Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #450022 > unrolled thread
| Started by | chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-05-02 06:54 -0500 |
| Last post | 2018-05-05 19:10 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 328 — 16 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-02 06:54 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2018-05-02 16:42 +0200
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-02 09:28 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-02 11:08 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-02 08:16 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-02 11:50 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-02 17:17 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-02 15:08 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-02 22:43 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-02 19:28 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-02 17:31 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-05-03 19:21 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-03 17:05 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-03 21:42 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-03 19:02 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-04 08:03 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-04 03:18 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-03 20:27 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-04 03:55 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-03 20:57 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-04 04:13 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-03 21:19 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-04 09:19 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-04 14:28 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-04 09:05 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-03 21:33 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-03 18:47 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-04 03:21 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-04 08:04 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-04 16:05 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-04 09:07 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-04 16:20 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-04 09:33 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-04 22:00 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-02 17:11 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-03 01:03 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-02 18:15 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-03 01:24 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-02 18:33 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-03 01:45 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-02 18:54 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-03 07:13 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-03 10:54 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-03 11:40 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-03 10:30 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-03 09:08 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-03 08:22 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-03 10:53 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-05-03 19:22 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-03 21:33 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-03 19:01 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-04 03:23 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-03 20:28 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-04 04:00 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-03 21:02 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-04 09:06 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-04 08:05 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-03 10:36 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-04 03:25 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-03 20:29 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-04 04:02 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-03 21:07 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-04 04:21 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-03 21:25 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-04 09:06 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-05-04 05:49 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-04 09:37 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-04 14:28 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-04 10:32 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-04 08:35 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-04 15:57 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-04 09:06 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-04 10:29 -0600
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-04 10:03 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-05 10:00 -0600
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-05 10:27 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-05 11:14 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-05 11:18 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-05 11:53 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-05 13:37 -0600
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-05 13:03 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-05 13:20 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-05 13:36 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-05 14:44 -0600
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-05 13:54 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-05 17:22 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 09:06 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 09:52 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 10:32 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 10:39 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 12:00 -0600
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 11:12 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 11:19 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 12:40 -0600
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 12:11 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 13:43 -0600
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 12:55 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 14:20 -0600
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 14:03 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 14:37 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 14:50 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 14:51 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-06 22:24 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 15:33 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2018-05-06 22:37 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 15:45 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-06 22:52 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-05-06 22:59 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 16:02 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-05-06 23:04 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 16:06 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-05-06 23:20 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 16:23 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-05-06 23:38 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 21:17 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 16:01 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-07 08:45 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 15:38 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 12:11 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 11:25 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-05 13:43 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-05 07:07 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-05 15:29 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-05 10:19 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-05 19:47 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-05 13:06 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-05 21:16 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-05 15:54 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-05 23:24 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-05 17:30 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-06 12:42 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-06 11:18 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 09:47 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 09:14 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 09:56 -0700
What's useful to Michael Glasser is very, -very- different... Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-05-06 10:27 -0700
Re: What's useful to Michael Glasser is very, -very- different... Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 10:43 -0700
Re: What's useful to Michael Glasser is very, -very- different... Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 10:54 -0700
Re: What's useful to Michael Glasser is very, -very- different... Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 12:12 -0600
Re: What's useful to Michael Glasser is very, -very- different... Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 11:22 -0700
Re: What's useful to Michael Glasser is very, -very- different... Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 12:41 -0600
Re: What's useful to Michael Glasser is very, -very- different... Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 12:12 -0700
Re: What's useful to Michael Glasser is very, -very- different... Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 11:23 -0700
Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-05-06 11:39 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 11:57 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 13:16 -0600
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 12:20 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 14:01 -0600
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 14:26 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-07 09:28 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-07 10:06 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-07 10:16 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-07 10:25 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-07 10:30 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-07 10:37 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-07 10:48 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-07 10:54 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-07 11:08 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-07 11:19 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-07 12:07 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-07 12:37 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-07 13:08 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-07 13:44 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-08 08:25 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-07 11:27 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-07 11:37 -0700
BrownEyed "Cuba, North Korea and Nepal" appear to be your ideal. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-05-06 13:15 -0700
Re: BrownEyed "Cuba, North Korea and Nepal" appear to be your ideal. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 13:18 -0700
Re: BrownEyed "Cuba, North Korea and Nepal" appear to be your ideal. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 13:32 -0700
Re: BrownEyed "Cuba, North Korea and Nepal" appear to be your ideal. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 14:35 -0700
Re: BrownEyed "Cuba, North Korea and Nepal" appear to be your ideal. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 14:41 -0700
Re: BrownEyed "Cuba, North Korea and Nepal" appear to be your ideal. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 14:49 -0700
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 12:58 -0600
Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 12:15 -0700
"CrackHead" is a pejorative -- it might be natural. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-05-06 13:34 -0700
Re: "CrackHead" is a pejorative -- it might be natural. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 14:37 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 09:41 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-06 11:11 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 09:46 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-06 11:00 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 09:45 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-06 10:52 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 09:44 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-05 10:35 -0600
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-05 10:41 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-05 11:47 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-05 19:17 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-05 13:08 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-05 13:16 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-05 14:42 -0600
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-05 13:46 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-05 14:49 -0600
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-05 13:56 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 09:09 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 09:55 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 10:40 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 10:49 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-06 11:01 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-06 11:25 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-05 07:09 -0700
