 
> >> Nope. Never. Remember the rules for figuring out if a post is from
> >> me:
> >> 
> >> 1) Look to see if it says it is from "Snit" - if not it is not
> >> from me. * 2) If it says it is from Snit then you might want to
> >> check headers to see if someone is forging me.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> * I have never posted to COLA with any name other than "Snit", in
> >> CSMA, years ago, I posted as "Brock McNuggets" as a joke and
> >> admitted it as soon as asked, and used things like "Şท¡ϯ" for a
> >> while in response to some heavy trolling, and even used a couple
> >> other names in a COMPLETELY OPEN WAY when I foolishly accepted the
> >> word of Sandman and Carroll and others trolling me that if I did
> >> so and admitted it they would stop trolling me. Yeah, foolish of
> >> me to accept the word of Sandman and Carroll and the like, but
> >> whatever. Years ago. Move the hell on. 
> >  
> > If you don't like people accusing you of using sock puppets, you
> > should stop using them.  
> 
> Your assumption that I use them is incorrect. Remember: I have NEVER
> posted to COLA with any name other than Snit.

Liar.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#353085

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2016-05-01 13:41 -0700
Message-ID<D34BB7FE.718F2%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#353076
On 5/1/16, 1:04 PM, in article 20160501220424.3b33fc4c@maxa-pc, "Melzzzzz"
<mel@zzzzz.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 01 May 2016 13:02:15 -0700
> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 5/1/16, 12:48 PM, in article fhjgle903.af3@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>> On 5/1/16, 8:58 AM, in article fhjd0tka.f311@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>>>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>>>>   
>>>>> I wanted to see if it
>>>>> was from NY or AZ.  I thought it might be Snit trying to
>>>>> mimic flatfish.
>>>> 
>>>> Nope. Never. Remember the rules for figuring out if a post is from
>>>> me:
>>>> 
>>>> 1) Look to see if it says it is from "Snit" - if not it is not
>>>> from me. * 2) If it says it is from Snit then you might want to
>>>> check headers to see if someone is forging me.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> * I have never posted to COLA with any name other than "Snit", in
>>>> CSMA, years ago, I posted as "Brock McNuggets" as a joke and
>>>> admitted it as soon as asked, and used things like "Şท¡ϯ" for a
>>>> while in response to some heavy trolling, and even used a couple
>>>> other names in a COMPLETELY OPEN WAY when I foolishly accepted the
>>>> word of Sandman and Carroll and others trolling me that if I did
>>>> so and admitted it they would stop trolling me. Yeah, foolish of
>>>> me to accept the word of Sandman and Carroll and the like, but
>>>> whatever. Years ago. Move the hell on.
>>>  
>>> If you don't like people accusing you of using sock puppets, you
>>> should stop using them.
>> 
>> Your assumption that I use them is incorrect. Remember: I have NEVER
>> posted to COLA with any name other than Snit.
> 
> Liar.
> 

See: the idiotic joke about how everyone is Snit. Nope. I do not believe you
are stupid enough to think I really use socks. Does not mean you know I do
not - how could you... but you know there is no real reason to think I do.

Unless you are insisting you are truly stupid enough to think I do in the
complete lack of any evidence that I have ever posted to COLA with any name
other than Snit.

To be clear: your claim is you are stupid enough to think I use socks, and I
am defending you and noting you likely are not. I cannot prove you are not,
just as neither you nor I can prove I do not use socks - but there is no
good reason to think you are THAT stupid, just as their is no reason to
think I use socks. 


