[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Aug 11, 9:54*am, Clyde Slick wrote:

George pretty much IS a socialist.
I disagree with Scott inpart, as I feel that George IS and elitist
and likes to order the proles about.

LoL.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Aug 11, 10:57*am, ScottW2 wrote:
On Aug 10, 10:39*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:

On 10 aug., 19:55, George M. Middius wrote:

You're an idiot, but you're not in Scottie's class of idiot.

your definition of an idiot is anyoidy who disagrees with you.
It is sad, so sad!

*As well as just another pompous elitist with nothing to justify his
pompousness.
He isn't even in-bred royalty.

Two idiots nod in agreement.

Sad? What could be funnier? LOL!

[vinyl anachronist]

On Aug 11, 11:22�am, ScottW2 wrote:
On Aug 11, 10:29�am, vinyl anachronist
wrote:





On Aug 11, 10:00 am, ScottW2 wrote:

On Aug 11, 9:37 am, vinyl anachronist
wrote:

On Aug 11, 9:16 am, ScottW2 wrote:

On Aug 10, 10:36 pm, vinyl anachronist
wrote:

On Aug 10, 3:49 pm, ScottW2 wrote:

So you're here to be an asshole. All righty then.

If that means not conforming to your way of thinking, I guess so.

No...it just means you're here to misbehave. I don't have a problem
with that as long as you're entertaining.

And there it is. Misbehaving is ok as long as you find it amusing..

Misbehaving is okay as long as you take it in the right spirit. If you
take it personally, then you probably should stay away from Usenet.

I don't find childish immaturity entertaining so are you going to
stop?

You mean, am I going to bow to your every whim and desire? No.

Some people obviously think
that you are.

The difference is I don't care what some people think, particularly
those who indulge in immaturity for their own amusement.

Then why don't you avoid them? Why do you constantly engage them?

Most of the time I do. I see your little peanut gallery snipes.
They usually lack substance and aren't worthy of a response.

That would be your opinion. I look at your excessive OT threads and
feel they also lack substance, especially when derived from such
blatantly biased people as Michelle Malkin.

�As Jenn often likes to say....show me where she lied.

I didn't say she lied...I said she's blatantly biased. Do you know the
difference?



You think wit can make up for lack of substance and knowledge.

Now you know what I think?

�I do when you say so. Unless you don't mean what you say.

So in your words, you're saying that I've said "I think wit can make
up for lack of substance or knowledge." Just show me where I said
that...or apologize for being wrong.


�LoL. No, I think wit can make a discussion
forum a much more interesting place to be. But exchanging information
should be a primary goal.

�Yet you objected to links that provide information. Go figure.

Information? Hardly. It's propaganda that you're passing on.



I don't.

I prefer to discuss current political events.

That's nice, but there are forums designed for that.

This forum has little to no audio discussion.

I participated in one yesterday.

�A very little one. �Still no one bothered you as far as I can tell.

It doesn't matter. I saw an audio topic and I commented on it. The
original poster replied, and I replied to that. What else am I
supposed to do to satisfy your ever shifting idea of right and wrong?




Yet with Arny gone there is no one that is going to disrupt
anything the comes up on-topic.

The right people have to come back. You and Bratzi aren't enough to
attract them.

�And you are? � How about Middiot? Shhtard?

Of course. Look at the posts over the last year from people like
Hophead and Herbert Hoover that said, "Wow, Boon...great to see you
again!" Contrast that with the number of posts that say, "Hey
Scott...I'm really happy you're here...you really contribute to the
group."


�Look RAHE. It's pretty open for any audio topic yet there is little
new. �Same 'ol folks, same 'ol debate.

That's why I'm not really interested in audio discussions on the
Internet anymore.



Meanwhile, everyone here engages in off-topic discussion.
Midiot does his silly sniping.
Jenn rants against Fox.
You get sprung over Palin.
Everyone here has started off-topic threads.
You've just decided you don't like the topics I raise
because they don't spawn nice friendly donut hole like
discussions. Too bad.