MainStream Media worships BlueEyed Norway. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-05-05 09:04 -0700
Re: MainStream Media worships BlueEyed Norway. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-05 12:36 -0400
Re: MainStream Media worships BlueEyed Norway. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-05 10:42 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-07 07:25 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-07 10:15 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-07 10:40 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-07 17:23 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-07 10:29 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-07 15:20 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-07 12:40 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-07 12:45 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-08 03:01 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-04 17:40 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-07 04:14 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-07 04:24 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-07 09:48 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-07 08:50 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-07 10:18 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-07 17:36 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-07 10:44 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-08 07:02 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-08 15:58 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 09:09 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-08 09:19 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 10:13 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-08 09:13 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 09:26 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-08 16:57 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 10:01 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-08 13:50 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 11:07 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-08 12:37 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-08 14:28 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-08 13:39 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-08 17:14 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 14:45 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 12:55 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-08 12:22 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 12:59 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-08 13:40 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 13:58 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-08 19:05 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 19:53 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 07:04 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-09 08:00 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 08:24 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-09 08:29 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 08:56 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-09 09:44 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 10:23 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-09 10:27 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 11:12 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 11:41 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 12:16 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-09 13:51 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 14:03 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-09 14:11 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 14:47 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-09 16:30 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 17:14 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 17:37 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-09 18:20 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 19:55 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-09 20:01 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 20:38 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-09 20:39 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-10 08:10 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-10 09:21 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-10 09:28 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-10 09:33 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-10 09:45 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-10 10:09 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-10 10:20 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-10 10:54 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 20:50 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 20:02 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 17:29 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 10:25 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-09 07:16 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 07:40 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-09 08:20 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-08 09:14 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-08 11:47 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 09:49 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-08 17:18 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 10:19 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-08 12:29 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 12:59 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 02:05 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-08 12:41 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-08 17:49 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 11:01 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-08 13:07 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 11:17 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-08 18:20 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 11:23 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-08 13:28 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-08 18:43 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-08 17:10 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 14:14 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-08 14:34 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 12:56 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-08 14:31 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-08 13:42 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-08 18:55 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-08 17:20 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 14:47 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-08 17:16 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 14:45 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-08 14:28 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 11:01 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-05-08 15:33 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-09 08:00 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-09 07:33 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-08 09:24 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-08 09:44 -0700
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-04 14:28 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-04 08:09 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-04 14:28 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-03 17:27 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-03 07:12 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-03 11:46 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-02 16:37 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-05-03 19:31 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-03 19:58 -0500
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-04 03:27 +0000
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-05-04 05:49 -0400
Re: I simply enjoy it too much, as Americans do. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-05 19:10 -0500
Page 8 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 17 Next page →
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-06 12:41 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: What's useful to Michael Glasser is very, -very- different... |
| Message-ID | <pcni8t$21m$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #450627 |
On 2018-05-06 18:22:42 +0000, Snit said: > On 5/6/18 11:12 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >> On 2018-05-06 17:54:13 +0000, Snit said: >> >>> On 5/6/18 10:43 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>> On Sunday, May 6, 2018 at 11:28:00 AM UTC-6, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: >>>>>>> You [MichaelGlasser] cannot read, yet you home-school your kids. >>>>>> >>>>>> His reading comprehension seems to have gotten worse; >>>>>> either that or I blocked out how bad it was, maybe some >>>>>> kind of dissociative amnesia. >>>>> >>>>> No, it's not amnesia. >>>> >>>> So he is worse? Almost hard to believe its even possible. >>>> >>>>> Michael Glasser only allows premises that are useful to him. >>>> >>>> Sure, but now he's going to 'the bad place' from which he may >>>> never return ;) >>>> >>>>> And what's useful to him is very, -very- different >>>>> from what's useful to the rest of us, here. >>>> >>>> What''s useful to him should be under lock and key. >>>> >>>> >>> This is where you go... >> >> .... it's where you get off ;) >> >> And you should really stop doing that, a steady regimen of psychotropic >> leads to 'the bad place'. Some of your issues are probably related to >> years of such abuse; just because they're legal doesn't make them safe. >> Seriously, whose words *haven't* you taken out of context, completely >> distorted the meaning of or flat out lied about? > > Do you recall I do... and it's a nice feeling, you should try it ;)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-06 12:12 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: What's useful to Michael Glasser is very, -very- different... |
| Message-ID | <fl92d2Fcb1gU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #450627 |
On 5/6/18 11:22 AM, Snit wrote: > On 5/6/18 11:12 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >> On 2018-05-06 17:54:13 +0000, Snit said: >> >>> On 5/6/18 10:43 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>> On Sunday, May 6, 2018 at 11:28:00 AM UTC-6, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: >>>>>>> You [MichaelGlasser] cannot read, yet you home-school your kids. >>>>>> >>>>>> His reading comprehension seems to have gotten worse; >>>>>> either that or I blocked out how bad it was, maybe some >>>>>> kind of dissociative amnesia. >>>>> >>>>> No, it's not amnesia. >>>> >>>> So he is worse? Almost hard to believe its even possible. >>>> >>>>> Michael Glasser only allows premises that are useful to him. >>>> >>>> Sure, but now he's going to 'the bad place' from which he may >>>> never return ;) >>>> >>>>> And what's useful to him is very, -very- different >>>>> from what's useful to the rest of us, here. >>>> >>>> What''s useful to him should be under lock and key. >>>> >>>> >>> This is where you go... >> >> .... it's where you get off ;) >> >> And you should really stop doing that, a steady regimen of >> psychotropic leads to 'the bad place'. Some of your issues are >> probably related to years of such abuse; just because they're legal >> doesn't make them safe. Seriously, whose words *haven't* you taken out >> of context, completely distorted the meaning of or flat out lied about? > > Do you recall, years ago, when you warned me that you had seen Usenet > debates lead to divorce and other family issues? That was before you got > divorced... and before now, when you have a family member who has > contacted me and asked me to respond to you so they can watch you in > full action. > > I want to be clear that I have not and never would reach out to ANYONE > in your life, as you have repeatedly done to me... but your family > reached out to me, based on your obsession and your personal problems. > > You should heed your own warning. > You responded with snipping again. I admit I am beginning to feel bad for you. -- 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>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-06 11:23 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: What's useful to Michael Glasser is very, -very- different... |
| Message-ID | <fl8vhtFbkvmU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #450620 |
