In article <0001HW.C70FBEA10021B389B02919BF@news.newscene.com>,
Morpheus <Morpheus@dreamland.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:11:45 -0700, Mover wrote
> (in article <291020092011459224%Mover@Watch-Me.com>):
>
> > In article <0001HW.C70E865E0030FC5BB02919BF@news.newscene.com>,
> > Morpheus <Morpheus@dreamland.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:37:02 -0700, Mover wrote
> >> (in article <271020090037026309%Mover@Watch-Me.com>):
> >>
> >>> In article <0001HW.C70BB33B00278972B02919BF@news.newscene.com>,
> >>> Morpheus <Morpheus@dreamland.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:08:23 -0700, Mover wrote
> >>>> (in article <261020091808232835%Mover@Watch-Me.com>):
> >>>>
> >>>>> In article <0001HW.C70A8A2C00132621B02919BF@news.newscene.com>,
> >>>>> Morpheus <Morpheus@dreamland.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 05:30:39 -0700, Fort Babysitter wrote
> >>>>>> (in article <4uOdnYDRoYPsbn_XnZ2dnUVZ_qWdnZ2d@giganews.com>):
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> A small bit of Y-Not profile
> >>>>>>> ===================
> >>>>>>> This post discusses a few of the small bits of
> >>>>>>> Y-Not and the small Y-Not's moronic presence
> >>>>>>> on Usenet.
> >>>>>>> ++
> >>>>>>> After repeatedly attempting to compete with
> >>>>>>> KidHacker for a presence in the Fort and upon
> >>>>>>> miserably failing, Y-Not started resorting to using
> >>>>>>> tricks that Y-Not thought were clever. And again
> >>>>>>> Y-Not failed miserably. Y-Not was Usenet castrated
> >>>>>>> in the Fort.
> >>>>>>> ++
> >>>>>>> The Usenet castration of Y-Not drove the small
> >>>>>>> bit Y-Not into a deep and torturous mind set. And
> >>>>>>> deep down within and into his insane real self. After
> >>>>>>> being Usenet castrated in the Fort, Y-Not could never
> >>>>>>> again use his little and pitiful Y-Not nic. And he never has.
> >>>>>>> ++
> >>>>>>> The small and little Y-Not's presence on Usenet is
> >>>>>>> now from the real and true Y-Not. Y-Not's presence
> >>>>>>> on Usenet is from a moronic coward that is hiding behind
> >>>>>>> anything that he can find.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Fort Babysitter
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Geeeze. Maybe you're not that crazy after all....
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> When Doc was 'outed' my theory is he went to ground and Y-Not took over
> >>>>>> his
> >>>>>> identity and has been posting as him since.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That's interesting! LOL
> >>>>>
> >>>>> But how did he get the password to Doc's hushmail account?
> >>>>> And, would Y Not as Doc do some really stupid things no one who's been
> >>>>> accused of Y Not ever did so bad? I don't think so. Would Y Not ever
> >>>>> attack Grant? No. Would Grant attack Y Not as Doc, even criticize him?
> >>>>> Impossible! LOL
> >>>>> I see the same Doc here who attacked Y Not so hysterically in the past,
> >>>>> who still can't stop accusing people who criticize him of being Y Not.
> >>>>> I see the same Doc who tries to split up friends and supporters of
> >>>>> people he fights with, and tries to manipulate them to attack who he
> >>>>> wants. I see the same Doc who uses personal info to attack people, and
> >>>>> never apologizes for all the wrong he does.
> >>>>> There IS a difference, however, in this new Doc (since just before Y
> >>>>> Not left), and the old; sometimes he tries to not do these bad things.
> >>>>> Sometimes he remembers that fighting here serves no GOOD purpose.
> >>>>> Sometimes he remembers to be a better man. Then he is accused of being
> >>>>> that ultimate better man, in the eyes of some, Y Not, his former arch
> >>>>> enemy, the stoic target of resentment and hate of all the fragile
> >>>>> paranoid egos who ever inhabited the Fort. He can't win! LOL
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From my viewpoint, the old simpler Doc was more fun to play with. This
> >>>>> new Doc requires a little more work, but I'll live with it. LOL
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Mover
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ps He's never going to like me. LOL
> >>>>> That's alright. I never wanted to lick boots anyway. I wonder what kind
> >>>>> of Polish he uses. Hungarian? LOL
> >>>>
> >>>> That certainly is an interesting (amusing even) version of events.
