"Malachias Invictus" <invictusebay@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
news:M6CdncWkN-e9-Y3YnZ2dnUVZ_v2dnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Joseph" <nonexistent@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:Xns98438ED30D0D5619void@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> "Malachias Invictus" <invictusebay@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>> news:nJOdnSkgk6lIvI3YnZ2dnUVZ_sKdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>>
>>> "Joseph" <nonexistent@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns98437E63290E619void@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> Some Guy <noemailformethanks@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>>>>> Joseph wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> Let's get real here -- Mal doesn't have an honest bone in his
>>>>>> body when challenged.
>>>
>>>>> Are you saying he won't admit when he's wrong? I think Google
>>>>> would disagree with you in that regard. Shall we have a look
>>>>> through the archives?
>>>
>>>> I am saying that he has a strong tendency for that when he has a
>>>> negative attitude towards a poster or position,
>>>
>>> Wow. Nice weasel, Joseph. Either back up your opinion with fact or
>>> shut the **** up.
>
>> 1. You were cordial with Terry Austin once upon a time.
>
> I have been cordial with Terry Austin recently, too.
It's the exception that proves the rule. Nice dodge.
>> Terry certainly hasn't changed. He hurt your little feelings too
>> much, did he?
>
> Nope. By the way, how does this, even if it were true, show that I
> don't have an honest bone in my body when challenged?
Answer it yourself, if you can.
>> 2. Isn't it odd that you state that I'm a moral cripple if I don't
>> believe in truth or morality,
>
> Not really.
Yes it is, IDIOT, since morality has no existence how can I be crippled
by something that is imaginary. The crippling comes from believing in
morality, instead of being liberated from realizing it is a facade
invented by humans.
>> but when say Kaos tosses out her chaote
>> slogan of Nothing is True and Everything Is Permitted you say
>> nothing.
>
> Am I somehow obligated to?
Of course not, but silence speaks also of intention. Care to go on the
record?
>> Is it because you are unobservant,
>
> Nope.
>
>> or you play favorites?
>
> Oh, I *do* play favorites. I am partial to those who are not idiots.
Most idiots think that.
>> Or are you just too stupid to understand her?
>
> Maybe I know what she is talking about, and it is *you* who are too
> stupid to understand her.
Objection Your Honor witness is being augmentative.
> By the way, how does this, even if it were true, show that I don't
> have an honest bone in my body when challenged?
My jurors the accused does not understand the value of character
evidence of integrity when talking about the accused lying, integrity
and so forth.
>> 3. Where were you during MSB's little meltdown in 2005?
>
> Probably eating pizza. Why do you ask?
You were also posting, smartass.
>> You didn't make one post critizing anything he said.
>
> I highly doubt that. You will have to be more specific, by the way,
> about this "meltdown." For example, thread names and dates of this
> alleged behavior you feel I was somehow obligated to criticize.
You are delusional if that's what you think. I really would like to see
any such post during that period. And no one said you were obligated,
I'm casting aspersions on your character.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.frp.dnd/browse_thread/thread/73
8ac2aa9260c38b/52e7636aaa979720?hl=en#52e7636aaa979720
Lawful Stupid Thread first post August 26 2005 by David Alex Lamb
MSB last significant posts in RGFD were in this thread. It was somewhat
sad to see him go out in such a blaze of stupidity.
> By the way, how does this, even if it were true, show that I don't
> have an honest bone in my body when challenged?
My jurors the accused does not understand the value of character
evidence of integrity when talking about the accused lying, integrity
and so forth.
>> Oh that's right, you were too busy laughing at me (granted there was
>> such material)
>
> There always is.
>
>> to show any integrity to critize your erstwhile role model.
>
> "Erstwhile role model?" Not hardly.
Horse****.
> We have similar posting styles,
> and some similar interests and attitudes otherwise.
Why don't you live with him, then? You live in the same state after all,
and you seem to know he still around... somehow.
> By the way, how does this, even if it were true, show that I don't
> have an honest bone in my body when challenged?
>
> By the way, I am not obligated to criticize every post I disagree
> with.
No one ever said you were.
>> That's just off the top of my head.
>
> You need to work harder.
>
>> To be fair you have given Cope a fair shake,
>
> That is because Cope is making well-reasoned, interesting posts.
Usually.
>> so I know you're capable of not being an ass all the time.
>
> Duh.
>
>>>>> I've not seen the anti-religion crusade by Mal you're referring to
>>>>> in this group. Were you talking about a different time or
>>>>> different group, perhaps? If so, you might have wanted to specify
>>>>> that.