On 5/6/18 10:54 AM, Snit wrote: > On 5/6/18 10:43 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >> On Sunday, May 6, 2018 at 11:28:00 AM UTC-6, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: >>>>> You [MichaelGlasser] cannot read, yet you home-school your kids. >>>> >>>> His reading comprehension seems to have gotten worse; >>>> either that or I blocked out how bad it was, maybe some >>>> kind of dissociative amnesia. >>> >>> No, it's not amnesia. >> >> So he is worse? Almost hard to believe its even possible. >> >>> Michael Glasser only allows premises that are useful to him. >> >> Sure, but now he's going to 'the bad place' from which he may >> never return ;) >> >>> And what's useful to him is very, -very- different >>> from what's useful to the rest of us, here. >> >> What''s useful to him should be under lock and key. >> >> > This is where you go... and it was predictable. > > You know you made a fool of yourself. Just in the last few days: > > * You whined about a black man being shown as an example of healthy > masculinity. > > * You lied about me equating things I did not, and otherwise lied about > and twisted what I said. > > * In the context of police shootings, you said it made sense to you for > them to have a bias against blacks. > > * You showed deep ignorance about the weaknesses of using a single test > to judge the qualifications of an individual. > > * You projected your reading comprehension and drug addiction issues > onto me. > > * When you backed yourself into a corner you reacted with anger -- name > calling, insults, lies, and more. > > Remember, Carroll, you have at least one family member watching these > discussions... reading them and working to better understand your > issues. I was contacted by your family because of their concerns about > you -- they are tired of your obsession with me. They are concerned > about you... that is those who still care.1 > Carroll's reply: Snip. Snip. Snip. You fear yourself. -- 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>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff-Relf.Me @. |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-06 11:39 -0700 |
| Subject | Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? |
| Message-ID | <Jeff-Relf.Me@May.6--11.39am.Seattle.2018> |
| In reply to | #450620 |
> * You [SteveCarroll] whined about a black man being shown as > an example of healthy masculinity. I missed that. > * You lied about me equating things I did not, > and otherwise lied about and twisted what I said. I missed that too. > * In the context of police shootings, you said it made sense > to you for them to have a bias against blacks. Yes, to stay alive, so fewer cops die. An 80 year old Japanese lady, who only speaks Japanese, isn't the same as a young, horny black male, who only speaks Arabic. > * You showed deep ignorance about the weaknesses of using a single test > to judge the qualifications of an individual. That's the solution to this problem ? ! You don't have one. > * You projected your reading comprehension and drug addiction issues onto me. Likely, you take legal drugs. Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? What about Cuba, North Korea and communist Nepal ? Are you aware of their existance ? > * When you backed yourself into a corner you reacted with anger > -- name calling, insults, lies, and more. Again, I don't recall this. > I was contacted by your family because of their concerns about you > -- they are tired of your obsession with me. How would any of us know if this is true or not ? ! We can't.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-06 11:57 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? |
| Message-ID | <fl91g9Fc439U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #450633 |
On 5/6/18 11:39 AM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote: >> * You [SteveCarroll] whined about a black man being shown as >> an example of healthy masculinity. > > I missed that. He pointed to a page with the second image in this poster series about healthy examples of masculinity : <https://cmhc.utexas.edu/vav/vav_masculinut_poster.html> Carroll took exception to them picking a poster with a black man to show this. >> * You lied about me equating things I did not, >> and otherwise lied about and twisted what I said. > > I missed that too. Without digging back for exact wording (on this or any of it) he claimed I equated policing with college and job related issues. I, of course, did no such thing. >> * In the context of police shootings, you said it made sense >> to you for them to have a bias against blacks. > > Yes, to stay alive, so fewer cops die. > An 80 year old Japanese lady, who only speaks Japanese, > isn't the same as a young, horny black male, who only speaks Arabic. I say treat people like individuals... and if you are not then you should accept things like affirmative action quotas which try to balance inequalities by dealing with groups. I reject such identity politics, though. >> * You showed deep ignorance about the weaknesses of using a single test >> to judge the qualifications of an individual. > > That's the solution to this problem ? ! > You don't have one. The additional measure suggested by the source Carroll quoted was "grades" (and he even quoted that part of the text). Failing to understand his own quote, though, he talked about added testing in schools, psychological evaluations, and more. He also came to the exact opposite conclusion about my view of testing based on his reading comprehension challenges. >> * You projected your reading comprehension and drug addiction issues onto me. > > Likely, you take legal drugs. I take some vitamins and do occasionally take a Tylenol or the like (though even that is rare). I avoid caffeine (though I do like chocolate I do not drink sodas or coffee, other than say Trader Joe's samples) > Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? They have benefits but I would not want the world to be like them. > What about Cuba, North Korea and communist Nepal ? Nope. > Are you aware of their existance ? Yes, but not of their relevance here. >> * When you backed yourself into a corner you reacted with anger >> -- name calling, insults, lies, and more. > > Again, I don't recall this. You can read his posts. >> I was contacted by your family because of their concerns about you >> -- they are tired of your obsession with me. > > How would any of us know if this is true or not ? ! > We can't. True enough and I will not offer anything I have not been specifically told I can (or requested to do so). But really does not matter to anyone else but Carroll. -- 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>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-06 13:16 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? |
| Message-ID | <pcnk9t$h1r$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #450637 |
On 2018-05-06 18:57:13 +0000, Snit said: > On 5/6/18 11:39 AM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote: >>> * You [SteveCarroll] whined about a black man being shown as >>> an example of healthy masculinity. >> >> I missed that. > > He pointed to a page with the second image in this poster series about > healthy examples of masculinity : > > <https://cmhc.utexas.edu/vav/vav_masculinut_poster.html> > > Carroll took exception to them picking a poster with a black man to show this. > >>> * You lied about me equating things I did not, >>> and otherwise lied about and twisted what I said. >> >> I missed that too. > > Without digging back for exact wording (on this or any of it) he > claimed I equated policing with college and job related issues. I, of > course, did no such thing. I gotcha covered, Snit: "They no more have to judge people by the color of their skin than colleges and employers have to with affirmative action. " - Snit <dc661906-943e-45a6-9420-48d11b6b9741@googlegroups.com> Are the people in "colleges" and "employers" as likely to get shot/killed as a cop policing a low income, high crime area? No? Then I say the cops would "have" a stronger interest in the politically incorrect way of *staying alive*. (snip crap)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-06 12:20 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? |
| Message-ID | <fl92r7Fcb1gU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #450643 |
On 5/6/18 12:16 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On 2018-05-06 18:57:13 +0000, Snit said: > >> On 5/6/18 11:39 AM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote: >>>> * You [SteveCarroll] whined about a black man being shown as >>>> an example of healthy masculinity. >>> >>> I missed that. >> >> He pointed to a page with the second image in this poster series about >> healthy examples of masculinity : >> >> <https://cmhc.utexas.edu/vav/vav_masculinut_poster.html> >> >> Carroll took exception to them picking a poster with a black man to >> show this. >> >>>> * You lied about me equating things I did not, >>>> and otherwise lied about and twisted what I said. >>> >>> I missed that too. >> >> Without digging back for exact wording (on this or any of it) he >> claimed I equated policing with college and job related issues. I, of >> course, did no such thing. > > I gotcha covered, Snit: > > "They no more have to judge people by the color of their skin than > colleges and employers have to with affirmative action. " - Snit > > > <dc661906-943e-45a6-9420-48d11b6b9741@googlegroups.com> I accept that this is the text you misunderstood and came to your bizarre conclusion I was equating colleges and employees to what the police do. Fair enough. You failed to understand what you read, as you often do. > Are the people in "colleges" and "employers" as likely to get > shot/killed as a cop policing a low income, high crime area? No? Then I > say the cops would "have" a stronger interest in the politically > incorrect way of *staying alive*. You agree with judging people by the color of their skin, and treating dark skinned people differently (and worse) even in matters of life and death. I do not. -- 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>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-06 14:01 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? |
| Message-ID | <pcnmu8$3ab$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #450644 |
On 2018-05-06 19:20:07 +0000, Snit said: > On 5/6/18 12:16 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: >> On 2018-05-06 18:57:13 +0000, Snit said: >> >>> On 5/6/18 11:39 AM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote: >>>>> * You [SteveCarroll] whined about a black man being shown as >>>>> an example of healthy masculinity. >>>> >>>> I missed that. >>> >>> He pointed to a page with the second image in this poster series about >>> healthy examples of masculinity : >>> >>> <https://cmhc.utexas.edu/vav/vav_masculinut_poster.html> >>> >>> Carroll took exception to them picking a poster with a black man to show this. >>> >>>>> * You lied about me equating things I did not, >>>>> and otherwise lied about and twisted what I said. >>>> >>>> I missed that too. >>> >>> Without digging back for exact wording (on this or any of it) he >>> claimed I equated policing with college and job related issues. I, of >>> course, did no such thing. >> >> I gotcha covered, Snit: >> >>> ⁃ "They no more have to judge people by the color of their skin than >>> ⁃ colleges and employers have to with affirmative action. " - Snit >> >> >> <dc661906-943e-45a6-9420-48d11b6b9741@googlegroups.com> > > I accept that this is the text you misunderstood and came to your > bizarre conclusion I was equating colleges and employees to what the > police do. LOL! You're the one whining that *your* context was regarding shooting, in that context, you were clearly equating the risk of getting shot amongst wildly different groups. As I pointed out, *my* statement wasn't in "the context of shootings", it was in the context of common sense... as related to 'judging' while policing... which is not the same thing as 'judging' while hiring or 'judging' while admitting people to college. And... again, 'judging' is not shooting. Let's rewrite what you were actually conveying there, had you understood the context, in the hopes that even you can understand it ;) 'Police officers patrolling low income, high crime rate areas, where they are being gunned down at an shocking percentage, no more have to judge people by the color of their skin than colleges and employers have to judge people by their skin with affirmative action.' And my response would be exactly the same: "No one has to do anything... but prudence suggests that it would be in their interest to do so if they want to live when policing in the high crime areas." The only thing that was "misunderstood" here was done so by you, when you replied with your nonsense: "One black person is not responsible for the actions of another. You are trying to justify police shooting someone based on the color of their skin. That it utterly reprehensible... " Anyone can see I didn't try "to justify police shooting someone based on the color of their skin" because, again... 'judging' is not shooting.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-06 14:26 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? |
| Message-ID | <fl9a94Fe2vdU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #450647 |
On 5/6/18 1:01 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On 2018-05-06 19:20:07 +0000, Snit said:
>
>> On 5/6/18 12:16 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>> On 2018-05-06 18:57:13 +0000, Snit said:
>>>
>>>> On 5/6/18 11:39 AM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
>>>>>> * You [SteveCarroll] whined about a black man being shown as
>>>>>> an example of healthy masculinity.
>>>>>
>>>>> I missed that.
>>>>
>>>> He pointed to a page with the second image in this poster series
>>>> about healthy examples of masculinity :
>>>>
>>>> <https://cmhc.utexas.edu/vav/vav_masculinut_poster.html>
>>>>
>>>> Carroll took exception to them picking a poster with a black man to
>>>> show this.
>>>>
>>>>>> * You lied about me equating things I did not,
>>>>>> and otherwise lied about and twisted what I said.
>>>>>
>>>>> I missed that too.
>>>>
>>>> Without digging back for exact wording (on this or any of it) he
>>>> claimed I equated policing with college and job related issues. I,
>>>> of course, did no such thing.
>>>
>>> I gotcha covered, Snit:
>>>
>>>> ⁃ "They no more have to judge people by the color of their
>>>> skin than
>>>> ⁃ colleges and employers have to with affirmative action. " -
>>>> Snit
>>>
>>>
>>> <dc661906-943e-45a6-9420-48d11b6b9741@googlegroups.com>
>>
>> I accept that this is the text you misunderstood and came to your
>> bizarre conclusion I was equating colleges and employees to what the
>> police do.