It has nothing to do with OT discussions.

� Well that's a change in argument.

No, it's not. I made it clear just ahead.

Most of us have known each
other for many years, and it's perfectly natural to talk about other
topics.

�Go ahead. �What you mostly talk about is other people in childish
fashion but reality is...no one is stopping you if that's what you
want to do.

"Childish fashion"? Like how?


Excessively spamming the group with right-wing and nationalist
links is another story, It violates the Usenet charter.

�So does your endless banter with Geo who you recently overtly trolled
about nothing. �So did your donut hole discussion.

No, it didn't. First, explain to me how I trolled a person who came on
here and immediately called two regulars "fat"? (Of course without
ever meeting either person.) THAT'S a troll. My response was pretty
normal in the context of discussion forums...if you can't play nice,
get the **** out.


�You want a group in strict compliance with usenet charter now?
Bye bye shhh. �Bye bye George. �Bye bye Mark.

Do you know what the charter is? It's not against OT topics. It's
against excessive spamming. When you introduce OT thread after OT
thread that's little more than a link to someone else's blog, that's
spam. By definition.


�Go to RAHE if you want charter rules.

Once again I see you obviously and hypocritically wanting your charter
violations
condoned while others are not.

Again, this point was proven and is therefore moot.




Do you see the difference, or is your world still black and white?

I see you trying to paint the world as you want it to be.
Not very tolerant, are you?

I'm not trying to paint it any way. Why are you treating me like I'm
some sort of authority who is making demands from the others? I am
merely expressing an opinion. 11 years ago, there was a lot of
entertaining and informed posters here. Now they come on here, see the
ridiculous OT spamming from people like you and Bratzi, and leave.
You're not saving RAO, you're ruining it. And I have a right to bitch
about it. If you don't like it, killfile me.




You prefer donut holes and T-shirts.

To what, your excessive OT posting?

LoL. You're off-topic as much as anyone.
You just want to decide what is acceptably entertaining
to you and what isn't.

It's called an opinion. Hence, rec.audio.opinion. And my opinion that
excessive OT spamming hurts the group.

�I think excessive whining, ridicule, and childish insults are far
more
damaging. �You engage in all of that.

In your opinion. From my point of view I got rid of Arny.



Your complaints are hypocritical.

You're failing to understand my complaints, so your point is moot.

�LoL. � I fail to see any honesty in your argument.

You fail to see honesty in any argument but your own. Consequently,
people tend to say the same about you. You're not known for being a
paragon of truth around here.



I don't find donut holes and T-shirts any more entertaining than the
childish ridicule and unsubstantiated insults but it is more tolerable

It doesn't matter what you think about donut holes and T-shirts. I had
a nice, friendly conversation with at least two other people here on a
subject we all found interesting.

And I didn't interfere nor do I complain about it beyond pointing
out the hypocrisy of your complaints.

That's interfering.

�LoL. �I don't think you belong on usenet. �You need a private forum
all to yourself.

Non-response noted.


It also makes YOU the hypocrite, not me. (That's
not a IKYABWAI but simple logic.)

�Simply futile and self-serving disingenuous logic.

If you say so.



Evidently you are against nice,
friendly conversations or else you would have more of them.

That's a matter of perspective.

Who other than you thinks you have nice friendly conversations here?

�See? Your leap of logic demands participation else I'm in opposition.
That's just more self-serving disingenuous logical BS.
I'm not opposed to your boring donut hole conversations.

Your obsession with donut holes is getting pretty dumb. It tells me
that you can only think of one instanceof my OT posting behavior and
you're repeating it over and over.

It's pretty much the only time you're civil.
But don't tell me I have to participate or I'm opposed.
I'm not opposed to them. I'm just bored by them.
Doesn't mean I don't think you should have them if you wish.

And I feel the same about you and your excessive spamming. I'll never
do anything about it other than complain when the subject comes up.
But if you go around saying your trying to save the group, I'll call
you on it.


Name one person. In other words, we're talking about YOUR prespective,
right?

�No, I'm actually talking about yours.