> >>>> Would
> >>>> Grant attack Y-Not?? Ha the puppets act out the play dictated by the
> >>>> pulling of the strings.
> >>>
> >>> I don't see strings. Nothing to gain by them. Results don't show
> >>> evidence of useful purpose. Therefore, you should check your delusion
> >>> for more justification, or Occam's Razor could slice your head off. LOL
> >>>
> >>>> The new 'voice' of Doc is different. It's obvious to anyone who has
> >>>> followed
> >>>> your dialogue with him in the past
> >>>
> >>> What dialog? He doesn't go out of his way to reply to me. I don't ask
> >>> for it, either.
> >>>
> >>>> Even you admit his style has changed. Of course. It isn't that Doc.
> >>>
> >>> Changing styles doesn't have to mean different people, Duey. LOL
> >>> Quack! Quack! Quack! Quack! Quack! Quack! Quack! LOL
> >>>
> >>> Doc was much nicer before you showed up at the Fort (he loved Y Not),
> >>> then he changed to fanatic combatant. Then he changed to being nice,
> >>> and pulled you into his attack he started again (this is the Doc you
> >>> fixated on, just as he intended), then he went nice (you were disgusted
> >>> with him for that), and then attacked again (ah, he's right again),
> >>> then he went nice (the traitor was lost to you), and then... You should
> >>> get the idea. All through this he was still the same person. He keeps
> >>> changing back and forth, like he was into a fifth. A whole case, a
> >>> whole brewery of it! LOL
> >>> Which is the REAL Doc? There isn't one. Never was. Because HE doesn't
> >>> know.
> >>>
> >>> Very young children can form Attachment Disorders when their parent(s)
> >>> change their behavior patterns significantly, after the child has
> >>> formed a fixed association for the parent(s) previous behavior pattern.
> >>> In their simple logic, "parent = this". Parent does not do this but
> >>> does that = "not parent". When they become older, and don't realize
> >>> where their feeling of family alienation comes from, they sometimes
> >>> form a fantasy of being adopted to explain it. Some children go so far
> >>> as to believe their parent has been abducted and replaced by an alien.
> >>> This could be your problem. You need Doc to be one way you've fixated
> >>> on. When he isn't, to you he can't be Doc, so he must have been
> >>> replaced by the very alien Y Not.
> >>> Now are you sure you want to be prancing about around here being the
> >>> poster CHILD of such a juvenile psychological disorder? I hope not! LOL
> >>>
> >>>> "...the stoic target of resentment and hate of all the fragile egos who
> >>>> ever
> >>>> inhabited the fort..." Wow. If I din't know you were kidding, I'd
> >>>> think
> >>>> you
> >>>> were delusional.
> >>>>
> >>>> But you're not.
> >>>
> >>> But I was. LOL
> >>> Obvious exaggeration can be a form of humor, right?
> >>> But you didn't want to see it that way. Now who's delusional? LOL
> >>>
> >>>> More of a sociopath.
> >>>
> >>> More of nothing but me. LOL
> >>>
> >>> Sorry, there's no evidence of my being a sociopath in any of my posts.
> >>> So far. LOL
> >>> Nor in yours. Or, possibly surprisingly enough, in lookin's.
> >>> In fact, I don't see how there could be, in the fantom partial entities
> >>> we create to show of ourselves in what we chose to post.
> >>>
> >>>> LOL
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Why should I post something you would agree with, to YOU? Where would
> >>> be the fun in that? LOL
> >>>
> >>> I don't think what I posted about psychological things is new to you or
> >>> to other people here (lots of people here know about psychology), so
> >>> don't go calling me Y Not because of that. Pick a different, better,
> >>> reason, if you have to use that old attack tactic that DOC invented for
> >>> you. LOL
> >>> Oh, didn't he once (or twice?) call YOU Y Not? LOL
> >>>
> >>> If you have any more buttons I haven't pushed yet, please let me know
> >>> about them. I'd be much obliged. LOL
> >>>
> >>> Mover
> >>
> >> If there was ever any doubt that you are Y-Not (not that anyone who's been
> >> listening in here for very long has any doubt), you removed it with your
> >> references to Duey. That nic was used by me long before most of the sock
> >> puppets you currently stage-manage were on scene (including Grant, Mover
> >> and
> >> even Awake).
