Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #453161 > unrolled thread
| Started by | oOze <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-06-01 21:57 -0400 |
| Last post | 2018-06-14 09:08 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 763 — 34 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
Microsoft to purchase Github oOze <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-06-01 21:57 -0400
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit ignores the 9th amendment <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 18:58 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Fred <Fred.rscmdffjf@l.invalid> - 2018-06-01 19:05 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Sam E <why.should.this@be.email.invalid> - 2018-06-02 10:06 -0500
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Fuck Snit <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-02 08:34 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2018-06-03 23:42 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Big Al <Big_Al@invalid.com> - 2018-06-01 22:13 -0400
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-06-02 07:28 -0400
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Fuck Snit <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-02 05:41 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-06-08 07:30 -0500
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github SilverSlimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-06-08 11:12 -0400
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-08 08:13 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> - 2018-06-08 21:56 +0000
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-09 13:45 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> - 2018-06-09 23:08 +0000
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-09 16:20 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-09 23:29 +0000
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-09 16:40 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-09 17:23 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-09 18:46 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-09 16:39 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-09 17:33 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-09 20:38 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 08:22 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 16:02 +0000
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 09:16 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 09:38 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 09:46 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 09:52 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 11:17 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 11:50 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 11:54 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 12:06 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 12:17 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 12:47 -0700
Is Mike on (prescription) drugs, or not ? Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-06-10 13:28 -0700
Re: Is Mike on (prescription) drugs, or not ? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 13:39 -0700
Re: Is Mike on (prescription) drugs, or not ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 14:01 -0700
Get your story straight, please. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-06-10 14:16 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 14:24 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 17:41 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 14:53 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 15:42 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 16:00 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 19:39 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 17:22 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 17:27 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 17:32 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 17:39 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 20:54 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfreude@null.net> - 2018-06-10 18:08 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 18:24 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 18:19 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 21:30 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 19:21 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 22:32 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 19:38 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 22:53 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 19:59 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 23:02 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 03:07 +0000
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 20:13 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 20:24 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 20:41 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 20:45 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 20:18 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 18:03 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 01:10 +0000
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 18:27 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 01:41 +0000
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 19:15 -0700
Random egos, Random games, and Random religions. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-06-10 23:55 -0700
Re: Random egos, Random games, and Random religions. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 10:58 -0700
More lizard than human. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-06-11 13:45 -0700
Re: More lizard than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 13:50 -0700
More bot than human. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-06-11 14:09 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 14:21 -0700
Does not compute. Beep ! Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-06-11 14:52 -0700
Re: Does not compute. Beep ! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 14:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 14:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 15:05 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 15:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 16:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 16:39 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-11 19:43 -0400
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 16:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 17:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 20:02 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 20:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 20:43 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 20:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 17:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 19:42 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 20:08 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 21:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 21:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 09:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-12 09:33 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 09:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 11:12 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-12 11:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 11:43 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-12 12:34 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 15:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-12 16:43 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 19:07 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-12 19:55 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-13 09:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-13 10:45 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-13 11:56 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-13 12:01 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-13 14:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-13 14:30 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 09:33 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-14 11:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 14:39 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-14 22:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-15 09:59 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-15 11:42 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-15 13:16 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-15 23:30 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 09:46 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 10:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 10:34 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 11:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 12:05 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 12:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 13:25 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 14:25 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 16:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 18:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 20:24 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 21:59 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 22:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 23:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 10:44 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-17 10:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-17 09:56 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-17 10:18 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 11:00 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-17 11:23 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 13:16 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-17 15:41 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 19:56 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-17 20:11 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 21:26 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-17 21:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 22:35 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-17 22:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 23:11 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-18 05:24 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 08:42 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-18 09:32 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 10:18 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-18 17:48 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 12:02 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-18 12:30 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 13:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-18 13:54 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Whistle Blower <wbedward@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 21:24 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 14:48 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Whistle Blower <wbedward@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 21:53 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-18 16:03 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Stumpee McGee <stumpeemcgee49@inoverter.net> - 2018-06-18 19:57 -0400
Is a woman "lying" when she spends thousands on cosmetic surgery ? Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-06-18 18:55 -0700
Re: Is a woman "lying" when she spends thousands on cosmetic surgery ? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-06-19 19:22 +0000
Re: Is a woman "lying" when she spends thousands on cosmetic surgery ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 12:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 14:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-18 16:01 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 17:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 18:35 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 18:48 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 20:22 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 20:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 21:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 22:09 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 22:22 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 20:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 21:09 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 22:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 09:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 10:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 11:16 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 11:23 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 11:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 11:51 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 21:12 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 21:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 22:22 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 09:40 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steven Petruzzellis <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 09:41 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 10:52 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 11:16 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 11:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 11:32 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 11:54 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 12:23 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 12:32 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 13:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 15:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 16:59 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 18:00 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 21:02 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 21:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 21:35 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 21:43 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 21:55 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-21 09:41 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steven Petruzzellis <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 10:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 12:07 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-21 13:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steven Petruzzellis <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 14:42 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 18:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 12:35 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 13:08 -0700
Re: More bot than human. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-21 02:08 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 19:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-21 02:50 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 20:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 20:54 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 21:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 13:05 -0600
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-21 13:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 15:49 -0600
Re: More bot than human. Steven Petruzzellis <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 14:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 14:51 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-21 15:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 17:01 -0600
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-21 16:22 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 18:08 -0600
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 17:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-21 17:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 17:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 08:55 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-22 09:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 11:44 -0600
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-22 11:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 13:45 -0600
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-22 13:07 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 14:29 -0600
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-22 14:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 15:01 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-22 15:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 15:24 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-22 15:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-23 11:05 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 12:37 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-25 12:51 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 12:59 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-13 11:52 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-13 15:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-25 13:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 13:48 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-25 14:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 15:00 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-25 15:11 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 15:24 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-25 15:35 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-26 09:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-26 13:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-26 14:41 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-26 15:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-26 16:24 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-26 16:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-27 03:08 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-01 08:52 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-01 09:51 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-01 10:03 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-01 10:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-01 23:00 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-02 01:15 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-02 09:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-13 10:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-13 11:07 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-13 11:35 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-13 12:24 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 02:09 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 10:01 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-14 10:08 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 10:33 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-14 11:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 11:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 10:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-14 11:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 11:22 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-14 11:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 11:33 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 12:07 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-14 11:52 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 12:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-14 21:00 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 14:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-14 15:03 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 09:18 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 09:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 09:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-15 16:43 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 10:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 10:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 11:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 11:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 13:54 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 14:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 14:54 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 17:25 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 17:34 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-15 23:26 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 17:02 -0700
Re: More bot than human. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-07-16 00:04 +0000
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-16 00:16 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 17:48 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-16 01:04 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 20:58 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 21:43 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 17:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 17:46 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-16 00:58 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 18:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-16 01:59 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 19:22 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 02:31 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 20:09 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-16 11:02 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 04:42 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 15:43 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-16 15:45 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 16:03 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 09:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-16 16:27 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 09:40 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 17:16 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 17:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 17:58 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 18:11 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 18:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 18:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 19:08 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 19:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 22:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 10:02 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 10:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 10:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 10:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 11:30 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 12:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 13:53 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 09:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 15:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 16:51 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-22 17:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 00:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 19:12 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 20:23 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-17 01:27 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-17 01:47 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 19:18 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 19:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. GasPipe <vinnythegaspipe@motz.org> - 2018-07-16 23:17 -0400
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 22:52 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 22:51 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 23:15 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 19:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 18:33 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 17:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 17:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 09:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-16 17:32 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 11:00 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-16 20:46 +0000
Re: More bot than human. GasPipe <vinnythegaspipe@motz.org> - 2018-07-16 17:01 -0400
