In article <0001HW.BFBB1ACF0002E21CF0305550@news.easynews.com>, Caprice
<Caprice@badluck.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 00:37:49 -0800, Y-Not:: wrote
> (in article <061220050337495820%+10$-Y-Not@here.com>):
>
>
> >
> > Do you know what quotes are for? I quoted YOU.
> > You wrote in one of your posts that you are "portly". It's not a word I
>
>
> So, if you are to believed (LOL) you recall a post I wrote in which I
> described myself in that way. Are you just making this up, or did you
> actually go through the voluminous archives and find a post in which I
> describe myself physically? ...I don't recall writing one.
I remember it from when I read it. This is how we usually do things in
these groups.
> So. You could find and cite this post, I guess, or that would make what you
> said a complete lie, a total fabrication. Right?
>
> Would you be kind enough to do that? Reproduce the post in which I said I
> was 'portly'....
I remember you saying it, because I was amused by it.
> It is not a word I ordinarily use either. Also it is the third or fourth
> reference you've made to my alleged large size....and the other references
> don't use that word. What is your obsession with my body size? Unlike your
> 'arthritic' condition (a parallel you attempt to draw), I don't endlessly
> write about my size (big or small) .
Produce the other posts where I said things about your size.
If you think three or four times is an obsession, you make yourself the
most obsessed of all the posters here!
I don't care about the size of your body. I just find your large size
amusing, in it's marked contrast with your small mind.
Well, you asked. You should have known better than to do that. :-)
> So find and cite the post. Otherwise it looks like another lie to me. The
> lies I nail you on are different qualitatively than those things I say that
> you call lies. In every case, when I call your behavior a lie, it is
> demonstrably so...not just an assertion. Like the email thing. You said I
> did something, but have you to provide a scintilla of proof. So that's just
> a lie and demonstrably so.
You have said that your software saves all your posts. Is that database
searchable? If so, look up the word "portly" and see if you said it.
You are the only one who cares, so YOU do the work.
> As for security, could it be that you are deliberately trying to find out who
> I am? Maybe you are trying to trick me into revealing more about myself
> (you do this with many of your fellow community members - some friend!!
Not only do I not want to find out who you are, I don't even want you
any where I can see your presence. Why would I want to associate with
someone as disturbed as you?
> And if you do chase me down and find out where I live and such, what then?
> Do you 'turn in' people to the authorities? Yes.
That is stupid.
How could I find out anything that other people here don't know? All we
post is being watched by hundreds of other people. If you post
something about yourself, no one has to tell them about it, because
they can SEE it here. Why should I go through the trouble of telling
anyone what they already know? Don't you EVER use any logic?
>
> It's also interesting that you would raise the issue of my hushmail name.....
> You wouldn't report me to Disney for using one of their character's names
> would you?
It was out of concern that that you might have exposed your other nics,
by using a quacker email address. I see that you don't want me to be
concerned about your personal security.
> You keep dragging PM into this....why? I know the answer...will you be
> honest enough to explain what you are doing to others? Of course not. I
> have no brief with him and he knows it. It's just more of your attempted
> manipulation.
Because he is another person who has described his size. Just like KH
did, in the other direction. And Doc did in his stories. I mentioned
all of them. There was no other reason. Should I have added more
people? Do you remember the blunder you made about the list of movie
posters who have quit? You like repeating your blunders?
Singling out PM, out of all the others I mentioned, is pure
manipulation. Thank you for showing us that.
Some people here have said they are diabetic. Should I say who they are
too? Fenton said he had Lupis. Many here say they drink too much. A lot
of people in these groups have described their physical characteristics
and illnesses. They shouldn't. It's my job to remind them of that.
> You are most certainly psychopathic.
You can't know, so it's a lie. Psychopaths lie, and sometimes don't
even know what lying is, just like you.
I help people. You don't.
I don't attack people. You do. You even attack children.
If we look at all the posts in these groups, it would not be I who
would be most likely to have that condition, as any psychologist would
know.
> >>
> >> You have already said many times that I am NOT psychopath, or
> >> psychotic. Now you are trying to say that I am.
>
> Since you save them all, I urge you to read them again...or is this just
> another slippery lie of yours. What I have said is you are not psychotic,
> not that you are not psychopathic....They are not the same. Don't you know
> the difference????
We've had this discussion before. I don't feel like repeating it for a
slow learner.
> You didn't seem to know the difference between a degreed psychologist and a
> clinical psychologist either....Remember?
There need not be.
A clinical psychologist is one who works directly in treating patients,
as opposed to a research psychologist, who doesn't treat patients.
