Google| Subject | Snit digest 123 / 2015-12-10 |
| From | Sandman |
| Date | 12/10/2015 22:26 (12/10/2015 22:26) |
| Message-ID | <sandman-16827377bc4e419c3d2cab09004a7283@individual.net> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy |
| Follows | Snit |
| Followups | Snit (34m) > Sandman |
In article <D28F3895.669F7%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>, Snit wrote:
SnitThe above is an outright and provable lie (hence the troll counter).
[820] I returned context your Usenent client snipped - or maybe you [820] did so to be dishonest (2). Either way, nothing wrong with RETURNING [820] content you left out.
This was owl's post: <ghj30.5ppihqh@rooftop.invalid>
That was a new thread, no quoted material. It was not a response to an earlier post and as such had nothing "snipped".
Your response: <D28F2200.669CB%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Added quoted material to owl's post that wasn't there and shouldn't be there in the original. You quote-forged the post to show something that poster never intended.
Violation of point 3:
3) Not add or alter the content of quoted materials in any way other than to snip
I hereby invoke point number 5:
5) If someone goofs give them a chance and note where you think they went astray.
You "goofed" and I expect an explicit apology to owl momentarily.
Snit summary of meaningless phrases (since 2015-12-09): ------------------------------------------------------------------------- troll 7 | lying/lie 13 | incest 0 sex 0 | honorable 0 | honest 2 run 3 | css 4 | tilde 0
-- Sandman
12/10/2015-
-
-
-