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-16 21:39 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-16 22:00 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 15:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-16 22:58 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 17:08 -0700
Re: More bot than human. GasPipe <vinnythegaspipe@motz.org> - 2018-07-16 20:20 -0400
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-17 00:30 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-17 00:32 +0000
Re: More bot than human. RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 15:57 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 09:00 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 10:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 10:34 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 10:54 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 12:18 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 12:48 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 13:46 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 14:07 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 14:34 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 14:55 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 14:32 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 14:45 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 14:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 14:58 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 15:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 14:47 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 08:15 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 08:40 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 15:52 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 09:33 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 19:53 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 08:24 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 11:31 -0500
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:56 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 11:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 11:26 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:02 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 12:07 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:26 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 13:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 13:32 -0500
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 11:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:24 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:22 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 12:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 12:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:40 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 19:51 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 09:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:44 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 11:25 -0500
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 13:11 -0500
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 11:16 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:03 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 11:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 11:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:06 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 12:15 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:26 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 19:36 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 13:51 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 14:25 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 14:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 14:45 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 14:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 15:08 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 15:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 09:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 11:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 11:18 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 11:59 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 12:33 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 13:35 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 20:23 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 13:41 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 09:44 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 20:11 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 13:14 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 09:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:39 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 12:34 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:44 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 15:11 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 13:53 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 07:37 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 07:42 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 09:30 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 19:48 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 09:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 19:48 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 12:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:55 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 20:40 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 13:56 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 11:33 -0500
Re: More bot than human. RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 17:02 +0000
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-19 07:51 -0500
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 08:22 -0700
Re: More bot than human. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-07-19 15:40 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 09:32 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-19 11:41 -0500
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 09:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 10:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. GasPipe <vinnythegaspipe@motz.org> - 2018-07-19 15:46 -0400
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-19 15:02 -0500
Re: More bot than human. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-07-19 20:47 +0000
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-20 07:14 -0500
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 19:53 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 15:03 -0500
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 20:41 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 14:12 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 14:15 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 14:22 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 14:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 15:05 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 17:48 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 18:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 11:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 11:40 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 12:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 12:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 12:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 16:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 16:32 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 18:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 12:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-19 11:55 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 08:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 08:55 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 11:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 11:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 11:46 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 12:01 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 12:56 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 13:05 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 13:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 14:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 15:26 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 15:58 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 16:11 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 12:37 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 16:08 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 16:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 16:14 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 09:55 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-20 17:19 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 13:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 20:57 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 16:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-21 16:06 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-21 12:44 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 14:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-21 14:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 14:41 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-21 16:01 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-22 10:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-22 11:11 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-22 11:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-22 13:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-22 11:09 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-25 13:51 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-25 15:04 -0600
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-25 14:18 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-26 10:06 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-26 12:59 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 14:30 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 12:37 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 16:59 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 12:37 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 12:37 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 16:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 12:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 12:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 12:15 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 12:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 12:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 14:54 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 14:23 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 15:03 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 15:26 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 11:12 -0500
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:46 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 19:31 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 12:44 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 13:49 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 09:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 19:46 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 17:23 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-22 14:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 13:35 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 07:06 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 08:58 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 16:12 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:35 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 09:42 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 11:38 -0500
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:41 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 20:00 +0000
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 15:01 -0500
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 20:41 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 13:11 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 11:09 -0500
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 16:12 +0000
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 11:59 -0500
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:42 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:48 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 20:10 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 13:14 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 17:46 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carrol Busted.... Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-17 01:14 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carrol Busted.... Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 19:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-17 01:14 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 19:14 -0700
Re: More bot than human. RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 15:59 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 09:00 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-17 01:14 +0000
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-17 01:33 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 19:12 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 19:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 15:56 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 09:01 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-17 16:27 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 09:30 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 15:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-16 21:06 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 15:34 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 16:44 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 21:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 23:02 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 02:23 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 18:05 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-15 22:51 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 17:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 10:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 03:26 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 03:37 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 20:40 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-14 13:16 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 14:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 10:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-14 11:18 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 10:09 -0600
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 09:55 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-23 10:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 10:26 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steven Petruzzellis <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 20:41 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 13:48 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 14:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 20:51 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 21:16 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 21:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 21:39 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 21:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 21:52 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 02:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steven Petruzzellis <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 10:15 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 01:41 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steven Petruzzellis <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 10:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 08:01 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 08:06 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 08:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 08:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 08:33 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 08:44 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 09:15 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 09:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 09:56 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 10:12 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 10:56 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 14:01 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 14:14 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 14:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 15:03 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 15:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 16:39 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 16:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 19:03 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 16:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 16:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 17:18 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 16:45 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 16:56 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 16:59 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 20:30 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 11:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 08:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 08:30 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 10:46 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-17 10:52 -0700
Re: More bot than human,talk.politics.guns Whistle Blower <wbedward@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 23:24 +0000
Re: More bot than human,talk.politics.guns Stumpee McGee <stumpeemcgee49@inoverter.net> - 2018-06-13 07:32 -0400
Re: More bot than human, Whistle Blower <wbedward@gmail.com> - 2018-06-13 21:14 +0000
How much do you think it's worth ? Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-06-11 15:19 -0700
Re: How much do you think it's worth ? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 15:26 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 18:23 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 21:32 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 19:22 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 22:33 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 19:02 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 19:34 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 22:46 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 19:51 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 19:49 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 19:54 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 22:59 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 20:42 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 20:37 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 18:29 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 21:42 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 16:55 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 20:33 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 17:39 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 20:56 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 14:55 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 18:10 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 21:28 +0000
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 14:32 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 13:42 -0700
An example of how snit trolls. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 21:03 +0000
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 14:15 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 21:26 +0000
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 14:43 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 17:48 -0400
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 14:47 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 22:01 +0000
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 15:48 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 15:29 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 15:45 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 16:45 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 17:29 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 17:37 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2018-06-12 17:54 +0000
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-12 11:22 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-06-12 13:22 -0500
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 15:59 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2018-06-12 23:02 +0000
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 16:10 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-12 16:46 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-12 16:45 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-06-13 06:53 -0500
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-12 16:45 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 09:20 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 15:35 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. !Jones <jones@fobahor.com> - 2018-06-10 16:52 -0500
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 15:30 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 16:13 +0000
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 09:39 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfreude@null.net> - 2018-06-10 11:49 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 11:52 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfreude@null.net> - 2018-06-10 11:53 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 12:18 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 10:56 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 04:11 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 12:28 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Pabst Blue Ribbon <pabst@blue.ribbon> - 2018-06-17 11:02 +0000
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Stumpee McGee <stumpeemcgee49@inoverter.net> - 2018-06-17 08:05 -0400
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-11 06:23 +0000
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 23:33 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 05:02 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 09:00 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 11:09 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 11:25 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 11:36 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 10:57 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-09 16:38 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github oOze <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-06-02 22:28 -0400
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2018-06-02 22:55 -0400
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github oOze <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-06-03 09:38 -0400
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steven Petruzzellis <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 09:38 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steven Petruzzellis <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 09:39 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2018-06-02 11:42 +0100
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Fuck Snit <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-02 03:52 -0700
what are all these Linux Developers going to do Simon bar Sinister <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 05:55 -0700
Re: what are all these Linux Developers going to do owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-06-14 13:55 +0000
Re: what are all these Linux Developers going to do chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-06-14 09:17 -0500
how can Microsoft be the great evil if Linux is all over their site? Simon bar Sinister <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 07:38 -0700
Re: what are all these Linux Developers going to do William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2018-06-14 15:54 +0100