> >
> > Not at all. I just proved I was here before you (years before Y Not
> > too), just like I showed lookin, and saw all that happened.
> > I saw the "Quack" being used against you, oh "portly" one. LOL
> > A lot of people saw all that too, and are perfectly able to type them
> > out in a post to you if they feel like it. Doesn't make them Y Not, any
> > more than typing "Amen" makes them the Pope. LOL
> > You always had a problem with proof. LOL
> >
> >> As for Doc, what you say is just bullshit and easily refuted. When I
> >> appeared on the scene you and Doc-1 were embattled. Daily messages flew
> >> back
> >> and forth with insults. In fact, (as you well know) Doc first accused me
> >> of
> >> being one your sock puppets. And "...in the enemy camp..."
> >
> > He sure did. It's hard for anyone else but you to say with accuracy
> > when you "appeared", because most posters lurk for a time before they
> > start posting, and are limited in which groups they know about.
> >
> >> Now you say he "...loved Y-Not'. What nonsense. It simply adds proof to
> >> the
> >> fact that Doc = 2 (present Doc) is your invention and bears little
> >> relationship to Doc -1 (original Doc).
> >
> > You really DO have a problem with proof. LOL
> > Most posters who posted before "X-No-Archive: yes" became a popular
> > addition to newsreader headers, have their posts available in the
> > Google archives for all to see. You could see I'm right, but you won't.
> > That would mean research! LOL
> > You might take a look at Doc's recent repost of his old post defending
> > Y Not against Lookin's original castration of him (regarding his
> > precious balls LOL). That was before their falling out. I can tell you
> > how that happened if you want. It could be very interesting what Doc
> > would say about it. LOL
> >
> >> Nonsense also, your contention that I was "fixated" on Doc. We rarely
> >> exchanged messages of any kind and then usually only about security
> >> issues.
> >>
> >> I never particularly trusted Doc then (I certainly don't trust him now).
> >> Nothing against Doc -1 as I don't trust anyone in these groups until I've
> >> known them a while and see if they are truthful or if they are true to who
> >> they say they are.
> >
> > That means you can't trust anybody, because it's impossible to know who
> > they are unless you know them in real life, and even that is no
> > guarantee. Unfortunately, it also shows you want them to expose
> > themselves to you. Not a good thing to hmm, expose here. LOL
> >
> > You do what Doc does; he does things in his posts and says in those
> > posts he's not doing them. For example, his reply to a poster here two
> > months (I think) ago was pure vent against other things, yet in the
> > post he said he wasn't venting. Now why would he think the other poster
> > would even think Doc was venting, at all, enough to justify mentioning
> > it in the first place? Obviously because Doc could see he was venting,
> > but didn't let himself be totally conscious of it, because he didn't
> > want to. I thought that was so funny, it was hard not to point that
> > out, but that would have been discourteous to the other poster.
> > Your use of "Doc-1" and "Doc-2" proves my point. LOL
> >
> >> My first encounter with Doc wasn't even in this group and I've always been
> >> suspcious because he demanded "proof I was a boylover" by sending him
> >> illegal
> >> pictures, movies, etc. I never did and was suspicious of him from that
> >> time
> >> on.
> >
> > Some other posters did that too. abc did that to High (I think that was
> > his nic) right after abc had said he would complain to another poster's
> > NSP about his porn posts to get him in trouble, and forced him out.
> > You were right to be suspicious of Doc, but you weren't of abc. Why?
> > Looks like one of Y Not's little truisms applies here; Double Standards!
> >
> >> There were some folks who, in my opinion, were who they appeared to be.
> >> Grumpy was one. So were abc and Mephi. There are a couple of others who
> >> I
> >> trust up to a point in that I'm pretty sure they are uncontaminated with
> >> you.
> >
> > You're not all that good with making accurate opinions. LOL
> > Paradoxically, You would be much better at it, if you could realize
> > that.
> > Grumpy was Boomer and other people. Mephi used a few different nics and
> > admitted it. So did abc. So did you. LOL In fact, most posters did,
> > except Doc. So, who were they really? Which nic was the real one? LOL
> >
> > How could I contaminate anybody? I never met anybody here in real life.
> > Couldn't give out pig wings (swine flu LOL) even if I wanted to.