>
> LOL!
>
> You're the one whining that *your* context was regarding shooting,
Ah, another of your famous misunderstandings. I was noting the context
YOU focused on was dealing with shooting, and quoted where you said that!
> in
> that context, you were clearly equating the risk of getting shot amongst
> wildly different groups.
Another of your famous misunderstandings. I never said, suggested,
hinted, or implied that your chance of risk of getting shot was the same
among different groups.
> As I pointed out, *my* statement wasn't in "the
> context of shootings"
It was in context to this research:
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0141854
——
The results provide evidence of a significant bias in the killing of
unarmed black Americans relative to unarmed white Americans, in that the
probability of being {black, unarmed, and shot by police} is about 3.49
times the probability of being {white, unarmed, and shot by police} on
average. Furthermore, the results of multi-level modeling show that
there exists significant heterogeneity across counties in the extent of
racial bias in police shootings, with some counties showing relative
risk ratios of 20 to 1 or more. Finally, analysis of police shooting
data as a function of county-level predictors suggests that racial bias
in police shootings is most likely to emerge in police departments in
larger metropolitan counties with low median incomes and a sizable
portion of black residents, especially when there is high financial
inequality in that county. There is no relationship between county-level
racial bias in police shootings and crime rates (even race-specific
crime rates), meaning that the racial bias observed in police shootings
in this data set is not explainable as a response to local-level crime
rates.
——
You even specifically called out the "last statement" where they speak
of a "racial bias" against blacks that is NOT explained by "local-level
crime rates".
You backed this bias... the specific bias against people based solely on
their skin color.
> , it was in the context of common sense
Your bigotry against blacks is NOT "common sense".
> related to 'judging' while policing... which is not the same thing as
> 'judging' while hiring or 'judging' while admitting people to college.
In BOTH cases bigotry against blacks (or other groups) is wrong. That
does not mean the situations are the same (they do not "equate") but
bigotry is still wrong.
You can twist all you want, Carroll, but you are the one who backed
bigotry against blacks and who showed you could not understand what you
were reading.
> And... again, 'judging' is not shooting.
Judging who to shoot... which is the context, as proved above.
> Let's rewrite what you were actually conveying there
You are NOT my spokesperson. Ever.
Get that through your head... you are NOT authorized to speak for me.
...
--
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>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-07 09:28 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? |
| Message-ID | <cc7f3028-c919-4a61-8e18-d51f8389d1ac@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #450655 |
On Sunday, May 6, 2018 at 3:27:02 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 5/6/18 1:01 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > > On 2018-05-06 19:20:07 +0000, Snit said: > > > >> On 5/6/18 12:16 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>> On 2018-05-06 18:57:13 +0000, Snit said: > >>> > >>>> On 5/6/18 11:39 AM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote: > >>>>>> * You [SteveCarroll] whined about a black man being shown as > >>>>>> an example of healthy masculinity. > >>>>> > >>>>> I missed that. > >>>> > >>>> He pointed to a page with the second image in this poster series > >>>> about healthy examples of masculinity : > >>>> > >>>> <https://cmhc.utexas.edu/vav/vav_masculinut_poster.html> > >>>> > >>>> Carroll took exception to them picking a poster with a black man to > >>>> show this. > >>>> > >>>>>> * You lied about me equating things I did not, > >>>>>> and otherwise lied about and twisted what I said. > >>>>> > >>>>> I missed that too. > >>>> > >>>> Without digging back for exact wording (on this or any of it) he > >>>> claimed I equated policing with college and job related issues. I, > >>>> of course, did no such thing. > >>> > >>> I gotcha covered, Snit: > >>> > >>>> ⁃ "They no more have to judge people by the color of their > >>>> skin than > >>>> ⁃ colleges and employers have to with affirmative action. " - > >>>> Snit > >>> > >>> > >>> <dc661906-943e-45a6-9420-48d11b6b9741@googlegroups.com> > >> > >> I accept that this is the text you misunderstood and came to your > >> bizarre conclusion I was equating colleges and employees to what the > >> police do. > > > > LOL! > > > > You're the one whining that *your* context was regarding shooting, > > Ah, another of your famous misunderstandings. Bull. you keep stating that is the *only* context for that discussion; it isn't, but that's the lie you've pushed. I was noting the context > YOU focused on LOL! The guy who can't understand what *he* writes is telling "others" what they've "focused on". You're a riot, Snit ;) > > in > > that context, you were clearly equating the risk of getting shot amongst > > wildly different groups. > > Another of your famous misunderstandings. You don't even comprehend what *you* write. > I never said, suggested, > hinted, or implied that your chance of risk of getting shot was the same > among different groups. You're now arguing that cops should simply ignore their increased risk factor. What do you think your statement is saying in the context that *you* kept insisting is *the* context (which was based on *your* "evidence", not mine)? "They no more have to judge people by the color of their skin than colleges and employers have to with affirmative action. " - Snit AGAIN... rewritten so even *you* can understand what you wrote in the context that *you* laid out, that would read: 'Police officers patrolling areas "with low median incomes" in "high violence and crime areas" which contain "a sizable portion of black residents" (where the cops are being gunned down at an alarming rate), 'no more have to judge people by the color of their skin than colleges and employers have to judge people by their skin with racially based affirmative action'. Even your text makes it clear that you're assessing the risk factor of both groups (cops in those areas versus civilians) to be equal, which is absurd. Now you're saying no to that, so you are necessarily arguing that officers should just ignore their *highly* increased risk as you and your brethren strike for more pay in AZ. What's wrong with this picture that anyone with a working brain won't immediately spot?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-07 10:06 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? |
| Message-ID | <flbfchFsl86U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #450726 |
On 5/7/18 9:28 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
...
You are STILL rehashing stuff and twisting stuff that was covered here.
NOT playing your games and playing with your meta-debates, word games,
misrepresentations, etc.
But I will post this again... something you mostly snipped when you saw
it. It explains the things you are NOW asking about.
Round and round you go... asking about things which have been fully
explained.
On 5/6/18 9:09 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Saturday, May 5, 2018 at 2:56:41 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
>> On 5/5/18 1:49 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>> On 2018-05-05 20:46:59 +0000, Snit said:
>>>
>>>> On 5/5/18 1:42 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>>> On 2018-05-05 20:16:53 +0000, Snit said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/5/18 1:08 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>> You are backing racial quotas of a sort...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm pointing out how they undoubtedly *must* be forced to look
>>>>>>>>> at things in a way that you and I will never have to if they
want to
>>>>>>>>> live through the day.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They no more have to judge people by the color of their skin than
>>>>>>>> colleges
>>>>>>>> and employers have to with affirmative action.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No one has to do anything... but prudence suggests that it would
>>>>>>> be in their interest to do so if they want to live when policing in
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> high crime areas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One black person is not responsible for the actions of another. You
>>>>>> are trying to justify police shooting someone based on the color of
>>>>>> their skin.
>>>>>
>>>>> LOL! Where do you believe I 'justified' that?
>>>>
>>>> Sigh. OK, you are back to your game playing nonsense... you JUST said
>>>> how they have to target blacks differently
>>>
>>> I used the wrod "target"?! Where?
>>
>> My level of interest in your word games: zero.
>
> The games were all yours, Mr. Pathological Liar.
>
You went back to your games where you demand I quote back to you what
you have said... and then denying you said it because I spoke of what I
disagree with in your views but did not use your exact words.
Even worse you do this AS you lie about what I have said, in this case
claiming I "equated policing in high crime areas with job/college
issues". You made that up in response to my noting I do not back
grouping people by color in either situation, which does not in any way
imply the two situations are equal.
But back to your support of judging people by the color of their skin,
and you being OK with this in situations where black people are shot!