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#353089

FromSteve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com>
Date2016-05-01 13:47 -0700
Message-ID<3398bfa8-3b59-496e-894b-07ea2f871b6d@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#353085
On Sunday, May 1, 2016 at 2:41:24 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> On 5/1/16, 1:04 PM, in article 20160501220424.3b33fc4c@maxa-pc, "Melzzzzz"
> <mel@zzzzz.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 01 May 2016 13:02:15 -0700
> > Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> On 5/1/16, 12:48 PM, in article fhjgle903.af3@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> >> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >>>> On 5/1/16, 8:58 AM, in article fhjd0tka.f311@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> >>>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> >>>>   
> >>>>> I wanted to see if it
> >>>>> was from NY or AZ.  I thought it might be Snit trying to
> >>>>> mimic flatfish.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Nope. Never. Remember the rules for figuring out if a post is from
> >>>> me:
> >>>> 
> >>>> 1) Look to see if it says it is from "Snit" - if not it is not
> >>>> from me. * 2) If it says it is from Snit then you might want to
> >>>> check headers to see if someone is forging me.
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> * I have never posted to COLA with any name other than "Snit", in
> >>>> CSMA, years ago, I posted as "Brock McNuggets" as a joke and
> >>>> admitted it as soon as asked, and used things like "Şท¡ϯ" for a
> >>>> while in response to some heavy trolling, and even used a couple
> >>>> other names in a COMPLETELY OPEN WAY when I foolishly accepted the
> >>>> word of Sandman and Carroll and others trolling me that if I did
> >>>> so and admitted it they would stop trolling me. Yeah, foolish of
> >>>> me to accept the word of Sandman and Carroll and the like, but
> >>>> whatever. Years ago. Move the hell on.
> >>>  
> >>> If you don't like people accusing you of using sock puppets, you
> >>> should stop using them.
> >> 
> >> Your assumption that I use them is incorrect. Remember: I have NEVER
> >> posted to COLA with any name other than Snit.
> > 
> > Liar.
> > 
> 
> See: the idiotic joke about how everyone is Snit. Nope. I do not believe you
> are stupid enough to think I really use socks. Does not mean you know I do
> not - how could you... but you know there is no real reason to think I do.
> 
> Unless you are insisting you are truly stupid enough to think I do in the
> complete lack of any evidence that I have ever posted to COLA with any name
> other than Snit.
> 
> To be clear: your claim is you are stupid enough to think I use socks, and I
> am defending you and noting you likely are not. I cannot prove you are not,
> just as neither you nor I can prove I do not use socks - but there is no
> good reason to think you are THAT stupid, just as their is no reason to
> think I use socks. 

Snit... trying to use his "psych degree" again ;)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#353133

FromMelzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com>
Date2016-05-02 02:21 +0200
Message-ID<20160502022101.5f99ad0d@maxa-pc>
In reply to#353085
On Sun, 01 May 2016 13:41:18 -0700
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:

> On 5/1/16, 1:04 PM, in article 20160501220424.3b33fc4c@maxa-pc,
> "Melzzzzz" <mel@zzzzz.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 01 May 2016 13:02:15 -0700
> > Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> On 5/1/16, 12:48 PM, in article fhjgle903.af3@rooftop.invalid,
> >> "owl" <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> >>   
> >>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:  
> >>>> On 5/1/16, 8:58 AM, in article fhjd0tka.f311@rooftop.invalid,
> >>>> "owl" <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> >>>>     
> >>>>> I wanted to see if it
> >>>>> was from NY or AZ.  I thought it might be Snit trying to
> >>>>> mimic flatfish.  
> >>>> 
> >>>> Nope. Never. Remember the rules for figuring out if a post is
> >>>> from me:
> >>>> 
> >>>> 1) Look to see if it says it is from "Snit" - if not it is not
> >>>> from me. * 2) If it says it is from Snit then you might want to
> >>>> check headers to see if someone is forging me.
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> * I have never posted to COLA with any name other than "Snit", in
> >>>> CSMA, years ago, I posted as "Brock McNuggets" as a joke and
> >>>> admitted it as soon as asked, and used things like "Şท¡ϯ" for a
> >>>> while in response to some heavy trolling, and even used a couple
> >>>> other names in a COMPLETELY OPEN WAY when I foolishly accepted
> >>>> the word of Sandman and Carroll and others trolling me that if I
> >>>> did so and admitted it they would stop trolling me. Yeah,
> >>>> foolish of me to accept the word of Sandman and Carroll and the
> >>>> like, but whatever. Years ago. Move the hell on.  
> >>>  
> >>> If you don't like people accusing you of using sock puppets, you
> >>> should stop using them.  
> >> 
> >> Your assumption that I use them is incorrect. Remember: I have
> >> NEVER posted to COLA with any name other than Snit.  
> > 
> > Liar.
> >   
> 
> See: the idiotic joke about how everyone is Snit. Nope. I do not
> believe you are stupid enough to think I really use socks. Does not
> mean you know I do not - how could you... but you know there is no
> real reason to think I do.

When socks disappear I would know you are no longer using socks, until
then... 

> 
> Unless you are insisting you are truly stupid enough to think I do in
> the complete lack of any evidence that I have ever posted to COLA
> with any name other than Snit.