Re: what are all these Linux Developers going to do Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-06-16 06:33 -0400
Re: what are all these Linux Developers going to do Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 09:08 -0700
Page 16 of 39 — ← Prev page 1 … 14 15 [16] 17 18 … 39 Next page →
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-15 11:50 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <9e065015-e0e3-42d7-94fa-8138ff0a2cf0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #457490 |
On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 11:50:02 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > Ah, now you claim to understand my views better than I do. LOL! Quit pretending you can read and write like "others". > >> As far as my view of the liberal worldview, and the conservative, what > >> about it can you even twist into saying the liberal side "loathes pretty > >> much everything": > >> > >> ----- > >> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative world > >> views: > >> > >> * Liberals: support equal rights > > > > Correction: they *claim* to, it's blatantly obviously this isn't true. > > Either that or even liberal has a different definition of the term. > > Ah, then of course you can find examples from popular liberals... and I > will grant there are some edge cases, such as affirmative action, where > I think the "cure" offers more harm than good (though even then the goal > is equal rights). But shoot... give your examples! LOL! You're actually going to try and sell the idea that you're not aware of the goings on in states like California (liberal central)? Are you also going to pretend that Californians aren't moving to Arizona in record numbers because their liberal hellhole has gotten so bad? How long do you think it'll take CA to complete their obvious conversion to a feudal system? > >> and environmental protection > > > > First of all, that's not exclusive to 'liberals', whatever that term even means now. > > Nor did I say it was... but it is contradictory to mainstream > conservative views The problem with painting with such a broad brush is you look like you now look like. > where things like climate change are to be denied for > the sake of socializing the costs of the rich. > > > Secondly, like the point above, liberals *claim* to want environmental protection, > > but their lifestyles highlight the degree to which they're lying. > > You can twist things that way I am sure. You're the only one doing the twisting here. There is nothing inherently honest about people who *claim* to be liberal and you're the poster boy. You spout the talking points but you have no understanding of those who *claim* to adhere to those points as they take money from those seeking to undercut their voiced interests, just like every other politician ever has. > >> , with a > >> focus on investing in the future and building a stronger tie between > >> hard work / productivity and financial reward. > > > > Again, not exclusive to what liberals *claim* to want... and, again, their > > lifestyles tell the real story. > > Most work hard. At spending other people's money. > > There's no point in continuing, you're living the dream that liberals created for > > you while they created an 'enemy' for you to point to so you could feel better > > about yourself. You're just a partisan hack, Snit... and you don't even realize it. > > There is no use continuing Because only one of us realizes what 'politics' has become.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-15 13:54 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <fr1qk5Fn9arU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #457495 |
On 7/15/18 11:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 11:50:02 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >> Ah, now you claim to understand my views better than I do. LOL! > > Quit pretending you can read and write like "others". > >>>> As far as my view of the liberal worldview, and the conservative, what >>>> about it can you even twist into saying the liberal side "loathes pretty >>>> much everything": >>>> >>>> ----- >>>> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative world >>>> views: >>>> >>>> * Liberals: support equal rights >>> >>> Correction: they *claim* to, it's blatantly obviously this isn't true. >>> Either that or even liberal has a different definition of the term. >> >> Ah, then of course you can find examples from popular liberals... and I >> will grant there are some edge cases, such as affirmative action, where >> I think the "cure" offers more harm than good (though even then the goal >> is equal rights). But shoot... give your examples! > > LOL! You're actually going to try and sell the idea that you're not aware of > the goings on in states like California (liberal central)? Are you also going to > pretend that Californians aren't moving to Arizona in record numbers because > their liberal hellhole has gotten so bad? How long do you think it'll take CA to > complete their obvious conversion to a feudal system? So no examples. This is funny coming from you who just threw a tantrum because I did not dig BACK into the history of COLA to show you Slimer's comments. Notice I am not asking you to do that... I am merely asking you to show examples of places where liberals are rejecting equal rights. But you have NO examples. I am not even saying there are none -- after all my brief description is very much broad strokes... but YOU cannot find any counter examples. That is quite telling. Meanwhile it is TRIVIAL to show where conservatives push for special entitlements for whites and Christians and heterosexuals, etc. While also a generalization, the key difference between liberals and conservatives, in modern America, the liberal agenda is one of equal rights and the conservative one is one of special entitlements. >>>> and environmental protection >>> >>> First of all, that's not exclusive to 'liberals', whatever that term even means now. >> >> Nor did I say it was... but it is contradictory to mainstream >> conservative views > > The problem with painting with such a broad brush is you look like you now look like. But you cannot find any counter examples. Fair enough. >> where things like climate change are to be denied for >> the sake of socializing the costs of the rich. >> >>> Secondly, like the point above, liberals *claim* to want environmental protection, >>> but their lifestyles highlight the degree to which they're lying. >> >> You can twist things that way I am sure. > > You're the only one doing the twisting here. There is nothing inherently > honest about people who *claim* to be liberal and you're the poster boy. > > You spout the talking points but you have no understanding of those who > *claim* to adhere to those points as they take money from those seeking > to undercut their voiced interests, just like every other politician ever has. See: I speak in terms of examples and you just lash out when you cannot find counter examples. Again, I am not denying they exist... and Slimer does a better job than you in pointing to some actions which could be said to be against the position (though notice how he has also failed to find POSITIONS which do not go against my gross generalizations). >>>> , with a >>>> focus on investing in the future and building a stronger tie between >>>> hard work / productivity and financial reward. >>> >>> Again, not exclusive to what liberals *claim* to want... and, again, their >>> lifestyles tell the real story. >> >> Most work hard. > > At spending other people's money. See: you just lash out. It is amazing to watch you freak out as you fail to find counter examples to what I have told you: -------- * Liberals: support equal rights and environmental protection, with a focus on investing in the future and building a stronger tie between hard work / productivity and financial reward. Additionally, Liberals want evidence-based regulation and oversight to help ensure clean air and water, safe food, and human rights. This includes following the scientific evidence about climate change and food safety, and things like setting levels of lead and other harmful substances allowed, and even to wanting to do research to reduce the harm of tools such as cars and guns and swimming pools. This is a form of control, and conservatives are right to note that. And they are right to note that sometimes these measures are taken too far. * Conservative: support special entitlements for whites, Christians, males, heterosexuals, and the wealthy, with a focus on redistributing wealth to the very richest in the nation with the idea that this will somehow help others. Conservatives want regulation and oversight based on their own feelings and what they believe has historically existed (which is often incorrect), or even just based on their own religion. This includes controlling which consenting adults can marry each other, what a woman can do with her own body, and even insisting the government gets to define YOUR gender. They also work to create regulations on voting to limit who can vote, for if the people truly get a voice they know their ideas are less likely to be accepted. Liberals are right to call conservatives out on this also being a form of control and, I think, a less defensible one. -------- And your counter examples to these generalizations: NONE! >>> There's no point in continuing, you're living the dream that liberals created for >>> you while they created an 'enemy' for you to point to so you could feel better >>> about yourself. You're just a partisan hack, Snit... and you don't even realize it. >> >> There is no use continuing > > Because only one of us realizes what 'politics' has become. Well, too many people do as you do and just blindly attack and show no understanding. But I will say I am speaking of ACTUAL liberals / progressives. Maybe we can look at the progressive side of the DNC. I am NOT speaking of the corporate side... they give lip service to the people but serve the wealthy. -- 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 <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-15 14:10 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <6b23265f-649c-446f-9ae6-5cec25fb11cc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #457508 |
On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 1:54:32 PM UTC-7, Snit wrote: > On 7/15/18 11:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > > On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 11:50:02 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > > > >> Ah, now you claim to understand my views better than I do. LOL! > > > > Quit pretending you can read and write like "others". > > > >>>> As far as my view of the liberal worldview, and the conservative, what > >>>> about it can you even twist into saying the liberal side "loathes pretty > >>>> much everything": > >>>> > >>>> ----- > >>>> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative world > >>>> views: > >>>> > >>>> * Liberals: support equal rights > >>> > >>> Correction: they *claim* to, it's blatantly obviously this isn't true. > >>> Either that or even liberal has a different definition of the term. > >> > >> Ah, then of course you can find examples from popular liberals... and I > >> will grant there are some edge cases, such as affirmative action, where > >> I think the "cure" offers more harm than good (though even then the goal > >> is equal rights). But shoot... give your examples! > > > > LOL! You're actually going to try and sell the idea that you're not aware of > > the goings on in states like California (liberal central)? Are you also going to > > pretend that Californians aren't moving to Arizona in record numbers because > > their liberal hellhole has gotten so bad? How long do you think it'll take CA to > > complete their obvious conversion to a feudal system? > > So no examples. This is funny coming from you who just threw a tantrum > because I did not dig BACK into the history of COLA to show you Slimer's > comments. Notice I am not asking you to do that... I am merely asking > you to show examples of places where liberals are rejecting equal rights. > > But you have NO examples. > > I am not even saying there are none -- after all my brief description is > very much broad strokes... but YOU cannot find any counter examples. > That is quite telling. > > Meanwhile it is TRIVIAL to show where conservatives push for special > entitlements for whites and Christians and heterosexuals, etc. While > also a generalization, the key difference between liberals and > conservatives, in modern America, the liberal agenda is one of equal > rights and the conservative one is one of special entitlements. > > >>>> and environmental protection > >>> > >>> First of all, that's not exclusive to 'liberals', whatever that term even means now. > >> > >> Nor did I say it was... but it is contradictory to mainstream > >> conservative views > > > > The problem with painting with such a broad brush is you look like you now look like. > > But you cannot find any counter examples. Fair enough. > > >> where things like climate change are to be denied for > >> the sake of socializing the costs of the rich. > >> > >>> Secondly, like the point above, liberals *claim* to want environmental protection, > >>> but their lifestyles highlight the degree to which they're lying. > >> > >> You can twist things that way I am sure. > > > > You're the only one doing the twisting here. There is nothing inherently > > honest about people who *claim* to be liberal and you're the poster boy. > > > > You spout the talking points but you have no understanding of those who > > *claim* to adhere to those points as they take money from those seeking > > to undercut their voiced interests, just like every other politician ever has. > > See: I speak in terms of examples and you just lash out when you cannot > find counter examples. Again, I am not denying they exist... and Slimer > does a better job than you in pointing to some actions which could be > said to be against the position (though notice how he has also failed to > find POSITIONS which do not go against my gross generalizations). > > >>>> , with a > >>>> focus on investing in the future and building a stronger tie between > >>>> hard work / productivity and financial reward. > >>> > >>> Again, not exclusive to what liberals *claim* to want... and, again, their > >>> lifestyles tell the real story. > >> > >> Most work hard. > > > > At spending other people's money. > > See: you just lash out. It is amazing to watch you freak out as you fail > to find counter examples to what I have told you: > > -------- > * Liberals: support equal rights and environmental protection, with a > focus on investing in the future and building a stronger tie between > hard work / productivity and financial reward. > > Additionally, Liberals want evidence-based regulation and oversight to > help ensure clean air and water, safe food, and human rights. This > includes following the scientific evidence about climate change and food > safety, and things like setting levels of lead and other harmful > substances allowed, and even to wanting to do research to reduce the > harm of tools such as cars and guns and swimming pools. This is a form > of control, and conservatives are... Klaus Schadenfreude's actions are entirely duplicitous. There is no doubt that as soon as any recent 'plonkee' does whatever to wound the inferior daisy's feelings that they'll be put right back in the kill filter. Sandman trolls Klaus Schadenfreude. Here is a list of names Jonas Eklundh has admitted he attributes to Klaus Schadenfreude "Cactus Pete", "Donald", "Donald Miller", "Horace McSwain", "Hymen", "meat", "Mike Weaver", "Modena IV Drid", "Omar Murad Asfour", "Rhino Plastee", "Soapy", "SopwithCamel", "Sunny Day", "Takuya Saitoh", "The Letter Q", "tmelmosfire", "zevon". All total lies, of course. How Klaus Schadenfreude determines when to use his stupid flood script to best emulate the style of Steve Carroll's posts http://usenet.sandman.net/misc/snit_flood. Steve Carroll's computer has more memory than Klaus Schadenfreude's. Steve Carroll wins. Klaus Schadenfreude loses. So take that, Klaus Schadenfreude. -- Get Rich Slow https://redd.it/6sfkup Jonas Eklundh Communication
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-15 14:54 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <6dd08a00-9586-427c-9fe5-f28be7202090@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #457508 |
On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 2:54:32 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 7/15/18 11:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > > On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 11:50:02 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > > > >> Ah, now you claim to understand my views better than I do. LOL! > > > > Quit pretending you can read and write like "others". > > > >>>> As far as my view of the liberal worldview, and the conservative, what > >>>> about it can you even twist into saying the liberal side "loathes pretty > >>>> much everything": > >>>> > >>>> ----- > >>>> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative world > >>>> views: > >>>> > >>>> * Liberals: support equal rights > >>> > >>> Correction: they *claim* to, it's blatantly obviously this isn't true. > >>> Either that or even liberal has a different definition of the term. > >> > >> Ah, then of course you can find examples from popular liberals... and I > >> will grant there are some edge cases, such as affirmative action, where > >> I think the "cure" offers more harm than good (though even then the goal > >> is equal rights). But shoot... give your examples! > > > > LOL! You're actually going to try and sell the idea that you're not aware of > > the goings on in states like California (liberal central)? Are you also going to > > pretend that Californians aren't moving to Arizona in record numbers because > > their liberal hellhole has gotten so bad? How long do you think it'll take CA to > > complete their obvious conversion to a feudal system? > > So no examples. No one could show you anything that would change your apparent viewpoint so there's no point in wasting the time... but the reality is you know I'm right. > This is funny coming from you who just threw a tantrum With tantrum meaning asking you for proof of your allegation. > But you have NO examples. The idea that any sensible person would need to ask for examples is ludicrous. The city of Hollywood alone has *tons* of examples... on every block. The CA version of "equal rights" is 'clean my pool but pool together miles away from me in an overpriced slum'. No one with a working brain would buy that idiocy but you swallow it whole, even as the overflow is flowing into your state. CA is becoming a cesspool, I have a growing number of friends who won't even gig in SF anymore.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-15 17:25 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <fr26vnFpar1U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #457516 |
On 7/15/18 2:54 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 2:54:32 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >> On 7/15/18 11:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>> On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 11:50:02 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>> >>>> Ah, now you claim to understand my views better than I do. LOL! >>> >>> Quit pretending you can read and write like "others". >>> >>>>>> As far as my view of the liberal worldview, and the conservative, what >>>>>> about it can you even twist into saying the liberal side "loathes pretty >>>>>> much everything": >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- >>>>>> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative world >>>>>> views: >>>>>> >>>>>> * Liberals: support equal rights >>>>> >>>>> Correction: they *claim* to, it's blatantly obviously this isn't true. >>>>> Either that or even liberal has a different definition of the term. >>>> >>>> Ah, then of course you can find examples from popular liberals... and I >>>> will grant there are some edge cases, such as affirmative action, where >>>> I think the "cure" offers more harm than good (though even then the goal >>>> is equal rights). But shoot... give your examples! >>> >>> LOL! You're actually going to try and sell the idea that you're not aware of >>> the goings on in states like California (liberal central)? Are you also going to >>> pretend that Californians aren't moving to Arizona in record numbers because >>> their liberal hellhole has gotten so bad? How long do you think it'll take CA to >>> complete their obvious conversion to a feudal system? >> >> So no examples. > > No one could show you anything that would change your apparent viewpoint > so there's no point in wasting the time... but the reality is you know I'm right. Ah, and an effort to blame ME for your lack of examples. Remember how just the other day you were crying I was not showing examples of Slimer's over-the-top bigotry and entitlement worldview. Well, as I said, it was TRIVIAL to show that... but now you blame ME for your failure. You have an amazing victim mentality. >> This is funny coming from you who just threw a tantrum > > With tantrum meaning asking you for proof of your allegation. I showed the proof (actually, as predicted, Slimer did). You threw a tantrum. And you still are. >> But you have NO examples. > > The idea that any sensible person would need to ask for examples is ludicrous. > The city of Hollywood alone has *tons* of examples... on every block. The CA > version of "equal rights" is 'clean my pool but pool together miles away from me > in an overpriced slum'. No one with a working brain would buy that idiocy but you > swallow it whole, even as the overflow is flowing into your state. CA is becoming > a cesspool, I have a growing number of friends who won't even gig in SF anymore. So NO examples from you but lots of excuses. Got it! Face it, you are talking out your ass. Again, does not mean there are no examples of any liberals acting poorly -- their ABSOLUTELY ARE -- but let us not pretend my generalizations are not VERY accurate AS generalizations: * Liberals: support equal rights and environmental protection, with a focus on investing in the future and building a stronger tie between hard work / productivity and financial reward. Additionally, Liberals want evidence-based regulation and oversight to help ensure clean air and water, safe food, and human rights. This includes following the scientific evidence about climate change and food safety, and things like setting levels of lead and other harmful substances allowed, and even to wanting to do research to reduce the harm of tools such as cars and guns and swimming pools. This is a form of control, and conservatives are right to note that. And they are right to note that sometimes these measures are taken too far. * Conservative: support special entitlements for whites, Christians, males, heterosexuals, and the wealthy, with a focus on redistributing wealth to the very richest in the nation with the idea that this will somehow help others. Conservatives want regulation and oversight based on their own feelings and what they believe has historically existed (which is often incorrect), or even just based on their own religion. This includes controlling which consenting adults can marry each other, what a woman can do with her own body, and even insisting the government gets to define YOUR gender. They also work to create regulations on voting to limit who can vote, for if the people truly get a voice they know their ideas are less likely to be accepted. Liberals are right to call conservatives out on this also being a form of control and, I think, a less defensible one. -- 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 <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-15 17:34 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <25971c72-ae26-443a-839d-47bbc4abd3da@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #457534 |