So I think you're having nice friendly conversations here? Would you
like to go back and read more carefully and try again?



You certainly aren't nice in a couple peoples perspective.

You mean people who tell lies about my family or write emails to my
business associates? You should know better than to make that comment.

�I mean you go out of your way to start and escalate personal
conflicts IMO.

In each case, people did something to me that crossed the line. Both
Bob and Arny went real-world on me. CISG told lies about me and my
family. If any of those three guys did that to my face, they'd take a
beating.

�You've also claimed to go real world yourself.

I didn't claim to go real world. I've told you privately what
happened. Apparently you've forgotten.

Even if you didn't do
it, I think
that's just dumb as it provides to those, like Bob, with justification
to do what
you say you do.

Ah, the two wrongs make a right argument.



But go ahead and be nice if you can. Unlike you, I won't try to stop
you.

I'm nice to more people here than you are.

�Oh goody.

You're also far nastier than I am.

In your opinion. Again, compare the number of people with whom I have
civil discussions with your personal list.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Shhhh! said:

George pretty much IS a socialist.
I disagree with Scott inpart, as I feel that George IS and elitist
and likes to order the proles about.

LoL.

Yes, Sacky nailed it: I'm a socialist *and* an elitist. And I have a pet tooth
fairy who eats rainbows and buries pots of treasure.

[GeoSynch]

Buffoon engages in more buffoonery:

[E]xplain to me how I trolled a person who came on here and immediately called
two regulars "fat"? (Of course without ever meeting either person.)

Not to belabor the obviouus, but as I previously stated, pudge long ago
described himself as a "gay obese man"; this picture of Jenn tells a similar
story
http://academic.cuesta.edu/performin...er_martin.html

So, as usual, you're wrong again.

Why are you treating me like I'm some sort of authority who is making demands
from the others?
,,,
From my point of view I got rid of Arny.

Like I also previously stated, "I guess your olfactory senses have become so
blunted, you no longer reek
yourself right out of the room with the stench of your own hypocrisy."

[MiNe 109]

In article
,
vinyl anachronist wrote:

From my point of view I got rid of Arny.

Wasn't there some understanding that Scott was defending Arny from
attacks, mentions, etc? Now that he's gone, what's Scott defending?

Stephen

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

MiNe 109 said:

From my point of view I got rid of Arny.

Wasn't there some understanding that Scott was defending Arny from
attacks, mentions, etc? Now that he's gone, what's Scott defending?

Arnii's turd collection?

[vinyl anachronist]

On Aug 11, 1:57�pm, MiNe 109 wrote:
In article
,
�vinyl anachronist wrote:

From my point of view I got rid of Arny.

Wasn't there some understanding that Scott was defending Arny from
attacks, mentions, etc? Now that he's gone, what's Scott defending?

Himself, I guess. He and Bratzi have a right to spam. It's very
important to Scott that this right be preserved, charter be damned.
It's about his right to express himself as an angry white guy.

[Clyde Slick]

On 11 aug., 16:46, George M. Middius wrote:
Shhhh! said:

George pretty much IS a socialist.
I disagree with Scott inpart, as I feel that George IS and elitist
and likes to order the proles about.

LoL.

Yes, Sacky nailed it: I'm a socialist *and* an elitist. And I have a pet tooth
fairy who eats rainbows and buries pots of treasure.

in your case, used condoms from the nether region.

[hophead]

In article , smcelroy2
@POPaustin.rr.com says...

Wasn't there some understanding that Scott was defending Arny from
attacks, mentions, etc?

Indeed: he still sometimes uses "NAT" to preface his mindless trolls.

Now that he's gone, what's Scott defending?

The "Truth" according to angry Republicans?

[vinyl anachronist]

On Aug 11, 2:48�pm, hophead wrote:
In article , smcelroy2
@POPaustin.rr.com says...

Wasn't there some understanding that Scott was defending Arny from
attacks, mentions, etc?

Indeed: he still sometimes uses "NAT" to preface his mindless trolls.