Lack of evidence? ;)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#353149

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2016-05-01 18:34 -0700
Message-ID<D34BFCA5.71964%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#353133
On 5/1/16, 5:21 PM, in article 20160502022101.5f99ad0d@maxa-pc, "Melzzzzz"
<mel@zzzzz.com> wrote:

>>>> Your assumption that I use them is incorrect. Remember: I have
>>>> NEVER posted to COLA with any name other than Snit.
>>> 
>>> Liar.
>>>   
>> 
>> See: the idiotic joke about how everyone is Snit. Nope. I do not
>> believe you are stupid enough to think I really use socks. Does not
>> mean you know I do not - how could you... but you know there is no
>> real reason to think I do.
> 
> When socks disappear I would know you are no longer using socks, until
> then... 
> 
>> 
>> Unless you are insisting you are truly stupid enough to think I do in
>> the complete lack of any evidence that I have ever posted to COLA
>> with any name other than Snit.
> 
> Lack of evidence? ;)

Of course. It is a running gag which nobody with a brain takes seriously.


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#353214

Fromchrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
Date2016-05-02 08:27 -0500
Message-ID<baleib19essc8p47qcikd8p7ft7gvtap1h@4ax.com>
In reply to#353076
Melzzzzz wrote:

> some thing wrote:
>>
>> Remember: I have NEVER posted to COLA with any name other than Snit.
>
> Liar.

Ask the pathological liar who "Herd Watch" was.

-- 
"For some reason the mindless droids here equate anything open source
with somehow being technically superior."  -  trolling fsckwit
"Ezekiel", lying shamelessly

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#353218

FromPeter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de>
Date2016-05-02 15:54 +0200
Message-ID<ng7lvk$e4n$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#353214
chrisv wrote:

> Melzzzzz wrote:
> 
>> some thing wrote:
>>>
>>> Remember: I have NEVER posted to COLA with any name other than Snit.
>>
>> Liar.
> 
> Ask the pathological liar who "Herd Watch" was.
> 

Brock McNugget naturally. And Larry Washington. And Jeremy from Walmart

And dozens, if not hundreds other nyms. After all, that lying imbecile does 
not just permeat COLA with his incredible shite

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#353078

FromSteve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com>
Date2016-05-01 13:15 -0700
Message-ID<311b8972-d04a-4f00-869e-5270098601ec@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#353075
On Sunday, May 1, 2016 at 2:02:22 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> On 5/1/16, 12:48 PM, in article fhjgle903.af3@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> On 5/1/16, 8:58 AM, in article fhjd0tka.f311@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> >> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> I wanted to see if it
> >>> was from NY or AZ.  I thought it might be Snit trying to
> >>> mimic flatfish.
> >> 
> >> Nope. Never. Remember the rules for figuring out if a post is from me:
> >> 
> >> 1) Look to see if it says it is from "Snit" - if not it is not from me. *
> >> 2) If it says it is from Snit then you might want to check headers to see
> >>    if someone is forging me.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> * I have never posted to COLA with any name other than "Snit", in CSMA,
> >> years ago, I posted as "Brock McNuggets" as a joke and admitted it as soon
> >> as asked, and used things like "Şท¡ϯ" for a while in response to some heavy
> >> trolling, and even used a couple other names in a COMPLETELY OPEN WAY when I
> >> foolishly accepted the word of Sandman and Carroll and others trolling me
> >> that if I did so and admitted it they would stop trolling me. Yeah, foolish
> >> of me to accept the word of Sandman and Carroll and the like, but whatever.
> >> Years ago. Move the hell on.
> >> 
> >  
> > If you don't like people accusing you of using sock puppets, you should
> > stop using them.
> 
> Your assumption that I use them is incorrect. Remember: I have NEVER posted
> to COLA with any name other than Snit.
> 
> But the accusations are made over and over and over and over by those who
> want to put me on the defensive to avoid speaking of Linux and technology...
> and people who assume others do as they do - use socks and otherwise act
> poorly. My refusal to sink to their level - and the level you often go -
> leads you and others to make such unsupported accusations. Of note, you will
> NEVER show anything from ME showing where I have posted to COLA with any
> name other than Snit.

Your problem, of course, is that it's been proven beyond reasonable doubt that you have. Here's the problem with lying so often and people spotting it: 

People don't believe you.