There are some different skills involved, and also some qualifications
(internship). Some psychologists do both, and other things as well,
such as industrial psychology.
All of them are likely to have degrees of some kind, sometimes the same.
Do you have any idea what you are talking about? It sure doesn't look
like it.
> Very interesting.
>
Not really.
Since I didn't reply to your post where you said you were portly, just
as I didn't reply to the post where abc said he was diabetic, I don't
have them. I don't feel like trying to find them in the online
databases, where you said it. You aren't worth the trouble. So, I will
cease using it. Would you rather I use "fatso" instead? :-)
This does bring up an interesting issue, though. When I say something
about what you said, you want me to produce your post. Does this mean
that you want me to start saving all your posts so I can do that? I
hope not, because I don't want to contaminate my computer with all that
filth.
Y Not
PS.
I find it extreamly amusing that you now think someone, who has
disagreed with almost everything I've ever said to him, is me. You even
said he writes like me! THAT is so off the mark, that makes you look
rediculous. No one with a useful brain will believe you, so if any do,
we get to see who the stupids are.
Hey, haven't you noticed that he is more demanding of references even
than YOU are? He can't be me! :-)
It's much more likely that you are me, then he is me.
Ah, quack?
[snipped post restored below]
> n article <0001HW.BFBA569F00251725F0305550@news.easynews.com>, Caprice
> <Caprice@badluck.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 5 Dec 2005 03:59:05 -0800, Y-Not:: wrote
> > (in article <051220050659056307%+10$-Y-Not@here.com>):
> >
> > -------snipped --------
> >
> >
> > Here you go with the security stuff again.....you just can't take it
> > seriously can you?
> >
> > > You are "portly".
> >
> > This is not the first time you've made reference to my size. You apparently
> > think I'm overweight or fat.
> >
> > On what basis do you make these remarks? You have no idea whether I'm
> > portly or not.
> >
> > If I am not, this is an out and out lie (again).
> >
> > If I am, how did you find that out? I don't believe I've ever mentioned my
> > size one way or the other and, in any case, aren't you the person who always
> > says don't believe what you read? What are you up to Mr. Y-Not???? You're
> > fucking with my security again.
>
> Do you know what quotes are for? I quoted YOU.
> You wrote in one of your posts that you are "portly". It's not a word I
> ordinarily use, but since you said it it in a public post, you must not
> have considered it a personal security issue, so I used it with you. PM
> is also ah, above average in size, but since he has never used that
> words to describe himself, that I remember, neither have I.
> In actuality, I have no idea whether or not you are portly, nor should
> anyone else here, BUT I think you are reasonably honest about what you
> say about yourself, in a strange opposite to what you are compelled to
> say about me, so I think I should believe you on this ah, size issue.
> This also goes against you, as well. Since you object to this label
> without denying it, you actually verify it's accuracy. If this actually
> concerns you, that was unwise.
>
> How does referring to what you yourself say, affect your security? If
> it in some way does, than you shouldn't have posted it. And even then,
> you should NOT have made a big issue of it in public, compounding your
> "exposure". An email would have caused me to never refer to it again.
> Since I think you know that, I think you do NOT consider it a security
> breach, and are just trying to falsely blow it up to use as a weapon
> with which to attack me. If you do this again, I will probably repost
> this to it. Anyone capable of feeling embarrassment, would want to
> avoid that.
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Y Not
> > >
> > >
> > > PS.
> > > THere is something familiar with the email address you recently posted.
> > > Please be careful.
> > >
> > The email address I posted? It is my email on hushmail. No particular
> > secret. Or else I'm missing your meaning....please explain.....
>
> Have you changed it from when you may have posted it with a previous
> nic to which you may not want to be linked?
> I didn't actually remember, so I tried to be subtle and desecrate about
> it, in expressing my concern for this possible security issue.
> Obviously, it went right over your head.
>
> > My thought here is that this is how you behave when you get really angry.
> > You compromise other people's security. I have reason to believe this, as
> > you well know.
> >
> Since I don't get angry here, your conclusion is invalid.
> Stop projecting your own feelings onto me. It's SO obvious that you are
> doing that here.
>
> In referring to what you have said of yourself, that you are "portly",
> have I harmed your personal security more than when YOU do mine, when
> you mention MY physical and health conditions? In the US, there are
> many more portly people than those who have arthritis. You have stated
> that you have been in the US military. There are many more fatsos than
> veterans, taken as separate categories. There are much less people with
> your combination of mental health issues, then the 40% who are
> significantly are overweight.