I've wondered why he still does the NAT thing. If anyone's keeping the
spirit of Arny alive, it's him.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Aug 11, 6:10*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Aug 11, 1:24*pm, vinyl anachronist
wrote:

Information? Hardly. It's propaganda that you're passing on.

*LoL. *How would you know if you don't read it?

Keep in mind that 2pid discounts experience.

In 2pid's 'mind' his 'differing POV' is as valid as a field-grade
officer's with over 20 years of service (not to mention that of
general officers in command of the theaters in question).

That's just how 2pid rolls.

[vinyl anachronist]

On Aug 11, 4:10�pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Aug 11, 1:24�pm, vinyl anachronist
wrote:

On Aug 11, 11:22 am, ScottW2 wrote:

On Aug 11, 10:29 am, vinyl anachronist
wrote:

On Aug 11, 10:00 am, ScottW2 wrote:

On Aug 11, 9:37 am, vinyl anachronist
wrote:

On Aug 11, 9:16 am, ScottW2 wrote:

On Aug 10, 10:36 pm, vinyl anachronist
wrote:

On Aug 10, 3:49 pm, ScottW2 wrote:

So you're here to be an asshole. All righty then.

If that means not conforming to your way of thinking, I guess so.

No...it just means you're here to misbehave. I don't have a problem
with that as long as you're entertaining.

And there it is. Misbehaving is ok as long as you find it amusing.

Misbehaving is okay as long as you take it in the right spirit. If you
take it personally, then you probably should stay away from Usenet.

I don't find childish immaturity entertaining so are you going to
stop?

You mean, am I going to bow to your every whim and desire? No.

Some people obviously think
that you are.

The difference is I don't care what some people think, particularly
those who indulge in immaturity for their own amusement.

Then why don't you avoid them? Why do you constantly engage them?

Most of the time I do. I see your little peanut gallery snipes.
They usually lack substance and aren't worthy of a response.

That would be your opinion. I look at your excessive OT threads and
feel they also lack substance, especially when derived from such
blatantly biased people as Michelle Malkin.

As Jenn often likes to say....show me where she lied.

I didn't say she lied...I said she's blatantly biased. Do you know the
difference?

�Yeah, one is a subjective opinion not worth arguing.

Yes, subjective opinions are never worth arguing. Only stupid people
do that.



You think wit can make up for lack of substance and knowledge.

Now you know what I think?

I do when you say so. Unless you don't mean what you say.

So in your words, you're saying that I've said "I think wit can make
up for lack of substance or knowledge."

� Or the equivalent.

No, that would be a subjective opinion of yours and not worth
arguing...at least according to your rules.


Just show me where I said
that...or apologize for being wrong.

�No.

Figures. Why use facts when you have white guy anger? It used to work
in the days when we'd lynch people jus' for bein' the wrong color!




LoL. No, I think wit can make a discussion
forum a much more interesting place to be. But exchanging information
should be a primary goal.

Yet you objected to links that provide information. Go figure.

Information? Hardly. It's propaganda that you're passing on.

�LoL. �How would you know if you don't read it?

How do you know I haven't read it?

People have read your links. They've noticed that you don't
necessarily connect the dots. They gave up listening to you because it
was a waste of their time.




I don't.

I prefer to discuss current political events.

That's nice, but there are forums designed for that.

This forum has little to no audio discussion.

I participated in one yesterday.

A very little one. Still no one bothered you as far as I can tell.

It doesn't matter.

� Yeah, it does.

How?

�I saw an audio topic and I commented on it. The
original poster replied, and I replied to that. What else am I
supposed to do to satisfy your ever shifting idea of right and wrong?

�Quit acting like someone disrupted you by commenting in other
threads.

I have no idea what that means. (Hint: it's you, not me.)



Yet with Arny gone there is no one that is going to disrupt
anything the comes up on-topic.

The right people have to come back. You and Bratzi aren't enough to
attract them.

And you are? How about Middiot? Shhtard?

Of course. Look at the posts over the last year from people like
Hophead and Herbert Hoover that said, "Wow, Boon...great to see you
again!"