Funny how it works, huh? Worse, even when you have one of those rare instances of telling the the truth, the likelihood is that you won't be believed anyway. That's the by-product of lying that you completely overlook.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#353079

Fromowl <owl@rooftop.invalid>
Date2016-05-01 20:16 +0000
Message-ID<ghjd0a3a.efgh@rooftop.invalid>
In reply to#353075
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 5/1/16, 12:48 PM, in article fhjgle903.af3@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>> On 5/1/16, 8:58 AM, in article fhjd0tka.f311@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I wanted to see if it
>>>> was from NY or AZ.  I thought it might be Snit trying to
>>>> mimic flatfish.
>>> 
>>> Nope. Never. Remember the rules for figuring out if a post is from me:
>>> 
>>> 1) Look to see if it says it is from "Snit" - if not it is not from me. *
>>> 2) If it says it is from Snit then you might want to check headers to see
>>>    if someone is forging me.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> * I have never posted to COLA with any name other than "Snit", in CSMA,
>>> years ago, I posted as "Brock McNuggets" as a joke and admitted it as soon
>>> as asked, and used things like "Şท¡ϯ" for a while in response to some heavy
>>> trolling, and even used a couple other names in a COMPLETELY OPEN WAY when I
>>> foolishly accepted the word of Sandman and Carroll and others trolling me
>>> that if I did so and admitted it they would stop trolling me. Yeah, foolish
>>> of me to accept the word of Sandman and Carroll and the like, but whatever.
>>> Years ago. Move the hell on.
>>> 
>>  
>> If you don't like people accusing you of using sock puppets, you should
>> stop using them.
> 
> Your assumption that I use them is incorrect. Remember: I have NEVER posted
> to COLA with any name other than Snit.
> 
> But the accusations are made over and over and over and over by those who
> want to put me on the defensive to avoid speaking of Linux and technology...
> and people who assume others do as they do - use socks and otherwise act
> poorly. My refusal to sink to their level - and the level you often go -
> leads you and others to make such unsupported accusations. Of note, you will
> NEVER show anything from ME showing where I have posted to COLA with any
> name other than Snit.
> 

Cry me a river.  I've seen this often enough:

-> Sock A makes a post
--> Somebody B replies to that sock.
---> You respond to Somebody B, as Snit, but with language making
     it seem as if you were Sock A continuing the discussion.

(IOW, you forgot to switch to the sock when replying). 
Invariably somebody busts you on it, but it's all crickets from
you at that point, unless later downthread you make one of your
pathetic "Everybody's Snit har har orange you glad i didn't say
banana" whines.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#353083

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2016-05-01 13:38 -0700
Message-ID<D34BB769.718F0%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#353079
On 5/1/16, 1:16 PM, in article ghjd0a3a.efgh@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> On 5/1/16, 12:48 PM, in article fhjgle903.af3@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>> On 5/1/16, 8:58 AM, in article fhjd0tka.f311@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>>>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I wanted to see if it
>>>>> was from NY or AZ.  I thought it might be Snit trying to
>>>>> mimic flatfish.
>>>> 
>>>> Nope. Never. Remember the rules for figuring out if a post is from me:
>>>> 
>>>> 1) Look to see if it says it is from "Snit" - if not it is not from me. *
>>>> 2) If it says it is from Snit then you might want to check headers to see
>>>>    if someone is forging me.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> * I have never posted to COLA with any name other than "Snit", in CSMA,
>>>> years ago, I posted as "Brock McNuggets" as a joke and admitted it as soon
>>>> as asked, and used things like "Şท¡ϯ" for a while in response to some heavy
>>>> trolling, and even used a couple other names in a COMPLETELY OPEN WAY when
>>>> I
>>>> foolishly accepted the word of Sandman and Carroll and others trolling me
>>>> that if I did so and admitted it they would stop trolling me. Yeah, foolish
>>>> of me to accept the word of Sandman and Carroll and the like, but whatever.
>>>> Years ago. Move the hell on.
>>>> 
>>>  
>>> If you don't like people accusing you of using sock puppets, you should
>>> stop using them.
>> 
>> Your assumption that I use them is incorrect. Remember: I have NEVER posted
>> to COLA with any name other than Snit.
>> 
>> But the accusations are made over and over and over and over by those who
>> want to put me on the defensive to avoid speaking of Linux and technology...
>> and people who assume others do as they do - use socks and otherwise act
>> poorly. My refusal to sink to their level - and the level you often go -
>> leads you and others to make such unsupported accusations. Of note, you will
>> NEVER show anything from ME showing where I have posted to COLA with any
>> name other than Snit.
> 
> Cry me a river.  I've seen this often enough:
> 
> -> Sock A makes a post
> --> Somebody B replies to that sock.
> ---> You respond to Somebody B, as Snit, but with language making
>      it seem as if you were Sock A continuing the discussion.
> 
> (IOW, you forgot to switch to the sock when replying).
> Invariably somebody busts you on it, but it's all crickets from
> you at that point, unless later downthread you make one of your
> pathetic "Everybody's Snit har har orange you glad i didn't say
> banana" whines.
> 
One word: bullshit.

