Path: news.nzbot.com!spool1.sonic-news.com!news-out.sonic-news.com!iad.highwinds-media.com!feeder.news-service.com!news.alt.net!fictitious-path
From: Morpheus <Morpheus@dreamland.com>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.prettyboy
Subject: Re: A small bit of Y-Not profile
Date: 31 Oct 2009 23:52:02 -0500
Organization: Dreamland
Lines: 404
Approved: abc
Message-ID: <0001HW.C71261AD00243AEEB02919BF@news.newscene.com>
References: <4uOdnYDRoYPsbn_XnZ2dnUVZ_qWdnZ2d@giganews.com> <0001HW.C70A8A2C00132621B02919BF@news.newscene.com> <261020091808232835%Mover@Watch-Me.com> <0001HW.C70BB33B00278972B02919BF@news.newscene.com> <271020090037026309%Mover@Watch-Me.com> <0001HW.C70E865E0030FC5BB02919BF@news.newscene.com> <291020092011459224%Mover@Watch-Me.com> <0001HW.C70FBEA10021B389B02919BF@news.newscene.com> <301020090345041111%Mover@Watch-Me.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Hogwasher/4.3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-No-Archive: yes
X-Original-Bytes: 20362
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.fan.prettyboy:7439
On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:45:04 -0700, Mover wrote
(in article <301020090345041111%Mover@Watch-Me.com>):
> 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
"Can not."
"Can too."
"Can not"
"Can too"
As usual you are operating at the level of an over-bearing 10 year old.
You cleverly caught two typos. Whooopdy-fucking-do. You ought to feel very
proud.
BTW (at the level of a little more advanced English criticism) you didn't
modify your pronoun "he".
Who he?
Or, better stated in your own language, "Hee Haw".
|
|