On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 5:25:30 PM UTC-7, Snit wrote: > On 7/15/18 2:54 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > > On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 2:54:32 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >> On 7/15/18 11:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>> On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 11:50:02 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >>> > >>>> Ah, now you claim to understand my views better than I do. LOL! > >>> > >>> Quit pretending you can read and write like "others". > >>> > >>>>>> As far as my view of the liberal worldview, and the conservative, what > >>>>>> about it can you even twist into saying the liberal side "loathes pretty > >>>>>> much everything": > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ----- > >>>>>> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative world > >>>>>> views: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> * Liberals: support equal rights > >>>>> > >>>>> Correction: they *claim* to, it's blatantly obviously this isn't true. > >>>>> Either that or even liberal has a different definition of the term. > >>>> > >>>> Ah, then of course you can find examples from popular liberals... and I > >>>> will grant there are some edge cases, such as affirmative action, where > >>>> I think the "cure" offers more harm than good (though even then the goal > >>>> is equal rights). But shoot... give your examples! > >>> > >>> LOL! You're actually going to try and sell the idea that you're not aware of > >>> the goings on in states like California (liberal central)? Are you also going to > >>> pretend that Californians aren't moving to Arizona in record numbers because > >>> their liberal hellhole has gotten so bad? How long do you think it'll take CA to > >>> complete their obvious conversion to a feudal system? > >> > >> So no examples. > > > > No one could show you anything that would change your apparent viewpoint > > so there's no point in wasting the time... but the reality is you know I'm right. > > Ah, and an effort to blame ME for your lack of examples. Remember how > just the other day you were crying I was not showing examples of > Slimer's over-the-top bigotry and entitlement worldview. Well, as I > said, it was TRIVIAL to show that... but now you blame ME for your failure. > > You have an amazing victim mentality. > > >> This is funny coming from you who just threw a tantrum > > > > With tantrum meaning asking you for proof of your allegation. > > I showed the proof (actually, as predicted, Slimer did). You threw a > tantrum. And you still are. > > >> But you have NO examples. > > > > The idea that any sensible person would need to ask for examples is ludicrous. > > The city of Hollywood alone has *tons* of examples... on every block. The CA > > version of "equal rights" is 'clean my pool but pool together miles away from me > > in an overpriced slum'. No one with a working brain would buy that idiocy but you > > swallow it whole, even as the overflow is flowing into your state. CA is becoming > > a cesspool, I have a growing number of friends who won't even gig in SF anymore. > > So NO examples from you but lots of excuses. Got it! > > Face it, you are talking out your ass. Again, does not mean there are no > examples of any liberals acting poorly -- their ABSOLUTELY ARE -- but > let us not pretend my generalizations are not VERY accurate AS > generalizations: > > * Liberals: support equal rights and environmental protection, with a > focus on investing in the future and building a stronger tie between > hard work / productivity and financial reward. > > Additionally, Liberals want evidence-based regulation and oversight to > help ensure clean air and water, safe food, and human rights. This > includes following the scien... At one point, vallor said a legitimate denizen was "obsessing" over him, which was identified as him posting to himself. Who *doesn't* know that this kind of nonsense is vallor's approach, not the approach of Owl? It's all just nonsense... the endless posting, the forging, the writing of gibberish, the temper... the puffy red eyes and eagerness to show how butthurt he is over being banned from the sandbox for crapping in it again... vallor can not help himself. Why does vallor focus on his own pride so much? For others I would simply think the comment is dubious. However, given that it's vallor I would dump that doubt and go straight to 'ego-trip' because that's most of what he does. Meaning no evidence is required to deem it dishonest. My original statement stands proper and correct. The Mac has a more advanced GUI. -- Best CMS Solution of 2017! http://alt.conspiracy.narkive.com/QcWYJ4Px/the-mentally-ill-mark-s-bilk https://youtu.be/HMx0RyzbPgQ https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/6sfkup/what_desktop_tasks_does_linux_handle_better_than/= Jonas Eklundh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-15 23:26 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <2LQ2D.441756$yc1.48697@fx40.iad> |
| In reply to | #457508 |
On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:54:28 -0700, Snit wrote: > On 7/15/18 11:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >> On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 11:50:02 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >> >>> Ah, now you claim to understand my views better than I do. LOL! >> >> Quit pretending you can read and write like "others". >> >>>>> As far as my view of the liberal worldview, and the conservative, >>>>> what about it can you even twist into saying the liberal side >>>>> "loathes pretty much everything": >>>>> >>>>> ----- >>>>> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative >>>>> world views: >>>>> >>>>> * Liberals: support equal rights >>>> >>>> Correction: they *claim* to, it's blatantly obviously this isn't >>>> true. >>>> Either that or even liberal has a different definition of the term. >>> >>> Ah, then of course you can find examples from popular liberals... and >>> I will grant there are some edge cases, such as affirmative action, >>> where I think the "cure" offers more harm than good (though even then >>> the goal is equal rights). But shoot... give your examples! >> >> LOL! You're actually going to try and sell the idea that you're not >> aware of the goings on in states like California (liberal central)? Are >> you also going to pretend that Californians aren't moving to Arizona in >> record numbers because their liberal hellhole has gotten so bad? How >> long do you think it'll take CA to complete their obvious conversion to >> a feudal system? > > So no examples. This is funny coming from you who just threw a tantrum > because I did not dig BACK into the history of COLA to show you Slimer's > comments. Notice I am not asking you to do that... I am merely asking > you to show examples of places where liberals are rejecting equal > rights. > > But you have NO examples. Meanwhile, you conveniently ignore the fact that liberals have a blacklist for conservative actors in Hollywood and that the liberal media - as well as liberal tech companies - are denying conservatives equal rights. The examples are countless but since you're a lying little shit, you chose to omit them. <https://globalnews.ca/news/3952517/google-discrimination-lawsuit-white- conservative-men/> <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5877545/Sarah-Sanders-gets- kicked-Virginia-restaurant.html> <http://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/2018/05/15/black-trump-supporter- attacked-at-cheesecake-factory-over-maga-hat-report.html> <https://www.breitbart.com/texas/2018/07/05/watch-texas-mom-claims-son- attacked-at-whataburger-for-maga-hat/> <https://nypost.com/2017/07/22/i-was-attacked-with-a-glass-bottle-because- of-my-maga-hat/> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/28/black-clad- antifa-attack-right-wing-demonstrators-in-berkeley/? noredirect=on&utm_term=.3965d586ac71> <https://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/03/06/watch-masked-antifa-attack- student-free-speech-event-injure-vandalise/> <https://www.dailywire.com/news/12418/youtube-bans-conservative-channel- hank-berrien> <https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/06/youtube-censorship-conservatives- banned-not-jihadists/> <https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/03/01/the-purge-youtube-mass-censors- conservatives-new-right-classical-liberals/> With _one_ post, I've destroyed you beyond repair.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-15 17:02 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <a049f270-e2af-420a-ad49-4b433a129584@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #457526 |
On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 4:26:57 PM UTC-7, SilverSlimer wrote: > On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:54:28 -0700, Snit wrote: > > > On 7/15/18 11:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >> On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 11:50:02 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >> > >>> Ah, now you claim to understand my views better than I do. LOL! > >> > >> Quit pretending you can read and write like "others". > >> > >>>>> As far as my view of the liberal worldview, and the conservative, > >>>>> what about it can you even twist into saying the liberal side > >>>>> "loathes pretty much everything": > >>>>> > >>>>> ----- > >>>>> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative > >>>>> world views: > >>>>> > >>>>> * Liberals: support equal rights > >>>> > >>>> Correction: they *claim* to, it's blatantly obviously this isn't > >>>> true. > >>>> Either that or even liberal has a different definition of the term. > >>> > >>> Ah, then of course you can find examples from popular liberals... and > >>> I will grant there are some edge cases, such as affirmative action, > >>> where I think the "cure" offers more harm than good (though even then > >>> the goal is equal rights). But shoot... give your examples! > >> > >> LOL! You're actually going to try and sell the idea that you're not > >> aware of the goings on in states like California (liberal central)? Are > >> you also going to pretend that Californians aren't moving to Arizona in > >> record numbers because their liberal hellhole has gotten so bad? How > >> long do you think it'll take CA to complete their obvious conversion to > >> a feudal system? > > > > So no examples. This is funny coming from you who just threw a tantrum > > because I did not dig BACK into the history of COLA to show you Slimer's > > comments. Notice I am not asking you to do that... I am merely asking > > you to show examples of places where liberals are rejecting equal > > rights. > > > > But you have NO examples. > > Meanwhile, you conveniently ignore the fact that liberals have a > blacklist for conservative actors in Hollywood and that the liberal media > - as well as liberal tech companies - are denying conservatives equal > rights. The examples are countless but since you're a lying little shit, > you chose to omit them. > > <https://globalnews.ca/news/3952517/google-discrimination-lawsuit-white- > conservative-men/> > > <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5877545/Sarah-Sanders-gets- > kicked-Vir... What were you hoping for? Protected code is not enough to protect you. I'm well aware the evidence I link to from YouTube is complete novice level; that said, it serves its purpose. -- Top Ten Ways the Script Troller Trolls https://youtu.be/GPPqvw8iEBs http://prescottcomputerguy.com https://youtu.be/HHT9SJgYsH4 Jonas Eklundh Communication
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-16 00:04 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <s90z779b3.hbi3g3@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #457526 |
SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> wrote: > On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:54:28 -0700, Snit wrote: > >> On 7/15/18 11:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>> On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 11:50:02 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>> >>>> Ah, now you claim to understand my views better than I do. LOL! >>> >>> Quit pretending you can read and write like "others". >>> >>>>>> As far as my view of the liberal worldview, and the conservative, >>>>>> what about it can you even twist into saying the liberal side >>>>>> "loathes pretty much everything": >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- >>>>>> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative >>>>>> world views: >>>>>> >>>>>> * Liberals: support equal rights >>>>> >>>>> Correction: they *claim* to, it's blatantly obviously this isn't >>>>> true. >>>>> Either that or even liberal has a different definition of the term. >>>> >>>> Ah, then of course you can find examples from popular liberals... and >>>> I will grant there are some edge cases, such as affirmative action, >>>> where I think the "cure" offers more harm than good (though even then >>>> the goal is equal rights). But shoot... give your examples! >>> >>> LOL! You're actually going to try and sell the idea that you're not >>> aware of the goings on in states like California (liberal central)? Are >>> you also going to pretend that Californians aren't moving to Arizona in >>> record numbers because their liberal hellhole has gotten so bad? How >>> long do you think it'll take CA to complete their obvious conversion to >>> a feudal system? >> >> So no examples. This is funny coming from you who just threw a tantrum >> because I did not dig BACK into the history of COLA to show you Slimer's >> comments. Notice I am not asking you to do that... I am merely asking >> you to show examples of places where liberals are rejecting equal >> rights. >> >> But you have NO examples. > > Meanwhile, you conveniently ignore the fact that liberals have a > blacklist for conservative actors in Hollywood and that the liberal media > - as well as liberal tech companies - are denying conservatives equal > rights. The examples are countless but since you're a lying little shit, > you chose to omit them. > > <https://globalnews.ca/news/3952517/google-discrimination-lawsuit-white- > conservative-men/> > > <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5877545/Sarah-Sanders-gets- > kicked-Virginia-restaurant.html> > > <http://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/2018/05/15/black-trump-supporter- > attacked-at-cheesecake-factory-over-maga-hat-report.html> > > <https://www.breitbart.com/texas/2018/07/05/watch-texas-mom-claims-son- > attacked-at-whataburger-for-maga-hat/> > > <https://nypost.com/2017/07/22/i-was-attacked-with-a-glass-bottle-because- > of-my-maga-hat/> > > <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/28/black-clad- > antifa-attack-right-wing-demonstrators-in-berkeley/? > noredirect=on&utm_term=.3965d586ac71> > > <https://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/03/06/watch-masked-antifa-attack- > student-free-speech-event-injure-vandalise/> > > <https://www.dailywire.com/news/12418/youtube-bans-conservative-channel- > hank-berrien> > > <https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/06/youtube-censorship-conservatives- > banned-not-jihadists/> > > <https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/03/01/the-purge-youtube-mass-censors- > conservatives-new-right-classical-liberals/> > > With _one_ post, I've destroyed you beyond repair. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypZmvwYiwjg
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-16 00:16 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <ftR2D.441759$yc1.4524@fx40.iad> |
| In reply to | #457530 |
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 00:04:17 +0000, owl wrote: > SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> wrote: >> On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:54:28 -0700, Snit wrote: >> >>> On 7/15/18 11:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>> On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 11:50:02 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>> >>>>> Ah, now you claim to understand my views better than I do. LOL! >>>> >>>> Quit pretending you can read and write like "others". >>>> >>>>>>> As far as my view of the liberal worldview, and the conservative, >>>>>>> what about it can you even twist into saying the liberal side >>>>>>> "loathes pretty much everything": >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ----- >>>>>>> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative >>>>>>> world views: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * Liberals: support equal rights >>>>>> >>>>>> Correction: they *claim* to, it's blatantly obviously this isn't >>>>>> true. >>>>>> Either that or even liberal has a different definition of the term. >>>>> >>>>> Ah, then of course you can find examples from popular liberals... >>>>> and I will grant there are some edge cases, such as affirmative >>>>> action, where I think the "cure" offers more harm than good (though >>>>> even then the goal is equal rights). But shoot... give your >>>>> examples! >>>> >>>> LOL! You're actually going to try and sell the idea that you're not >>>> aware of the goings on in states like California (liberal central)? >>>> Are you also going to pretend that Californians aren't moving to >>>> Arizona in record numbers because their liberal hellhole has gotten >>>> so bad? How long do you think it'll take CA to complete their >>>> obvious conversion to a feudal system? >>> >>> So no examples. This is funny coming from you who just threw a tantrum >>> because I did not dig BACK into the history of COLA to show you >>> Slimer's comments. Notice I am not asking you to do that... I am >>> merely asking you to show examples of places where liberals are >>> rejecting equal rights. >>> >>> But you have NO examples. >> >> Meanwhile, you conveniently ignore the fact that liberals have a >> blacklist for conservative actors in Hollywood and that the liberal >> media - as well as liberal tech companies - are denying conservatives >> equal rights. The examples are countless but since you're a lying >> little shit, you chose to omit them. >> >> <https://globalnews.ca/news/3952517/google-discrimination-lawsuit- white- >> conservative-men/> >> >> <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5877545/Sarah-Sanders-gets- >> kicked-Virginia-restaurant.html> >> >> <http://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/2018/05/15/black-trump-supporter- >> attacked-at-cheesecake-factory-over-maga-hat-report.html> >> >> <https://www.breitbart.com/texas/2018/07/05/watch-texas-mom-claims-son- >> attacked-at-whataburger-for-maga-hat/> >> >> <https://nypost.com/2017/07/22/i-was-attacked-with-a-glass-bottle- because- >> of-my-maga-hat/> >> >> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/28/black- clad- >> antifa-attack-right-wing-demonstrators-in-berkeley/? >> noredirect=on&utm_term=.3965d586ac71> >> >> <https://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/03/06/watch-masked-antifa- attack- >> student-free-speech-event-injure-vandalise/> >> >> <https://www.dailywire.com/news/12418/youtube-bans-conservative- channel- >> hank-berrien> >> >> <https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/06/youtube-censorship- conservatives- >> banned-not-jihadists/> >> >> <https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/03/01/the-purge-youtube-mass- censors- >> conservatives-new-right-classical-liberals/> >> >> With _one_ post, I've destroyed you beyond repair. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypZmvwYiwjg Which is why sites like pew.tube, bitchute.com and now real.video exist. Under liberal control, you may not think anything other than what they (think) they believe or you deserve to be banned, fired or killed. Despite what the Prescott Crackhead claims, they are by far the most discriminatory, intolerant pieces of crap on the face of the Earth and there are tons of links showing just that. If you're a conservative woman, liberals will be grossly offensive toward you, call for your head and shockingly sexist. If you're a conservative black man, there is no racist term liberals are unwilling to use against you. If you're a conservative homosexual, the story is exactly the same and the treatment of Milo Yiannopoulos is excellent evidence of that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-15 17:48 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <fr28afFpi8jU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #457531 |
On 7/15/18 5:16 PM, SilverSlimer wrote: > On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 00:04:17 +0000, owl wrote: > >> SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> wrote: >>> On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:54:28 -0700, Snit wrote: >>> >>>> On 7/15/18 11:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>> On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 11:50:02 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Ah, now you claim to understand my views better than I do. LOL! >>>>> >>>>> Quit pretending you can read and write like "others". >>>>> >>>>>>>> As far as my view of the liberal worldview, and the conservative, >>>>>>>> what about it can you even twist into saying the liberal side >>>>>>>> "loathes pretty much everything": >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ----- >>>>>>>> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative >>>>>>>> world views: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> * Liberals: support equal rights >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Correction: they *claim* to, it's blatantly obviously this isn't >>>>>>> true. >>>>>>> Either that or even liberal has a different definition of the term. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ah, then of course you can find examples from popular liberals... >>>>>> and I will grant there are some edge cases, such as affirmative >>>>>> action, where I think the "cure" offers more harm than good (though >>>>>> even then the goal is equal rights). But shoot... give your >>>>>> examples! >>>>> >>>>> LOL! You're actually going to try and sell the idea that you're not >>>>> aware of the goings on in states like California (liberal central)? >>>>> Are you also going to pretend that Californians aren't moving to >>>>> Arizona in record numbers because their liberal hellhole has gotten >>>>> so bad? How long do you think it'll take CA to complete their >>>>> obvious conversion to a feudal system? >>>> >>>> So no examples. This is funny coming from you who just threw a tantrum >>>> because I did not dig BACK into the history of COLA to show you >>>> Slimer's comments. Notice I am not asking you to do that... I am >>>> merely asking you to show examples of places where liberals are >>>> rejecting equal rights. >>>> >>>> But you have NO examples. >>> >>> Meanwhile, you conveniently ignore the fact that liberals have a >>> blacklist for conservative actors in Hollywood and that the liberal >>> media - as well as liberal tech companies - are denying conservatives >>> equal rights. The examples are countless but since you're a lying >>> little shit, you chose to omit them. >>> >>> <https://globalnews.ca/news/3952517/google-discrimination-lawsuit- > white- >>> conservative-men/> >>> >>> <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5877545/Sarah-Sanders-gets- >>> kicked-Virginia-restaurant.html> >>> >>> <http://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/2018/05/15/black-trump-supporter- >>> attacked-at-cheesecake-factory-over-maga-hat-report.html> >>> >>> <https://www.breitbart.com/texas/2018/07/05/watch-texas-mom-claims-son- >>> attacked-at-whataburger-for-maga-hat/> >>> >>> <https://nypost.com/2017/07/22/i-was-attacked-with-a-glass-bottle- > because- >>> of-my-maga-hat/> >>> >>> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/28/black- > clad- >>> antifa-attack-right-wing-demonstrators-in-berkeley/? >>> noredirect=on&utm_term=.3965d586ac71> >>> >>> <https://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/03/06/watch-masked-antifa- > attack- >>> student-free-speech-event-injure-vandalise/> >>> >>> <https://www.dailywire.com/news/12418/youtube-bans-conservative- > channel- >>> hank-berrien> >>> >>> <https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/06/youtube-censorship- > conservatives- >>> banned-not-jihadists/> >>> >>> <https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/03/01/the-purge-youtube-mass- > censors- >>> conservatives-new-right-classical-liberals/> >>> >>> With _one_ post, I've destroyed you beyond repair. >> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypZmvwYiwjg > > Which is why sites like pew.tube, bitchute.com and now real.video exist. > Under liberal control, you may not think anything other than what they > (think) they believe or you deserve to be banned, fired or killed. Liberal control? They are corporate controlled. > Despite what the Prescott Crackhead claims, they are by far the most > discriminatory, intolerant pieces of crap on the face of the Earth and > there are tons of links showing just that. Ah, more victim playing by you. > If you're a conservative woman, liberals will be grossly offensive toward > you, call for your head and shockingly sexist. If you're a conservative > black man, there is no racist term liberals are unwilling to use against > you. If you're a conservative homosexual, the story is exactly the same > and the treatment of Milo Yiannopoulos is excellent evidence of that. Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative world views: * Liberals: support equal rights and environmental protection, with a focus on investing in the future and building a stronger tie between hard work / productivity and financial reward. Additionally, Liberals want evidence-based regulation and oversight to help ensure clean air and water, safe food, and human rights. This includes following the scientific evidence about climate change and food safety, and things like setting levels of lead and other harmful substances allowed, and even to wanting to do research to reduce the harm of tools such as cars and guns and swimming pools. This is a form of control, and conservatives are right to note that. And they are right to note that sometimes these measures are taken too far. * Conservative: support special entitlements for whites, Christians, males, heterosexuals, and the wealthy, with a focus on redistributing wealth to the very richest in the nation with the idea that this will somehow help others. Conservatives want regulation and oversight based on their own feelings and what they believe has historically existed (which is often incorrect), or even just based on their own religion. This includes controlling which consenting adults can marry each other, what a woman can do with her own body, and even insisting the government gets to define YOUR gender. They also work to create regulations on voting to limit who can vote, for if the people truly get a voice they know their ideas are less likely to be accepted. Liberals are right to call conservatives out on this also being a form of control and, I think, a less defensible one. -- 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 | SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-16 01:04 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <GaS2D.538829$PE5.176021@fx37.iad> |