>
> Many people here have described their physical size and health
> conditions. Doc is big and tall, and used that to his advantage in
> confronting would be delinquents who wanted to rob him in a project
> stairwell, after delivering a pizza. KH is short and thin. PM is big
> and diabetic. There are more people who have also said things like
> this. YOU did. I have warned them about saying these things about
> themselves, but people DO have an urge to express more of themselves
> than I think they should. You did. Maybe this will make you more
> cautious with your posts, but I doubt it.
>
> So, with all of this in consideration, has my use of "portly" REALLY
> harmed your security? If you feel that such is the case, then we would
> have to add paranoia to your list of conditions.
> I advise you to not refer to this issue again, or I think people will
> think you are reeeelly nutso.
> I will probably help them to think so, too. :-)
>
> Since you object to me mentioning something about yourself that you
> first mentioned, which probably only hurts your vanity, I will not
> mention it again. But I have to call you something. Should I replace it
> with "stupid idiot"? Or "compulsive lying attacker" Or "foolish
> incompetent manipulator"? Or 'severely disturbed antagonist"? These
> descriptions are much more accurate, because you show conclusive
> evidence of them in your posts, where ass, for your size, we have only
> your word, which doesn't have much going for it.
>
>
> Y Not
>
>
> {snipped post restored below]
>
> > In article <0001HW.BFB8D1330086BA87F0305550@news.easynews.com>, Caprice
> > <Caprice@badluck.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, 4 Dec 2005 14:54:37 -0800, Y-Not:: wrote
> > > (in article <041220051754372174%+10$-Y-Not@here.com>):
> > >
> > > > In article <4pDkf.181909$7k1.133373@fe12.news.easynews.com>, abc
> > > > <abc@wxyz.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> On 4-Dec-2005, "::Y-Not::" <+10$-Y-Not@here.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> What I'm doing with Michael, is mostly to entertain PM, because he has
> > > >>> cut himself off from the Fort, and is missing some fun things.
> > > >>
> > > >> Hmmmm...
> > > >>
> > > >> I am as certain as the sun will rise in the East tomorrow that PM would
> > > >> *never* want anyone to play with another poster for his entertainment.
> > > >>
> > > >> He is above such things, and shame on you for bringing PM's name into the
> > > >> mind games you are trying to play with Michael.
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> abc
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I wasn't playing. Unlike you, I don't do that here.
> > > >
> > > > I don't waste my time and efforts to post for only one reason. My most
> > > > recent posts to Michael show that.
> > > > You are here for your "pleasure". I am here to work.
> > > >
> > > > PM knows that I treat religion VERY seriously. So should you.
> > > >
> > > > Michael is not open to your manipulation. I like that about him.
> > > > PM is not going to allow your friendship destroying manipulations to
> > > > affect him again.
> > > >
> > > > I predicted that you and Caprice would post more objections.
> > > > Michael understands persecution. How do you think your group's
> > > > continuing to do that to me, will affect him? You are playing with
> > > > things here you do not understand. You may very well cause to happen
> > > > what you are trying to prevent. I would rather that people make their
> > > > own decisions of their own free will.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Y Not
> > >
> > > Is there any situation you will not try to turn to your advantage? This is
> > > all some demented game to you; every word of it. It is your pleasure much
> > > more so than mine...
> >
> > So you admit to having pleasure in attacking people?
> > That's disgusting!
> >
> > I don't take pleasure in my work. I am required by my commitment to be
> > here. Typing hurts. Pain is NO fun for me.
> >
> > Unlike you, I don't have to try to "turn" situations any which way. The
> > truth speaks for itself. If you didn't act with childish resentment and
> > hostility, and stopped telling such obvious lies, there would be no
> > situations that you think I want to "turn". When you stop creating this
> > situations, you would not have them to complain about.
> > Unfortunately, this idea seems to be a little too complicated for you
> > to grasp.
> >
> > > How can this charade you are perpetrating to Michael be called work? I ask
> > > the questions others have asked. What is this work? On who's behalf are
> > > your 'working'? Who is your boss? Who asked you do this work?
> >
> > You call religious studies a charade? This will NOT impress Michael, or
> > anyone else who values religion and scholarship.
> >
> > > You won't answer. Certainly you haven't answered. All that's forthcoming is
> > > just more of your 'game' of verbal sparring.
> >
> > I have answered your questions many times. Most people here know that.
> > So your continuing to say that I haven't, is an obvious lie to them.
> > You offered to post my mission statement, in another group. This means
> > that you have it, and have the answers to your questions you are asking
> > here. When will you post it? Why haven't you? What are you afraid of?
