Doc wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 00:23:48 +0100, ac <a@a.com> wrote:
>
> >Doc wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 18:22:04 +0100, ac <a@a.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Doc wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:47:40 +0100, ac <ac@ac.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >she's wearing jeans for god's sake !!
> >> >> >
> >> >> >ac
> >> >>
> >> >> LOL, here we go again, a couple weeks of quiet and ac returns to
> >> >> whine.
> >> >>
> >> >> Perhaps Ohmster will take the time to "explain" to ac but frankly it's
> >> >> just a waste of time because no explanation will ever satisfy ac. He
> >> >> doesn't really care about whatever silly "issue" he may happen to
> >> >> raise anyway - there have been no similar complaints by him about
> >> >> other posters - this is strictly only about him trying to seek
> >> >> personal "revenge" against me for 3 years because I exposed him as an
> >> >> ass after he got to this group and began telling others what to do and
> >> >> how to post, along with arguing stupidly about yenc (which he
> >> >> hypocritically has since posted in).
> >> >> --
> >> >> The Source For Premium Newsgroup Access
> >> >> Great Speed, Great Retention
> >> >> 1 GB/Day for only $8.95
> >> >
> >> >Doc
> >> >
> >> >You've never been frank in your life
> >> >and the only thing you've exposed ...... is yourself in the local park
> >> >thing is no-one noticed ... they just thought you were holding a
> >> >cigarette.
> >> >
> >> >How about arguing for yEnc when you refuse to use it yourself?
> >> >
> >> >but ..... Perhaps you *** could *** explain ?
> >> >This is your marketing strategy after all .... how and why should people
> >> >buy from you when your subject matter doesn't get close to hitting the
> >> >topic and have no respect for your customers.
> >> >(was she wearing nylons doc? .... was she?)
> >> >
> >> >endless re-posts ... off topic spam ....
> >> >all archived and saved (by accident?!!!)
> >> >
> >> >what happens in docland?
> >> >I'd love to see inside your head .... that vast unbroken plain - there
> >> >must be so much room for all your imaginary friends!
> >> >
> >> >You may be happy to know ...
> >> >it ends here ...
> >> >no more flame wars ....
> >> >just questions .... like how is a pair of jeans on topic?
> >> >why don't you post a contribution rather than just spam
> >> >why does gandalf accept your movies ....
> >> >but complain about every one else's
> >> >None of which you'll answer ...
> >> >maybe you'll chose to ramble on yourself ...
> >> >despite what you've said about being bored with this .. (almost every day
> >> >since 2004 ....)
> >> >
> >> >..... you ain't backwards about posting a couple of hundred lines yourself
> >> >- are you?
> >>
> >> How about it? I argued for the right of a poster to use whatever he
> >> wanted, yenc or no yenc but you argued against yenc, and this is what
> >> it all started over, and since then you've used it yourself. You just
> >> wanted to tell people what to do from when you first got to the group
> >> and got frustrated when it didn't work and were labeled an asshole.
> >>
> >> So now ac you continue this for 3 years because it's simply stupid and
> >> personal now. That's the most "frank" thing anyone can say. It's just
> >> obvious. You are a sore loser ac and a baby because grown-ups normally
> >> get over things like that.
> >>
> >> It festered in you so long. Obviously you couldn't wait to get back
> >> from your holiday and come up with a new charge to finally "get" me
> >> just like the stupid shit from last month claiming I used my foot
> >> instead of Arianna's in a post etc. When that fails and you ac look
> >> like an ass, you have no shame and just come up with another equally
> >> stupid accusation. It never ends. Anyway, here it is, ac is back from
> >> vacation, ready to blather and waste time in his endless personal
> >> jihad.
> >> --
> >> The Source For Premium Newsgroup Access
> >> Great Speed, Great Retention
> >> 1 GB/Day for only $8.95
> >
> >doc
> >
> >you tire me
> >you have nothing to say ...
> >and you obviously have no idea what is and has been said
> >so you quote your own versions of reality
> >I actually said that it ***could*** have been anyone's foot - even yours.