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0141854
——
The results provide evidence of a significant bias in the killing of
unarmed black Americans relative to unarmed white Americans, in that the
probability of being {black, unarmed, and shot by police} is about 3.49
times the probability of being {white, unarmed, and shot by police} on
average. Furthermore, the results of multi-level modeling show that
there exists significant heterogeneity across counties in the extent of
racial bias in police shootings, with some counties showing relative
risk ratios of 20 to 1 or more. Finally, analysis of police shooting
data as a function of county-level predictors suggests that racial bias
in police shootings is most likely to emerge in police departments in
larger metropolitan counties with low median incomes and a sizable
portion of black residents, especially when there is high financial
inequality in that county. There is no relationship between county-level
racial bias in police shootings and crime rates (even race-specific
crime rates), meaning that the racial bias observed in police shootings
in this data set is not explainable as a response to local-level crime
rates.
——
Steve Carroll
-----
What does that last statement tell you? In such areas, given
that stats show a police officer is 18.9 times more likely
to be killed by a black male (who, at 6% commit 42% of
police officer deaths), you wouldn't think it prudent for
them to exhibit a "bias" if they want to come home from work
that night? It's a war zone, the things we'd all like to
believe should be done can't be done, there'd be no one left
alive to do them.
-----
I'm pointing out how they undoubtedly *must* be forced to
look at things in a way that you and I will never have to if
they want to live through the day.
-----
> They no more have to judge people by the color of
> their skin than colleges and employers have to
> with affirmative action.
No one has to do anything... but prudence suggests
that it would be in their interest to do so if they
want to live when policing in the high crime areas.
-----
> You are STILL backing judging people by the color
> of their skin
I'm just recognizing that police officers in these
high crime areas don't have the luxury not to.
-----
That is you, Carroll, noting your support for targeting people based on
the color of their skin in determining who to shoot. You can cry and
whine and lie when faced with your own words, as you did during your
tantrum over a black person being shown as an example of healthy
masculinity, but you still are responsible for your words.
You have always shown racist tendencies but you used to be better at
hiding them... you used to want to be the KKK member who never had his
hood lifted. Now, perhaps based on Trump's open bigotry and how he has
made it more acceptable in this nation to be a bigot, you have a harder
time keeping your hood on. Or maybe you just do not care to.
--
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>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-07 10:16 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? |
| Message-ID | <ad018b69-7691-479c-9f57-17835f55e196@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #450727 |
On Monday, May 7, 2018 at 11:06:29 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 5/7/18 9:28 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: (snip) > I'm pointing out how they undoubtedly *must* be forced to > look at things in a way that you and I will never have to if > they want to live through the day. > ----- > > They no more have to judge people by the color of > > their skin than colleges and employers have to > > with affirmative action. > No one has to do anything... but prudence suggests > that it would be in their interest to do so if they > want to live when policing in the high crime areas. > ----- > > You are STILL backing judging people by the color > > of their skin > I'm just recognizing that police officers in these > high crime areas don't have the luxury not to. > ----- > > That is you, Carroll, noting your support for targeting people based on > the color of their skin in determining who to shoot. I said nothing about shooting anyone. When you wrote that bit about college and employers above, where you've falsely alleged my reply is calling for blacks to be shot, were you talking about shooting people, Mr. Ridiculously Idiotic Liar? Once again, the overmedicated nitwit proves how context eludes him.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-07 10:25 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? |
| Message-ID | <flbggrFstemU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #450732 |
On 5/7/18 10:16 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
You snipped key context and then pretended it did not exist. Not biting.
But I will, AGAIN, post the full commentary.
At some point I will stop doing even this. Then you will claim victory
and insist I am running... even though with your dishonest snipping,
word play, blaming me for all that is wrong in your life and all the
mistakes you make, etc. YOU are the one running from accepting
responsibility for your own words and actions.
On 5/6/18 9:09 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Saturday, May 5, 2018 at 2:56:41 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
>> On 5/5/18 1:49 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>> On 2018-05-05 20:46:59 +0000, Snit said:
>>>
>>>> On 5/5/18 1:42 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>>> On 2018-05-05 20:16:53 +0000, Snit said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/5/18 1:08 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>> You are backing racial quotas of a sort...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm pointing out how they undoubtedly *must* be forced to look
>>>>>>>>> at things in a way that you and I will never have to if they
>>>>>>>>> want to live through the day.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They no more have to judge people by the color of their skin
>>>>>>>> than colleges and employers have to with affirmative action.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No one has to do anything... but prudence suggests that it would
>>>>>>> be in their interest to do so if they want to live when policing
>>>>>>> in the high crime areas.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> One black person is not responsible for the actions of another.
>>>>>> You are trying to justify police shooting someone based on the
>>>>>> color of their skin.
>>>>>>
>>>>> LOL! Where do you believe I 'justified' that?
>>>>>
>>>> Sigh. OK, you are back to your game playing nonsense... you JUST
>>>> said how they have to target blacks differently
>>>>
>>> I used the wrod "target"?! Where?
>>>
>> My level of interest in your word games: zero.
>>
> The games were all yours, Mr. Pathological Liar.
You went back to your games where you demand I quote back to you what
you have said... and then denying you said it because I spoke of what I
disagree with in your views but did not use your exact words.
Even worse you do this AS you lie about what I have said, in this case
claiming I "equated policing in high crime areas with job/college
issues". You made that up in response to my noting I do not back
grouping people by color in either situation, which does not in any way
imply the two situations are equal.
But back to your support of judging people by the color of their skin,
and you being OK with this in situations where black people are shot!
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0141854
——
The results provide evidence of a significant bias in the killing of
unarmed black Americans relative to unarmed white Americans, in that the
probability of being {black, unarmed, and shot by police} is about 3.49
times the probability of being {white, unarmed, and shot by police} on
average. Furthermore, the results of multi-level modeling show that
there exists significant heterogeneity across counties in the extent of
racial bias in police shootings, with some counties showing relative
risk ratios of 20 to 1 or more. Finally, analysis of police shooting
data as a function of county-level predictors suggests that racial bias
in police shootings is most likely to emerge in police departments in
larger metropolitan counties with low median incomes and a sizable
portion of black residents, especially when there is high financial
inequality in that county. There is no relationship between county-level
racial bias in police shootings and crime rates (even race-specific
crime rates), meaning that the racial bias observed in police shootings
in this data set is not explainable as a response to local-level crime
rates.
——
Steve Carroll
-----
What does that last statement tell you? In such areas, given
that stats show a police officer is 18.9 times more likely
to be killed by a black male (who, at 6% commit 42% of
police officer deaths), you wouldn't think it prudent for
them to exhibit a "bias" if they want to come home from work
that night? It's a war zone, the things we'd all like to
believe should be done can't be done, there'd be no one left
alive to do them.
-----
I'm pointing out how they undoubtedly *must* be forced to
look at things in a way that you and I will never have to if
they want to live through the day.
-----
> They no more have to judge people by the color of
> their skin than colleges and employers have to
> with affirmative action.
No one has to do anything... but prudence suggests
that it would be in their interest to do so if they
want to live when policing in the high crime areas.
-----
> You are STILL backing judging people by the color
> of their skin
I'm just recognizing that police officers in these
high crime areas don't have the luxury not to.
-----
That is you, Carroll, noting your support for targeting people based on
the color of their skin in determining who to shoot. You can cry and
whine and lie when faced with your own words, as you did during your
tantrum over a black person being shown as an example of healthy
masculinity, but you still are responsible for your words.
You have always shown racist tendencies but you used to be better at
hiding them... you used to want to be the KKK member who never had his
hood lifted. Now, perhaps based on Trump's open bigotry and how he has
made it more acceptable in this nation to be a bigot, you have a harder
time keeping your hood on. Or maybe you just do not care to.
