Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #452930 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Simon Singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-05-31 22:42 +0000 |
| Last post | 2018-06-03 23:23 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 143 — 15 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Simon Singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-05-31 22:42 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-31 17:01 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Simon Singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 01:12 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Simon Singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 01:49 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-31 21:32 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Simon Singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 14:19 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-01 07:35 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Simon Singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 14:49 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-01 08:04 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 09:16 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit calls the cops when he steps on his dick <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 09:35 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Simon Singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 16:24 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-01 09:53 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 10:06 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit says unsupported claims are lies <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 12:42 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Simon Singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 20:32 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-01 13:38 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 14:38 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit ignores the 9th amendment <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 14:48 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit says unsupported claims are lies <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 14:01 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-02 04:58 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-01 22:03 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 22:32 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-02 22:48 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-03 00:47 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-02 18:05 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-02 21:26 -0400
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-03 01:36 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-02 18:50 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-02 22:07 -0400
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-03 04:05 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-03 08:18 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-03 08:58 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-03 03:07 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-03 10:14 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-03 11:29 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-03 11:54 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-03 12:15 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-03 12:32 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-03 12:37 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-03 14:27 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-03 16:34 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-03 18:13 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-03 18:19 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-03 18:36 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-03 11:01 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-03 02:18 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-02 20:12 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-02 22:38 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-03 00:46 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-02 21:28 -0400
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-02 18:50 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-02 22:04 -0400
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-02 19:08 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-03 02:24 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-02 20:12 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-03 01:50 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-02 22:50 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-03 00:47 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-02 21:32 -0400
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-02 18:50 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. "Snit's dysautonomia http://bit.ly/2Jqpplk" <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-02 19:10 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-06-08 07:35 -0500
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-08 07:21 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-06-08 09:21 -0500
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Simon Singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-02 13:48 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Fuck Snit <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-02 08:03 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-02 08:35 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-02 10:33 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-02 11:07 -0700
Re: Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2018-06-04 06:51 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-04 00:02 -0700
Snit digest 448 / 2018-06-04 Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2018-06-04 14:16 +0000
Re: Snit digest 448 / 2018-06-04 Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-04 07:48 -0700
Re: Snit digest 448 / 2018-06-04 Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-05 09:20 -0700
Re: Snit digest 448 / 2018-06-04 Steven Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-05 09:33 -0700
Re: Snit digest 448 / 2018-06-04 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-05 09:59 -0700
Re: Snit digest 448 / 2018-06-04 Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-05 10:10 -0700
Re: Snit digest 448 / 2018-06-04 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-05 10:12 -0700
Re: Snit digest 448 / 2018-06-04 Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-05 10:52 -0700
Re: Snit digest 448 / 2018-06-04 Steven Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-05 10:35 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-04 08:42 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-04 09:54 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-06-08 07:43 -0500
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-08 07:21 -0700
Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2018-06-14 08:58 +0000
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-14 08:44 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 09:07 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-14 11:59 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 13:07 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-14 13:24 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 14:56 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-14 16:21 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 17:12 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-14 18:03 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-15 09:30 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-15 11:24 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 09:54 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 10:06 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 10:15 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 10:31 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 10:47 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 11:05 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 11:22 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 11:32 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 12:02 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 12:13 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 12:24 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 12:34 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 13:56 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 14:31 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 16:12 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 17:44 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 20:30 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 21:03 -0700
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-16 21:41 +0000
Re: Snit digest 449 / 2018-06-14 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 14:51 -0700
Re: Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2018-06-04 06:07 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-03 23:42 -0700
Re: Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2018-06-04 12:53 +0000
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-04 08:41 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-04 08:46 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-04 10:00 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-04 10:06 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steven Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-04 11:58 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-04 10:10 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-04 11:56 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-04 12:01 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-04 12:22 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-04 13:08 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-04 13:24 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-04 16:03 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-04 16:32 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-04 17:00 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-04 17:23 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-05 16:17 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-05 16:17 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-04 10:00 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit calls the cops when he steps on his dick <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 07:45 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit calls the cops when he steps on his dick <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 08:00 -0700
Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Snit calls the cops when he steps on his dick <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 08:16 -0700
Re: Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2018-06-04 06:04 +0000
Re: Re: Snit: Please explain Steve Carrol and the police. Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-03 23:23 -0700
Page 2 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-02 04:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <fnemfnFsksjU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #453084 |
On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 20:32:44 +0000, Simon Singh wrote: > Projection again. > Your logic is faulty snit. > > You made the statement that the police asked Steve Carroll to stop > "harassing you" so the burden of proof rests solely with you. > You went on to claim the statement was a fact and that even Steve > Carroll admitted this happened. > > > Those are your statements. > > To date you have not provided any documentation to substantiate your > claims so the only conclusion that can be reached is that you lied once > again and have demonstrated that you are indeed a dishonest person. > I merely challenged you to provide that proof The burden of proof is on > you to prove This is exactly correct. And "Snit" knows it. -- -v
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-01 22:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fnemokFsn82U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #453208 |
On 6/1/18 9:58 PM, vallor wrote: > On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 20:32:44 +0000, Simon Singh wrote: > >> Projection again. >> Your logic is faulty snit. >> >> You made the statement that the police asked Steve Carroll to stop >> "harassing you" so the burden of proof rests solely with you. >> You went on to claim the statement was a fact and that even Steve >> Carroll admitted this happened. >> >> >> Those are your statements. >> >> To date you have not provided any documentation to substantiate your >> claims so the only conclusion that can be reached is that you lied once >> again and have demonstrated that you are indeed a dishonest person. >> I merely challenged you to provide that proof The burden of proof is on >> you to prove > > This is exactly correct. It is grossly incorrect. It speaks of "lies" and offers ZERO examples of such. > And "Snit" knows it. > If my goal was to convince you it would be my burden of proof. That is not my goal though. I do not care if you or he believes it. Why would I? I know it is true and so does Carroll, who even acknowledged it as such. And if you do not know this you should. :) -- 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 | 2018-06-01 22:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ff02eab2-fe83-4baf-84ae-c9999d3b85db@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #453210 |
On Friday, June 1, 2018 at 11:03:20 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 6/1/18 9:58 PM, vallor wrote: > > On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 20:32:44 +0000, Simon Singh wrote: > > > >> Projection again. > >> Your logic is faulty snit. > >> > >> You made the statement that the police asked Steve Carroll to stop > >> "harassing you" so the burden of proof rests solely with you. > >> You went on to claim the statement was a fact and that even Steve > >> Carroll admitted this happened. > >> > >> > >> Those are your statements. > >> > >> To date you have not provided any documentation to substantiate your > >> claims so the only conclusion that can be reached is that you lied once > >> again and have demonstrated that you are indeed a dishonest person. > >> I merely challenged you to provide that proof The burden of proof is on > >> you to prove > > > > This is exactly correct. > > It is grossly incorrect. It speaks of "lies" and offers ZERO examples of > such. So you do still beat your wife and kids? We all know this is a “fact’ so there is no reason to provide “evidence” of it, right (After all, that is your ‘logic’ here)? > > And "Snit" knows it. > > > If my goal was to convince you it would be my burden of proof. That is > not my goal though. I do not care if you or he believes it. Why would I? > I know it is true and so does Carroll, who even acknowledged it as such. I “know” it is “true” that you still beat your wife and kids, so it’s a “fact”. That “fact’ doesn’t require any “evidence” simply because I “know” it. Anyone, who was blasted on sterno and testors would be happy to have you on a jury, Snit. LOL! > And if you do not know this you should. :) What he knows is a *ridiculously* idiotic liar when he sees one... as do most “others”.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-02 22:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pev6sr$62p$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #453219 |
On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 22:32:02 -0700, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Friday, June 1, 2018 at 11:03:20 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >> On 6/1/18 9:58 PM, vallor wrote: >> > On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 20:32:44 +0000, Simon Singh wrote: >> > >> >> Projection again. >> >> Your logic is faulty snit. >> >> >> >> You made the statement that the police asked Steve Carroll to stop >> >> "harassing you" so the burden of proof rests solely with you. >> >> You went on to claim the statement was a fact and that even Steve >> >> Carroll admitted this happened. >> >> >> >> >> >> Those are your statements. >> >> >> >> To date you have not provided any documentation to substantiate your >> >> claims so the only conclusion that can be reached is that you lied >> >> once again and have demonstrated that you are indeed a dishonest >> >> person. >> >> I merely challenged you to provide that proof The burden of proof is >> >> on you to prove >> > >> > This is exactly correct. >> >> It is grossly incorrect. It speaks of "lies" and offers ZERO examples >> of such. > > So you do still beat your wife and kids? We all know this is a “fact’ so > there is no reason to provide “evidence” of it, right (After all, that > is your ‘logic’ here)? Perfect reply! He won't understand why though because he is obviously not too intelligent. >> > And "Snit" knows it. >> > >> If my goal was to convince you it would be my burden of proof. That is >> not my goal though. I do not care if you or he believes it. Why would >> I? >> I know it is true and so does Carroll, who even acknowledged it as >> such. > > I “know” it is “true” that you still beat your wife and kids, so it’s a > “fact”. > That “fact’ doesn’t require any “evidence” simply because I “know” it. > Anyone, who was blasted on sterno and testors would be happy to have you > on a jury, Snit. LOL! I initially assumed that snit was just the run of the mill troll only with a lot of free time on his hands. After observing him it's become apparent that snit is seriously mentally ill. Just for starters, NPD/BPD are high on the list along with a case of substance abuse where he fogs out and gets repetitive like Rain Man. I suspect he might also suffer from a mild case of mental retardation, possibly due to fetal alcohol syndrome as he exhibits classic signs of that illness as well. There is no question that Snit would be unable to sustain himself in a traditional workplace because his co-workers would not put up with his behavior for long. I suspect his wife and possibly his children, depending upon their age, are well aware that "daddy ain't well". Kids can be cruel. >> And if you do not know this you should. :) > What he knows is a *ridiculously* idiotic liar when he sees one... > as do most “others”.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-03 00:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <fngs44Fb1d7U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #453384 |
simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 22:32:02 -0700, Steve Carroll wrote: > >> On Friday, June 1, 2018 at 11:03:20 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>> On 6/1/18 9:58 PM, vallor wrote: >>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 20:32:44 +0000, Simon Singh wrote: >>>> >>>>> Projection again. >>>>> Your logic is faulty snit. >>>>> >>>>> You made the statement that the police asked Steve Carroll to stop >>>>> "harassing you" so the burden of proof rests solely with you. >>>>> You went on to claim the statement was a fact and that even Steve >>>>> Carroll admitted this happened. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Those are your statements. >>>>> >>>>> To date you have not provided any documentation to substantiate your >>>>> claims so the only conclusion that can be reached is that you lied >>>>> once again and have demonstrated that you are indeed a dishonest >>>>> person. >>>>> I merely challenged you to provide that proof The burden of proof is >>>>> on you to prove >>>> >>>> This is exactly correct. >>> >>> It is grossly incorrect. It speaks of "lies" and offers ZERO examples >>> of such. >> >> So you do still beat your wife and kids? We all know this is a “fact’ so >> there is no reason to provide “evidence” of it, right (After all, that >> is your ‘logic’ here)? > > Perfect reply! > He won't understand why though because he is obviously not too > intelligent. > > >>>> And "Snit" knows it. >>>> >>> If my goal was to convince you it would be my burden of proof. That is >>> not my goal though. I do not care if you or he believes it. Why would >>> I? >>> I know it is true and so does Carroll, who even acknowledged it as >>> such. >> >> I “know” it is “true” that you still beat your wife and kids, so it’s a >> “fact”. >> That “fact’ doesn’t require any “evidence” simply because I “know” it. >> Anyone, who was blasted on sterno and testors would be happy to have you >> on a jury, Snit. LOL! > > I initially assumed that snit was just the run of the mill troll only > with a lot of free time on his hands. After observing him it's become > apparent that snit is seriously mentally ill. Just for starters, NPD/BPD > are high on the list along with a case of substance abuse where he fogs > out and gets repetitive like Rain Man. I suspect he might also suffer > from a mild case of mental retardation, possibly due to fetal alcohol > syndrome as he exhibits classic signs of that illness as well. > > There is no question that Snit would be unable to sustain himself in a > traditional workplace because his co-workers would not put up with his > behavior for long. I suspect his wife and possibly his children, > depending upon their age, are well aware that "daddy ain't well". Kids > can be cruel. > > > > > >>> And if you do not know this you should. :) > > >> What he knows is a *ridiculously* idiotic liar when he sees one... >> as do most “others”. > > Wow. A lot of accusations you offer no support for. Interesting.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-02 18:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <67ebb46b-0b09-4a51-a99a-13a1fbda7edb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #453423 |