| In reply to | #457539 |
On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 17:48:15 -0700, Snit wrote: > On 7/15/18 5:16 PM, SilverSlimer wrote: >> On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 00:04:17 +0000, owl wrote: >> >>> SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> wrote: >>>> On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:54:28 -0700, Snit wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 7/15/18 11:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>>> On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 11:50:02 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Ah, now you claim to understand my views better than I do. LOL! >>>>>> >>>>>> Quit pretending you can read and write like "others". >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As far as my view of the liberal worldview, and the >>>>>>>>> conservative, what about it can you even twist into saying the >>>>>>>>> liberal side "loathes pretty much everything": >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ----- >>>>>>>>> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and >>>>>>>>> conservative world views: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> * Liberals: support equal rights >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Correction: they *claim* to, it's blatantly obviously this isn't >>>>>>>> true. >>>>>>>> Either that or even liberal has a different definition of the >>>>>>>> term. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ah, then of course you can find examples from popular liberals... >>>>>>> and I will grant there are some edge cases, such as affirmative >>>>>>> action, where I think the "cure" offers more harm than good >>>>>>> (though even then the goal is equal rights). But shoot... give >>>>>>> your examples! >>>>>> >>>>>> LOL! You're actually going to try and sell the idea that you're not >>>>>> aware of the goings on in states like California (liberal central)? >>>>>> Are you also going to pretend that Californians aren't moving to >>>>>> Arizona in record numbers because their liberal hellhole has gotten >>>>>> so bad? How long do you think it'll take CA to complete their >>>>>> obvious conversion to a feudal system? >>>>> >>>>> So no examples. This is funny coming from you who just threw a >>>>> tantrum because I did not dig BACK into the history of COLA to show >>>>> you Slimer's comments. Notice I am not asking you to do that... I am >>>>> merely asking you to show examples of places where liberals are >>>>> rejecting equal rights. >>>>> >>>>> But you have NO examples. >>>> >>>> Meanwhile, you conveniently ignore the fact that liberals have a >>>> blacklist for conservative actors in Hollywood and that the liberal >>>> media - as well as liberal tech companies - are denying conservatives >>>> equal rights. The examples are countless but since you're a lying >>>> little shit, you chose to omit them. >>>> >>>> <https://globalnews.ca/news/3952517/google-discrimination-lawsuit- >> white- >>>> conservative-men/> >>>> >>>> <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5877545/Sarah-Sanders-gets- >>>> kicked-Virginia-restaurant.html> >>>> >>>> <http://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/2018/05/15/black-trump-supporter- >>>> attacked-at-cheesecake-factory-over-maga-hat-report.html> >>>> >>>> <https://www.breitbart.com/texas/2018/07/05/watch-texas-mom-claims- son- >>>> attacked-at-whataburger-for-maga-hat/> >>>> >>>> <https://nypost.com/2017/07/22/i-was-attacked-with-a-glass-bottle- >> because- >>>> of-my-maga-hat/> >>>> >>>> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/28/black- >> clad- >>>> antifa-attack-right-wing-demonstrators-in-berkeley/? >>>> noredirect=on&utm_term=.3965d586ac71> >>>> >>>> <https://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/03/06/watch-masked-antifa- >> attack- >>>> student-free-speech-event-injure-vandalise/> >>>> >>>> <https://www.dailywire.com/news/12418/youtube-bans-conservative- >> channel- >>>> hank-berrien> >>>> >>>> <https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/06/youtube-censorship- >> conservatives- >>>> banned-not-jihadists/> >>>> >>>> <https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/03/01/the-purge-youtube-mass- >> censors- >>>> conservatives-new-right-classical-liberals/> >>>> >>>> With _one_ post, I've destroyed you beyond repair. >>> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypZmvwYiwjg >> >> Which is why sites like pew.tube, bitchute.com and now real.video >> exist. Under liberal control, you may not think anything other than >> what they (think) they believe or you deserve to be banned, fired or >> killed. > > Liberal control? They are corporate controlled. Unquotable lie #1. >> Despite what the Prescott Crackhead claims, they are by far the most >> discriminatory, intolerant pieces of crap on the face of the Earth and >> there are tons of links showing just that. > > Ah, more victim playing by you. Unquotable lie #2. >> If you're a conservative woman, liberals will be grossly offensive >> toward you, call for your head and shockingly sexist. If you're a >> conservative black man, there is no racist term liberals are unwilling >> to use against you. If you're a conservative homosexual, the story is >> exactly the same and the treatment of Milo Yiannopoulos is excellent >> evidence of that. > > Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative world > views: > > * Liberals: support equal rights and environmental protection, with a > focus on investing in the future and building a stronger tie between > hard work / productivity and financial reward. Unquotable lie #3: liberals do not believe in hard work and financial reward as these are values consistent with capitalism, not the socialism they advocate. > Additionally, Liberals want evidence-based regulation and oversight to > help ensure clean air and water, safe food, and human rights. This > includes following the scientific evidence about climate change and food > safety, and things like setting levels of lead and other harmful > substances allowed, and even to wanting to do research to reduce the > harm of tools such as cars and guns and swimming pools. This is a form > of control, and conservatives are right to note that. And they are right > to note that sometimes these measures are taken too far. > > * Conservative: support special entitlements for whites, Christians, > males, heterosexuals, and the wealthy, with a focus on redistributing > wealth to the very richest in the nation with the idea that this will > somehow help others. Unquotable lie #4: neo-conservatives want redistribution of wealth to the richest and that position is not consistent with conservatives as a whole. > Conservatives want regulation and oversight based on their own feelings > and what they believe has historically existed (which is often > incorrect), Unquotable lie #5: no explanation necessary. > or even just based on their own religion. This includes > controlling which consenting adults can marry each other, what a woman > can do with her own body, and even insisting the government gets to > define YOUR gender. Unquotable lie #6: BIOLOGY alone defines your gender. > They also work to create regulations on voting to > limit who can vote, for if the people truly get a voice they know their > ideas are less likely to be accepted. Unquotable lie #7: subjective analysis, demonization and prediction. > Liberals are right to call > conservatives out on this also being a form of control and, I think, a > less defensible one. Opinion based on subjective observation.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-15 20:58 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <fr2jevFraf6U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #457543 |
On 7/15/18 6:04 PM, SilverSlimer wrote: ... >>> Which is why sites like pew.tube, bitchute.com and now real.video >>> exist. Under liberal control, you may not think anything other than >>> what they (think) they believe or you deserve to be banned, fired or >>> killed. >> >> Liberal control? They are corporate controlled. > > Unquotable lie #1. You deny that CORPORATIONS are corporate controlled. Oy. >>> Despite what the Prescott Crackhead claims, they are by far the most >>> discriminatory, intolerant pieces of crap on the face of the Earth and >>> there are tons of links showing just that. >> >> Ah, more victim playing by you. > > Unquotable lie #2. You are acting like Sandman's bot of just making random accusations. :) >>> If you're a conservative woman, liberals will be grossly offensive >>> toward you, call for your head and shockingly sexist. If you're a >>> conservative black man, there is no racist term liberals are unwilling >>> to use against you. If you're a conservative homosexual, the story is >>> exactly the same and the treatment of Milo Yiannopoulos is excellent >>> evidence of that. >> >> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative world >> views: >> >> * Liberals: support equal rights and environmental protection, with a >> focus on investing in the future and building a stronger tie between >> hard work / productivity and financial reward. > > Unquotable lie #3: liberals do not believe in hard work and financial > reward as these are values consistent with capitalism, not the socialism > they advocate. Again, completely empty words from you. Look at Sanders -- he wants those who EARN a living to get that living paid to them. Conservatives tend to want the government to step in and cover some of the costs of labor. There -- a specific example of what I mean. Heck, even Clinton, as horrible as she is, at least to some extent backs reducing the socializing of the cost of labor. What conservative does? My guess: you will not name a single one. >> Additionally, Liberals want evidence-based regulation and oversight to >> help ensure clean air and water, safe food, and human rights. This >> includes following the scientific evidence about climate change and food >> safety, and things like setting levels of lead and other harmful >> substances allowed, and even to wanting to do research to reduce the >> harm of tools such as cars and guns and swimming pools. This is a form >> of control, and conservatives are right to note that. And they are right >> to note that sometimes these measures are taken too far. >> >> * Conservative: support special entitlements for whites, Christians, >> males, heterosexuals, and the wealthy, with a focus on redistributing >> wealth to the very richest in the nation with the idea that this will >> somehow help others. > > Unquotable lie #4: neo-conservatives want redistribution of wealth to the > richest and that position is not consistent with conservatives as a whole. OK, so name some mainstream conservatives who actively seek to reduce corporate wealthfare. >> Conservatives want regulation and oversight based on their own feelings >> and what they believe has historically existed (which is often >> incorrect), > > Unquotable lie #5: no explanation necessary. Notice below I give specific examples. >> or even just based on their own religion. This includes >> controlling which consenting adults can marry each other, what a woman >> can do with her own body, and even insisting the government gets to >> define YOUR gender. > > Unquotable lie #6: BIOLOGY alone defines your gender. And yet you provide NO evidence for that. None. And it is TRIVIAL to show counter evidence. <https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-new-science-of-sex-and-gender/> OR <https://goo.gl/oY33WR> ----- Sex is supposed to be simple—at least at the molecular level. The biological explanations that appear in textbooks amount to X + X = and X + Y = . Venus or Mars, pink or blue. As science looks more closely, however, it becomes increasingly clear that a pair of chromosomes do not always suffice to distinguish girl/boy—either from the standpoint of sex (biological traits) or of gender (social identity). ----- And the fact that gender is not as binary as the right wing fantasy has been accepted by many cultures throughout history: <http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/content/two-spirits_map-html/> ----- On nearly every continent, and for all of recorded history, thriving cultures have recognized, revered, and integrated more than two genders. Terms such as “transgender” and “gay” are strictly new constructs that assume three things: that there are only two sexes (male/female), as many as two sexualities (gay/straight), and only two genders (man/woman). Yet hundreds of distinct societies around the globe have their own long-established traditions for third, fourth, fifth, or more genders. The subject of Two Spirits, Fred Martinez, for example, was not a boy who wanted to be a girl, but both a boy and a girl — an identity his Navajo culture recognized and revered as nádleehí. Meanwhile, Hina of Kumu Hina is part of a a native Hawaiian culture that has traditionally revered and respected mahu, those who embody both male and female spirit. ----- There is also a map and far more details at that second link. Remember, I show respectable links and actually quote them. You show Breitbart which is NOT respectable and you do not even quote the articles. >> They also work to create regulations on voting to >> limit who can vote, for if the people truly get a voice they know their >> ideas are less likely to be accepted. > > Unquotable lie #7: subjective analysis, demonization and prediction. It is not subjective. It is simply objective truth that conservatives tend to be the one to push the voter ID laws and the like which are designed to keep "undesirable" eligible voters from voting. >> Liberals are right to call >> conservatives out on this also being a form of control and, I think, a >> less defensible one. > > Opinion based on subjective observation. If you disagree then explain why. Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative world views: * Liberals: support equal rights and environmental protection, with a focus on investing in the future and building a stronger tie between hard work / productivity and financial reward. Additionally, Liberals want evidence-based regulation and oversight to help ensure clean air and water, safe food, and human rights. This includes following the scientific evidence about climate change and food safety, and things like setting levels of lead and other harmful substances allowed, and even to wanting to do research to reduce the harm of tools such as cars and guns and swimming pools. This is a form of control, and conservatives are right to note that. And they are right to note that sometimes these measures are taken too far. * Conservative: support special entitlements for whites, Christians, males, heterosexuals, and the wealthy, with a focus on redistributing wealth to the very richest in the nation with the idea that this will somehow help others. Conservatives want regulation and oversight based on their own feelings and what they believe has historically existed (which is often incorrect), or even just based on their own religion. This includes controlling which consenting adults can marry each other, what a woman can do with her own body, and even insisting the government gets to define YOUR gender. They also work to create regulations on voting to limit who can vote, for if the people truly get a voice they know their ideas are less likely to be accepted. Liberals are right to call conservatives out on this also being a form of control and, I think, a less defensible one. -- 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 <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-15 21:43 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <6c44eba1-69a8-465f-8d37-aa0956dc6f43@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #457559 |
On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 8:58:26 PM UTC-7, Snit wrote: > On 7/15/18 6:04 PM, SilverSlimer wrote: > ... > >>> Which is why sites like pew.tube, bitchute.com and now real.video > >>> exist. Under liberal control, you may not think anything other than > >>> what they (think) they believe or you deserve to be banned, fired or > >>> killed. > >> > >> Liberal control? They are corporate controlled. > > > > Unquotable lie #1. > > You deny that CORPORATIONS are corporate controlled. Oy. > > >>> Despite what the Prescott Crackhead claims, they are by far the most > >>> discriminatory, intolerant pieces of crap on the face of the Earth and > >>> there are tons of links showing just that. > >> > >> Ah, more victim playing by you. > > > > Unquotable lie #2. > > You are acting like Sandman's bot of just making random accusations. :) > > >>> If you're a conservative woman, liberals will be grossly offensive > >>> toward you, call for your head and shockingly sexist. If you're a > >>> conservative black man, there is no racist term liberals are unwilling > >>> to use against you. If you're a conservative homosexual, the story is > >>> exactly the same and the treatment of Milo Yiannopoulos is excellent > >>> evidence of that. > >> > >> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative world > >> views: > >> > >> * Liberals: support equal rights and environmental protection, with a > >> focus on investing in the future and building a stronger tie between > >> hard work / productivity and financial reward. > > > > Unquotable lie #3: liberals do not believe in hard work and financial > > reward as these are values consistent with capitalism, not the socialism > > they advocate. > > Again, completely empty words from you. Look at Sanders -- he wants > those who EARN a living to get that living paid to them. Conservatives > tend to want the government to step in and cover some of the costs of > labor. There -- a specific example of what I mean. Heck, even Clinton, > as horrible as she is, at least to some extent backs reducing the > socializing of the cost of labor. What conservative does? My guess: you > will not name a single one. > > >> Additionally, Liberals want evidence-based regulation and oversight to > >> help ensure clean air and water, safe food, and human rights. This > >> includes following the scientific evidence about climate change and food > >> safety, and things like setting levels of lead and other harmful > >> substances allowed, and even to wanting to do research to reduce the > >> harm of tools such as cars and guns and swimming pools. This is a form > >> of control, and conservatives are right to note that. And they are right > >> to note that sometimes these measures are taken too far. > >> > >> * Conservative: support special entitlements for whites, Christians, > >> males, heterosexuals, and the wealthy, with a focus on redistributing > >> wealth to the very richest in the nation with the idea that this will > >> somehow help others. > > > > Unquotable lie #4: neo-conservatives want redistribution of wealth to the > > richest and that position is not consistent with conservatives as a whole. > > OK, so name some mainstream conservatives who actively seek to reduce > corporate wealthfare. > > >> Conservatives want regulation and oversight based on their own feelings > >> and what they believe has historically existed (which is often > >> incorrect), > > > > Unquotable lie #5: no explanation necessary. > > Notice below I give specific examples. > > >> or even just based on their own religion. This includes > >> controlling which consenting adults can marry each other, what a woman > >> can do with her own body, and even insisting the government gets to > >> define YOUR gender. > > > > Unquotable lie #6: BIOLOGY alone defines your gender. > > And yet you provide NO evidence for that. None. And it is TRIVIAL to > show counter evidence. > > <https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-new-science-of-sex-and-gender/> > OR <https://goo.gl/oY33WR> > ----- > Sex is supposed to be simple—at least at the molecular level. The > biological explanations that appear in textbooks amount to X + X = and X > + Y = . Venus or Mars, pink or blue. As science looks more closely, > however, it becomes increasingly clear that a pair of chromosomes do not > always suffice to distinguish girl/boy—either from the standpoint of sex > (biological traits) or of gender (social identity). > ----- > > And the fact that gender is not as binary as the right wing fantasy has > been accepted by many cultures throughout history: > > <http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/content/two-spirits_map-html/> > ----- > On nearly every continent, and for all of recorded history, thriving > cultures have recognized, revered, and integrated more than two genders. > Terms such as “transgender” and “gay” are strictly new constructs that > assume three things: that there are only two sexes (male/female), as > many as two sexualities (gay/straight), and only two genders (man/woman). > > Yet hundreds of distinct societies around the globe have their own > long-established traditions for third, fourth, fifth, or more genders. > The subject of Two Spirits, Fred Martinez, for example, was not a boy > who wanted to be a girl, but both a boy and a girl — an identity his > Navajo culture recognized and revered as nádleehí. Meanwhile, Hina of > ... Mint's update system failed over and over again. You refuse to take blame for your own comments. Quotes that are easily seen to be trolling. Usenet is an uncontrollable protocol based on the belief in good character. So, yeah, I buy into my own make believe world, fully knowing chrisv has been fooled, because it makes me reconsider my script, improving it. Your system will crawl while finding a way to stop chrisv. And it takes a long time. -- Eight things to never feed your cat! http://comp.os.linux.advocacy.narkive.com/711dskzA/steven-petruzzellis-admits-he-can-not-back-his-claims-about-snit https://youtu.be/5OfWsoPAg7o Jonas Eklundh Communication