Your claim is utter and complete bullshit. The ongoing joke of COLA is
everyone is Snit. This is just a fact. I do not think you or others are
stupid enough to really believe it.

The fact is I do not use socks and as such there is no evidence I do. There
are idiots who post about screencasting and consistency and pretend to be me
to fool idiots... and then those who troll pretend to be stupid enough to
fall for it.

I am giving you a compliment here: I do not think you are so stupid as to
actually fall for it. Are you saying you are? If so, well, I suppose I will
accept your word you are THAT stupid.


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#353091

Fromowl <owl@rooftop.invalid>
Date2016-05-01 20:55 +0000
Message-ID<fhjdoaefa@rooftop.invalid>
In reply to#353083
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 5/1/16, 1:16 PM, in article ghjd0a3a.efgh@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>> On 5/1/16, 12:48 PM, in article fhjgle903.af3@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 5/1/16, 8:58 AM, in article fhjd0tka.f311@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>>>>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I wanted to see if it
>>>>>> was from NY or AZ.  I thought it might be Snit trying to
>>>>>> mimic flatfish.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Nope. Never. Remember the rules for figuring out if a post is from me:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 1) Look to see if it says it is from "Snit" - if not it is not from me. *
>>>>> 2) If it says it is from Snit then you might want to check headers to see
>>>>>    if someone is forging me.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> * I have never posted to COLA with any name other than "Snit", in CSMA,
>>>>> years ago, I posted as "Brock McNuggets" as a joke and admitted it as soon
>>>>> as asked, and used things like "Şท¡ϯ" for a while in response to some heavy
>>>>> trolling, and even used a couple other names in a COMPLETELY OPEN WAY when
>>>>> I
>>>>> foolishly accepted the word of Sandman and Carroll and others trolling me
>>>>> that if I did so and admitted it they would stop trolling me. Yeah, foolish
>>>>> of me to accept the word of Sandman and Carroll and the like, but whatever.
>>>>> Years ago. Move the hell on.
>>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> If you don't like people accusing you of using sock puppets, you should
>>>> stop using them.
>>> 
>>> Your assumption that I use them is incorrect. Remember: I have NEVER posted
>>> to COLA with any name other than Snit.
>>> 
>>> But the accusations are made over and over and over and over by those who
>>> want to put me on the defensive to avoid speaking of Linux and technology...
>>> and people who assume others do as they do - use socks and otherwise act
>>> poorly. My refusal to sink to their level - and the level you often go -
>>> leads you and others to make such unsupported accusations. Of note, you will
>>> NEVER show anything from ME showing where I have posted to COLA with any
>>> name other than Snit.
>> 
>> Cry me a river.  I've seen this often enough:
>> 
>> -> Sock A makes a post
>> --> Somebody B replies to that sock.
>> ---> You respond to Somebody B, as Snit, but with language making
>>      it seem as if you were Sock A continuing the discussion.
>> 
>> (IOW, you forgot to switch to the sock when replying).
>> Invariably somebody busts you on it, but it's all crickets from
>> you at that point, unless later downthread you make one of your
>> pathetic "Everybody's Snit har har orange you glad i didn't say
>> banana" whines.
>> 
> One word: bullshit.
> 

Are you bad at math or just lying?
I mean, that sentence alone was a lie even before it was finished.
Then what about all this...

> Your claim is utter and complete bullshit. The ongoing joke of COLA is
> everyone is Snit. This is just a fact. I do not think you or others are
> stupid enough to really believe it.
> 
> The fact is I do not use socks and as such there is no evidence I do. There
> are idiots who post about screencasting and consistency and pretend to be me
> to fool idiots... and then those who troll pretend to be stupid enough to
> fall for it.
> 
> I am giving you a compliment here: I do not think you are so stupid as to
> actually fall for it. Are you saying you are? If so, well, I suppose I will
> accept your word you are THAT stupid.
> 


[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#353094

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2016-05-01 14:17 -0700
Message-ID<D34BC05D.71903%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#353091
On 5/1/16, 1:55 PM, in article fhjdoaefa@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

... 
>>>>>> Nope. Never. Remember the rules for figuring out if a post is from me:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 1) Look to see if it says it is from "Snit" - if not it is not from me. *
>>>>>> 2) If it says it is from Snit then you might want to check headers to see
>>>>>>    if someone is forging me.