On Saturday, June 2, 2018 at 6:47:02 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 22:32:02 -0700, Steve Carroll wrote: > > > >> On Friday, June 1, 2018 at 11:03:20 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >>> On 6/1/18 9:58 PM, vallor wrote: > >>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 20:32:44 +0000, Simon Singh wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Projection again. > >>>>> Your logic is faulty snit. > >>>>> > >>>>> You made the statement that the police asked Steve Carroll to stop > >>>>> "harassing you" so the burden of proof rests solely with you. > >>>>> You went on to claim the statement was a fact and that even Steve > >>>>> Carroll admitted this happened. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Those are your statements. > >>>>> > >>>>> To date you have not provided any documentation to substantiate your > >>>>> claims so the only conclusion that can be reached is that you lied > >>>>> once again and have demonstrated that you are indeed a dishonest > >>>>> person. > >>>>> I merely challenged you to provide that proof The burden of proof is > >>>>> on you to prove > >>>> > >>>> This is exactly correct. > >>> > >>> It is grossly incorrect. It speaks of "lies" and offers ZERO examples > >>> of such. > >> > >> So you do still beat your wife and kids? We all know this is a “fact’ so > >> there is no reason to provide “evidence” of it, right (After all, that > >> is your ‘logic’ here)? > > > > Perfect reply! > > He won't understand why though because he is obviously not too > > intelligent. > > > > > >>>> And "Snit" knows it. > >>>> > >>> If my goal was to convince you it would be my burden of proof. That is > >>> not my goal though. I do not care if you or he believes it. Why would > >>> I? > >>> I know it is true and so does Carroll, who even acknowledged it as > >>> such. > >> > >> I “know” it is “true” that you still beat your wife and kids, so it’s a > >> “fact”. > >> That “fact’ doesn’t require any “evidence” simply because I “know” it. > >> Anyone, who was blasted on sterno and testors would be happy to have you > >> on a jury, Snit. LOL! > > > > I initially assumed that snit was just the run of the mill troll only > > with a lot of free time on his hands. After observing him it's become > > apparent that snit is seriously mentally ill. Just for starters, NPD/BPD > > are high on the list along with a case of substance abuse where he fogs > > out and gets repetitive like Rain Man. I suspect he might also suffer > > from a mild case of mental retardation, possibly due to fetal alcohol > > syndrome as he exhibits classic signs of that illness as well. > > > > There is no question that Snit would be unable to sustain himself in a > > traditional workplace because his co-workers would not put up with his > > behavior for long. I suspect his wife and possibly his children, > > depending upon their age, are well aware that "daddy ain't well". Kids > > can be cruel. > > > > > > > > > > > >>> And if you do not know this you should. :) > > > > > >> What he knows is a *ridiculously* idiotic liar when he sees one... > >> as do most “others”. > > > > > > Wow. A lot of accusations you offer no support for. LOL! Think, if you can: Who would he need to "support" it *to* that isn't already convinced you are what you've shown yourself to be?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-02 21:26 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <gkajw4o9vq8o$.1psmjjh7bhtpw.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #453439 |
On Sat, 2 Jun 2018 18:05:16 -0700 (PDT), Steve Carroll wrote: > On Saturday, June 2, 2018 at 6:47:02 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >> simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 22:32:02 -0700, Steve Carroll wrote: >>> >>>> On Friday, June 1, 2018 at 11:03:20 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>> On 6/1/18 9:58 PM, vallor wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 20:32:44 +0000, Simon Singh wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Projection again. >>>>>>> Your logic is faulty snit. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You made the statement that the police asked Steve Carroll to stop >>>>>>> "harassing you" so the burden of proof rests solely with you. >>>>>>> You went on to claim the statement was a fact and that even Steve >>>>>>> Carroll admitted this happened. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Those are your statements. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To date you have not provided any documentation to substantiate your >>>>>>> claims so the only conclusion that can be reached is that you lied >>>>>>> once again and have demonstrated that you are indeed a dishonest >>>>>>> person. >>>>>>> I merely challenged you to provide that proof The burden of proof is >>>>>>> on you to prove >>>>>> >>>>>> This is exactly correct. >>>>> >>>>> It is grossly incorrect. It speaks of "lies" and offers ZERO examples >>>>> of such. >>>> >>>> So you do still beat your wife and kids? We all know this is a “fact’ so >>>> there is no reason to provide “evidence” of it, right (After all, that >>>> is your ‘logic’ here)? >>> >>> Perfect reply! >>> He won't understand why though because he is obviously not too >>> intelligent. >>> >>> >>>>>> And "Snit" knows it. >>>>>> >>>>> If my goal was to convince you it would be my burden of proof. That is >>>>> not my goal though. I do not care if you or he believes it. Why would >>>>> I? >>>>> I know it is true and so does Carroll, who even acknowledged it as >>>>> such. >>>> >>>> I “know” it is “true” that you still beat your wife and kids, so it’s a >>>> “fact”. >>>> That “fact’ doesn’t require any “evidence” simply because I “know” it. >>>> Anyone, who was blasted on sterno and testors would be happy to have you >>>> on a jury, Snit. LOL! >>> >>> I initially assumed that snit was just the run of the mill troll only >>> with a lot of free time on his hands. After observing him it's become >>> apparent that snit is seriously mentally ill. Just for starters, NPD/BPD >>> are high on the list along with a case of substance abuse where he fogs >>> out and gets repetitive like Rain Man. I suspect he might also suffer >>> from a mild case of mental retardation, possibly due to fetal alcohol >>> syndrome as he exhibits classic signs of that illness as well. >>> >>> There is no question that Snit would be unable to sustain himself in a >>> traditional workplace because his co-workers would not put up with his >>> behavior for long. I suspect his wife and possibly his children, >>> depending upon their age, are well aware that "daddy ain't well". Kids >>> can be cruel. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>> And if you do not know this you should. :) >>> >>> >>>> What he knows is a *ridiculously* idiotic liar when he sees one... >>>> as do most “others”. >>> >>> >> >> Wow. A lot of accusations you offer no support for. > > LOL! Think, if you can: Who would he need to "support" it *to* > that isn't already convinced you are what you've shown yourself > to be? An oldie but a goodie http://www.mofeel.net/711-comp-sys-mac-advocacy/21729.aspx Read it and weep snit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-03 01:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pevgn7$v4o$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #453451 |
On Sat, 02 Jun 2018 21:26:49 -0400, Horace wrote: > On Sat, 2 Jun 2018 18:05:16 -0700 (PDT), Steve Carroll wrote: > >> On Saturday, June 2, 2018 at 6:47:02 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>> simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 22:32:02 -0700, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Friday, June 1, 2018 at 11:03:20 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>> On 6/1/18 9:58 PM, vallor wrote: >>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 20:32:44 +0000, Simon Singh wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Projection again. >>>>>>>> Your logic is faulty snit. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You made the statement that the police asked Steve Carroll to >>>>>>>> stop "harassing you" so the burden of proof rests solely with >>>>>>>> you. >>>>>>>> You went on to claim the statement was a fact and that even Steve >>>>>>>> Carroll admitted this happened. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Those are your statements. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To date you have not provided any documentation to substantiate >>>>>>>> your claims so the only conclusion that can be reached is that >>>>>>>> you lied once again and have demonstrated that you are indeed a >>>>>>>> dishonest person. >>>>>>>> I merely challenged you to provide that proof The burden of proof >>>>>>>> is on you to prove >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is exactly correct. >>>>>> >>>>>> It is grossly incorrect. It speaks of "lies" and offers ZERO >>>>>> examples of such. >>>>> >>>>> So you do still beat your wife and kids? We all know this is a >>>>> “fact’ so there is no reason to provide “evidence” of it, right >>>>> (After all, that is your ‘logic’ here)? >>>> >>>> Perfect reply! >>>> He won't understand why though because he is obviously not too >>>> intelligent. >>>> >>>> >>>>>>> And "Snit" knows it. >>>>>>> >>>>>> If my goal was to convince you it would be my burden of proof. That >>>>>> is not my goal though. I do not care if you or he believes it. Why >>>>>> would I? >>>>>> I know it is true and so does Carroll, who even acknowledged it as >>>>>> such. >>>>> >>>>> I “know” it is “true” that you still beat your wife and kids, so >>>>> it’s a “fact”. >>>>> That “fact’ doesn’t require any “evidence” simply because I “know” >>>>> it. >>>>> Anyone, who was blasted on sterno and testors would be happy to have >>>>> you on a jury, Snit. LOL! >>>> >>>> I initially assumed that snit was just the run of the mill troll only >>>> with a lot of free time on his hands. After observing him it's become >>>> apparent that snit is seriously mentally ill. Just for starters, >>>> NPD/BPD are high on the list along with a case of substance abuse >>>> where he fogs out and gets repetitive like Rain Man. I suspect he >>>> might also suffer from a mild case of mental retardation, possibly >>>> due to fetal alcohol syndrome as he exhibits classic signs of that >>>> illness as well. >>>> >>>> There is no question that Snit would be unable to sustain himself in >>>> a traditional workplace because his co-workers would not put up with >>>> his behavior for long. I suspect his wife and possibly his children, >>>> depending upon their age, are well aware that "daddy ain't well". >>>> Kids can be cruel. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>> And if you do not know this you should. :) >>>> >>>> >>>>> What he knows is a *ridiculously* idiotic liar when he sees one... >>>>> as do most “others”. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> Wow. A lot of accusations you offer no support for. >> >> LOL! Think, if you can: Who would he need to "support" it *to* that >> isn't already convinced you are what you've shown yourself to be? > > An oldie but a goodie > > http://www.mofeel.net/711-comp-sys-mac-advocacy/21729.aspx > > Read it and weep snit. Fuck. This snit clown is really fucked up.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-02 18:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fngvrdFbk5tU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #453458 |
On 6/2/18 6:36 PM, simon singh wrote: > On Sat, 02 Jun 2018 21:26:49 -0400, Horace wrote: > >> On Sat, 2 Jun 2018 18:05:16 -0700 (PDT), Steve Carroll wrote: >> >>> On Saturday, June 2, 2018 at 6:47:02 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>> simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 22:32:02 -0700, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Friday, June 1, 2018 at 11:03:20 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>>> On 6/1/18 9:58 PM, vallor wrote: >>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 20:32:44 +0000, Simon Singh wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Projection again. >>>>>>>>> Your logic is faulty snit. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You made the statement that the police asked Steve Carroll to >>>>>>>>> stop "harassing you" so the burden of proof rests solely with >>>>>>>>> you. >>>>>>>>> You went on to claim the statement was a fact and that even Steve >>>>>>>>> Carroll admitted this happened. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Those are your statements. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> To date you have not provided any documentation to substantiate >>>>>>>>> your claims so the only conclusion that can be reached is that >>>>>>>>> you lied once again and have demonstrated that you are indeed a >>>>>>>>> dishonest person. >>>>>>>>> I merely challenged you to provide that proof The burden of proof >>>>>>>>> is on you to prove >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is exactly correct. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is grossly incorrect. It speaks of "lies" and offers ZERO >>>>>>> examples of such. >>>>>> >>>>>> So you do still beat your wife and kids? We all know this is a >>>>>> “fact’ so there is no reason to provide “evidence” of it, right >>>>>> (After all, that is your ‘logic’ here)? >>>>> >>>>> Perfect reply! >>>>> He won't understand why though because he is obviously not too >>>>> intelligent. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> And "Snit" knows it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> If my goal was to convince you it would be my burden of proof. That >>>>>>> is not my goal though. I do not care if you or he believes it. Why >>>>>>> would I? >>>>>>> I know it is true and so does Carroll, who even acknowledged it as >>>>>>> such. >>>>>> >>>>>> I “know” it is “true” that you still beat your wife and kids, so >>>>>> it’s a “fact”. >>>>>> That “fact’ doesn’t require any “evidence” simply because I “know” >>>>>> it. >>>>>> Anyone, who was blasted on sterno and testors would be happy to have >>>>>> you on a jury, Snit. LOL! >>>>> >>>>> I initially assumed that snit was just the run of the mill troll only >>>>> with a lot of free time on his hands. After observing him it's become >>>>> apparent that snit is seriously mentally ill. Just for starters, >>>>> NPD/BPD are high on the list along with a case of substance abuse >>>>> where he fogs out and gets repetitive like Rain Man. I suspect he >>>>> might also suffer from a mild case of mental retardation, possibly >>>>> due to fetal alcohol syndrome as he exhibits classic signs of that >>>>> illness as well. >>>>> >>>>> There is no question that Snit would be unable to sustain himself in >>>>> a traditional workplace because his co-workers would not put up with >>>>> his behavior for long. I suspect his wife and possibly his children, >>>>> depending upon their age, are well aware that "daddy ain't well". >>>>> Kids can be cruel. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> And if you do not know this you should. :) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> What he knows is a *ridiculously* idiotic liar when he sees one... >>>>>> as do most “others”. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Wow. A lot of accusations you offer no support for. >>> >>> LOL! Think, if you can: Who would he need to "support" it *to* that >>> isn't already convinced you are what you've shown yourself to be? >> >> An oldie but a goodie >> >> http://www.mofeel.net/711-comp-sys-mac-advocacy/21729.aspx >> >> Read it and weep snit. > > Fuck. This snit clown is really fucked up. > Ah, insults. How creative! -- 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 | Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-02 22:07 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <i7njwc6dihct$.1btwd7sgtrxv0.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #453467 |
On Sat, 2 Jun 2018 18:50:37 -0700, Snit wrote: > On 6/2/18 6:36 PM, simon singh wrote: >> On Sat, 02 Jun 2018 21:26:49 -0400, Horace wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 2 Jun 2018 18:05:16 -0700 (PDT), Steve Carroll wrote: >>> >>>> On Saturday, June 2, 2018 at 6:47:02 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>> simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 22:32:02 -0700, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Friday, June 1, 2018 at 11:03:20 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>>>> On 6/1/18 9:58 PM, vallor wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 20:32:44 +0000, Simon Singh wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Projection again. >>>>>>>>>> Your logic is faulty snit. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> You made the statement that the police asked Steve Carroll to >>>>>>>>>> stop "harassing you" so the burden of proof rests solely with >>>>>>>>>> you. >>>>>>>>>> You went on to claim the statement was a fact and that even Steve >>>>>>>>>> Carroll admitted this happened. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Those are your statements. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> To date you have not provided any documentation to substantiate >>>>>>>>>> your claims so the only conclusion that can be reached is that >>>>>>>>>> you lied once again and have demonstrated that you are indeed a >>>>>>>>>> dishonest person. >>>>>>>>>> I merely challenged you to provide that proof The burden of proof >>>>>>>>>> is on you to prove >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This is exactly correct. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It is grossly incorrect. It speaks of "lies" and offers ZERO >>>>>>>> examples of such. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So you do still beat your wife and kids? We all know this is a >>>>>>> “fact’ so there is no reason to provide “evidence” of it, right >>>>>>> (After all, that is your ‘logic’ here)? >>>>>> >>>>>> Perfect reply! >>>>>> He won't understand why though because he is obviously not too >>>>>> intelligent. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> And "Snit" knows it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If my goal was to convince you it would be my burden of proof. That >>>>>>>> is not my goal though. I do not care if you or he believes it. Why >>>>>>>> would I? >>>>>>>> I know it is true and so does Carroll, who even acknowledged it as >>>>>>>> such. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I “know” it is “true” that you still beat your wife and kids, so >>>>>>> it’s a “fact”. >>>>>>> That “fact’ doesn’t require any “evidence” simply because I “know” >>>>>>> it. >>>>>>> Anyone, who was blasted on sterno and testors would be happy to have >>>>>>> you on a jury, Snit. LOL! >>>>>> >>>>>> I initially assumed that snit was just the run of the mill troll only >>>>>> with a lot of free time on his hands. After observing him it's become >>>>>> apparent that snit is seriously mentally ill. Just for starters, >>>>>> NPD/BPD are high on the list along with a case of substance abuse >>>>>> where he fogs out and gets repetitive like Rain Man. I suspect he >>>>>> might also suffer from a mild case of mental retardation, possibly >>>>>> due to fetal alcohol syndrome as he exhibits classic signs of that >>>>>> illness as well. >>>>>> >>>>>> There is no question that Snit would be unable to sustain himself in >>>>>> a traditional workplace because his co-workers would not put up with >>>>>> his behavior for long. I suspect his wife and possibly his children, >>>>>> depending upon their age, are well aware that "daddy ain't well". >>>>>> Kids can be cruel. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> And if you do not know this you should. :) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> What he knows is a *ridiculously* idiotic liar when he sees one... >>>>>>> as do most “others”. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Wow. A lot of accusations you offer no support for. >>>> >>>> LOL! Think, if you can: Who would he need to "support" it *to* that >>>> isn't already convinced you are what you've shown yourself to be? >>> >>> An oldie but a goodie >>> >>> http://www.mofeel.net/711-comp-sys-mac-advocacy/21729.aspx >>> >>> Read it and weep snit. >> >> Fuck. This snit clown is really fucked up. >> > > Ah, insults. How creative! Facts snit. I know you don't like facts, but you need to realize that when you spew your guts people can find those posts years later. It's very easy in fact. All about your life as a child of fetal alcohol syndrom. And in your own words. This is certainly getting too easy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-03 04:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <fnh7okFcefgU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #453489 |