> >boycott ID the foot because of her circus toe (lol - good one boycott).
> >and on past evidence you ***could*** quite easily look back through your
> >archives
> >(jeezus that never ceases to creep me out [shudder])
> >to confirm that (you did after all try to (mis)"quote" a post from way back in
> >2004......
> >you even keep trying to resurrect the yEnc thing
> >
> >perhaps it's you who should move on doc ....
> >
> >On the subject of feet ... this isn't a foot group ... it's a pantyhose group
> >... ... but subject/spam on/off topic new/repost are all mysteries to you ...
> >so I guess it's not not worth more words
> >
> >go back to spamming the groups pretending to be a benefactor - posting nothing
> >new - or of value
> >look at my 2 pictures.... buy my goods
> >remember 2004??
> >
> >ac
>
> There were 2 pics. There was room for 2 foot and jean pics on this
> group, just like room for encased pantyhose, ripped pantyhose, wet
> pantyhose, crotch only pantyhose, tits and pantyhose or anything else
> as long as it doesn't dominate and choke off the rest.
>
> In fact the person (Ohmster) ac asked to comment or "explain" about
> whether the pic was on topic praised the very same pic in another
> pantyhose group.
> And yet another specifically asked for jeans and pantyhose the week
> before. So should ignore them and listen to the stupid yapping dog
> named ac? Ac did try to give orders to this long established group
> soon after arriving in 2004.
> They count, ac, you don't. The subject of the post was clear. AC, you
> could have skipped the 2 pics instead of being an ass (again).
>
> So why ac did you so dishonestly charge that Arianna's foot "could"
> have been my foot? Were you really talking about mathematical
> possibilities or is this just another way a pathological liar tries to
> weasel out when caught (again)?
>
> AC has no shame. He is willing to look like a complete retard over
> and over if only once he could come up with some "charge" against me
> that someday someone might buy or believe. Even over 2 pantyhose and
> jeans pics. Or the idea that I substituted my foot for Arianna's on a
> close-up (for no good reason).
>
> Retarded shit but that's ac, still pissed off after 3 years because I
> personally embarrassed him here after he started picking fights with a
> couple other regulars. Ac lost any sense of shame and will do (and
> say) anything know, no matter how retarded) in his childish revenge
> quest.
> --
> The Source For Premium Newsgroup Access
> Great Speed, Great Retention
> 1 GB/Day for only $8.95
difference was ... the other pikkies from the other posters
you mention showed a little flesh ... and were unarguably pantyhose pics.
yours on the other hand .... well she ***could*** have been wearing anything ... it
was just a pikkie of a chick ... no fetish orientation other than your words ... no
one could possibly have determined what ... if any fetish was represented without
them.
same with the pikkies of the park bench
(still would like to know if they were nylons)
and the above hemline landscape .... wtf?
finally ... while we are talking retard ....
>>>In fact the person (Ohmster) ac asked to comment or "explain" about
>>>whether the pic was on topic
look at the subject line ..... it says
Re: Another movie (with sample for Ohmster)
(this denotes that the movie sample was for ohm)
then
in return can ***anyone***
(anyone = anyone .... not specifically ohm)
explain ?????
what I'm trying to do here ...
I know it's a complete waste of time ... you don't have the cells to understand
that this is a general comment
which is it doc .... are you a liar? .... just stupid? .... or as it looks here ...
a stupid liar?
(pretty dumb when what you are misquoting is at the top of the post.)
>>>praised the very same pic in another pantyhose group
oh yea? - which one?
>>>And yet another specifically asked for jeans and pantyhose the week
>>>before
oh yea - who?
let's see how good your archive is
and cross posting as well as spamming ... shame on you!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_posting
Excessive crossposting is considered bad form because it multiplies traffic without
adding any new content. In the extreme case, if all messages were crossposted to
every group, then every group would look exactly the same. A crossposter can
minimize this problem by specifying that all responses be directed to a single
group.
ac
|
|
 - in return - can anyone explain to me how doc's latest post is on topic? - thumbs20070718142754.jpg (0/1)')){kind=link}