--
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>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-07 10:30 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? |
| Message-ID | <6fd59bff-86d5-4b03-a0e3-f8b2b4a08542@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #450738 |
On Monday, May 7, 2018 at 11:25:52 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 5/7/18 10:16 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > > You ...pointed out your lie didn't sell well? That's true. We all know you can't stop lying so I suggest you start telling lies that don't require "others" to be as stupid as you need them to be.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-07 10:37 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? |
| Message-ID | <flbh6eFstemU5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #450738 |
On 5/7/18 10:25 AM, Snit wrote:
> On 5/7/18 10:16 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>
> You snipped key context and then pretended it did not exist. Not biting.
> But I will, AGAIN, post the full commentary.
>
> At some point I will stop doing even this. Then you will claim victory
> and insist I am running... even though with your dishonest snipping,
> word play, blaming me for all that is wrong in your life and all the
> mistakes you make, etc. YOU are the one running from accepting
> responsibility for your own words and actions.
>
>
> On 5/6/18 9:09 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> > On Saturday, May 5, 2018 at 2:56:41 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> >> On 5/5/18 1:49 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> >>> On 2018-05-05 20:46:59 +0000, Snit said:
> >>>
> >>>> On 5/5/18 1:42 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> >>>>> On 2018-05-05 20:16:53 +0000, Snit said:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 5/5/18 1:08 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> >>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>>>> You are backing racial quotas of a sort...
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I'm pointing out how they undoubtedly *must* be forced to look
> >>>>>>>>> at things in a way that you and I will never have to if they
> >>>>>>>>> want to live through the day.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> They no more have to judge people by the color of their skin
> >>>>>>>> than colleges and employers have to with affirmative action.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> No one has to do anything... but prudence suggests that it would
> >>>>>>> be in their interest to do so if they want to live when policing
> >>>>>>> in the high crime areas.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> One black person is not responsible for the actions of another.
> >>>>>> You are trying to justify police shooting someone based on the
> >>>>>> color of their skin.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> LOL! Where do you believe I 'justified' that?
> >>>>>
> >>>> Sigh. OK, you are back to your game playing nonsense... you JUST
> >>>> said how they have to target blacks differently
> >>>>
> >>> I used the wrod "target"?! Where?
> >>>
> >> My level of interest in your word games: zero.
> >>
> > The games were all yours, Mr. Pathological Liar.
>
> You went back to your games where you demand I quote back to you what
> you have said... and then denying you said it because I spoke of what I
> disagree with in your views but did not use your exact words.
>
> Even worse you do this AS you lie about what I have said, in this case
> claiming I "equated policing in high crime areas with job/college
> issues". You made that up in response to my noting I do not back
> grouping people by color in either situation, which does not in any way
> imply the two situations are equal.
>
> But back to your support of judging people by the color of their skin,
> and you being OK with this in situations where black people are shot!
>
> http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0141854
> ——
> The results provide evidence of a significant bias in the killing of
> unarmed black Americans relative to unarmed white Americans, in that the
> probability of being {black, unarmed, and shot by police} is about 3.49
> times the probability of being {white, unarmed, and shot by police} on
> average. Furthermore, the results of multi-level modeling show that
> there exists significant heterogeneity across counties in the extent of
> racial bias in police shootings, with some counties showing relative
> risk ratios of 20 to 1 or more. Finally, analysis of police shooting
> data as a function of county-level predictors suggests that racial bias
> in police shootings is most likely to emerge in police departments in
> larger metropolitan counties with low median incomes and a sizable
> portion of black residents, especially when there is high financial
> inequality in that county. There is no relationship between county-level
> racial bias in police shootings and crime rates (even race-specific
> crime rates), meaning that the racial bias observed in police shootings
> in this data set is not explainable as a response to local-level crime
> rates.
> ——
>
> Steve Carroll
> -----
> What does that last statement tell you? In such areas, given
> that stats show a police officer is 18.9 times more likely
> to be killed by a black male (who, at 6% commit 42% of
> police officer deaths), you wouldn't think it prudent for
> them to exhibit a "bias" if they want to come home from work
> that night? It's a war zone, the things we'd all like to
> believe should be done can't be done, there'd be no one left
> alive to do them.
> -----
> I'm pointing out how they undoubtedly *must* be forced to
> look at things in a way that you and I will never have to if
> they want to live through the day.
> -----
> > They no more have to judge people by the color of
> > their skin than colleges and employers have to
> > with affirmative action.
> No one has to do anything... but prudence suggests
> that it would be in their interest to do so if they
> want to live when policing in the high crime areas.
> -----
> > You are STILL backing judging people by the color
> > of their skin
> I'm just recognizing that police officers in these
> high crime areas don't have the luxury not to.
> -----
>
> That is you, Carroll, noting your support for targeting people based on
> the color of their skin in determining who to shoot. You can cry and
> whine and lie when faced with your own words, as you did during your
> tantrum over a black person being shown as an example of healthy
> masculinity, but you still are responsible for your words.
>
> You have always shown racist tendencies but you used to be better at
> hiding them... you used to want to be the KKK member who never had his
> hood lifted. Now, perhaps based on Trump's open bigotry and how he has
> made it more acceptable in this nation to be a bigot, you have a harder
> time keeping your hood on. Or maybe you just do not care to.
>
Gee, and in response Carroll snipped all content and blamed ME again.
LOL! He even claimed I lied but, of course for some unstated reason he
keeps snipping some unnamed and unquotable "lie" just to cry about all
that is wrong in his life is somehow my fault.
Seriously, your trolling has become too predictable.
--
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>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-07 10:48 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? |
| Message-ID | <40e26ac0-b568-41fa-b898-50c650e20e9f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #450744 |
On Monday, May 7, 2018 at 11:37:22 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> On 5/7/18 10:25 AM, Snit wrote:
> > On 5/7/18 10:16 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> >
> > You snipped key context and then pretended it did not exist. Not biting.
> > But I will, AGAIN, post the full commentary.
> >
> > At some point I will stop doing even this. Then you will claim victory
> > and insist I am running... even though with your dishonest snipping,
> > word play, blaming me for all that is wrong in your life and all the
> > mistakes you make, etc. YOU are the one running from accepting
> > responsibility for your own words and actions.
> >
> >
> > On 5/6/18 9:09 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> > > On Saturday, May 5, 2018 at 2:56:41 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> > >> On 5/5/18 1:49 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> > >>> On 2018-05-05 20:46:59 +0000, Snit said:
> > >>>
> > >>>> On 5/5/18 1:42 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> > >>>>> On 2018-05-05 20:16:53 +0000, Snit said:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> On 5/5/18 1:08 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> > >>>>>> ...
> > >>>>>>>>>> You are backing racial quotas of a sort...
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> I'm pointing out how they undoubtedly *must* be forced to look
> > >>>>>>>>> at things in a way that you and I will never have to if they
> > >>>>>>>>> want to live through the day.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> They no more have to judge people by the color of their skin
> > >>>>>>>> than colleges and employers have to with affirmative action.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> No one has to do anything... but prudence suggests that it would
> > >>>>>>> be in their interest to do so if they want to live when policing
> > >>>>>>> in the high crime areas.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> One black person is not responsible for the actions of another.
> > >>>>>> You are trying to justify police shooting someone based on the
> > >>>>>> color of their skin.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> LOL! Where do you believe I 'justified' that?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> Sigh. OK, you are back to your game playing nonsense... you JUST
> > >>>> said how they have to target blacks differently
> > >>>>
> > >>> I used the wrod "target"?! Where?
> > >>>
> > >> My level of interest in your word games: zero.
> > >>
> > > The games were all yours, Mr. Pathological Liar.
> >
> > You went back to your games where you demand I quote back to you what
> > you have said... and then denying you said it because I spoke of what I
> > disagree with in your views but did not use your exact words.
> >
> > Even worse you do this AS you lie about what I have said, in this case
> > claiming I "equated policing in high crime areas with job/college
> > issues". You made that up in response to my noting I do not back
> > grouping people by color in either situation, which does not in any way
> > imply the two situations are equal.
