Subject | Re: Snit digest 124 / 2015-12-12 |
From | Snit |
Date | 12/12/2015 23:26 (12/12/2015 15:26) |
Message-ID | <D291ED24.66DBC%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy |
Follows | tmelmosfire (Snit) |
Followups | Sandman (16m) |
Nope. He is just a pathetic troll who refuses to accept any evidence and spews the same crap over and over and over for years, no matter how often it is shown to be utterly absurd. And he backs his puppies - Alan Baker, Tim Adams, and to a large extent Steve Carroll (though I guess in Carroll's defense he is insane and obsessed in his own right and is not just doing Sandman's bidding).Snittmelmosfire (Snit)
1) Not bring up long dead debates, INCLUDING trolling someone over being butthurt over them when you have been proved to be wrong. 2) Not change subject lines to count trolling or otherwise push a circus. 3) Not add or alter the content of quoted materials in any way other than to snip, and when doing so note it. No trolling by adding numbers and other indicators at the start of lines or in the middle. Just reply without trolling. 4) Not have ANY web pages or other material where you make accusations about another person or blame them for your own lying saying they asked you to lie or otherwise post such nonsense. 5) If someone goofs give them a chance and note where you think they went astray.
Above you break #1, #2, #3, #4.
Looking at Sandman's posts he likely is another Steven Petruzzellis sock.
He backs him no matter what and just like Petruzzellis when his relentless accusations are shown to have no support he just denies it and blames you then repeats the same accusation. He is pulls things from usenet and has a completely insane trolling site with claims which make no sense.Exactly. He just goes on and on and on and on pushing insane circuses and blaming others for his own actions.
He wants attention and as you note he always runs from one fact; his CSS failed to validate. Sandman refuses to speak of this because you have proved it failed. He also snips whenever you speak of it proving you are right his vendetta is based on that one ancient debate.Exactly right. Unlike Sandman, when I show proof it is solid and clear. <http://goo.gl/0KwDMI>
Sandman will not speak of his CSS because it it is ripping him apart from the inside out.Exactly.
He will move the topic to saying A is not A, to defend Petruzzellis, to accuse you of making him lie and troll in usenet and on the web.Yes. And he will break his word repeatedly. Then blame me.
You are best off ignoring Sandman as you generally ignore Steven Petruzzellis.Pretty much agree... though Sandman is merely annoying and dishonest and obsessive... he is not as dangerous as Carroll.