Google| Subject | Re: Apple Ad debate |
| From | Snit |
| Date | 07/03/2006 23:40 (07/03/2006 14:40) |
| Message-ID | <C0CEDCD2.53D9A%SNIT@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | comp.sys.mac.advocacy |
| Follows | Sandman |
| Followups | Sandman (20m) > Snit Steve Carroll (46m) |
"Sandman" <mr@sandman.net>stated in post mr-0CE0E9.23211003072006@individual.net on 7/3/06 2:21 PM:
SandmanWhy don't you try the truth? The fact is trolls who infest advocacy groups, such as yourself, tend to speak poorly of me.
In article <C0CECC4B.53D68%SNIT@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID>, Snit <SNIT@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID>wrote:SandmanSnitSnitSandman
What makes you think my "persona" is any different in other groups?
I don't.
Then why do you think I am not followed around by trolls such as yourself elsewhere?
I've given two possible explanations. A third would be that you're lying.
Keep in mind how often you and the other trolls sink to dishonest snipping, falsely attributing quotes, running from clear evidence of your lies, etc. I, being very focused on honor and honesty, do point these things out along with your other lies and trollish behavior.
I am "rewarded" with more of your trolling. So be it.
If you claim you have, please point to the post.SandmanI offered it as an explanation. Another reason could be that they are more tolerant towards trolls in your other groups. I really don't know why they tolerate you, if you behave the same way there as you do here - where you're the most hated and most killfiled person in the history of csma.Snit
Gee, care to support your personal attacks against me?
Again?
Again note how happy I am to do so - though then you and other trolls whine that I post the same info repeatedly. So be it. There is nothing wrong with you posting something again when you are asked or when it is appropriate.
So, yes, Sandman, if you think you have posted such support in the past please do so again or just link to the post. You do not even have to make it easy and use a snipurl if you cannot figure out how, that is OK by me.
What makes you think that? You sure do spew a lot of silly ideas.SnitSandman
Funny how people in other groups do not feel the need to spew personal attacks as you do.
You mean as "we" do, don't you? After all, you're being persecuted by several "trolls" here, right? For some unspeakable reason, a whole slew of "trolls" have decided unanimously to harass you and only you in csma. Strange indeed.
Incorrect, though you do in your very next sentence:SandmanSnitSnitSandman
I am honest and honorable wherever I am, not just in CSMA.
You meant "just not in CSMA". Ooops.
Gee, Sandman, do I get to speak for you, too?
No, Sandman, I meant exactly what I wrote.
So then you lied?
You have never engaged in honesty in csma.Please note how when I accuse you of lying, as I just did, I provide a clear example.
Incorrect - you claimed my "persona", which is to be honest and honorable, is a troll persona. You will deny this, but being that you cannot point out examples of dishonesty by me your claims are empty.SandmanSnitSnitSandman
I do find it sad how you refer to being honest and honorable as being a "troll persona"; says a lot about your values.
Obfuscation.
How do you figure?
I have never refered to being honest and honorable as being a troll persona.
We can debate this all we like, Sandman, but the fact is you are neglecting to point out any lies you think I have told. If you knew of some you would point them out.SandmanSnitSnitSandman
Fact is nobody lies about me the way you and the other trolls of CSMA do.
Given that the amount of "lies" I tell about you is "zero", you just said that nobody tells zero lies about you.
Denying your lies does not make them go away.
Claiming they exist doesn't create any.
Do you value your participation in the group-think group in CSMA?SandmanWhy do so many people tell all these lies, Michael? Is it a conspiracy?Snit
Keep in mind a lot of people speak poorly of you, Carroll, and others in CSMA. These are things I have conclusively shown to be true.
Sure they do. Problem is, I don't have a whole pack of people with whom I constantly argue that constantly keep calling me a troll. You do.
In fact, the people that HAVE called me troll are people who have huge almost Snit-like arrays of people calling them trolls, such as Mayor, or Josh or Edwin.Yet you think that the words of you, Carroll, Adams, Wally and other such trolls who lie so often should hold value. Do you see your hypocrisy?
What point do you think I "ran" from? Please be specific. In the end you will fail to find anything that fits that criteria.SandmanSnitSnitSandman
Why do you think that is you and other trolls in CSMA see me one way and people who are not CSMA trolls do *not* see me that way?
