Google| Subject | Re: spreadsheet ergonomics |
| From | Snit |
| Date | 04/04/2017 03:37 (04/03/2017 18:37) |
| Message-ID | <D50846D1.9C951%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy |
| Follows | Sandman |
| Followups | Sandman (4h & 51m) > Snit |
On 4/3/17, 3:24 PM, in article sandman-7e931417b6e805b49607643049e7d3c9@individual.net, "Sandman" <mr@sandman.net>wrote:
SandmanSo specifics examples proving my point are deemed insufficient to you.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
In article <D508173B.9C8F8%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>, Snit wrote:SandmanSnit's response: *silence*SnitSandman
Comes down to Sandman is going FAR out of his way to prove me right about his obsession over me.
What is the quantifiable measurement of my "obsession" this time? Can't be "responses" because you respond to me as much as I do to you. Can't be "mentions" because you mention me far more than I mention you.So what is it, then? In what way can you show me that I am more obsessed about you than you are about me?SnitSnitSandman
If those who troll COLA are not obsessing over me, lying about me, and begging for my attention then why are there so many examples of them doing so?
Unsubstantiated claim #1
It is a direct response to you trolling and doing as I say!
Unsubstantiated claim #1SnitSandman
Seriously, what more "substation" do you need?
Yeah, you know... *actual* substantiation. Instead of that thing you do when you can't support something... What was it... Yes - just make claims using empty words! That's the thing.
My, how honest of you.
It is like your CSS claims where you insist your CSS was valid but do not even present your HTML file or ANY part of it that would back your point. You DID point to an irrelevant .css file where the invalid CSS is not present. Looking at your HTML file we see, from multiple examples on the WBM where you have this:
<div style="padding: 3px; align: center;">
Which is, of course, not valid. You note, correctly, that that invalid CSS is from before the date I noted your CSS was invalid... and it does NOT show on the ones AFTER that date (once you fixed it).
So when did you fix it? Right before I noted it? How did you know to fix an error you had on your site for some time BEFORE I pointed it out to you? You just happened to find it yourself, fix it, and then coincidently I "lied" and said it was there? Where would that lie even come from? How would I know? Are you saying I found your error in the WBM and waited for you to fix it and then I lied?
What, really, is your claim anyway? Nothing that makes sense and fits the data. But for over a decade you have been lying about this.
If you are going to lie about something so basic, and you are, why should your other claims be believed?
Ah, so let us talk about one of your tech claims. Show your HTML file with this line:SnitSandman
This is part of your problem: you just make mindless accusations and then demand I work to refute them... ignoring how you were just proved wrong.
Only, I make claims and I support them. You make claims, full stop. Huge difference.
<div style="padding: 3px; align: center;">
And then explain why you think it would validate correctly. Or explain why it did not have that line when the WBM shows it as having it, consistently, for some time before that date.
I would sincerely love to hear you explain your side of the story. No insults. No accusations. Just a talk of the technology you say you used at the time.
Do you count my responding to your trolling and the trolling of others as me, also, trolling? If so then my percentage is pretty high. If not it is very low. You need to define your terms before we can even make a rough guess, but, frankly, I know I am not that obsessed with my posts to even care. YOU, clearly, are that obsessed.SnitSandman
And with that, I will let you freak out and troll COLA while I focus, mostly, on tech. You have bored me out of your BS.
You say "mostly", what percentage of your posts will be trolling then?
I welcome any initiative from you that makes you focus *only* on tech.Sure. First we need to understand the two categories almost all my posts fit into:
1) Talking about tech 2) Responding to the trolling of you and others
If you want me to talk more about tech, then stop yourself trolling me and work to reduce others. Boom. Once I have less trolling to respond to I will respond to less of it.
Simple!
Why would you want to focus on anything but?I have answered this question many times: I find the psychology of those of you troll COLA (and elsewhere) to be interesting. Your recent frenzy, for example, has been amazing. I will say it has gotten a bit long and you have sunk to your normal empty-knee-jerk-accusations, but even then it is interesting, on some level to see how predictable you will be.
You have already started using your automated trolling tools (the ones you deny exist but have shown examples of how you use them!) and I suspect you will use them even more in the next few days. It is what you do when you realize you have backed yourself into a corner and that the attention you begged for is not the attention you are getting.
What you will NOT do is actually respond to any real issue, especially a tech one. For example, you will NOT present the HTML page with the invalid CSS which you deny has invalid CSS. You simply will not. You will dodge and lie and twist and play your games.
You will also, as you have already stated, just deny all evidence, even direct and specific examples, which prove you wrong and even get to the point of whining I am just copying and pasting text in response to the examples. You will NEVER admit that the examples I am showing you are, well, what they are. You will lie.
I tell you these things in the interest of seeing if even knowing how predictable you are will you be able to stop yourself. I suspect no... you will do exactly what I say, or very close to it.
Why set up a wiggle room?For what?
Just focus on tech, we know that means that interest about you dies down, it has been shown.Well, when I respond less to your trolling and the trolling of others those of you who troll do not have those posts to respond to. No mystery there! But that does not really show your obsession is any less. In fact, when I a month without posting at all I was still the most talked about poster.
Again, with that pesky thing called 'substantiation'.It is something you struggle with... the accuse me of it as you engage in what you call role reversal. But, of course, since your "objective" trolling criteria is just you lying, you never are objective about your own actions.
Again, that is interesting to watch.
-- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger.
They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
03/31/2017-
-
-
