Snit
[839] Nope. He is just a pathetic troll (13) who refuses to accept any [839] evidence and spews the same crap over and over and over for years, [839] no matter how often it is shown to be utterly absurd. And he backs [839] his puppies - Alan Baker, Tim Adams, and to a large extent Steve [839] Carroll (though I guess in Carroll's defense he is insane and [839] obsessed in his own right and is not just doing Sandman's bidding).

[840] Exactly. He just goes on and on and on and on pushing insane [840] circuses and blaming others for his own actions.

[841] Exactly right. Unlike Sandman, when I show proof it is solid and [841] clear. <http://goo.gl/0KwDMI>

[842] Boom. Sandman's CSS (5) failed to validate. No debate. No wiggle [842] room. No argument. Just solid proof. And Sandman is STILL bothered [842] he was busted lying (17) about this years ago.

[843] Exactly.

[844] Yes. And he will break his word repeatedly. Then blame me.

[845] Pretty much agree... though Sandman is merely annoying and dishonest [845] (4) and obsessive... he is not as dangerous as Carroll.