...
>>> Cry me a river.  I've seen this often enough:
>>> 
>>> -> Sock A makes a post
>>> --> Somebody B replies to that sock.
>>> ---> You respond to Somebody B, as Snit, but with language making
>>>      it seem as if you were Sock A continuing the discussion.
>>> 
>>> (IOW, you forgot to switch to the sock when replying).
>>> Invariably somebody busts you on it, but it's all crickets from
>>> you at that point, unless later downthread you make one of your
>>> pathetic "Everybody's Snit har har orange you glad i didn't say
>>> banana" whines.
>>> 
>> One word: bullshit.
> 
> Are you bad at math or just lying?

I am noting you have NEVER seen what you claim to have seen. Maybe you think
you have... but no reason to think even that. In short: you are full of
shit. You are lying. It really is that simple.

> I mean, that sentence alone was a lie even before it was finished.
> Then what about all this...

>> Your claim is utter and complete bullshit. The ongoing joke of COLA is
>> everyone is Snit. This is just a fact. I do not think you or others are
>> stupid enough to really believe it.
>> 
>> The fact is I do not use socks and as such there is no evidence I do. There
>> are idiots who post about screencasting and consistency and pretend to be me
>> to fool idiots... and then those who troll pretend to be stupid enough to
>> fall for it.
>> 
>> I am giving you a compliment here: I do not think you are so stupid as to
>> actually fall for it. Are you saying you are? If so, well, I suppose I will
>> accept your word you are THAT stupid.

Remember when you set up a task dealing with recipes and saving them as a
PDF. You accused me of cheating on that - OS X handled the task so well you
literally could not believe it was true. Peter Köhlmann joined you in that.
You both made false and unsupported accusations against ME, ones you could
not in any way support, based on your inability to believe OS X could handle
your hand-picked task as well as it did (not only doing what you asked for
but a LOT more in terms of speed, having smaller file sizes, allowing me to
select text and do searches, etc.).

You both assumed wrong doing based on your own ignorance. In that case I was
able to prove your attack false and you did finally admit to it. Of course I
would not cheat... what would the purpose even be? My goal is not to try to
convince someone of something that is not true but to educate them about how
things can be done. To falsify it would be to go directly against my own
goals! Your accusation did not even make sense... yet you and Peter both
were insistent that I must prove to you that your accusation was false...
neither of you thought for one second about how the burden of proof was on
you to back why I would go against my own self interest and do as you
accused. 

Think of that: you assumed others would go against their own best interest
and do wrong... and you not only failed to show any evidence they would you
gave no reason they would. And you failed to back your claims. You insisted
and whined how others should prove you wrong. Completely backward of you and
absurd... and even then I was kind enough to help educate you, even as you
accused me of things that would be against my own interests.

In this case, of course, you are doing the same thing: pushing an
accusations - but this time one which cannot be proved false. You have no
evidence. You have no reason why I would act against my own self interest
and do such as thing. You have no examples. But you insist it is true. Just
silly. 

Anyway, the gag is mostly about pushing me on the defensive to avoid
speaking about technology. And it is old. Why not drop the gag and come up
with another task - maybe one that is a bit more sensible than downloading
ALL recipes from a home page of a recipe site. Never did quite understand
the value of it... though I did admit it was fun to do.