�Those guys are like you. Shallow and without substance IMO.

Goddamn you sound like Arny these days. You don't know either of those
guys. They are strangers on the Internet to you.


Perfect donut holes. �But feel free to have your discussions.
No one is stopping you but you with your extreme sensitivity.

Extreme sensitivity? About what? About having someone **** with my
livelihood?


Contrast that with the number of posts that say, "Hey
Scott...I'm really happy you're here...you really contribute to the
group."

� You were gone for years.

No, I wasn't.

�I didn't see anyone lamenting your
absence.

I received plenty of emails.

�In return all you want to do is censor what you don't like.

No, I don't.

Why not just kill-file me instead of insisting on being group cop?

I don't need to kill-file you. 99% of the time I ignore you. And you
know that.




Look RAHE. It's pretty open for any audio topic yet there is little
new. Same 'ol folks, same 'ol debate.

That's why I'm not really interested in audio discussions on the
Internet anymore.

�So you want to remake RAO in your "non-audio" image. �LoL.

I don't want to remake RAO. It's you and Bret that have remade
RAO...into something close to worthless.

�You are a blazing hypocrite.

I don't think you understand what that word means. You keep misusing
it.



Meanwhile, everyone here engages in off-topic discussion.
Midiot does his silly sniping.
Jenn rants against Fox.
You get sprung over Palin.
Everyone here has started off-topic threads.
You've just decided you don't like the topics I raise
because they don't spawn nice friendly donut hole like
discussions. Too bad.

It has nothing to do with OT discussions.

Well that's a change in argument.

No, it's not. I made it clear just ahead.

Most of us have known each
other for many years, and it's perfectly natural to talk about other
topics.

Go ahead. What you mostly talk about is other people in childish
fashion but reality is...no one is stopping you if that's what you
want to do.

"Childish fashion"? Like how?

�Like your silly sideline comments about me but not
addressed to me. �That is childish.

It's childish to talk about a third party? Really?

Wow, talk about sensitive.

The fact that you don't know that speaks volumes.

Yes, it's childish to talk about other human beings. Utterly
infantile.



Excessively spamming the group with right-wing and nationalist
links is another story, It violates the Usenet charter.

So does your endless banter with Geo who you recently overtly trolled
about nothing. So did your donut hole discussion.

No, it didn't.

�Yes it did. �But only condemn you for hypocrisy, not the act.

No. You keep clinging to the fact that you're not spamming the group.
You are.


�First, explain to me how I trolled a person who came on
here and immediately called two regulars "fat"?

So you trolled a troll. It's still trolling.

No, it's not.


�(Of course without
ever meeting either person.) THAT'S a troll. �My response was pretty
normal in the context of discussion forums...if you can't play nice,
get the **** out.

�Marc the rulemaker.

Ugh. You can't tell the difference between spamming and off-topic, and
you can't tell the difference between voicing an opinion and trying to
take over.



You want a group in strict compliance with usenet charter now?
Bye bye shhh. Bye bye George. Bye bye Mark.

Do you know what the charter is? It's not against OT topics. It's
against excessive spamming. When you introduce OT thread after OT
thread that's little more than a link to someone else's blog, that's
spam. By definition.

� �Nope, it's just OT stuff you're not interested.

Few are.

�You aren't Bush the decider of what OT is spam and what OT
is not.

Ummm...I'm not sure what Bush has to do with it, but you're right.
It's not my decision. It's Usenet. And your in clear violation of
their charter.



Go to RAHE if you want charter rules.

Once again I see you obviously and hypocritically wanting your charter
violations
condoned while others are not.

Again, this point was proven and is therefore moot.

�LoL. �The debating trade "proof".

No, it's just that you can't concede your mistakes, so we go round and
round.



Do you see the difference, or is your world still black and white?

I see you trying to paint the world as you want it to be.
Not very tolerant, are you?

I'm not trying to paint it any way. Why are you treating me like I'm
some sort of authority who is making demands from the others?

Because you are.