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-15 17:50 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <9260db83-7ef4-4ade-b099-95d94e4644f7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #457530 |
On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 5:04:19 PM UTC-7, owl wrote: > SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> wrote: > > On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:54:28 -0700, Snit wrote: > > > >> On 7/15/18 11:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>> On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 11:50:02 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >>> > >>>> Ah, now you claim to understand my views better than I do. LOL! > >>> > >>> Quit pretending you can read and write like "others". > >>> > >>>>>> As far as my view of the liberal worldview, and the conservative, > >>>>>> what about it can you even twist into saying the liberal side > >>>>>> "loathes pretty much everything": > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ----- > >>>>>> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative > >>>>>> world views: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> * Liberals: support equal rights > >>>>> > >>>>> Correction: they *claim* to, it's blatantly obviously this isn't > >>>>> true. > >>>>> Either that or even liberal has a different definition of the term. > >>>> > >>>> Ah, then of course you can find examples from popular liberals... and > >>>> I will grant there are some edge cases, such as affirmative action, > >>>> where I think the "cure" offers more harm than good (though even then > >>>> the goal is equal rights). But shoot... give your examples! > >>> > >>> LOL! You're actually going to try and sell the idea that you're not > >>> aware of the goings on in states like California (liberal central)? Are > >>> you also going to pretend that Californians aren't moving to Arizona in > >>> record numbers because their liberal hellhole has gotten so bad? How > >>> long do you think it'll take CA to complete their obvious conversion to > >>> a feudal system? > >> > >> So no examples. This is funny coming from you who just threw a tantrum > >> because I did not dig BACK into the history of COLA to show you Slimer's > >> comments. Notice I am not asking you to do that... I am merely asking > >> you to show examples of places where liberals are rejecting equal > >> rights. > >> > >> But you have NO examples. > > > > Meanwhile, you conveniently ignore the fact that liberals have a > > blacklist for conservative actors in Hollywood and that the liberal media > > - as well as liberal tech companies - are denying conservatives equal > > rights. The examples are countless but since you're a lying little shit, > > you chose to omit them. > > > > <https://globalnews.ca/news/3952517/google-discrimination-lawsuit-white- > > conservative-men/> > > > > <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5877545/Sarah-Sanders-get... No no. Klaus Schadenfreude never agreed to stop accusing good people of being like him. He lied about his trolling which surprised nobody. LOL! For crying out loud, man... even you have plonked that peabrain. Given what he is nary a soul could blame you for seeking to be rid of his outrageous form of flapdoodle. That is the problem today and younger students don't care at all, people from past generations (~40 or so) are the only ones who know better than to fall for the indoctrination BS. The teller of untruths AKA Klaus Schadenfreude does it every time. Then the flood begins. Because the troll just has to run to other groups in an effort to get attention from someone. Anyone. -- Live on Kickstarter http://www.5z8.info/stalin-will-rise-again_j3h5uj_nakedgrandmas.jpg Jonas Eklundh Communication AB
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-15 17:46 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <fr2884Fpi8jU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #457526 |
On 7/15/18 4:26 PM, SilverSlimer wrote: > On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:54:28 -0700, Snit wrote: > >> On 7/15/18 11:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>> On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 11:50:02 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>> >>>> Ah, now you claim to understand my views better than I do. LOL! >>> >>> Quit pretending you can read and write like "others". >>> >>>>>> As far as my view of the liberal worldview, and the conservative, >>>>>> what about it can you even twist into saying the liberal side >>>>>> "loathes pretty much everything": >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- >>>>>> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative >>>>>> world views: >>>>>> >>>>>> * Liberals: support equal rights >>>>> >>>>> Correction: they *claim* to, it's blatantly obviously this isn't >>>>> true. >>>>> Either that or even liberal has a different definition of the term. >>>> >>>> Ah, then of course you can find examples from popular liberals... and >>>> I will grant there are some edge cases, such as affirmative action, >>>> where I think the "cure" offers more harm than good (though even then >>>> the goal is equal rights). But shoot... give your examples! >>> >>> LOL! You're actually going to try and sell the idea that you're not >>> aware of the goings on in states like California (liberal central)? Are >>> you also going to pretend that Californians aren't moving to Arizona in >>> record numbers because their liberal hellhole has gotten so bad? How >>> long do you think it'll take CA to complete their obvious conversion to >>> a feudal system? >> >> So no examples. This is funny coming from you who just threw a tantrum >> because I did not dig BACK into the history of COLA to show you Slimer's >> comments. Notice I am not asking you to do that... I am merely asking >> you to show examples of places where liberals are rejecting equal >> rights. >> >> But you have NO examples. > > Meanwhile, you conveniently ignore the fact that liberals have a > blacklist for conservative actors in Hollywood and that the liberal media > - as well as liberal tech companies - are denying conservatives equal > rights. The examples are countless but since you're a lying little shit, > you chose to omit them. > > <https://globalnews.ca/news/3952517/google-discrimination-lawsuit-white- > conservative-men/> He was fired for posting bigoted attacks against woman on INTERNAL Google message board! <https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/08/james-damore-just-filed-a-class-action-lawsuit-against-google-saying-it-discriminates-against-white-male-conservatives/> > <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5877545/Sarah-Sanders-gets- > kicked-Virginia-restaurant.html> Story about someone who repeatedly lies to the public being treated poorly. I do not defend the actions and they do not represent the liberal view at all, but you ignore that they are against someone who is repeatedly attacking others. > <http://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/2018/05/15/black-trump-supporter- > attacked-at-cheesecake-factory-over-maga-hat-report.html> Some guy says he was attacked over wearing symbols of bigotry. Um, OK. We do not really know the story but I do not approve of anyone attacking someone for wearing such symbols. > <https://www.breitbart.com/texas/2018/07/05/watch-texas-mom-claims-son- > attacked-at-whataburger-for-maga-hat/> Might as well point to the Onion... and another claim of someone being attacked for wearing symbols of bigotry. > <https://nypost.com/2017/07/22/i-was-attacked-with-a-glass-bottle-because- > of-my-maga-hat/> Not even clicking... the title says this is another such story. > <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/28/black-clad- > antifa-attack-right-wing-demonstrators-in-berkeley/? > noredirect=on&utm_term=.3965d586ac71> One hate group attacked by another. Whatever. > <https://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/03/06/watch-masked-antifa-attack- > student-free-speech-event-injure-vandalise/> Again, Breitbart. And more on Antifa which is NOT a progressive movement. > <https://www.dailywire.com/news/12418/youtube-bans-conservative-channel- > hank-berrien> Copyright violations are not allowed. And? <https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jan/13/youtube-removes-conservative-law-channel-legal-ins/> > <https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/06/youtube-censorship-conservatives- > banned-not-jihadists/> Some guy making claims. Oh. > <https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/03/01/the-purge-youtube-mass-censors- > conservatives-new-right-classical-liberals/> More breitbart... again, why not link to the Onion? But overall, hate speech is generally conservative so, sure, more conservative speech will be "banned"... you have no right to harm others. Oh well. > With _one_ post, I've destroyed you beyond repair. Would be happy to talk to you about those. But keep in mind you are pretending -- and it is just that, pretending -- that whites have it worse off overall. This is completely contradictory to the evidence. <https://www.icloud.com/pages/0OxJ9LmqU3lZI9p0TBEFkbkBQ> Also note many of your links are to things like Breitbart... which is NOT news or reliable in ANY way. You seek out confirmation bias and often find fake-news sites to back your biases. Look at what I show... actual scientific research. -- 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 | SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-16 00:58 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <T4S2D.538828$PE5.192573@fx37.iad> |
| In reply to | #457538 |
On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 17:46:58 -0700, Snit wrote: > On 7/15/18 4:26 PM, SilverSlimer wrote: >> On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:54:28 -0700, Snit wrote: >> >>> On 7/15/18 11:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>> On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 11:50:02 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>> >>>>> Ah, now you claim to understand my views better than I do. LOL! >>>> >>>> Quit pretending you can read and write like "others". >>>> >>>>>>> As far as my view of the liberal worldview, and the conservative, >>>>>>> what about it can you even twist into saying the liberal side >>>>>>> "loathes pretty much everything": >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ----- >>>>>>> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative >>>>>>> world views: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * Liberals: support equal rights >>>>>> >>>>>> Correction: they *claim* to, it's blatantly obviously this isn't >>>>>> true. >>>>>> Either that or even liberal has a different definition of the term. >>>>> >>>>> Ah, then of course you can find examples from popular liberals... >>>>> and I will grant there are some edge cases, such as affirmative >>>>> action, where I think the "cure" offers more harm than good (though >>>>> even then the goal is equal rights). But shoot... give your >>>>> examples! >>>> >>>> LOL! You're actually going to try and sell the idea that you're not >>>> aware of the goings on in states like California (liberal central)? >>>> Are you also going to pretend that Californians aren't moving to >>>> Arizona in record numbers because their liberal hellhole has gotten >>>> so bad? How long do you think it'll take CA to complete their >>>> obvious conversion to a feudal system? >>> >>> So no examples. This is funny coming from you who just threw a tantrum >>> because I did not dig BACK into the history of COLA to show you >>> Slimer's comments. Notice I am not asking you to do that... I am >>> merely asking you to show examples of places where liberals are >>> rejecting equal rights. >>> >>> But you have NO examples. >> >> Meanwhile, you conveniently ignore the fact that liberals have a >> blacklist for conservative actors in Hollywood and that the liberal >> media - as well as liberal tech companies - are denying conservatives >> equal rights. The examples are countless but since you're a lying >> little shit, you chose to omit them. >> >> <https://globalnews.ca/news/3952517/google-discrimination-lawsuit- white- >> conservative-men/> > > He was fired for posting bigoted attacks against woman on INTERNAL > Google message board! Unquotable lie #1. > <https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/08/james-damore-just-filed-a-class- action-lawsuit-against-google-saying-it-discriminates-against-white-male- conservatives/> > >> <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5877545/Sarah-Sanders-gets- >> kicked-Virginia-restaurant.html> > > Story about someone who repeatedly lies to the public being treated > poorly. I do not defend the actions and they do not represent the > liberal view at all, but you ignore that they are against someone who is > repeatedly attacking others. Unlike you, I've actually watched Sarah Sanders in action and she is objective, respectful of everyone and neutral. She is also honest with the information that she has and provides. Unquotable lie #2. >> <http://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/2018/05/15/black-trump-supporter- >> attacked-at-cheesecake-factory-over-maga-hat-report.html> > > Some guy says he was attacked over wearing symbols of bigotry. Um, OK. > We do not really know the story but I do not approve of anyone attacking > someone for wearing such symbols. A MAGA hat is not a symbol of bigotry. Unquotable lie #3. >> <https://www.breitbart.com/texas/2018/07/05/watch-texas-mom-claims-son- >> attacked-at-whataburger-for-maga-hat/> > > Might as well point to the Onion... Breitbart is as accurate if not more so than all other publications in the mainstream media. Unquotable lie #4. > and another claim of someone being > attacked for wearing symbols of bigotry. Again, a MAGA hat is not a symbol of bigotry. Unquotable lie #5. >> <https://nypost.com/2017/07/22/i-was-attacked-with-a-glass-bottle- because- >> of-my-maga-hat/> > > Not even clicking... the title says this is another such story. Didn't bother to read the article and are therefore lying about the contents. Unquotable lie #6. >> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/28/black- clad- >> antifa-attack-right-wing-demonstrators-in-berkeley/? >> noredirect=on&utm_term=.3965d586ac71> > > One hate group attacked by another. Whatever. Right-wing protestors are not a hate group. Unquotable lie #7. >> <https://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/03/06/watch-masked-antifa- attack- >> student-free-speech-event-injure-vandalise/> > > Again, Breitbart. And more on Antifa which is NOT a progressive > movement. Antifa counts "progressives" as members and regularly associates itself with liberalism in general. Unquotable lie #8. >> <https://www.dailywire.com/news/12418/youtube-bans-conservative- channel- >> hank-berrien> > > Copyright violations are not allowed. And? Lie about the reason for banning. Unquotable lie #9. > <https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jan/13/youtube-removes- conservative-law-channel-legal-ins/> > >> <https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/06/youtube-censorship- conservatives- >> banned-not-jihadists/> > > Some guy making claims. Oh. If a liberal in the same position says something, it must be true but not so if it's a conservative. Unquotable lie #10. >> <https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/03/01/the-purge-youtube-mass- censors- >> conservatives-new-right-classical-liberals/> > > More breitbart... again, why not link to the Onion? Unquotable lie #11 about Breitbart's reputation for accuracy. > But overall, hate speech is generally conservative so, Unquotable lie #12. > sure, more > conservative speech will be "banned"... you have no right to harm > others. Oh well. > >> With _one_ post, I've destroyed you beyond repair. > > Would be happy to talk to you about those. But keep in mind you are > pretending -- and it is just that, pretending -- that whites have it > worse off overall. This is completely contradictory to the evidence. Unquotable lie #13. > <https://www.icloud.com/pages/0OxJ9LmqU3lZI9p0TBEFkbkBQ> > > Also note many of your links are to things like Breitbart... which is > NOT news or reliable in ANY way. Unquotable lie #14. > You seek out confirmation bias and > often find fake-news sites to back your biases. Unquotable lie #15. > Look at what I show... > actual scientific research. Unquotable lie #16. Here's something that isn't a lie: you're a despicable rat-like pansy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-15 18:28 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <fr2amcFptc0U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #457542 |
On 7/15/18 5:58 PM, SilverSlimer wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 17:46:58 -0700, Snit wrote:
>
>> On 7/15/18 4:26 PM, SilverSlimer wrote:
>>> On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:54:28 -0700, Snit wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 7/15/18 11:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 11:50:02 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ah, now you claim to understand my views better than I do. LOL!
>>>>>
>>>>> Quit pretending you can read and write like "others".
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As far as my view of the liberal worldview, and the conservative,
>>>>>>>> what about it can you even twist into saying the liberal side
>>>>>>>> "loathes pretty much everything":
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>>> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and conservative
>>>>>>>> world views:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> * Liberals: support equal rights
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Correction: they *claim* to, it's blatantly obviously this isn't
>>>>>>> true.
>>>>>>> Either that or even liberal has a different definition of the term.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ah, then of course you can find examples from popular liberals...
>>>>>> and I will grant there are some edge cases, such as affirmative
>>>>>> action, where I think the "cure" offers more harm than good (though
>>>>>> even then the goal is equal rights). But shoot... give your
>>>>>> examples!
>>>>>
>>>>> LOL! You're actually going to try and sell the idea that you're not
>>>>> aware of the goings on in states like California (liberal central)?
>>>>> Are you also going to pretend that Californians aren't moving to
>>>>> Arizona in record numbers because their liberal hellhole has gotten
>>>>> so bad? How long do you think it'll take CA to complete their
>>>>> obvious conversion to a feudal system?
>>>>
>>>> So no examples. This is funny coming from you who just threw a tantrum
>>>> because I did not dig BACK into the history of COLA to show you
>>>> Slimer's comments. Notice I am not asking you to do that... I am
>>>> merely asking you to show examples of places where liberals are
>>>> rejecting equal rights.
>>>>
>>>> But you have NO examples.
>>>
>>> Meanwhile, you conveniently ignore the fact that liberals have a
>>> blacklist for conservative actors in Hollywood and that the liberal
>>> media - as well as liberal tech companies - are denying conservatives
>>> equal rights. The examples are countless but since you're a lying
>>> little shit, you chose to omit them.
>>>
>>> <https://globalnews.ca/news/3952517/google-discrimination-lawsuit-
> white-
>>> conservative-men/>
>>
>> He was fired for posting bigoted attacks against woman on INTERNAL
>> Google message board!
>
> Unquotable lie #1.
I posted a link that showed it.
>> <https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/08/james-damore-just-filed-a-class-
> action-lawsuit-against-google-saying-it-discriminates-against-white-male-
> conservatives/>
>>
>>> <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5877545/Sarah-Sanders-gets-
>>> kicked-Virginia-restaurant.html>
>>
>> Story about someone who repeatedly lies to the public being treated
>> poorly. I do not defend the actions and they do not represent the
>> liberal view at all, but you ignore that they are against someone who is
>> repeatedly attacking others.
>
> Unlike you, I've actually watched Sarah Sanders in action and she is
> objective, respectful of everyone and neutral. She is also honest with
> the information that she has and provides. Unquotable lie #2.
You assume I have not watched her lie over and over and over and over
and over. Your assumption is inaccurate. She lies... people respond.
AGAIN, this does not mean I back any violence against her -- I do not.
But she is publicly lying pretty much non-stop. That has consequences.
>>> <http://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/2018/05/15/black-trump-supporter-
>>> attacked-at-cheesecake-factory-over-maga-hat-report.html>
>>
>> Some guy says he was attacked over wearing symbols of bigotry. Um, OK.
>> We do not really know the story but I do not approve of anyone attacking
>> someone for wearing such symbols.
>
> A MAGA hat is not a symbol of bigotry. Unquotable lie #3.
Of course it is, at least as used by the Trump campaign and still used
by him and his followers. Just one article on it.
<https://www.trtworld.com/magazine/why-some-americans-want-to-make-america-white-again--16799>
To be fair, though, the phrase is not specific and is mostly there to
promote emotion over reason... and has been used by others.
>>> <https://www.breitbart.com/texas/2018/07/05/watch-texas-mom-claims-son-
>>> attacked-at-whataburger-for-maga-hat/>
>>
>> Might as well point to the Onion...
>
> Breitbart is as accurate if not more so than all other publications in
> the mainstream media. Unquotable lie #4.
This is an absurd claim. And easy to show:
<https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/breitbart/>
-----
QUESTIONABLE SOURCE
Breitbart consist of various sections called Big Government, Big
Journalism, Big Hollywood, National Security, Tech, Sports, and Wired.
Breitbart uses sensational emotionally loaded language in their
headlines such as “Obama Loses 2 Million+ Followers During Twitter Fake
Account Purge.” They utilize sources such as tabloid entertainment
magazine Variety, and credible sources such as Bloomberg. as well as
factually mixed sources such as the Daily Mail. Under the Big Hollywood
section they publish tabloid stories such as “Fashion Notes: Melania
Trump is Posh and Proper for Final Day in England” utilizing fashion
sources such as farfetch.com
In general, the majority of published stories favor the right and are
highly pro-Trump in tone and story selection.
A factual search reveals numerous failed fact checks by IFCN Fact
Checkers. Here are just a few of many as an example:
Breitbart Duped by Fake News (Again) (False)
Following Joe Kennedy’s speech, Breitbart says Fall River, Mass. not
built by immigrants (False)
Breitbart gets the wrong Loretta Lynch in Whitewater claim (Pants on Fire)
Did Planned Parenthood ‘Team Up’ With Satanists to Promote Abortion
Rights in Missouri? (False)
Trump’s ISIS Conspiracy Theory (False)
Overall, we rate Breitbart Questionable based on extreme right wing bias
and publication of numerous false claims. (M. Huitsing 7/14/2018)
-----
>> and another claim of someone being
>> attacked for wearing symbols of bigotry.
>
> Again, a MAGA hat is not a symbol of bigotry. Unquotable lie #5.
It STILL is, as used by Trump and his followers.
>>> <https://nypost.com/2017/07/22/i-was-attacked-with-a-glass-bottle-
> because-
>>> of-my-maga-hat/>
>>
>> Not even clicking... the title says this is another such story.