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#353095

Fromowl <owl@rooftop.invalid>
Date2016-05-01 21:35 +0000
Message-ID<fhjgd003.afa3@rooftop.invalid>
In reply to#353094
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 5/1/16, 1:55 PM, in article fhjdoaefa@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> 
> ... 
>>>>>>> Nope. Never. Remember the rules for figuring out if a post is from me:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 1) Look to see if it says it is from "Snit" - if not it is not from me. *
>>>>>>> 2) If it says it is from Snit then you might want to check headers to see
>>>>>>>    if someone is forging me.
> 
> ...
>>>> Cry me a river.  I've seen this often enough:
>>>> 
>>>> -> Sock A makes a post
>>>> --> Somebody B replies to that sock.
>>>> ---> You respond to Somebody B, as Snit, but with language making
>>>>      it seem as if you were Sock A continuing the discussion.
>>>> 
>>>> (IOW, you forgot to switch to the sock when replying).
>>>> Invariably somebody busts you on it, but it's all crickets from
>>>> you at that point, unless later downthread you make one of your
>>>> pathetic "Everybody's Snit har har orange you glad i didn't say
>>>> banana" whines.
>>>> 
>>> One word: bullshit.
>> 
>> Are you bad at math or just lying?
> 
> I am noting you have NEVER seen what you claim to have seen. Maybe you think
> you have... but no reason to think even that. In short: you are full of
> shit. You are lying. It really is that simple.
> 
>> I mean, that sentence alone was a lie even before it was finished.
>> Then what about all this...
> 
>>> Your claim is utter and complete bullshit. The ongoing joke of COLA is
>>> everyone is Snit. This is just a fact. I do not think you or others are
>>> stupid enough to really believe it.
>>> 
>>> The fact is I do not use socks and as such there is no evidence I do. There
>>> are idiots who post about screencasting and consistency and pretend to be me
>>> to fool idiots... and then those who troll pretend to be stupid enough to
>>> fall for it.
>>> 
>>> I am giving you a compliment here: I do not think you are so stupid as to
>>> actually fall for it. Are you saying you are? If so, well, I suppose I will
>>> accept your word you are THAT stupid.
> 
> Remember when you set up a task dealing with recipes and saving them as a
> PDF. You accused me of cheating on that - OS X handled the task so well you
> literally could not believe it was true. Peter Köhlmann joined you in that.
> You both made false and unsupported accusations against ME, ones you could
> not in any way support, based on your inability to believe OS X could handle
> your hand-picked task as well as it did (not only doing what you asked for
> but a LOT more in terms of speed, having smaller file sizes, allowing me to
> select text and do searches, etc.).
> 

All I remember about that was it turned out your "processing" speed was
entirely related to your 50Mbps network connection vs my 8Mbps connection.
When I mirrored the site locally and did the same processing, it completely
stomped your ass.  I guess we'll never know, since you were unable to
mirror the site.

I don't feel like reading all the rest of this blah, so I'll just
snip it...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#353097

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2016-05-01 14:47 -0700
Message-ID<D34BC77F.7190D%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#353095
On 5/1/16, 2:35 PM, in article fhjgd003.afa3@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> On 5/1/16, 1:55 PM, in article fhjdoaefa@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>> ... 
>>>>>>>> Nope. Never. Remember the rules for figuring out if a post is from me:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 1) Look to see if it says it is from "Snit" - if not it is not from me.
>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>> 2) If it says it is from Snit then you might want to check headers to
>>>>>>>> see
>>>>>>>>    if someone is forging me.
>> 
>> ...
>>>>> Cry me a river.  I've seen this often enough:
>>>>> 
>>>>> -> Sock A makes a post
>>>>> --> Somebody B replies to that sock.
>>>>> ---> You respond to Somebody B, as Snit, but with language making
>>>>>      it seem as if you were Sock A continuing the discussion.
>>>>> 
>>>>> (IOW, you forgot to switch to the sock when replying).
>>>>> Invariably somebody busts you on it, but it's all crickets from
>>>>> you at that point, unless later downthread you make one of your
>>>>> pathetic "Everybody's Snit har har orange you glad i didn't say
>>>>> banana" whines.
>>>>> 
>>>> One word: bullshit.
>>> 
>>> Are you bad at math or just lying?
>> 
>> I am noting you have NEVER seen what you claim to have seen. Maybe you think
>> you have... but no reason to think even that. In short: you are full of
>> shit. You are lying. It really is that simple.
>> 
>>> I mean, that sentence alone was a lie even before it was finished.
>>> Then what about all this...
>> 
>>>> Your claim is utter and complete bullshit. The ongoing joke of COLA is
>>>> everyone is Snit. This is just a fact. I do not think you or others are
>>>> stupid enough to really believe it.
>>>> 
>>>> The fact is I do not use socks and as such there is no evidence I do. There
>>>> are idiots who post about screencasting and consistency and pretend to be
>>>> me
>>>> to fool idiots... and then those who troll pretend to be stupid enough to
>>>> fall for it.
>>>> 
>>>> I am giving you a compliment here: I do not think you are so stupid as to
>>>> actually fall for it. Are you saying you are? If so, well, I suppose I will
>>>> accept your word you are THAT stupid.
>> 
>> Remember when you set up a task dealing with recipes and saving them as a
>> PDF. You accused me of cheating on that - OS X handled the task so well you
>> literally could not believe it was true. Peter Köhlmann joined you in that.
>> You both made false and unsupported accusations against ME, ones you could
>> not in any way support, based on your inability to believe OS X could handle
>> your hand-picked task as well as it did (not only doing what you asked for
>> but a LOT more in terms of speed, having smaller file sizes, allowing me to
>> select text and do searches, etc.).
> 
> All I remember about that was it turned out your "processing" speed was
> entirely related to your 50Mbps network connection vs my 8Mbps connection.