You think I am. I'm not sure why you're so threatened by me.


I am
merely expressing an opinion.

�Then I shall give it all the consideration is deserves.
Anything else?

11 years ago, there was a lot of
entertaining and informed posters here. Now they come on here, see the
ridiculous OT spamming from people like you and Bratzi, and leave.

Revisionist history. �


Prove it. No one sent you emails about why they left.

The left because of the nasty flamefests.

Many left because of Arny. MANY.

This place was dead long before I started making political posts.
You had vacated it yourself. � Silence isn't going to bring the past
back.

Now it's the "we found it like this" argument. How noble.

You're not saving RAO, you're ruining it. And I have a right to bitch
about it. If you don't like it, killfile me.

�OK.

Promise?



You prefer donut holes and T-shirts.

To what, your excessive OT posting?

LoL. You're off-topic as much as anyone.
You just want to decide what is acceptably entertaining
to you and what isn't.

It's called an opinion. Hence, rec.audio.opinion. And my opinion that
excessive OT spamming hurts the group.

I think excessive whining, ridicule, and childish insults are far
more
damaging. You engage in all of that.

In your opinion. From my point of view I got rid of Arny.

�Not withoug collateral damage. � What if some people would
prefer Arny be here? �Did you ever consider that decision wasn't
your right?

Yes, I did. I know many people were here to poke fun at Arny and I
took that away from them. But they weren't in the position I was.

I did receive several emails from people here who encouraged me to go
after him and drive him away.



Your complaints are hypocritical.

You're failing to understand my complaints, so your point is moot.

LoL. I fail to see any honesty in your argument.

You fail to see honesty in any argument but your own. Consequently,
people tend to say the same about you. You're not known for being a
paragon of truth around here.

�RAO isn't know as a paragon of judgement of truth.

Of course not. It's the Internet. But it doesn't have to be a pack of
lies, either.



I don't find donut holes and T-shirts any more entertaining than the
childish ridicule and unsubstantiated insults but it is more tolerable

It doesn't matter what you think about donut holes and T-shirts.. I had
a nice, friendly conversation with at least two other people here on a
subject we all found interesting.

And I didn't interfere nor do I complain about it beyond pointing
out the hypocrisy of your complaints.

That's interfering.

LoL. I don't think you belong on usenet. You need a private forum
all to yourself.

Non-response noted.

�It was clear even if over your head.

It wasn't over my head. It was just sort of a feeble response.



It also makes YOU the hypocrite, not me. (That's
not a IKYABWAI but simple logic.)

Simply futile and self-serving disingenuous logic.

If you say so.

I do.

Fine. The feeling is mutual.



Evidently you are against nice,
friendly conversations or else you would have more of them.

That's a matter of perspective.

Who other than you thinks you have nice friendly conversations here?

See? Your leap of logic demands participation else I'm in opposition.
That's just more self-serving disingenuous logical BS.
I'm not opposed to your boring donut hole conversations.

Your obsession with donut holes is getting pretty dumb.

�Then have a less boring conversation.

I already said I wasn't going to killfile you.


�It tells me
that you can only think of one instanceof my OT posting behavior and
you're repeating it over and over.

�Non-response noted.

I don't think you understand what that means, either.



It's pretty much the only time you're civil.
But don't tell me I have to participate or I'm opposed.
I'm not opposed to them. I'm just bored by them.
Doesn't mean I don't think you should have them if you wish.

And I feel the same about you and your excessive spamming. I'll never
do anything about it other than complain when the subject comes up.
But if you go around saying your trying to save the group, I'll call
you on it.

�Feel free. Once I thought RAO could be saved. No more.
RAO isn't the only audio forum that is dying.

No kidding.



Name one person. In other words, we're talking about YOUR prespective,
right?

No, I'm actually talking about yours.

So I think you're having nice friendly conversations here?

�Now you have to ask me what you think? �Try again.

Let's make it simple. I don't think my conversations will be percieved
as "nice and friendly" by some who demand "like-minded" thinking to be
perceived as nice and friendly. �I am not a big admirer of "like-
mindedness".