>
>>>> I believe it goes back to the BBK days with those long atheism
>>>> threads. Recently, you can look at those witchcraft threads he was
>>>> hip-deep in
>
>>> I am waiting for you to sup****t your position, weasel.
>
>> Google is available for anyone who has the endurance.
>
> Nice cop-out, weasel. You really are ****y at backing up your
> bull**** assertions, aren't you?
>
>>>> (plus his laughable excursion into the Wicca newsgroup recently).
>
>>> That had very little to do with religion, and everything to do with
>>> my pet punching bag. It is pretty interesting that your obsession
>>> with me led you to follow me to another newsgroup. Did you read my
>>> posts to the trucker newsgroup, too?
>
>> No jackass, I had alt.religion.wicca subscribed before you went in
>> there.
>
> Prove it, stalker.
Don't need to.
>> I stopped reading when your **** became unbearable.
>
> Ever hear of a killfile? How about ignoring a thread? What were you
> reading about before I got there? Was it the anti-Semitism that kept
> you coming back for more, or was it the kookery and conspiracy
> theories?
>
>> Are you still in there making an ass of yourself?
>
> Never was, bub.
Spin baby, spin.
>> And yeah, you pick Talespin, Wicca's most obvious trolling joke to
>> play with.
>
> Yes. He was a good punching bag, while he lasted. Funny how you call
> him "Talespin," which is the nickname I came up with for him. You
> must have *really* been reading my posts faithfully to have that
> filter into your subconscious.
>
>> You want to be like Terry so much, huh?
>
> Totally different posting styles, bub.
>
>>>> And it is fun to tweak his nose by using that term.
>>>
>>> It is more fun to watch someone make an ass of themselves while
>>> claiming they are tweaking my nose.
>>
>> So you're claming you're an expert at ass watching?
>
> Yes.
Good to know.
>>>>>> MSB actually had talent. Mal just has the vileness and the
>>>>>> posting endurance.
>
>>>>> There will never be another MSB, but it's hardly fair to accuse
>>>>> Mal of that behavior. It's more descriptive of someone like Terry
>>>>> than Mal. Post for post, Mal is on-topic much more in RGFD than
>>>>> Terry, which reduces the accuracy of your contention
>>>>> significantly.
>
>>>> First of all, you and Mal need to drop the obsession with Terry
>>>> Austin.
>
>>> Worried about your hero, fanboy? I am sure he is still taking
>>> applications for sycophants.
Project much?
>> You lying dog, you're not going to find any evidence of that.
>
> Your posts about him are evidence, sycophant.
>
>> But keep on showing that you are paranoid and stupid.
>
> I'll just let this ironic statement stand on its own.
Then you should have kept silent, dummy.
>>>> because Terry has reduced his posting from years ago and Mal is
>>>> prolific as ever.
>>>
>>> Not remotely. Check the newsgroup stats.
>>
>> Liar.
>
> Nope, it is you who are the liar:
Actually, I'm in error here.
> http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?
enc_user=bYScLBoAAAA2dsoIBxKgN2
> j2BawDkP-qOgultvhkVwhfUahTtv1_ew&group=rec.games.frp.dnd&hl=en
>
> I posted more in March of 2005 than I have during the entire year of
> 2006, **** for brains. In fact, I have posted less to this newsgroup
> (and Usenet in general) this year than I have during an other period
> since I started posting to Usenet.
Kind of shows I'm not a stalker. I really thought different (although I
was including 2005 and 2006 as recent). Boy has the bottom fallen out on
your use to the community with the drought of on-topic material you used
to produce in abundance.
>> Besides getting a headache from looking through your mountain of
>> posting drivel this year;
>
> The facts contradict your bull****.
>
>>>> And what does Terry and Mal have to do with what I said about MSB
>>>> and Mal.
>
>>> He explained that already. Perhaps you should learn to read for
>>> content.
>
>> You keep on telling yourself that, Skipper.
>
> The thinking people already have it figured out.
And the lurkers who sup****t you in e-mail, of course.
>>>> Again, stop projecting your obsession with Terry into things.
>>>
>>> Some Guy is obsessed about posting, not Terry.
>>
>> That's pathetic weaseling, even from you.
>
> Bull****. The facts put lie to your claim. He responds to
> *everyone*, *all the time*.
No he doesn't. For one thing Some Guy takes breaks. And his obsession
with Terry mirrors his obsession with Bradd awhile ago. He doesn't reply
like that to everyone else.
|