> >
> > But back to your support of judging people by the color of their skin,
> > and you being OK with this in situations where black people are shot!
> >
> > http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0141854
> > ——
> > The results provide evidence of a significant bias in the killing of
> > unarmed black Americans relative to unarmed white Americans, in that the
> > probability of being {black, unarmed, and shot by police} is about 3.49
> > times the probability of being {white, unarmed, and shot by police} on
> > average. Furthermore, the results of multi-level modeling show that
> > there exists significant heterogeneity across counties in the extent of
> > racial bias in police shootings, with some counties showing relative
> > risk ratios of 20 to 1 or more. Finally, analysis of police shooting
> > data as a function of county-level predictors suggests that racial bias
> > in police shootings is most likely to emerge in police departments in
> > larger metropolitan counties with low median incomes and a sizable
> > portion of black residents, especially when there is high financial
> > inequality in that county. There is no relationship between county-level
> > racial bias in police shootings and crime rates (even race-specific
> > crime rates), meaning that the racial bias observed in police shootings
> > in this data set is not explainable as a response to local-level crime
> > rates.
> > ——
> >
> > Steve Carroll
> > -----
> > What does that last statement tell you? In such areas, given
> > that stats show a police officer is 18.9 times more likely
> > to be killed by a black male (who, at 6% commit 42% of
> > police officer deaths), you wouldn't think it prudent for
> > them to exhibit a "bias" if they want to come home from work
> > that night? It's a war zone, the things we'd all like to
> > believe should be done can't be done, there'd be no one left
> > alive to do them.
> > -----
> > I'm pointing out how they undoubtedly *must* be forced to
> > look at things in a way that you and I will never have to if
> > they want to live through the day.
> > -----
> > > They no more have to judge people by the color of
> > > their skin than colleges and employers have to
> > > with affirmative action.
> > No one has to do anything... but prudence suggests
> > that it would be in their interest to do so if they
> > want to live when policing in the high crime areas.
> > -----
> > > You are STILL backing judging people by the color
> > > of their skin
> > I'm just recognizing that police officers in these
> > high crime areas don't have the luxury not to.
> > -----
> >
> > That is you, Carroll, noting your support for targeting people based on
> > the color of their skin in determining who to shoot. You can cry and
> > whine and lie when faced with your own words, as you did during your
> > tantrum over a black person being shown as an example of healthy
> > masculinity, but you still are responsible for your words.
> >
> > You have always shown racist tendencies but you used to be better at
> > hiding them... you used to want to be the KKK member who never had his
> > hood lifted. Now, perhaps based on Trump's open bigotry and how he has
> > made it more acceptable in this nation to be a bigot, you have a harder
> > time keeping your hood on. Or maybe you just do not care to.
> >
> Gee, and in response Carroll snipped all content
Content? LOL!
I created this thread for the purpose of penning you in, I was gonna
call it 'Snit's house' but that woulda been too obvious. So, it's OK...
as we go through your exorcism feel free to puke, crap your pants,
head spin, all that stuff... eventually well get there. pal ;)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-07 10:54 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? |
| Message-ID | <flbi6oFt8thU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #450748 |
On 5/7/18 10:48 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Monday, May 7, 2018 at 11:37:22 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
>> On 5/7/18 10:25 AM, Snit wrote:
>>> On 5/7/18 10:16 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>
>>> You snipped key context and then pretended it did not exist. Not biting..
>>> But I will, AGAIN, post the full commentary.
>>>
>>> At some point I will stop doing even this. Then you will claim victory
>>> and insist I am running... even though with your dishonest snipping,
>>> word play, blaming me for all that is wrong in your life and all the
>>> mistakes you make, etc. YOU are the one running from accepting
>>> responsibility for your own words and actions.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/6/18 9:09 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>> > On Saturday, May 5, 2018 at 2:56:41 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
>>> >> On 5/5/18 1:49 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>> >>> On 2018-05-05 20:46:59 +0000, Snit said:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> On 5/5/18 1:42 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>> >>>>> On 2018-05-05 20:16:53 +0000, Snit said:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> On 5/5/18 1:08 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>> >>>>>> ...
>>> >>>>>>>>>> You are backing racial quotas of a sort...
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm pointing out how they undoubtedly *must* be forced to look
>>> >>>>>>>>> at things in a way that you and I will never have to if they
>>> >>>>>>>>> want to live through the day.
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> They no more have to judge people by the color of their skin
>>> >>>>>>>> than colleges and employers have to with affirmative action.
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> No one has to do anything... but prudence suggests that it would
>>> >>>>>>> be in their interest to do so if they want to live when policing
>>> >>>>>>> in the high crime areas.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> One black person is not responsible for the actions of another.
>>> >>>>>> You are trying to justify police shooting someone based on the
>>> >>>>>> color of their skin.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>> LOL! Where do you believe I 'justified' that?
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>> Sigh. OK, you are back to your game playing nonsense... you JUST
>>> >>>> said how they have to target blacks differently
>>> >>>>
>>> >>> I used the wrod "target"?! Where?
>>> >>>
>>> >> My level of interest in your word games: zero.
>>> >>
>>> > The games were all yours, Mr. Pathological Liar.
>>>
>>> You went back to your games where you demand I quote back to you what
>>> you have said... and then denying you said it because I spoke of what I
>>> disagree with in your views but did not use your exact words.
>>>
>>> Even worse you do this AS you lie about what I have said, in this case
>>> claiming I "equated policing in high crime areas with job/college
>>> issues". You made that up in response to my noting I do not back
>>> grouping people by color in either situation, which does not in any way
>>> imply the two situations are equal.
>>>
>>> But back to your support of judging people by the color of their skin,
>>> and you being OK with this in situations where black people are shot!
>>>
>>> http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0141854
>>> ——
>>> The results provide evidence of a significant bias in the killing of
>>> unarmed black Americans relative to unarmed white Americans, in that the
>>> probability of being {black, unarmed, and shot by police} is about 3.49
>>> times the probability of being {white, unarmed, and shot by police} on
>>> average. Furthermore, the results of multi-level modeling show that
>>> there exists significant heterogeneity across counties in the extent of
>>> racial bias in police shootings, with some counties showing relative
>>> risk ratios of 20 to 1 or more. Finally, analysis of police shooting
>>> data as a function of county-level predictors suggests that racial bias
>>> in police shootings is most likely to emerge in police departments in
>>> larger metropolitan counties with low median incomes and a sizable
>>> portion of black residents, especially when there is high financial
>>> inequality in that county. There is no relationship between county-level
>>> racial bias in police shootings and crime rates (even race-specific
>>> crime rates), meaning that the racial bias observed in police shootings
>>> in this data set is not explainable as a response to local-level crime
>>> rates.
>>> ——
>>>
>>> Steve Carroll
>>> -----
>>> What does that last statement tell you? In such areas, given
>>> that stats show a police officer is 18.9 times more likely
>>> to be killed by a black male (who, at 6% commit 42% of
>>> police officer deaths), you wouldn't think it prudent for
>>> them to exhibit a "bias" if they want to come home from work
>>> that night? It's a war zone, the things we'd all like to
>>> believe should be done can't be done, there'd be no one left
>>> alive to do them.
>>> -----
>>> I'm pointing out how they undoubtedly *must* be forced to
>>> look at things in a way that you and I will never have to if
>>> they want to live through the day.
>>> -----
>>> > They no more have to judge people by the color of
>>> > their skin than colleges and employers have to
>>> > with affirmative action.
>>> No one has to do anything... but prudence suggests
>>> that it would be in their interest to do so if they
>>> want to live when policing in the high crime areas.
>>> -----
>>> > You are STILL backing judging people by the color
>>> > of their skin
>>> I'm just recognizing that police officers in these
>>> high crime areas don't have the luxury not to.