> > If you mean Y Not, that applies too, if he never met anyone here in
> > real life. Do you mean he invaded their minds and changed who they
> > were? You like science fiction too? LOL He would have to be a master
> > psychologist to be able to do that with just text, even if it were
> > possible, which I doubt. Oh wait, you said he isn't one at all. We have
> > more than a pair a doxies here! LOL
> > Could it be your understanding of people changed, and not the people?
> > Are you too covered in ego to admit to yourself you can't judge people
> > very well from posts? No one can. Your fixations, not just on Doc as
> > you wanted to know him, but on Y Not and other posters, show you place
> > much too much credence on your non existent ability to judge and
> > recognize people from their posts. None of us can, least of all you.
> > Y Not was impersonated many times, probably over a hundred. Most of
> > them would have gone unrecognized if the header difference hadn't been
> > pointed out. The other way applies too. I could post just like Y Not,
> > use all his deliberate "trademarks" (yes, it was obvious), "especially"
> > his "somewhat" stilted rhythmic prose, just like anybody else can who's
> > a professional writer, and still never be him, because I'm not.
> > All I've said here is logical and reasonable, but can you understand
> > it? Actually, the question should be WHY can't you understand it.
> > Fixations, maybe? LOL
> >
> > Here's a funny incident you might find amusing, and VERY apropos to
> > this theme:
> > In another BL group, before your time, when Y Not was respected and
> > admired by all (and loved too) for being a gentle scholar and
> > counselor, some posters were discussing flaming. Y Not joined the
> > discussion in a different way by posting a short movie of a college
> > student prank of someone setting his fart on fire, and his surprised
> > reaction and yells (I saved it and can repost it if you want, if I can
> > remember which of the two I have was the right one).
> > Many posters there couldn't believe the gentle Y Not would post such a
> > thing, and accused him of being impersonated. It took Y Not a lot of
> > wordy posts, against a lot of resistance, to convince them he was
> > really him. LOL
> >
> > Too bad you weren't here before Doc's blowup, to see Y Not how he was
> > then, and how he was treated in those days. You might think differently
> > about this entire issue now, just as many who knew him then do now.
> >
> >> Other than that I just take folks as they present themselves and neither
> >> believe or disbelieve them. Except for you, of course.
> >
> > You do what you want to do, what makes you feel good (selfish? LOL),
> > irrespective of logic and facts. That makes you funny, but not always
> > in a flattering to you way.
> > Not that I mind. LOL
> >
> >> You are not to be believed. All you do and all that you pretend to be is,
> >> as
> >> far as I can tell, some sort of fiction. Fortunately you are given to
> >> creating sock puppets that are so like you that they are easy to detect.
> >
> > So what else is new? Every poster here is fiction! LOL
> > Well, except for Doc, since his exposure.
> >
> > I think you need better glasses, before you make more of a spectacle of
> > yourself. LOL
> >
> > Mover
>
> Tell me more about how it is you know Doc didn't post under different nics.
>
> I didn't realize that, in addition to ALL your other skills -( psychologist,
> clergyman, martial arts experts, secret spy, etc. ad nauseum) you ar
> clairvoyent?
>
Read a dictionary lately? Obviously not. LOL
I never said I had any of those "skills", some of which are occupations
instead. I thought you had sum edducationalistic skills yourself. Was I
wrong to count on you using them here? LOL
By the way, isn't "secret spy" a little redundant? LOL
I don't remember he ever said he was one of those. Tell me, what did he
say about that? Could be interesting.
He did say he had dyslexia. Did you know that is often accompanied by
motion sickness? So you really could add nauseums to the list. LOL
"martial arts experts" is supposed to be plural for one person? So many
missed-steaks. Should I feel insulted you didn't give me your best text
cooking effort? LOL
Doc has posted with different nics, with an autoposter, and not as a
secret, but for his text posts he only used various forms of his full
nic and Doc, and Fort ID, in the Fort and the discussion group, since
at least from when you "appeared", as far as I remember. He said that's
what he did, and I believe him, because he obviously didn't need to do
more. If he wanted clones to fight along side and for him, he
manipulated other people into doing it, such as you and Ninja. Doc
didn't need extra nics. So you "see", clear-voyence isn't needed, when
clear illuminating reason is used with the intelligence to make it
work. That why you didn't? LOL
Ask Doc (he doesn't have a good reason to lie about it), if you really
want to know. I doubt you will. LOL
If this is all you can complain about in my post, you're almost too
boring to notice. LOL
But anyway, thank you for agreeing with the rest of what I wrote.
Mover
|
|