>
> Didn't bother to read the article and are therefore lying about the
> contents. Unquotable lie #6.
You have not quoted anything from any of these articles. I doubt you
read any of them. But the link speaks of EXACTLY what I note.
Note when I offer links I show relevant quotes from them and generally
use scientific sources (though not always, as above). But, for example,
to counter your white-victim crap I easily show these:
Racial Discrimination in the US
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2011.00230.x/full
——
The meta-analysis shows with strong consistency that minority suspects
are more likely to be arrested than White suspects.
——
https://sites.hks.harvard.edu/criminaljustice-backup/publications/Police-on-Police_Shootings.pdf
——
Specifically, we are persuaded by evidence that both police officers and
members of the general public display unconscious biases that lead them
to be quicker to “shoot” images of armed black people than of armed
white people in computer‐based simulations testing shoot/don’t‐shoot
decision‐making.
——
http://www.rshroff.com/uploads/6/2/3/5/62359383/frisky.pdf
——
We further find that blacks and Hispanics were disproportionately
stopped in these low hit rate contexts, a phenomenon that we trace to
two factors: (1) lower thresholds for stopping individuals—regardless of
race—in high-crime, predominately minority areas, particularly public
housing; and (2) lower thresholds for stopping minorities relative to
similarly situated whites.
——
https://washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/janfeb-2014/driving-while-black
——
“Stop and frisk” isn’t just a reality in New York City. New data shows
how police target African Americans on highways across America.
——
http://sfblueribbonpanel.com/sites/default/files/BRP_Exec_Summ.pdf
——
While the SFPD’s policies prohibiting biased policing are in line with
best practices, available statistics indicate racial disparities in its
stops, searches, and arrests. Black and Hispanic people are more likely
to be searched without consent than any other group, and of those
searched, Black and Hispanic people had the lowest “hit rates” (i.e.,
the rate at which searches found contraband).
——
http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/published/frisk9.pdf
——
In the period for which we had data, the NYPD’s records indicate that
they were stopping blacks and Hispanics more often than whites, in
comparison to both the populations of these groups and the best
estimates of the rate of crimes committed by each group. After
controlling for precincts, this pattern still holds. More specifically,
for violent crimes and weapons offenses, blacks and Hispanics are
stopped about twice as often as whites.
——
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1740-1461.2012.01272.x/abstract
——
The pattern of racially selective enforcement suggests the potential for
systemic violations of the Fourteenth Amendment's prohibition on racial
discrimination.
——
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1740-1461.2010.01190.x/abstract
——
The racial skew, questionable constitutionality, and limited efficiency
of marijuana enforcement in detecting serious crimes suggest that
nonwhite New Yorkers bear a racial tax from contemporary policing
strategy, a social cost not offset by any substantial observed benefits
to public safety.
——
https://ccrjustice.org/sites/default/files/assets/files/Expert_Report_JeffreyFagan.pdf
——
Specifically, I provide evidence that the NYPD has engaged in patterns
of unconstitutional stops of City residents that are more likely to
affect Black and Latino citizens.
——
http://policingequity.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/CPE_SoJ_Race-Arrests-UoF_2016-07-08-1130.pdf
——
That racially disparate crime rate is an insufficient explanation of
racially disparate use of force rates for this sample of police
departments. Given that these departments range widely in size and
represent urban cities, suburban counties, and transportation police in
geographically diverse jurisdictions, the results are suggestive that
these findings may generalize beyond the sample.
——
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.
——
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/post-nation/wp/2016/07/11/arent-more-white-people-than-black-people-killed-by-police-yes-but-no
——
“The only thing that was significant in predicting whether someone shot
and killed by police was unarmed was whether or not they were black. ...
Crime variables did not matter in terms of predicting whether the person
killed was unarmed.”
——
https://chicagopatf.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/PATF_Final_Report_Executive_Summary_4_13_16-1.pdf
——
Moreover, black and Hispanic drivers were searched approximately four
times as often as white drivers, yet CPD’s own data show that contraband
was found on white drivers twice as often as black and Hispanic drivers.
——
https://www.aclu-il.org/en/press-releases/traffic-stop-data-shows-persistent-patterns-racial-bias-according-new-report
——
The data reveals, as an example, that statewide across Illinois, African
American and Latino drivers are nearly twice as likely as white drivers
to be asked during a routine traffic stop for "consent" to have their
car searched. Yet white motorists are 49% more likely than African
American motorists to have contraband discovered during a consent search
by law enforcement, and 56% more likely when compared to Latinos.
——
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/25/us/racial-disparity-traffic-stops-driving-black.html
——
Officers were more likely to stop black drivers for no discernible
reason. And they were more likely to use force if the driver was black,
even when they did not encounter physical resistance.
——
http://www.nber.org/papers/w22399.pdf
——
On non-lethal uses of force, blacks and Hispanics are more than fifty
percent more likely to experience some form of force in interactions
with police. Adding controls that account for important context and
civilian behavior reduces, but cannot fully explain, these disparities.
——
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/08/us/study-supports-suspicion-that-police-use-of-force-is-more-likely-for-blacks.html
——
African-Americans are far more likely than whites and other groups to be
the victims of use of force by the police, even when racial disparities
in crime are taken into account.
——
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1948550616633505
——
Regression analyses confirmed that police used less force with highly
stereotypical Whites, and this protective effect was stronger than the
effect for non-Whites. Results suggest that intragroup bias is a
protective factor for Whites, but not for non-Whites, providing an
additional route through which racial disparities in policing operate.
——
https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2011/12/16/spd_findletter_12-16-11.pdf
——
Analysis of limited data suggests that, in certain precincts, S.P.D.
officers may stop a disproportionate number of people of color where no
offense or other police incident occurred.
——
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2016/06/15/oakland-police-stopping-and-handcuffing-disproportionate-numbers-of-blacks-work-to-restore-trust
——
And in Oakland, Calif., a new study found that if you are African
American and encounter a police officer, there is a 25 percent chance
you will be handcuffed, often in front of family or friends, even though
you are not being arrested.
——
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/mar/15/jalen-ross/black-name-resume-50-percent-less-likely-get-respo
——
The resumes with white-sounding names spurred 50 percent more callbacks
than the ones with black-sounding names.
——
http://www.pnas.org/content/114/41/10870.full
——
We find no change in the levels of discrimination against African
Americans since 1989, although we do find some indication of declining
discrimination against Latinos. The results document a striking
persistence of racial discrimination in US labor markets.
——
http://fortune.com/2016/07/19/mortgage-lending-racial-disparities
——
Blacks Are Still Significantly Less Likely to Get Approved for a
Mortgage than Whites
——
https://phys.org/news/2015-08-african-americans-discriminated-access-local.html
——
Study shows African Americans discriminated against in access to US
local public services
——
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/19/upshot/race-class-white-and-black-men.html
——
Black boys raised in America, even in the wealthiest families and living
in some of the most well-to-do neighborhoods, still earn less in
adulthood than white boys with similar backgrounds, according to a
sweeping new study that traced the lives of millions of children.
White boys who grow up rich are likely to remain that way. Black boys
raised at the top, however, are more likely to become poor than to stay
wealthy in their own adult households.
…
The research makes clear that there is something unique about the
obstacles black males face. The gap between Hispanics and whites is
narrower, and their incomes will converge within a couple of generations
if mobility stays the same. Asian-Americans earn more than whites raised
at the same income level, or about the same when first-generation
immigrants are excluded. Only Native Americans have an income gap
comparable to African-Americans. But the disparities are widest for
black boys.
——
Every single one I offer relevant quotes from.
>>> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/28/black-
> clad-
>>> antifa-attack-right-wing-demonstrators-in-berkeley/?
>>> noredirect=on&utm_term=.3965d586ac71>
>>
>> One hate group attacked by another. Whatever.
>
> Right-wing protestors are not a hate group. Unquotable lie #7.
Read the article and do research. It was one hate group against another.
>>> <https://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/03/06/watch-masked-antifa-
> attack-
>>> student-free-speech-event-injure-vandalise/>
>>
>> Again, Breitbart. And more on Antifa which is NOT a progressive
>> movement.
>
> Antifa counts "progressives" as members and regularly associates itself
> with liberalism in general. Unquotable lie #8.
Antifa supports violence which is contrary to the progressive movement.
Well, to the extent that Antifa is a group at all.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-WWII_anti-fascism>
It is really many groups.
>>> <https://www.dailywire.com/news/12418/youtube-bans-conservative-
> channel-
>>> hank-berrien>
>>
>> Copyright violations are not allowed. And?
>
> Lie about the reason for banning. Unquotable lie #9.
I provided evidence.
>> <https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jan/13/youtube-removes-
> conservative-law-channel-legal-ins/>
>>
>>> <https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/06/youtube-censorship-
> conservatives-
>>> banned-not-jihadists/>
>>
>> Some guy making claims. Oh.
>
> If a liberal in the same position says something, it must be true but not
> so if it's a conservative. Unquotable lie #10.
You playing victim. Whatever.
Also note I am speaking of mainstream movements and you are dodging that
to talk about individual and often unsupported incidents. For example,
it is a part of the GOP platform to try to stop the poor and minorities
from voting, to deny women equal rights, to work to stop gays from
having equal rights, to have the government dictate your gender no
matter what the evidence says, to deny man-made global climate change, etc.
These are MAINSTREAM conservative positions.
And they are indefensible.
>>> <https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/03/01/the-purge-youtube-mass-
> censors-
>>> conservatives-new-right-classical-liberals/>
>>
>> More breitbart... again, why not link to the Onion?
>
> Unquotable lie #11 about Breitbart's reputation for accuracy.
Ah, more evidence to prove you wrong:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breitbart_News>
-----
The site has published a number of falsehoods, conspiracy
theories,[13][14][15][16][17] and intentionally misleading stories.[18][19]
-----
Yes, that is Wikipedia... but check the references.
-----
^ Jump up to: a b * Jessica Roy (November 14, 2016). "What is the
alt-right? A refresher course on Steve Bannon's fringe brand of
conservatism". Los Angeles Times. ISSN 0458-3035. Under Bannon's
leadership, Breitbart published ... articles regurgitating conspiracy
theories about Hillary Clinton and her staff.
Ken Thomas, Catherine Lucey & Julie Pace (November 17, 2016). "Trump
picks national security adviser". Associated Press. Bannon's news
website has peddled conspiracy theories
Benjy Sarlin (November 14, 2016). "Analysis: Breitbart's Steve Bannon
leads the 'alt right' to the White House". NBC News. [A] major question
moving forward will be how the Breitbart wing gets along with more
traditional Republican leaders uncomfortable with its emphasis on
race-baiting headlines and conspiracy theories.
Gregory Krieg (August 22, 2016). "The new birthers: Debunking the
Hillary Clinton health conspiracy". CNN. Breitbart News ... has also
been among the most consistent and highly trafficked peddlers of the
conspiracy theories surrounding Clinton's health.
Robert Farley (November 14, 2013). "The Keg Stand Obamacare Ads".
FactCheck.org. Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of
Pennsylvania. A story on the conservative website Breitbart.com also
claimed it was a 'taxpayer-funded' campaign. But the ads are not
taxpayer-funded.
^ Jump up to: a b c d Lori Robertson (June 16, 2016). "Trump's ISIS
Conspiracy Theory". FactCheck.org. Annenberg Public Policy Center of the
University of Pennsylvania. Donald Trump said a report on a conservative
news site proved he was 'right' in suggesting President Obama supported
terrorists. It doesn't. ... It's the kind of claim that we'd debunk in
an article on viral conspiracy theories.
^ Jump up to: a b c d Louis Jacobson (June 15, 2016). "Donald Trump
suggests Barack Obama supported ISIS, but that's a conspiracy theory".
PolitiFact.
Jump up ^ "Did 58 Scientific Papers Published in 2017 Say Global Warming
is a Myth?". Snopes.com. Retrieved July 14, 2017.
Jump up ^ Bhat, Prashanth (January 19, 2018). "Advertisements in the Age
of Hyper-Partisan Media". The Trump Presidency, Journalism, and
Democracy. Routledge. ISBN 9781351392013 – via Google Books.
^ Jump up to: a b c Viveca Novak (July 21, 2010). "Shirley Sherrod's
Contextual Nightmare". FactCheck.org. Annenberg Public Policy Center of
the University of Pennsylvania. We've posted no shortage of pieces on
political attacks that leave context on the cutting room floor to give
the public a misleading impression. ... The latest victim of the missing
context trick is U.S. Department of Agriculture employee Shirley
Sherrod. ... a clip of several minutes of her roughly 45-minute speech
surfaced on conservative Andrew Breitbart's website, where he labeled
her remarks 'racist' and proof of "bigotry" on the part of the NAACP.
... It quickly became clear that the climax, not to mention the moral,
of Sherrod's tale had been edited out of the version Breitbart posted.
^ Jump up to: a b II, Scott A. Eldridge (September 26, 2017). Online
Journalism from the Periphery: Interloper Media and the Journalistic
Field. Routledge. ISBN 9781317370055 – via Google Books.
-----
>> But overall, hate speech is generally conservative so,
>
> Unquotable lie #12.
Look at you... perfect example.
>> sure, more
>> conservative speech will be "banned"... you have no right to harm
>> others. Oh well.
>>
>>> With _one_ post, I've destroyed you beyond repair.
>>
>> Would be happy to talk to you about those. But keep in mind you are
>> pretending -- and it is just that, pretending -- that whites have it
>> worse off overall. This is completely contradictory to the evidence.
>
> Unquotable lie #13.
>
>> <https://www.icloud.com/pages/0OxJ9LmqU3lZI9p0TBEFkbkBQ>
>>
>> Also note many of your links are to things like Breitbart... which is
>> NOT news or reliable in ANY way.
>
> Unquotable lie #14.
>
>> You seek out confirmation bias and
>> often find fake-news sites to back your biases.
>
> Unquotable lie #15.
>
>> Look at what I show...
>> actual scientific research.
>
> Unquotable lie #16.
>
> Here's something that isn't a lie: you're a despicable rat-like pansy.
>
Above I quote MANY scientific sources. You tend to rely on things equal
to the Onion, such as Breitbart.