So you do no remember you and Peter accusing me of lying and cheating? That
has completely slipped you mind? Really?

> When I mirrored the site locally and did the same processing, it completely
> stomped your ass.  I guess we'll never know, since you were unable to
> mirror the site.

I could use wget if I wanted to... heck, I even have a GUI wrapper for it.
The claim I cannot do so is just silly... another lie from you.

I also showed you and even highlighted all the timing for one of my
solutions. The video I point to time and time again shows it:

* Download as PDFs all the recipes from the homepage of allrecipes.com (Owl
is the one who suggested this). I did several versions... here is one:
<https://youtu.be/_J4PppWroWY>. Mine not only worked, but the PDF had
selectable text and allowed me to do quick searches on ingredients and the
like... something Owl was never able to do on Linux. Worked so well that he
and Peter Köhlmann insisted it must have been faked.

Jump to the 1:00 mark and you can see all the details. Then I show the PDFs
and how the text can be selected and all how I can do with it as I do with
any text - look things up, etc. Worked great!

Now you were doing yours with the command line and may have eventually found
a faster solution... if I recall correctly that is what we decided. But
yours created PDFs that were bigger and you could not do any of the lookups
or the like I could do.

But the bigger point here is you just assumed I would go against my own
self-interest and fake it and Peter jumped in to agree. In that case I was
able to do you the favor of proving you wrong. With your current accusation
there is no way to prove you wrong, but your evidence is no stronger and
makes no more sense.

And now you say you do not even recall making your false accusations!
Insane.

My advice: Stick to tech. Come up with other tasks. Stop making false
accusations you cannot back.
 
...


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#353098

FromMarek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com>
Date2016-05-01 14:56 -0700
Message-ID<t7WdnfrbK4oT5rvKnZ2dnUU7-W_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#353097
On 2016-05-01, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:

// snip

> I could use wget if I wanted to... heck, I even have a GUI wrapper for it.
> The claim I cannot do so is just silly... another lie from you.
>
> I also showed you and even highlighted all the timing for one of my
> solutions. The video I point to time and time again shows it:
>
> * Download as PDFs all the recipes from the homepage of allrecipes.com (Owl
> is the one who suggested this). I did several versions... here is one:
><https://youtu.be/_J4PppWroWY>. Mine not only worked, but the PDF had
> selectable text and allowed me to do quick searches on ingredients and the
> like... something Owl was never able to do on Linux. Worked so well that he
> and Peter Köhlmann insisted it must have been faked.
>
> Jump to the 1:00 mark and you can see all the details. Then I show the PDFs
> and how the text can be selected and all how I can do with it as I do with
> any text - look things up, etc. Worked great!
>
> Now you were doing yours with the command line and may have eventually found
> a faster solution... if I recall correctly that is what we decided. But
> yours created PDFs that were bigger and you could not do any of the lookups
> or the like I could do.
>
> But the bigger point here is you just assumed I would go against my own
> self-interest and fake it and Peter jumped in to agree. In that case I was
> able to do you the favor of proving you wrong. With your current accusation
> there is no way to prove you wrong, but your evidence is no stronger and
> makes no more sense.
>
> And now you say you do not even recall making your false accusations!
> Insane.
>
> My advice: Stick to tech. Come up with other tasks. Stop making false
> accusations you cannot back.

Isn't there a simple way to solve this problem? Why don't you, Snit,
simply provide your script/method such that it can run on someone else's
machine? 

If I write a bash shell script, I publish it so everyone can use it and
give me feedback. I don't make a video of it, I just give the source
code away and they can run it themselves. 

Same thing here, yes? Just publish the method so it can be duplicated by
anyone else and thus confirmed. 

-- 
Marek Novotny
https://github.com/marek-novotny

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy


csiph-web