On Sat, 02 Jun 2018 22:07:59 -0400, Horace wrote: > On Sat, 2 Jun 2018 18:50:37 -0700, Snit wrote: > >> On 6/2/18 6:36 PM, simon singh wrote: >>> On Sat, 02 Jun 2018 21:26:49 -0400, Horace wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, 2 Jun 2018 18:05:16 -0700 (PDT), Steve Carroll wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Saturday, June 2, 2018 at 6:47:02 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>> simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 22:32:02 -0700, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Friday, June 1, 2018 at 11:03:20 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 6/1/18 9:58 PM, vallor wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 20:32:44 +0000, Simon Singh wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Projection again. >>>>>>>>>>> Your logic is faulty snit. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You made the statement that the police asked Steve Carroll to >>>>>>>>>>> stop "harassing you" so the burden of proof rests solely with >>>>>>>>>>> you. >>>>>>>>>>> You went on to claim the statement was a fact and that even >>>>>>>>>>> Steve Carroll admitted this happened. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Those are your statements. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> To date you have not provided any documentation to >>>>>>>>>>> substantiate your claims so the only conclusion that can be >>>>>>>>>>> reached is that you lied once again and have demonstrated that >>>>>>>>>>> you are indeed a dishonest person. >>>>>>>>>>> I merely challenged you to provide that proof The burden of >>>>>>>>>>> proof is on you to prove >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This is exactly correct. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It is grossly incorrect. It speaks of "lies" and offers ZERO >>>>>>>>> examples of such. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So you do still beat your wife and kids? We all know this is a >>>>>>>> “fact’ so there is no reason to provide “evidence” of it, right >>>>>>>> (After all, that is your ‘logic’ here)? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Perfect reply! >>>>>>> He won't understand why though because he is obviously not too >>>>>>> intelligent. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> And "Snit" knows it. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If my goal was to convince you it would be my burden of proof. >>>>>>>>> That is not my goal though. I do not care if you or he believes >>>>>>>>> it. Why would I? >>>>>>>>> I know it is true and so does Carroll, who even acknowledged it >>>>>>>>> as such. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I “know” it is “true” that you still beat your wife and kids, so >>>>>>>> it’s a “fact”. >>>>>>>> That “fact’ doesn’t require any “evidence” simply because I >>>>>>>> “know” >>>>>>>> it. >>>>>>>> Anyone, who was blasted on sterno and testors would be happy to >>>>>>>> have you on a jury, Snit. LOL! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I initially assumed that snit was just the run of the mill troll >>>>>>> only with a lot of free time on his hands. After observing him >>>>>>> it's become apparent that snit is seriously mentally ill. Just for >>>>>>> starters, NPD/BPD are high on the list along with a case of >>>>>>> substance abuse where he fogs out and gets repetitive like Rain >>>>>>> Man. I suspect he might also suffer from a mild case of mental >>>>>>> retardation, possibly due to fetal alcohol syndrome as he exhibits >>>>>>> classic signs of that illness as well. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is no question that Snit would be unable to sustain himself >>>>>>> in a traditional workplace because his co-workers would not put up >>>>>>> with his behavior for long. I suspect his wife and possibly his >>>>>>> children, depending upon their age, are well aware that "daddy >>>>>>> ain't well". Kids can be cruel. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> And if you do not know this you should. :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What he knows is a *ridiculously* idiotic liar when he sees >>>>>>>> one... >>>>>>>> as do most “others”. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> Wow. A lot of accusations you offer no support for. >>>>> >>>>> LOL! Think, if you can: Who would he need to "support" it *to* that >>>>> isn't already convinced you are what you've shown yourself to be? >>>> >>>> An oldie but a goodie >>>> >>>> http://www.mofeel.net/711-comp-sys-mac-advocacy/21729.aspx >>>> >>>> Read it and weep snit. >>> >>> Fuck. This snit clown is really fucked up. >>> >>> >> Ah, insults. How creative! > > Facts snit. I know you don't like facts, but you need to realize that > when you spew your guts people can find those posts years later. > It's very easy in fact. > All about your life as a child of fetal alcohol syndrom. > And in your own words. > > This is certainly getting too easy. Quote from that link above: "For that matter, FAS was not a major area of study until the early to mid 70's... and I was born in the 60's." Ever watch TV shows from the 60's? Those people drank like fish. -- -v
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-03 08:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <fnhmifFfg7oU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #453574 |
vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> wrote: > On Sat, 02 Jun 2018 22:07:59 -0400, Horace wrote: > >> On Sat, 2 Jun 2018 18:50:37 -0700, Snit wrote: >> >>> On 6/2/18 6:36 PM, simon singh wrote: >>>> On Sat, 02 Jun 2018 21:26:49 -0400, Horace wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sat, 2 Jun 2018 18:05:16 -0700 (PDT), Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Saturday, June 2, 2018 at 6:47:02 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>>> simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 22:32:02 -0700, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Friday, June 1, 2018 at 11:03:20 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/18 9:58 PM, vallor wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 20:32:44 +0000, Simon Singh wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Projection again. >>>>>>>>>>>> Your logic is faulty snit. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> You made the statement that the police asked Steve Carroll to >>>>>>>>>>>> stop "harassing you" so the burden of proof rests solely with >>>>>>>>>>>> you. >>>>>>>>>>>> You went on to claim the statement was a fact and that even >>>>>>>>>>>> Steve Carroll admitted this happened. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Those are your statements. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> To date you have not provided any documentation to >>>>>>>>>>>> substantiate your claims so the only conclusion that can be >>>>>>>>>>>> reached is that you lied once again and have demonstrated that >>>>>>>>>>>> you are indeed a dishonest person. >>>>>>>>>>>> I merely challenged you to provide that proof The burden of >>>>>>>>>>>> proof is on you to prove >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> This is exactly correct. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It is grossly incorrect. It speaks of "lies" and offers ZERO >>>>>>>>>> examples of such. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So you do still beat your wife and kids? We all know this is a >>>>>>>>> “fact’ so there is no reason to provide “evidence” of it, right >>>>>>>>> (After all, that is your ‘logic’ here)? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Perfect reply! >>>>>>>> He won't understand why though because he is obviously not too >>>>>>>> intelligent. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> And "Snit" knows it. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> If my goal was to convince you it would be my burden of proof. >>>>>>>>>> That is not my goal though. I do not care if you or he believes >>>>>>>>>> it. Why would I? >>>>>>>>>> I know it is true and so does Carroll, who even acknowledged it >>>>>>>>>> as such. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I “know” it is “true” that you still beat your wife and kids, so >>>>>>>>> it’s a “fact”. >>>>>>>>> That “fact’ doesn’t require any “evidence” simply because I >>>>>>>>> “know” >>>>>>>>> it. >>>>>>>>> Anyone, who was blasted on sterno and testors would be happy to >>>>>>>>> have you on a jury, Snit. LOL! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I initially assumed that snit was just the run of the mill troll >>>>>>>> only with a lot of free time on his hands. After observing him >>>>>>>> it's become apparent that snit is seriously mentally ill. Just for >>>>>>>> starters, NPD/BPD are high on the list along with a case of >>>>>>>> substance abuse where he fogs out and gets repetitive like Rain >>>>>>>> Man. I suspect he might also suffer from a mild case of mental >>>>>>>> retardation, possibly due to fetal alcohol syndrome as he exhibits >>>>>>>> classic signs of that illness as well. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is no question that Snit would be unable to sustain himself >>>>>>>> in a traditional workplace because his co-workers would not put up >>>>>>>> with his behavior for long. I suspect his wife and possibly his >>>>>>>> children, depending upon their age, are well aware that "daddy >>>>>>>> ain't well". Kids can be cruel. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> And if you do not know this you should. :) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> What he knows is a *ridiculously* idiotic liar when he sees >>>>>>>>> one... >>>>>>>>> as do most “others”. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Wow. A lot of accusations you offer no support for. >>>>>> >>>>>> LOL! Think, if you can: Who would he need to "support" it *to* that >>>>>> isn't already convinced you are what you've shown yourself to be? >>>>> >>>>> An oldie but a goodie >>>>> >>>>> http://www.mofeel.net/711-comp-sys-mac-advocacy/21729.aspx >>>>> >>>>> Read it and weep snit. >>>> >>>> Fuck. This snit clown is really fucked up. >>>> >>>> >>> Ah, insults. How creative! >> >> Facts snit. I know you don't like facts, but you need to realize that >> when you spew your guts people can find those posts years later. >> It's very easy in fact. >> All about your life as a child of fetal alcohol syndrom. >> And in your own words. >> >> This is certainly getting too easy. > > Quote from that link above: "For that matter, FAS was not a major area > of study until the early to mid 70's... and I was born in the 60's." > > Ever watch TV shows from the 60's? Those people drank like fish. > Carroll and friends stop at nothing with their attacks. They hate how I refuse to sink to their level.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-03 08:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <fnhostFd2isU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #453613 |