Yeah - why is that? Why are you the most hated person in the history of csma? Why is it that every single person you keep arguing with pretty much only argue with you, and isn't having lengthy discussions with lots of OTHER people. The common factor is you, and only you. Why is that? How come all these evil "trolls" like Steve, George, Tim, Ed, Wally, Sandman, Elizabot, Jim, Rick, Steve, Alan all focus on only you? What makes you so special for these "trolls"? Why can't they find someone else to troll?
The important thing here is how you relate to them. You claim they troll YOU. Which - if the above scenario were true - would be correct, since they only make fun of you, only "harass" you. But the difference is when you ask each of them about you - they probably won't say "Yeah, Snit trolls ME". They would probably all say "Yeah, Snit trolls THE GROUP". You're a troll of csma, not a troll of just a single person.
Because that's a fact. Neither of the above posters match the objective troll criteria other in posts they make to you (things like role reversal for example). It's not a common thing for them to any other poster. They don't create antagonizing threads on a regular basis, they don't create sock puppets and things like that.
You're the only one, in the ENTIRE group that matches the objective troll criteria in so many ways in so many thread sto so many posters. Sure, there are "lesser" trolls such as Josh and the Mayor that also match the criteria on a wide basis - but they couldn't hold a candle to you if their life depended on it.
The above were one of those rare moments where I actually talk with you (as opposed to just make fun of you and prove that you're a troll). We'll see how much you snip and/or run :-D
Posting accusations and noting how your group think buddies agree does not support your claims. Please note that I happily support my claims in relation to you with actual data and quotes from you. You simply cannot do so. That, too, is very telling.
And Michael runs, just like I said he would.
See, this is exactly why I so rarely actually talk with you,But above you claimed you were part of the group that follows me around trolling and calling me names. Please make up your mind.
and just fall back on pointing out your lies and trolling.What lie? What trolling?
Here is your summary - that you keep running from.
Sandman 1) Sandman often goes off into lying, trolling whacked out modes where he insists that his lies are not lies, even though they clearly are. He attributes his own words to others, creates contrived videos and clearly erroneous "FAQs" and tries to pass them off as truth. He will insist they are accurate no matter how many times others (and even he) prove otherwise. 2) Favorite quotes from Sandman: "I continued to be the biggest troll in the group during tyhe time period in question. Lying, failing to support my accusations, obfuscating. You name it, I did it." "I think it's the right move to snip out all the facts you can't face." 3) Sandman flamed me about my web skills and claimed he knew I was not teaching a web class, but when asked he was not able to even point to a single web site I had designed, no less a relevant one I had done for a customer! He also back pedaled and ran when offered to be shown conclusive proof of the classes I teach. I looked at his site: <http://www.sandman.net>, posted info on clear flaws and suggestions for improvement, and Sandman then changed his site to accommodate my suggestions, including altering the contrast, the white space, making both the HTML and CSS validate (both had some pretty severe errors), etc. Instead of thanking me for my assistance, Sandman lied about having changed his site *even after* I pointed out that the Google cache proved he had done so. He went so far as to lie and say I only had suggested getting his HTML to validate. Sandman offered no explanation for the "magic" change; in other word he did not admit he lied. In the end, Sandman trolled me and I, being the honest and honorable person I am, *still* helped Sandman to better his web skills. For more info on this, see: <http://snipurl.com/Sandman_Lie2>and <http://snurl.com/Web_Design_Facts>. 4) Sandman claimed that Dreamweaver, the number one professional web design tool, with a command of 80% or so of the market, is used only by beginners. He did this to try to belittle my use of the tool I use and teach but ended up just showing off his ignorance. 5) When someone else pointed out a problem they were having with technology, Sandman claimed to "debunk" *their* experience based on a contrived video he posted. He stated: Your "experience" is totally debunked with my video clips. I have proven you utterly wrong, face it and move on. When Sandman had a problem, though, and someone else did not, Sandman did not stay consistent. He did not accept his claims had been "debunked". For more info on this, see: <http://snipurl.com/s6f7>.
-- ? Things which are not the same are not "identical" ??Incest and sex are not identical (only a pervert would disagree) ? OS X is partially based on BSD (esp. FreeBSD)
07/02/2006-