--
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 | SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-16 01:59 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <s_S2D.523769$nq5.471078@fx36.iad> |
| In reply to | #457546 |
On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 18:28:44 -0700, Snit wrote: > On 7/15/18 5:58 PM, SilverSlimer wrote: >> On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 17:46:58 -0700, Snit wrote: >> >>> On 7/15/18 4:26 PM, SilverSlimer wrote: >>>> On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:54:28 -0700, Snit wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 7/15/18 11:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>>> On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 11:50:02 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Ah, now you claim to understand my views better than I do. LOL! >>>>>> >>>>>> Quit pretending you can read and write like "others". >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As far as my view of the liberal worldview, and the >>>>>>>>> conservative, what about it can you even twist into saying the >>>>>>>>> liberal side "loathes pretty much everything": >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ----- >>>>>>>>> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and >>>>>>>>> conservative world views: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> * Liberals: support equal rights >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Correction: they *claim* to, it's blatantly obviously this isn't >>>>>>>> true. >>>>>>>> Either that or even liberal has a different definition of the >>>>>>>> term. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ah, then of course you can find examples from popular liberals... >>>>>>> and I will grant there are some edge cases, such as affirmative >>>>>>> action, where I think the "cure" offers more harm than good >>>>>>> (though even then the goal is equal rights). But shoot... give >>>>>>> your examples! >>>>>> >>>>>> LOL! You're actually going to try and sell the idea that you're not >>>>>> aware of the goings on in states like California (liberal central)? >>>>>> Are you also going to pretend that Californians aren't moving to >>>>>> Arizona in record numbers because their liberal hellhole has gotten >>>>>> so bad? How long do you think it'll take CA to complete their >>>>>> obvious conversion to a feudal system? >>>>> >>>>> So no examples. This is funny coming from you who just threw a >>>>> tantrum because I did not dig BACK into the history of COLA to show >>>>> you Slimer's comments. Notice I am not asking you to do that... I am >>>>> merely asking you to show examples of places where liberals are >>>>> rejecting equal rights. >>>>> >>>>> But you have NO examples. >>>> >>>> Meanwhile, you conveniently ignore the fact that liberals have a >>>> blacklist for conservative actors in Hollywood and that the liberal >>>> media - as well as liberal tech companies - are denying conservatives >>>> equal rights. The examples are countless but since you're a lying >>>> little shit, you chose to omit them. >>>> >>>> <https://globalnews.ca/news/3952517/google-discrimination-lawsuit- >> white- >>>> conservative-men/> >>> >>> He was fired for posting bigoted attacks against woman on INTERNAL >>> Google message board! >> >> Unquotable lie #1. > > I posted a link that showed it. > >>> <https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/08/james-damore-just-filed-a-class- >> action-lawsuit-against-google-saying-it-discriminates-against-white- male- >> conservatives/> It proves nothing other than what *I* said, pansy. Unquotable lie #1. >>>> <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5877545/Sarah-Sanders-gets- >>>> kicked-Virginia-restaurant.html> >>> >>> Story about someone who repeatedly lies to the public being treated >>> poorly. I do not defend the actions and they do not represent the >>> liberal view at all, but you ignore that they are against someone who >>> is repeatedly attacking others. >> >> Unlike you, I've actually watched Sarah Sanders in action and she is >> objective, respectful of everyone and neutral. She is also honest with >> the information that she has and provides. Unquotable lie #2. > > You assume I have not watched her lie over and over and over and over > and over. Your assumption is inaccurate. She lies... people respond. > AGAIN, this does not mean I back any violence against her -- I do not. > But she is publicly lying pretty much non-stop. That has consequences. Unquotable lie #2. Support your statement with links to videos showing her lying and then _objective_ sources showing that her statement was a lie. Until then, you're a liar. >>>> <http://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/2018/05/15/black-trump-supporter- >>>> attacked-at-cheesecake-factory-over-maga-hat-report.html> >>> >>> Some guy says he was attacked over wearing symbols of bigotry. Um, OK. >>> We do not really know the story but I do not approve of anyone >>> attacking someone for wearing such symbols. >> >> A MAGA hat is not a symbol of bigotry. Unquotable lie #3. > > Of course it is, at least as used by the Trump campaign and still used > by him and his followers. Just one article on it. Unquotable lie #3. Absolutely nothing in the statement "make America great again," which was also used by Ronald Reagan without complaint, is in any way bigoted. The mere suggestion of it not only makes you a liar, but a borderline retard. It's shocking that you were able to write a complete sentence. > <https://www.trtworld.com/magazine/why-some-americans-want-to-make- america-white-again--16799> > > To be fair, Something you're unable to be. Pasting a link to some obscure left-wing website does not prove anything other than there are other people in the world with literacy issues such as your own. > though, the phrase is not specific and is mostly there to > promote emotion over reason... and has been used by others. It's _emotion_ that led to retarded individuals such as yourself claiming that "make America great again" is a bigoted statement. >>>> <https://www.breitbart.com/texas/2018/07/05/watch-texas-mom-claims- son- >>>> attacked-at-whataburger-for-maga-hat/> >>> >>> Might as well point to the Onion... >> >> Breitbart is as accurate if not more so than all other publications in >> the mainstream media. Unquotable lie #4. > > This is an absurd claim. And easy to show: > > <https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/breitbart/> > ----- The site has wonderful things to say about MSNBC and CNN, your favourite sources, as well. Both are considered to be "mixed." Meanwhile, no reason is provided as to why anyone should care what they believe about bias. Your lie therefore remains a lie. >>> and another claim of someone being attacked for wearing symbols of >>> bigotry. >> >> Again, a MAGA hat is not a symbol of bigotry. Unquotable lie #5. > > It STILL is, as used by Trump and his followers. Unquotable lie #5 and also a retarded statement in which Michael Glasser of Prescott, Arizona is suggesting that simply voting for Donald Trump makes someone a racist. Once again, you are demonstrating what kind of an undisputed imbecile you are. < snip time-wasting > >>>> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/28/black- >> clad- >>>> antifa-attack-right-wing-demonstrators-in-berkeley/? >>>> noredirect=on&utm_term=.3965d586ac71> >>> >>> One hate group attacked by another. Whatever. >> >> Right-wing protestors are not a hate group. Unquotable lie #7. > > Read the article and do research. It was one hate group against another. Michael Glasser doubles down on his lie. Conservatives are not a hate group. >>>> <https://www.dailywire.com/news/12418/youtube-bans-conservative- >> channel- >>>> hank-berrien> >>> >>> Copyright violations are not allowed. And? >> >> Lie about the reason for banning. Unquotable lie #9. > > I provided evidence. Unquotable lie #6. No evidence challenging the statement was provided. >>> <https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jan/13/youtube-removes- >> conservative-law-channel-legal-ins/> >>> >>>> <https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/06/youtube-censorship- >> conservatives- >>>> banned-not-jihadists/> >>> >>> Some guy making claims. Oh. >> >> If a liberal in the same position says something, it must be true but >> not so if it's a conservative. Unquotable lie #10. > > You playing victim. Whatever. Unquotable lie #7. I am not the person in question and don't have a Youtube channel therefore cannot be the victim. > Also note I am speaking of mainstream movements and you are dodging that > to talk about individual and often unsupported incidents. For example, > it is a part of the GOP platform to try to stop the poor and minorities > from voting, to deny women equal rights, to work to stop gays from > having equal rights, to have the government dictate your gender no > matter what the evidence says, to deny man-made global climate change, > etc. Unquotable lie #8. No evidence of general statements provided. Michael Glasser attempts to turn his flawed interpretation of something he heard into a general rule about conservatives. A very serious lie, even by Michael Glasser's standards. The biggest lie there, that "government wants to dictate your gender" is particularly idiotic. If you have a vagina, you are a woman; if you have a penis, you are a man. No amount of emotion will change that and the government believes, like any sane human being, that BIOLOGY DETERMINES GENDER. Unlike pansies like you, they believe in science and not "science." > These are MAINSTREAM conservative positions. > > And they are indefensible. Unquotable lie #9. >>>> <https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/03/01/the-purge-youtube-mass- >> censors- >>>> conservatives-new-right-classical-liberals/> >>> >>> More breitbart... again, why not link to the Onion? >> >> Unquotable lie #11 about Breitbart's reputation for accuracy. > > Ah, more evidence to prove you wrong: > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breitbart_News> Michael Glasser doubles down on his lie. >>> But overall, hate speech is generally conservative so, >> >> Unquotable lie #12. > > Look at you... perfect example. Stating _facts_ does not make a person hateful. Unquotable lie #10. > Above I quote MANY scientific sources. You tend to rely on things equal > to the Onion, such as Breitbart. Unquotable lie #11. I read from everywhere and rely on science, not "convenient information which agrees with my philosophy" known as "science."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-15 19:22 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <9fd22ed0-b055-4306-9adc-086673405e7f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #457548 |
On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 6:59:54 PM UTC-7, SilverSlimer wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 18:28:44 -0700, Snit wrote:
>
> > On 7/15/18 5:58 PM, SilverSlimer wrote:
> >> On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 17:46:58 -0700, Snit wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 7/15/18 4:26 PM, SilverSlimer wrote:
> >>>> On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:54:28 -0700, Snit wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 7/15/18 11:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> >>>>>> On Sunday, July 15, 2018 at 11:50:02 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Ah, now you claim to understand my views better than I do. LOL!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Quit pretending you can read and write like "others".
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> As far as my view of the liberal worldview, and the
> >>>>>>>>> conservative, what about it can you even twist into saying the
> >>>>>>>>> liberal side "loathes pretty much everything":
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> -----
> >>>>>>>>> Keep in mind the main differences between liberal and
> >>>>>>>>> conservative world views:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> * Liberals: support equal rights
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Correction: they *claim* to, it's blatantly obviously this isn't
> >>>>>>>> true.
> >>>>>>>> Either that or even liberal has a different definition of the
> >>>>>>>> term.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Ah, then of course you can find examples from popular liberals...
> >>>>>>> and I will grant there are some edge cases, such as affirmative
> >>>>>>> action, where I think the "cure" offers more harm than good
> >>>>>>> (though even then the goal is equal rights). But shoot... give
> >>>>>>> your examples!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> LOL! You're actually going to try and sell the idea that you're not
> >>>>>> aware of the goings on in states like California (liberal central)?
> >>>>>> Are you also going to pretend that Californians aren't moving to
> >>>>>> Arizona in record numbers because their liberal hellhole has gotten
> >>>>>> so bad? How long do you think it'll take CA to complete their
> >>>>>> obvious conversion to a feudal system?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So no examples. This is funny coming from you who just threw a
> >>>>> tantrum because I did not dig BACK into the history of COLA to show
> >>>>> you Slimer's comments. Notice I am not asking you to do that... I am
> >>>>> merely asking you to show examples of places where liberals are
> >>>>> rejecting equal rights.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> But you have NO examples.
> >>>>
> >>>> Meanwhile, you conveniently ignore the fact that liberals have a
> >>>> blacklist for conservative actors in Hollywood and that the liberal
> >>>> media - as well as liberal tech companies - are denying conservatives
> >>>> equal rights. The examples are countless but since you're a lying
> >>>> little shit, you chose to omit them.
> >>>>
> >>>> <https://globalnews.ca/news/3952517/google-discrimination-lawsuit-
> >> white-
> >>>> conservative-men/>
> >>>
> >>> He was fired for posting bigoted attacks against woman on INTERNAL
> >>> Google message board!
> >>
> >> Unquotable lie #1.
> >
> > I posted a link that showed it.
> >
> >>> <https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/08/james-damore-just-filed-a-class-
> >> action-lawsuit-against-google-saying-it-discriminates-against-white-
> male-
> >> conservatives/>
>
> It proves nothing other than what *I* said, pansy. Unquotable lie #1.
>
> >>>> <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5877545/Sarah-Sanders-gets-
> >>>> kicked-Virginia-restaurant.html>
> >>>
> >>> Story about someone who repeatedly lies to the public being treated
> >>> poorly. I do not defend the actions and they do not represent the
> >>> liberal view at all, but you ignore that they are against someone who
> >>> is repeatedly attacking others.
> >>
> >> Unlike you, I've actually watched Sarah Sanders in action and she is
> >> objective, respectful of everyone and neutral. She is also honest with
> >> the information that she has and provides. Unquotable lie #2.
> >
> > You assume I have not watched her lie over and over and over and over
> > and over. Your assumption is inaccurate. She lies... people respond.
> > AGAIN, this does not mean I back any violence against her -- I do not.
> > But she is publicly lying pretty much non-stop. That has consequences.
>
> Unquotable lie #2. Support your statement with links to videos showing
> her lying and then _objective_ sources showing that her statement was a
> lie. Until then, you're a liar.
>
> >>>> <http://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/2018/05/15/black-trump-supporter-
> >>>> attacked-at-cheesecake-factory-over-maga-hat-report.html>
> >>>
> >>> Some guy says he was attacked over wearing symbols of bigotry. Um, OK.
> >>> We do not really know the story but I do not approve of anyone
> >>> attacking someone for wearing such symbols.
> >>
> >> A MAGA hat is not a symbol of bigotry. Unquotable lie #3.
> >
> > Of course it is, at least as used by the Trump campaign and still used
> > by him and his followers. Just one article on it.
>
> Unquotable lie #3. Absolutely nothing in the statement "make America
> great again," which was also used by Ronald Reagan without complaint, is
> in any way bigoted. The mere suggestion of it not only makes you a liar,
> but a borderline retard. It's shocking that you were able to write a
> complete sentence.
>
> > <https://www.trtworld.com/magazine/why-some-americans-want-to-make-
> america-white-again--16799>
> >
> > To be fair,
>
> Something you're unable to be. Pasting a link to some obscure left-wing
> website does not prove anything other than there are other people in the
> world with literacy issues such as your own.
>
> > though, the phrase is not specific and is mostly there to
> > promote emotion over reason... and has been used by others.
>
> It's _emotion_ that led to retarded individuals such as yourself claiming
> that "make America great again" is a bigoted statement.
>
> >>>> <https://www.breitbart.com/texas/2018/07/05/watch-texas-mom-claims-
> son-
> >>>> attacked-at-whataburger-for-maga-hat/>
> >>>
> >>> Might as well point to the Onion...
> >>
> >> Breitbart is as accurate if not more so than all other publications in
> >> the mainstream media. Unquotable lie #4.
> >
> > This is an absurd claim. And easy to show:
> >
> > <https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/breitbart/>
> > -----
>
> The site has wonderful things to say about MSNBC and CNN, your favourite
> sources, as well. Both are considered to be "mixed." Meanwhile, no reason
> is provided as to why anyone should care what they believe about bias.
> Your lie therefore remains a lie.
>
> >>> and another claim of someone being attacked for wearing symbols of
> >>> bigotry.
> >>
> >> Again, a MAGA hat is not a symbol of bigotry. Unquotable lie #5.
> >
> > It STILL is, as used by Trump and his followers.
>
> Unquotable lie #5 and also a retarded statement in which Michael Glasser
> of Prescott, Arizona is suggesting that simply voting for Donald Trump
> makes someone a racist. Once again, you are demo...
Just some names Steve Carroll has used
"Evil" John *
"Evil" Snit *
Big Crotch on a Small Fish
Cornelius Munshower
CSMA Moderator
Edward Stanfield
Fretwiz *
Hitman Hero
Measles
Petruzzellis Kids
Sigmond
Slaveen
Smit
Steve C *
Steve Camoll *
Steve Carroll <noone@xxxxxxxxxxx> *
Steve Carroll <stevecarroll@xxxxxxxxxxx> *
Steve Carroll <trollkiller@xxxxxx> *
Steve Carroll's Dog *
Steve Carrolll *
Steve Carrroll *
Yevette Owens
Yobo_Obyo
HA!
What did you assume from the lying imbecile? That vallor dunce has nothing to waste but time. He has nothing else, especially not confidence. This is something you should ask Jonas Eklundh. "Well, that wasn't hard" said vallor's husband.
--
I Left My Husband & Daughter At Home And THIS happened
http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/BilkHelp.html
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/RSikBcWxBLo
https://youtu.be/OffkiSAsYo8
Jonas Eklundh Communication AB
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 16 of 39 — ← Prev page 1 … 14 15 [16] 17 18 … 39 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web