On Sun, 03 Jun 2018 08:18:23 +0000, Snit wrote: > vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> wrote: >> On Sat, 02 Jun 2018 22:07:59 -0400, Horace wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 2 Jun 2018 18:50:37 -0700, Snit wrote: >>> >>>> On 6/2/18 6:36 PM, simon singh wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 02 Jun 2018 21:26:49 -0400, Horace wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jun 2018 18:05:16 -0700 (PDT), Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Saturday, June 2, 2018 at 6:47:02 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>>>> simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 22:32:02 -0700, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Friday, June 1, 2018 at 11:03:20 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/18 9:58 PM, vallor wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 20:32:44 +0000, Simon Singh wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Projection again. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Your logic is faulty snit. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You made the statement that the police asked Steve Carroll >>>>>>>>>>>>> to stop "harassing you" so the burden of proof rests solely >>>>>>>>>>>>> with you. >>>>>>>>>>>>> You went on to claim the statement was a fact and that even >>>>>>>>>>>>> Steve Carroll admitted this happened. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Those are your statements. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> To date you have not provided any documentation to >>>>>>>>>>>>> substantiate your claims so the only conclusion that can be >>>>>>>>>>>>> reached is that you lied once again and have demonstrated >>>>>>>>>>>>> that you are indeed a dishonest person. >>>>>>>>>>>>> I merely challenged you to provide that proof The burden of >>>>>>>>>>>>> proof is on you to prove >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> This is exactly correct. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> It is grossly incorrect. It speaks of "lies" and offers ZERO >>>>>>>>>>> examples of such. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> So you do still beat your wife and kids? We all know this is a >>>>>>>>>> “fact’ so there is no reason to provide “evidence” of it, right >>>>>>>>>> (After all, that is your ‘logic’ here)? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Perfect reply! >>>>>>>>> He won't understand why though because he is obviously not too >>>>>>>>> intelligent. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> And "Snit" knows it. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> If my goal was to convince you it would be my burden of proof. >>>>>>>>>>> That is not my goal though. I do not care if you or he >>>>>>>>>>> believes it. Why would I? >>>>>>>>>>> I know it is true and so does Carroll, who even acknowledged >>>>>>>>>>> it as such. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I “know” it is “true” that you still beat your wife and kids, >>>>>>>>>> so it’s a “fact”. >>>>>>>>>> That “fact’ doesn’t require any “evidence” simply because I >>>>>>>>>> “know” >>>>>>>>>> it. >>>>>>>>>> Anyone, who was blasted on sterno and testors would be happy to >>>>>>>>>> have you on a jury, Snit. LOL! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I initially assumed that snit was just the run of the mill troll >>>>>>>>> only with a lot of free time on his hands. After observing him >>>>>>>>> it's become apparent that snit is seriously mentally ill. Just >>>>>>>>> for starters, NPD/BPD are high on the list along with a case of >>>>>>>>> substance abuse where he fogs out and gets repetitive like Rain >>>>>>>>> Man. I suspect he might also suffer from a mild case of mental >>>>>>>>> retardation, possibly due to fetal alcohol syndrome as he >>>>>>>>> exhibits classic signs of that illness as well. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There is no question that Snit would be unable to sustain >>>>>>>>> himself in a traditional workplace because his co-workers would >>>>>>>>> not put up with his behavior for long. I suspect his wife and >>>>>>>>> possibly his children, depending upon their age, are well aware >>>>>>>>> that "daddy ain't well". Kids can be cruel. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> And if you do not know this you should. :) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> What he knows is a *ridiculously* idiotic liar when he sees >>>>>>>>>> one... >>>>>>>>>> as do most “others”. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Wow. A lot of accusations you offer no support for. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> LOL! Think, if you can: Who would he need to "support" it *to* >>>>>>> that isn't already convinced you are what you've shown yourself to >>>>>>> be? >>>>>> >>>>>> An oldie but a goodie >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.mofeel.net/711-comp-sys-mac-advocacy/21729.aspx >>>>>> >>>>>> Read it and weep snit. >>>>> >>>>> Fuck. This snit clown is really fucked up. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Ah, insults. How creative! >>> >>> Facts snit. I know you don't like facts, but you need to realize that >>> when you spew your guts people can find those posts years later. It's >>> very easy in fact. >>> All about your life as a child of fetal alcohol syndrom. >>> And in your own words. >>> >>> This is certainly getting too easy. >> >> Quote from that link above: "For that matter, FAS was not a major area >> of study until the early to mid 70's... and I was born in the 60's." >> >> Ever watch TV shows from the 60's? Those people drank like fish. >> >> > Carroll and friends stop at nothing with their attacks. > > They hate how I refuse to sink to their level. No sinking at all, just contemporary culture. Ever watch Mad Men? Those guys would get to the office and pour themselves a drink. Three-martini lunches, a few when they got home. Hell, in the TV show "UFO" from 1970, they had "high-tech" booze dispensers built into the walls. Was a completely different culture back then. -- -v
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-03 03:07 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6680a95d-b7f5-4ff7-9c89-32291175e59c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #453617 |
On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 1:58:09 AM UTC-7, vallor wrote: > On Sun, 03 Jun 2018 08:18:23 +0000, Snit wrote: > > > vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> wrote: > >> On Sat, 02 Jun 2018 22:07:59 -0400, Horace wrote: > >> > >>> On Sat, 2 Jun 2018 18:50:37 -0700, Snit wrote: > >>> > >>>> On 6/2/18 6:36 PM, simon singh wrote: > >>>>> On Sat, 02 Jun 2018 21:26:49 -0400, Horace wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jun 2018 18:05:16 -0700 (PDT), Steve Carroll wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Saturday, June 2, 2018 at 6:47:02 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >>>>>>>> simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 22:32:02 -0700, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Friday, June 1, 2018 at 11:03:20 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/18 9:58 PM, vallor wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 20:32:44 +0000, Simon Singh wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Projection again. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Your logic is faulty snit. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> You made the statement that the police asked Steve Carroll > >>>>>>>>>>>>> to stop "harassing you" so the burden of proof rests solely > >>>>>>>>>>>>> with you. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> You went on to claim the statement was a fact and that even > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Steve Carroll admitted this happened. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Those are your statements. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> To date you have not provided any documentation to > >>>>>>>>>>>>> substantiate your claims so the only conclusion that can be > >>>>>>>>>>>>> reached is that you lied once again and have demonstrated > >>>>>>>>>>>>> that you are indeed a dishonest person. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I merely challenged you to provide that proof The burden of > >>>>>>>>>>>>> proof is on you to prove > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> This is exactly correct. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> It is grossly incorrect. It speaks of "lies" and offers ZERO > >>>>>>>>>>> examples of such. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> So you do still beat your wife and kids? We all know this is a > >>>>>>>>>> “fact’ so there is no reason to provide “evidence” of it, right > >>>>>>>>>> (After all, that is your ‘logic’ here)? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Perfect reply! > >>>>>>>>> He won't understand why though because he is obviously not too > >>>>>>>>> intelligent. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> And "Snit" knows it. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> If my goal was to convince you it would be my burden of proof. > >>>>>>>>>>> That is not my goal though. I do not care if you or he > >>>>>>>>>>> believes it. Why would I? > >>>>>>>>>>> I know it is true and so does Carroll, who even acknowledged > >>>>>>>>>>> it as such. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I “know” it is “true” that you still beat your wife and kids, > >>>>>>>>>> so it’s a “fact”. > >>>>>>>>>> That “fact’ doesn’t require any “evidence” simply because I > >>>>>>>>>> “know” > >>>>>>>>>> it. > >>>>>>>>>> Anyone, who was blasted on sterno and testors would be happy to > >>>>>>>>>> have you on a jury, Snit. LOL! > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I initially assumed that snit was just the run of the mill troll > >>>>>>>>> only with a lot of free time on his hands. After observing him > >>>>>>>>> it's become apparent that snit is seriously mentally ill. Just > >>>>>>>>> for starters, NPD/BPD are high on the list along with a case of > >>>>>>>>> substance abuse where he fogs out and gets repetitive like Rain > >>>>>>>>> Man. I suspect he might also suffer from a mild case of mental > >>>>>>>>> retardation, possibly due to fetal alcohol syndrome as he > >>>>>>>>> exhibits classic signs of that illness as well. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> There is no question that Snit would be unable to sustain > >>>>>>>>> himself in a traditional workplace because his co-workers would > >>>>>>>>> not put up with his behavior for long. I suspect his wife and > >>>>>>>>> possibly his children, depending upon their age, are well aware > >>>>>>>>> that "daddy ain't well". Kids can be cruel. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> And if you do not know this you should. :) > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> What he knows is a *ridiculously* idiotic liar when he sees > >>>>>>>>>> one... > >>>>>>>>>> as do most “others”. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Wow. A lot of accusations you offer no support for. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> LOL! Think, if you can: Who would he need to "support" it *to* > >>>>>>> that isn't already convinced you are what you've shown yourself to > >>>>>>> be? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> An oldie but a goodie > >>>>>> > >>>>>> http://www.mofeel.net/711-comp-sys-mac-advocacy/21729.aspx > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Read it and weep snit. > >>>>> > >>>>> Fuck. This snit clown is really fucked up. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> Ah, insults. How creative! > >>> > >>> Facts snit. I know you don't like facts, but you need to realize that > >>> when you spew your guts people can find those posts years later. It's > >>> very easy in fact. > >>> All about your life as a child of fetal alcohol syndrom. > >>> And in your own words. > >>> > >>> This is certainly getting too easy. > >> > >> Quote from that link above: "For that matter, FAS was not a major area > >> of study until the early to mid 70's... and I was born in the 60's." > >> > >> Ever watch TV shows from the 60's? Those people drank like fish. > >> > >> > > Carroll and friends stop at nothing with their attacks. > > > > They hate how I refuse to sink to their level. > > > No sinking at all, just contemporary culture. > > Ever watch Mad Men? Those guys would get to the office and pour > themselves a drink. Three-martini lunches, a few when they got home. > > Hell, in the TV show "UFO" from 1970, they had "high-tech" booze > dispensers built into the walls. Was a completely different culture back > then. > > -- > -v Perhaps you use it like Melzzzz. Do you not realize the use of https? Melzzzz must grasp Silver "Christ is King" Slimer knows he is just being a moron. Why would you want to restrict the tools on Mint to what can be done on Windows and macOS? Now that nobody is replying to Melzzzz, he's making it sound like he's achieved some great victory -- when in fact, people are just not playing his game anymore. "Well, that wasn't hard" said Melzzzz's girlfriend. Really, those of you who troll are not able to manage yourselves anymore. -- This Trick Gets Women Hot For You https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.c/KDQrv8appR8 Jonas Eklundh Communication
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-03 10:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a8877b31-3a5f-4476-8311-46d156fcda0f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #453617 |
On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 2:58:09 AM UTC-6, vallor wrote: > >> Ever watch TV shows from the 60's? Those people drank like fish. > >> > >> > > Carroll and friends stop at nothing with their attacks. > > > > They hate how I refuse to sink to their level. > > > No sinking at all, just contemporary culture. > > Ever watch Mad Men? Those guys would get to the office and pour > themselves a drink. Three-martini lunches, a few when they got home. > > Hell, in the TV show "UFO" from 1970, they had "high-tech" booze > dispensers built into the walls. Was a completely different culture back > then. I grew up in the 60s and 70, preganant women were not depicted as heavy drinkers on TV. They may have done so in RL but usually only if one was an alcoholic.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-03 11:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fniqcdFm0isU5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #453662 |
On 6/3/18 10:14 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 2:58:09 AM UTC-6, vallor wrote: > >>>> Ever watch TV shows from the 60's? Those people drank like fish. >>>> >>>> >>> Carroll and friends stop at nothing with their attacks. >>> >>> They hate how I refuse to sink to their level. >> >> >> No sinking at all, just contemporary culture. >> >> Ever watch Mad Men? Those guys would get to the office and pour >> themselves a drink. Three-martini lunches, a few when they got home. >> >> Hell, in the TV show "UFO" from 1970, they had "high-tech" booze >> dispensers built into the walls. Was a completely different culture back >> then. > > I grew up in the 60s and 70, preganant women were not depicted > as heavy drinkers on TV. They may have done so in RL but usually > only if one was an alcoholic. > Regardless of your view of drinking in the '60s, what you did was reprehensible. You dug up content from another site where I ASKED about my mother drinking (not heavily) and then you lied about it and my health issues as you brought it to COLA. You also have dug up comments about my disautonomia and then made assumptions about how it effects me -- direct lies on your part -- and also brought that to COLA (and elsewhere I see). Bottom line: you ARE trolling and lying as you do this. You do it to get attention and because it bothers you deeply that it is trivial to quote you lying more in a day than you can quote me lying in a year. You have no boundaries for your attacks -- to the point that the police have talked you about your harassment outside of Usenet. Predictably you will twist this and play victim. But note I do not do research on you and your life... I have only rarely even done any searching to see if your stories about your wife leaving you are true... you are the one who brings your divorce and your demeaning of your kids to COLA -- NOT me. You do so to play victim. -- 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 | 2018-06-03 11:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ca847f96-5995-4241-8305-ff3dbc26324e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #453686 |
On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 12:29:35 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 6/3/18 10:14 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > > On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 2:58:09 AM UTC-6, vallor wrote: > > > >>>> Ever watch TV shows from the 60's? Those people drank like fish. > >>>> > >>>> > >>> Carroll and friends stop at nothing with their attacks. > >>> > >>> They hate how I refuse to sink to their level. > >> > >> > >> No sinking at all, just contemporary culture. > >> > >> Ever watch Mad Men? Those guys would get to the office and pour > >> themselves a drink. Three-martini lunches, a few when they got home. > >> > >> Hell, in the TV show "UFO" from 1970, they had "high-tech" booze > >> dispensers built into the walls. Was a completely different culture back > >> then. > > > > I grew up in the 60s and 70, preganant women were not depicted > > as heavy drinkers on TV. They may have done so in RL but usually > > only if one was an alcoholic. > > > Regardless of your view of drinking in the '60s, what you did was > reprehensible. Not at all... I was seeking an explanation for your extremely bizarre online behavior that virtually everyone you have ever come in contact with on CSMA and COLA, at the least, has commented on... this was a potential explanation. > You dug up content from another site where I ASKED about > my mother drinking (not heavily) How do you know your mother drank? Does that sound like the topic of casual conversation to you? Were you really worried that a few drinks would make a difference? That doesn't sound as likely as you being aware she's an alcoholic. No big deal and not your fault... but it may explain some of your health issues... as even *you* thought may be the case when you asked that question, regardless of how 'heavy', or not, her drinking was. No one cares if your mother drank, they don't even care why you are like you are, but knowing may cause them to reassess their outlook on you if the condition is a medical one that is totally beyond your control. So is it? > and then you lied about it and my > health issues as you brought it to COLA. You also have dug up comments > about my disautonomia and then made assumptions about how it effects me Something clearly does... and you never have answered the question about how you want people to treat you. I'm actually giving you something most don't. We can all see how something, whatever you want to call it, impacts YOU... because whatever it is also impacts people on Usenet. So can you answer that question now?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-03 12:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fnit2eFm0isU8@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #453698 |