>>> -----
>>>
>>> That is you, Carroll, noting your support for targeting people based on
>>> the color of their skin in determining who to shoot. You can cry and
>>> whine and lie when faced with your own words, as you did during your
>>> tantrum over a black person being shown as an example of healthy
>>> masculinity, but you still are responsible for your words.
>>>
>>> You have always shown racist tendencies but you used to be better at
>>> hiding them... you used to want to be the KKK member who never had his
>>> hood lifted. Now, perhaps based on Trump's open bigotry and how he has
>>> made it more acceptable in this nation to be a bigot, you have a harder
>>> time keeping your hood on. Or maybe you just do not care to.
>>>
>> Gee, and in response Carroll snipped all content
>
> Content? LOL!
Yes, content. And below you pretend -- lie -- about completely insane
off topic claims.
Not biting.
> I created this thread for the purpose of penning you in, I was gonna
> call it 'Snit's house' but that woulda been too obvious. So, it's OK...
> as we go through your exorcism feel free to puke, crap your pants,
> head spin, all that stuff... eventually well get there. pal ;)
>
--
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>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-07 11:08 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? |
| Message-ID | <10005bb8-feb9-4fd0-a28e-741392e1af45@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #450749 |
On Monday, May 7, 2018 at 11:54:37 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: (snip) > >> Gee, and in response Carroll snipped all content > > > > Content? LOL! > > Yes, content. The purposeful misrepresentation of what someone wrote is better described as anti-content. > And below you pretend -- lie -- about completely insane > off topic claims. So now you're telling me my motives for starting this thread? LOL! > Not biting. > > > I created this thread for the purpose of penning you in, I was gonna > > call it 'Snit's house' but that woulda been too obvious. So, it's OK... > > as we go through your exorcism feel free to puke, crap your pants, > > head spin, all that stuff... eventually well get there. pal ;) I knew the first post would draw you in, I was hoping all your idiocy, which we all knew was coming, would stay here... but that would've required you to have progressed. I still have faith ;)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-07 11:19 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? |
| Message-ID | <flbjlnFtk31U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #450751 |
On 5/6/18 9:09 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Saturday, May 5, 2018 at 2:56:41 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
>> On 5/5/18 1:49 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>> On 2018-05-05 20:46:59 +0000, Snit said:
>>>
>>>> On 5/5/18 1:42 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>>> On 2018-05-05 20:16:53 +0000, Snit said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/5/18 1:08 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>> You are backing racial quotas of a sort...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm pointing out how they undoubtedly *must* be forced to look
>>>>>>>>> at things in a way that you and I will never have to if they
>>>>>>>>> want to live through the day.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They no more have to judge people by the color of their skin
>>>>>>>> than colleges and employers have to with affirmative action.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No one has to do anything... but prudence suggests that it would
>>>>>>> be in their interest to do so if they want to live when policing
>>>>>>> in the high crime areas.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> One black person is not responsible for the actions of another.
>>>>>> You are trying to justify police shooting someone based on the
>>>>>> color of their skin.
>>>>>>
>>>>> LOL! Where do you believe I 'justified' that?
>>>>>
>>>> Sigh. OK, you are back to your game playing nonsense... you JUST
>>>> said how they have to target blacks differently
>>>>
>>> I used the wrod "target"?! Where?
>>>
>> My level of interest in your word games: zero.
>>
> The games were all yours, Mr. Pathological Liar.
You went back to your games where you demand I quote back to you what
you have said... and then denying you said it because I spoke of what I
disagree with in your views but did not use your exact words.
Even worse you do this AS you lie about what I have said, in this case
claiming I "equated policing in high crime areas with job/college
issues". You made that up in response to my noting I do not back
grouping people by color in either situation, which does not in any way
imply the two situations are equal.
But back to your support of judging people by the color of their skin,
and you being OK with this in situations where black people are shot!
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0141854
——
The results provide evidence of a significant bias in the killing of
unarmed black Americans relative to unarmed white Americans, in that the
probability of being {black, unarmed, and shot by police} is about 3.49
times the probability of being {white, unarmed, and shot by police} on
average. Furthermore, the results of multi-level modeling show that
there exists significant heterogeneity across counties in the extent of
racial bias in police shootings, with some counties showing relative
risk ratios of 20 to 1 or more. Finally, analysis of police shooting
data as a function of county-level predictors suggests that racial bias
in police shootings is most likely to emerge in police departments in
larger metropolitan counties with low median incomes and a sizable
portion of black residents, especially when there is high financial
inequality in that county. There is no relationship between county-level
racial bias in police shootings and crime rates (even race-specific
crime rates), meaning that the racial bias observed in police shootings
in this data set is not explainable as a response to local-level crime
rates.
——
Steve Carroll
-----
What does that last statement tell you? In such areas, given
that stats show a police officer is 18.9 times more likely
to be killed by a black male (who, at 6% commit 42% of
police officer deaths), you wouldn't think it prudent for
them to exhibit a "bias" if they want to come home from work
that night? It's a war zone, the things we'd all like to
believe should be done can't be done, there'd be no one left
alive to do them.
-----
I'm pointing out how they undoubtedly *must* be forced to
look at things in a way that you and I will never have to if
they want to live through the day.
-----
> They no more have to judge people by the color of
> their skin than colleges and employers have to
> with affirmative action.
No one has to do anything... but prudence suggests
that it would be in their interest to do so if they
want to live when policing in the high crime areas.
-----
> You are STILL backing judging people by the color
> of their skin
I'm just recognizing that police officers in these
high crime areas don't have the luxury not to.
-----
That is you, Carroll, noting your support for targeting people based on
the color of their skin in determining who to shoot. You can cry and
whine and lie when faced with your own words, as you did during your
tantrum over a black person being shown as an example of healthy
masculinity, but you still are responsible for your words.
You have always shown racist tendencies but you used to be better at
hiding them... you used to want to be the KKK member who never had his
hood lifted. Now, perhaps based on Trump's open bigotry and how he has
made it more acceptable in this nation to be a bigot, you have a harder
time keeping your hood on. Or maybe you just do not care to.
--
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>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-07 12:07 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Is BlueEyed Norway your "more equal, low-carbon" ideal ? |
| Message-ID | <039c5814-a6f4-43a7-8910-87e363ebee86@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #450752 |
On Monday, May 7, 2018 at 12:19:39 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 5/6/18 9:09 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > > On Saturday, May 5, 2018 at 2:56:41 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >> On 5/5/18 1:49 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>> On 2018-05-05 20:46:59 +0000, Snit said: > >>> > >>>> On 5/5/18 1:42 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>>>> On 2018-05-05 20:16:53 +0000, Snit said: > >>>>> > >>>>>> On 5/5/18 1:08 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>>>>> ... > >>>>>>>>>> You are backing racial quotas of a sort... > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I'm pointing out how they undoubtedly *must* be forced to look > >>>>>>>>> at things in a way that you and I will never have to if they > >>>>>>>>> want to live through the day. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> They no more have to judge people by the color of their skin > >>>>>>>> than colleges and employers have to with affirmative action. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> No one has to do anything... but prudence suggests that it would > >>>>>>> be in their interest to do so if they want to live when policing > >>>>>>> in the high crime areas. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> One black person is not responsible for the actions of another. > >>>>>> You are trying to justify police shooting someone based on the > >>>>>> color of their skin. > >>>>>> > >>>>> LOL! Where do you believe I 'justified' that? > >>>>> > >>>> Sigh. OK, you are back to your game playing nonsense... you JUST > >>>> said how they have to target blacks differently > >>>> > >>> I used the wrod "target"?! Where? > >>> > >> My level of interest in your word games: zero. > >> > > The games were all yours, Mr. Pathological Liar. > > You went back to your games where you demand I quote back to you what > you have said... Why *shouldn't* I ask you to quote something of mine you've *claimed* I've written? Well, OK... you, being you... we all know why I shouldn't... but you get the idea ;) I suggest you either get better at telling lies or go back to talkin' tech.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 17 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web