I'm not asking for nice and friendly.

But I will be civil if treated civilly.

I have treated you in a civil manner. I've even apologized whenever I
take it too far. I've done it more than once with you.

Would you
like to go back and read more carefully and try again?

You certainly aren't nice in a couple peoples perspective.

You mean people who tell lies about my family or write emails to my
business associates? You should know better than to make that comment.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Aug 11, 9:25*pm, vinyl anachronist
wrote:
On Aug 11, 4:10 pm, ScottW2 wrote:

It's time to teach a shorthand course:

"2pid are a imbecile."

[vinyl anachronist]

On Aug 11, 8:15�pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
On Aug 11, 9:25�pm, vinyl anachronist
wrote:

On Aug 11, 4:10 pm, ScottW2 wrote:

It's time to teach a shorthand course:

"2pid are a imbecile."

Yeah, no more of these epics. Life's too short.

[GeoSynch]

Buffoon bawled:

Both Bob and Arny went real-world on me. CISG told lies about me and my
family.

I didn't claim to go real world.

You were crying like a girl about "taking food off my table" when Bob and Arny
went 'real-world' on you but in the next breath you wetted yourself with gleeful
self-satisfaction when you mistakenly believed you had gone 'real-world' on me
and gotten me fired from my job.

Face it, you're a no-credibility rat fink snitch hypocrite idiot loser.
And that's what you will always be.

Too bad you didn't heed your own advice and just "stop talking." Ha-ha-ha!

In trolling me - as a proxy for Arny to vainly display your argumentative
prowess - you've only exposed what a lowdown, dirty scoundrel you really are.

That karma thing I previously mentioned seems to finally be catching up with
you.

But the icing on the cake is that all this I've written will be gnawing away at
your psyche for days on end, the pent-up rage exacerbated by your silly "refuse
to engage" vow a few days ago. ;-)

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Aug 11, 11:43*pm, vinyl anachronist
wrote:
On Aug 11, 8:15 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
On Aug 11, 9:25 pm, vinyl anachronist
wrote:

On Aug 11, 4:10 pm, ScottW2 wrote:

It's time to teach a shorthand course:

"2pid are a imbecile."

Yeah, no more of these epics. Life's too short.

It would be one thing if the intended recipient could actually process
and understand what is being said.

In the words of a former RAOer about trying to hold adult-level
discussions with 2pid, "Been there, done that".

[vinyl anachronist]

On Aug 12, 9:43�am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
On Aug 11, 11:43�pm, vinyl anachronist
wrote:

On Aug 11, 8:15 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
On Aug 11, 9:25 pm, vinyl anachronist
wrote:

On Aug 11, 4:10 pm, ScottW2 wrote:

It's time to teach a shorthand course:

"2pid are a imbecile."

Yeah, no more of these epics. Life's too short.

It would be one thing if the intended recipient could actually process
and understand what is being said.

In the words of a former RAOer about trying to hold adult-level
discussions with 2pid, "Been there, done that".

The sad thing is that when I do engage him point by point like that, I
see a tiny hint of the human being behind the spam. But this neo-con
discomfiture syndrome is a powerful and debilitating disease.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Aug 12, 1:18*pm, vinyl anachronist
wrote:
On Aug 12, 9:43 am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"





wrote:
On Aug 11, 11:43 pm, vinyl anachronist
wrote:

On Aug 11, 8:15 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
On Aug 11, 9:25 pm, vinyl anachronist
wrote:

On Aug 11, 4:10 pm, ScottW2 wrote:

It's time to teach a shorthand course:

"2pid are a imbecile."

Yeah, no more of these epics. Life's too short.

It would be one thing if the intended recipient could actually process
and understand what is being said.

In the words of a former RAOer about trying to hold adult-level
discussions with 2pid, "Been there, done that".

The sad thing is that when I do engage him point by point like that, I
see a tiny hint of the human being behind the spam. But this neo-con
discomfiture syndrome is a powerful and debilitating disease.

It seems to put people in cranial arrest.