Sandman
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 In article <D50BF3BC.9D157%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>, Snit wrote:

chrisv
Well, you must concede that the thing is sometimes mentioned, without using its name.

Snit
Including in this post and many others, some of which I pointed out just yesterday. No need to dig through the past. No need for databases. No need for anything but actually looking at the posts on COLA.

Sandman
Yeah, just the words "many others". That's all that's needed for you to substantiate your claim.

Snit
Well, that and examples...

Sandman
No examples posted, no.

Snit
You mean other than the multiple examples I posted. Yeah, other than that, no examples.

Sandman
Thus far you have posted no examples to substantiate your claims: "What about when those who troll me refer to me with derogatory nicknames" What "nicknames"? Still no list of verifiable and quantifiable support for this claim. "as they do so often..." How often is that? No metric on how to measure this supposed "often", just an empty claim using merely words.

Snit
But that is an idiotic way to say "no examples" -- you are just flat out lying.

Sandman
[X] Lying (http://tinyurl.com/gtdd77m) Automatic reinsertion of snipped text by Snit: - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- What you had to snip and run away from: Yeah, just the words "many others". That's all that's needed for you to substantiate your claim. No need for anything that can be verified, sure. You sure showed us, balloon boy.

Snit
But Sandman will ALWAYS deny evidence.

Sandman
I can see Snit's vision of court vividly in front of me: Lawyer: As you can see, the defendant is guilty of killing many people Judge: Actually, no, we have only ever heard you claim he killed a lot of people Lawyer: MANY PEOPLE I say! Case closed, I win!

Snit
He will ALWAYS lie when the truth does not fit his trolling nonsense.

Sandman
What "truth" against what supposed "nonsense"?

You brought up this irrelevant obfuscation in response to my actual data on how often *you* mention others in posts not in response to them. The data said nothing about how often they mentioned you. You know, these facts: Regular | R | % | M | % - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Marek Novotny | 130 | 33% | 38 | 10% owl | 91 | 23% | 36 | 9% Silver Slimer | 0 | 0% | 44 | 11% Steve Caroll | 0 | 0% | 3 | 1% Peter Kohlmann | 17 | 4% | 9 | 2% DFS | 21 | 5% | 13 | 3% Sandman | 50 | 13% | 31 | 8% chrisv | 7 | 2% | 2 | 1% vallor | 9 | 2% | 1 | 0% Desk Rabbit | 1 | 0% | 0 | 0% RonB | 0 | 0% | 1 | 0% - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Total posts between 2017-03-21 - 2017-04-06: 390 Percentage of posts that are in (R)esponse to regulars: 82% Percentage of posts that are (M)entioning regulars: 45% - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Snippage reinserter v1.0