On 6/3/18 11:54 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 12:29:35 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >> On 6/3/18 10:14 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>> On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 2:58:09 AM UTC-6, vallor wrote: >>> >>>>>> Ever watch TV shows from the 60's? Those people drank like fish. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Carroll and friends stop at nothing with their attacks. >>>>> >>>>> They hate how I refuse to sink to their level. >>>> >>>> >>>> No sinking at all, just contemporary culture. >>>> >>>> Ever watch Mad Men? Those guys would get to the office and pour >>>> themselves a drink. Three-martini lunches, a few when they got home. >>>> >>>> Hell, in the TV show "UFO" from 1970, they had "high-tech" booze >>>> dispensers built into the walls. Was a completely different culture back >>>> then. >>> >>> I grew up in the 60s and 70, preganant women were not depicted >>> as heavy drinkers on TV. They may have done so in RL but usually >>> only if one was an alcoholic. >>> >> Regardless of your view of drinking in the '60s, what you did was >> reprehensible. > > Not at all... I was seeking an explanation for your extremely bizarre > online behavior that virtually everyone you have ever come in contact > with on CSMA and COLA, at the least, has commented on... this was > a potential explanation. See how you move goal posts from your reprehensible behavior and work to put me on the defensive with vague accusations. I noted SPECIFIC actions of yours. Not things people say about you. Not things I say about you. YOUR actions. You clearly did research outside of COLA to find "dirt" on me and then lied about it and made absurd conclusions as you brought it to COLA. That is you. Your response is to claim you are a victim of "bizarre online behavior" you do not even pretend to define. This is just what you do: you lie and you play victim and work to change the topic from your own behavior YOU bring to COLA. >> You dug up content from another site where I ASKED about >> my mother drinking (not heavily) > > How do you know your mother drank? This may come as a shock to you, but my family speaks to each other. We communicate and are honest and open. This is clearly very different than your family life... if it was not you would not be asking such questions. > Does that sound like the > topic of casual conversation to you? Speaking of our lives is a common thing in my family. Again, the fact this is outside of your norm is quite telling... and something YOU have just brought to COLA. You are going to try to get me to speak more about MY family, and you will twist what I have just said to suggest drinking is a common topic or whatever. You WILL lie about it. There is no doubt about that at all. > Were you really worried that > a few drinks would make a difference? I was looking into many things that could have impacted my health... but the details are not in any way relevant here. You can work to excuse your reprehensible behavior but THAT is the topic. The fact you are so obsessed and engage in so much harassment you cannot understand why you finding and bringing such things to COLA was wrong, nor why lying about it and pushing insane speculation is wrong, says a lot about you. > That doesn't sound as likely > as you being aware she's an alcoholic. See: this is you pushing INSANE speculation. It is utter madness. > No big deal and not your > fault... but it may explain some of your health issues... as even > *you* thought may be the case when you asked that question, > regardless of how 'heavy', or not, her drinking was. No one > cares if your mother drank, Yet you obsess about it, bring it to COLA, lie about it, and push insane speculations to harass me. > they don't even care why you are > like you are, but knowing may cause them to reassess their > outlook on you if the condition is a medical one that is totally > beyond your control. So is it? > >> and then you lied about it and my >> health issues as you brought it to COLA. You also have dug up comments >> about my dysautonomia and then made assumptions about how it effects me > > Something clearly does... and you never have answered the > question about how you want people to treat you. I'm actually > giving you something most don't. We can all see how something, > whatever you want to call it, impacts YOU... because whatever > it is also impacts people on Usenet. So can you answer that > question now? See how you play victim and then insist that your own lies, obsession, and harassment are somehow a "gift". That is classic gas-lighting you are engaging in. Meanwhile YOU talk about your divorce with your wife and how you blame me for her finding out about you cheating on her. Even with your own screwing up of your life you blame 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 | 2018-06-03 12:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <bf1b1364-ba46-48a4-b9b0-f19bb9f9a28b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #453705 |
On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 1:15:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 6/3/18 11:54 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > > On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 12:29:35 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >> On 6/3/18 10:14 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>> On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 2:58:09 AM UTC-6, vallor wrote: > >>> > >>>>>> Ever watch TV shows from the 60's? Those people drank like fish. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> Carroll and friends stop at nothing with their attacks. > >>>>> > >>>>> They hate how I refuse to sink to their level. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> No sinking at all, just contemporary culture. > >>>> > >>>> Ever watch Mad Men? Those guys would get to the office and pour > >>>> themselves a drink. Three-martini lunches, a few when they got home. > >>>> > >>>> Hell, in the TV show "UFO" from 1970, they had "high-tech" booze > >>>> dispensers built into the walls. Was a completely different culture back > >>>> then. > >>> > >>> I grew up in the 60s and 70, preganant women were not depicted > >>> as heavy drinkers on TV. They may have done so in RL but usually > >>> only if one was an alcoholic. > >>> > >> Regardless of your view of drinking in the '60s, what you did was > >> reprehensible. > > > > Not at all... I was seeking an explanation for your extremely bizarre > > online behavior that virtually everyone you have ever come in contact > > with on CSMA and COLA, at the least, has commented on... this was > > a potential explanation. > > See how you move goal posts ??? My "goal" was to find an explanation for what I just said. from your reprehensible behavior and work to > put me on the defensive with vague accusations. > > I noted SPECIFIC actions of yours. My "action" here was to note what you said about your mother's pregnancy and the fact that she drank during it. I didn't create anything so it's not much of an action. > Your response is to claim you are a victim of "bizarre online behavior" Were it just me you'd have a point... but that *is* the point... it's not *just* me. > >> You dug up content from another site where I ASKED about > >> my mother drinking (not heavily) > > > > How do you know your mother drank? > > This may come as a shock to you, but my family speaks to each other. We > communicate and are honest and open. This is clearly very different than > your family life... if it was not you would not be asking such questions. > > > Does that sound like the > > topic of casual conversation to you? > > Speaking of our lives is a common thing in my family. Who talks about drinking during pregnancy as a "common thing" in a family? Someone with a drinking problem, that's who. > > Were you really worried that > > a few drinks would make a difference? > > I was looking into many things that could have impacted my health... but > the details are not in any way relevant here. Whatever the causes of your behavior, they become relevant when everyone notices. Whether you like it, or not, this is one lesson about life you're going to have to learn.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-03 12:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fniubuFm0isU15@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #453715 |
On 6/3/18 12:32 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 1:15:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >> On 6/3/18 11:54 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>> On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 12:29:35 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>> On 6/3/18 10:14 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>> On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 2:58:09 AM UTC-6, vallor wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>> Ever watch TV shows from the 60's? Those people drank like fish. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Carroll and friends stop at nothing with their attacks. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> They hate how I refuse to sink to their level. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> No sinking at all, just contemporary culture. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ever watch Mad Men? Those guys would get to the office and pour >>>>>> themselves a drink. Three-martini lunches, a few when they got home. >>>>>> >>>>>> Hell, in the TV show "UFO" from 1970, they had "high-tech" booze >>>>>> dispensers built into the walls. Was a completely different culture back >>>>>> then. >>>>> >>>>> I grew up in the 60s and 70, preganant women were not depicted >>>>> as heavy drinkers on TV. They may have done so in RL but usually >>>>> only if one was an alcoholic. >>>>> >>>> Regardless of your view of drinking in the '60s, what you did was >>>> reprehensible. >>> >>> Not at all... I was seeking an explanation for your extremely bizarre >>> online behavior that virtually everyone you have ever come in contact >>> with on CSMA and COLA, at the least, has commented on... this was >>> a potential explanation. >> >> See how you move goal posts > > ??? My "goal" was to find an explanation for what I just said. Your goal is to change the topic from your reprehensible behavior of harassment: of digging up health information about me from other sources, bringing it to COLA, lying about it, pushing insane speculations, blaming me for when the police contact you over your harassment, and otherwise outright lie nonstop. In your mind this is all my fault for some comment of mine you cannot quote. You ALWAYS play victim. ... -- 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]
Page 2 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web