> >
> > > Why don't you stop screwing around with Michael "For PM's entertainment" and
> > > let the man be. You're helping him? Like you were helping Mac? Help to
> > > you means to become one of your robots....KH is now one of your pet
> > > projects...haven't quite him turned around completely though...
> >
> > It is not possible to do that to anyone in Usenet.
> > You insult the people who you think this can happen to.
> > I have done nothing specifically to influence KH in any way. What HAS
> > caused him to not fight with me, is the destructive dishonorable
> > tactics that you and others, particularly abc, are using against
> > people. He doesn't support me, he is just against what he sees you
> > people doing. YOU are causing all this that you don't like, and it's
> > likely to get worse, from your point of view, the more you keep at it.
> > The truth is in here (X-Files?), and no amount of your clumsy lies will
> > keep them from seeing it. I know this, because the emails I get express
> > this. The more that people like you attack others, the more people you
> > turn away from you. Not that I expect you to understand that.
> >
> > > Are you paid by the person or are you on salary in this 'work' of yours. How
> > > much did you get for helping to bust Homeanon? 30 pieces.....? I'd rather
> > > be a little compulsive than a full blown psychopath.
> >
> > I already told you, and everyone else, that I'm retired. I just do
> > volunteer work. This means that I get no money from anyone. This
> > actually annoys some of the people I help. They want to give me
> > something in return. I tell them to help others, instead.
> >
> > You have already said many times that I am NOT psychopath, or
> > psychotic. Now you are trying to say that I am. Either way, you show
> > your incompetence with psychology, that you actually don't believe in,
> > because such a condition can not be diagnosed from my posts, or the
> > posts of anyone else here. This is like when you said that there is no
> > such thing as the ego, and then said that the Eastern concept of the
> > ego was more valid, and that I had a big Western ego that doesn't exist
> > for you, when I was expressing the Eastern ego to you.
> > It's possible that your actual understanding of these things far
> > exceeds your ability to express them, but as a teacher, I really doubt
> > that.
> >
> > "30 pieces" is really cute. Should we tell Michael what Homeanon
> > actually did to children, and what you think I did to stop him? DO you?
> > Have you actually READ Michael's posts? Do you want to make him LOVE
> > me? That's what could happen. Do you really want that? You really are a
> > fool. Even abc wouldn't have brought this up in a thread that involves
> > Michael.
> > Well, I don't want this to influence Michael's feelings about me. I
> > want to engage his mind, not his emotions.
> >
> > I do NOT want people here to love me. This is counterproductive to my
> > professional activities in these groups. You may recall the
> > "attachment" mini-discussion I had with Ronin. That's what it was
> > about, if you hadn't understood it then. I also had a much more
> > complete discussion about the subject with Ninja in the Fort, quite
> > some time ago.
> >
> > > With regard to your and Ronin's discussion of message and messenger, I'd
> > > think a couple of deep eastern thinkers like yourselves would know that the
> > > two are inseparable....
> >
> > Here you show that you don't know what you are talking about.
> > Consider perception.
> >
> > And then there is this:
> > If your dog brings you the newspaper... Well?
> >
> > > Of course, what do I know? I'm just one of those ....how did he put
> > > it...."Gifted 13 year old schooldhildren...". You both continue to think you
> > > are above. There is you and then the rest of the crowd. Remember I
> > > commented a while back that "them is us"... guess you don't agree...
> >
> > You are "portly". Should we consider that you are not? YOU are into the
> > denying reality gig, not us. When one denies reality, one's resulting
> > actions are not optimal.
> > If I treated you as my intellectual equal, you would not understand a
> > thing I communicated, but my peers would. So I MUST, in communicating
> > with you, dumb down my posts. It can't be helped.
> > Of course you resent this. Immature people DO. But it doesn't have to
> > be this way, if you actually make an effort to know what you are
> > talking about. There is NO excuse for expressing your physical and
> > mental laziness.
> >
> > > Are you going to start referring to yourself in the third person too?
> > >
> >
> > Not that fat. So far, there is just enough for one of me. But with my
> > hearty appreciation of donuts, chocolate, sugar glazed (just had one),
> > I may eventually become somewhat plump. :-)
> >
> >
> > Y Not
> >
> >
> > PS.
> > THere is something familiar with the email address you recently posted.
> > Please be careful.
> >
> >
> > "The extent of a man's ignorance
> > is not measured in what he doesn't know,
> > but in what he refuses to learn."
> > (borrowed with permission from oDDz Bodtkin, who shares the stars.)
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 |
|