Skip to main content
news

Re: Proof Sandman keeps run...

Snit
SubjectRe: Proof Sandman keeps running from.
FromSnit
Date08/03/2009 09:32 (08/03/2009 00:32)
Message-ID<C69BE081.3F860%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Client
Newsgroupscomp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
FollowsSandman
FollowupsSandman (39m) > Snit

Sandman stated in post mr-F70631.09140203082009@News.Individual.NET on 8/3/09 12:14 AM:

Sandman
In article <C69AE337.3F645%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>wrote:

Snit
Clearly you are dishonestly snipping... and then lying and saying you are doing what I did when I *returned* other content you dishonestly snipped.

Sandman
That's exactly what I did above.

Snit
Good to see you admit to it.

Sandman
I admit to using your trolling technique to make a point, yes. The point, of course, was totally lost on you since if there is anyting stronger than your urge to troll csma, it's your capacity for denial.

You had snipped out the part I returned which made it look like your "Ok" was a response to something you had snipped out.

A bummer when your trolling bites yourself in the ass like this.

Snit
I did no such thing. I *returned* the context you had dishonestly snipped.

Sandman
As did I - I *returned* the context which you had dishonestly snipped away when you answered with "Ok". When returning that context, I made it appear that your Ok was in response to the context that you had snipped away. This is your Circus, Snit. I'm just using it against you.

I.e. the context you dishonestly snipped in this post:

<C699CBA9.3F495%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>

From this post:

<mr-14A3EE.17120501082009@News.Individual.NET>

Was returned in a fashion where it seemed like you replied to content you had snipped:

Sandman, wrote this: But you can't do that, because it doesn't exist, since you forged the quote, since you're a dishonest lying troll.

Snit wrote this in a follow-up post: Ok

Just like content *I* had snipped in this post:

<mr-F23E3D.11165701082009@News.Individual.NET>

From this post:

<C698C528.3F295%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>

Was returned by you in a fashion where it seemed like I was replying to content that I had snipped:

Snit's quote-forging: Snit: I will not stop being honest and honorable, no matter how you misrepresent it or what demands you make.

Too bad.

Your quote forging is easy to spot, since you can never attach a Message-ID to those quotes, because there isn't one, like in this case. When you don't quote-forge, you usually attach a google link or a Message-ID, even when the quote is taken completely out of context (which is the norm for you), but when you quote-forge, you can't, because there is no link to the passages you make appear as a quote. That is quote-forging.

The reality:

Sandman: Just as much as you can show me writing that as a response to your paragraph. Snit: Ok, then *do* it.

Sandman's dishonest misrepresentation:

Sandman: But you can't do that, because it doesn't exist, since you forged the quote, since you're a dishonest lying troll. Snit: Ok

What made Sandman freak out... my *returning* context he dishonesty snipped:

Snit: [1] I will not stop being honest and honorable, no matter how you misrepresent it or what demands you make.

Sandman: [2] Too bad.

That is the *exact* sentence I wrote and the *exact* response you gave (though you followed it with BS and lies). Now you are pulling a Carroll and insisting your dishonesty is my fault. Nope. You lied. Again. And you were busted. Again.

[1] <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/3960b606a8b7c118> [2] <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/d06248dbb4125599>

-- [INSERT .SIG HERE]

Sandman (39m) > Snit