| Michael Baldwin Bruce 2004-11-01, 8:57 pm |
| bruce aka tholen@antispam.ham wrote in message news:<kbdhd.30550$jo2.4631@twister.socal.rr.com>...
> Michael Baldwin Bruce writes:
>
> 220> when will you stop depressing the newsgroups, bruce?
>
> 221> what is all this shit, bruce?
>
> 222> is that right, bruce?
>
> 223> are you a kook, bruce?
>
> 224> so how long have you been a kook, bruce?
>
> 225> LOL!!!!!! You don't know shit do you, bruce?
>
> 226> you just don't measure up do you, bruce?
>
> 226> what is this crap, bruce?
>
> 226> pull the other one, bruce.
>
> 226> no time to lose, bruce.
>
> 226> are you sure, bruce?
>
> What do all your questions to yourself have to do with classical music,
> Bruce?
they call me bruce, bruce.
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> Nicolai P. Zwar writes:
>
> 433> Dr. David Tholen cared to share with us all:
>
> Where did the referenced item say anything about a "Dr. David Tholen",
> Zwar?
>
> 433> What tools do you use to compile your digest, Dave? Do you use a
> 433> spreadsheet software?
>
> What do your questions have to do with classical music, Zwar?
>
> "I don't feel the need to rationalize my own odd behavior.
> I just accept it my own odd behavior as odd behavior."
> --Nicolai P. Zwar
>
> "I'm just being an eccentric oddball, Dave."
> --Nicolai P. Zwar
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> Risto Karttunen writes:
>
> 138> I have this impression, based on some distinguishing characteristics
> 138> (size, shape, even color). In fact, this impression has some
> 138> resemblance to the aesthetic feeling which classical music
> 138> occasionally gives to me, Wagner's operas for example.
>
> Classic illogic.
>
> 138> You mean your ever-recurring question "what does that have to do with
> 138> classical music, X"? (X being a name). If that is the case, you seem
> 138> to say that your digests are relevant and justified, since you use the
> 138> words "classical music" in them, without saying anything *about*
> 138> classical music. Am I correct?
>
> Well, it wouldn't make sense to ask what your questions have to do with
> classical music in a newsgroup about Karl Malden's nose, now would it,
> Karttunen?
how do you know that, bruce?
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> grantco writes:
>
> 1778> And yet even more evasion from Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1778> And yet even more evasion from Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1778> And yet even more evasion from Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1778> And yet even more evasion from Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1778> And yet even more evasion from Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1778> And yet even more evasion from Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1778> And yet even more evasion from Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1778> Given that your post did not appear at rec.music.classical I haven't
> 1778> seen it, Tholen.
>
> The previous postings of mine also did not appear at rec.music.classical,
> grantco, yet that didn't stop your from seeing them.
>
> 1778> Why don't you tell me where it is?
>
> Still having trouble figuring out how to use google, grantco?
>
> 1778> Beside you continue to forget that you wrote:
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 1778> And yet once again you are discussing it.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 1778> Perhaps if you didn't
> 1778> dishonestly remove it this time you would better remember it, Tholen?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1778> You brought it up, Hypocrite.
>
> Who is "Hypocrite", grantco? Still having attribution problems?
>
> 1778> Why did you bring up a post you wrote to
> 1778> me in another newsgroup, Tholen?
>
> Still having memory problems, grantco? You're the one who brought up
> the erroneous allegation of a retreat.
>
> 1778> Especially when it obviously had
> 1778> nothing to do with classical music, Hypocrite?
>
> Responding to yourself again, grantco?
>
> 1778> Once again more removal. Such dishonesty on your part Tholen.
> 1778> I'm ashamed for you.
>
> What does your unsubstantiated and erroneous claim of dishonesty have
> to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1778> You evasion is yet AGAIN noted, Liar.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1778> More removal by Tholen of his lies.
>
> You're erroneously presupposing the existence of some lies on my
> part, grantco.
>
> 1778> Typical.
>
> Stating the truth is typical for me, grantco.
is that right, bruce?
>
> 1778> You evasion is yet AGAIN noted, Liar.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1778> You removed your quote I provided. You continue to discuss posts which
> 1778> have nothing to do with classical music like this you wrote above:
>
> Ah, so you admit that your postings to this newsgroup have nothing to
> do with classical music, eh grantco? Tell me, why do you continue to
> post there here, grantco?
>
> 1778> Which part of your response quoted above was about classical music,
> 1778> HYPOCRITE???
>
> Who is "Hypocrite", grantco? Still having attribution problems?
>
> 1778> My claim is substantiated unless you provide evidence for which part
> 1778> of what you wrote above had ANYTHING to do with classical music.
>
> Non sequitur, given that the discussion was about the irony of your
> retreat, grantco.
Non sequitur? Do you read that comic too, bruce?
>
> 1778> Your evasion is again noted, Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1778> Your evasion is again noted, Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1778> Your evasion is again noted, Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1778> Your evasion is again noted, Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1778> Its so easy yet you can't do it, can you?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1778> Poor Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition.
>
> 1778> He could have what he supposedly wants, yet lacks the courage to do
> 1778> it.
>
> What does that have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1778> Typical.
>
> Stating the truth is typical for me, grantco.
>
> 1778> Its so easy yet you can't do it, can you?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1778> Evidence for Tholen's hypocrisy:
>
> You're erroneously presupposing some hypocrisy on my part, grantco.
> Rather ironic, coming from a hypocrite, the evidence of which appears
> at the end of the grantco portion of the digest.
>
> 1778> He writes at rec.music.classical:
>
> I'm well aware of what I wrote at rec.music.classical, grantco.
>
> 1778> Yet has the audacity to question what MY post has to do with classical
> 1778> music when obviously he ignores his own erroneous "rules of
> 1778> relevance."
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 1778> He also claimed:
>
> I'm well aware of what I claimed, grantco.
>
> 1778> Yet continues to discuss it in his statement regarding a retreat.
>
> Still suffering from memory problems, grantco? You're the one who
> brought up the erroneous allegation of a retreat, not me.
>
> 1778> Evidence for Tholen's hypocrisy.
>
> You're erroneously presupposing some hypocrisy on my part, grantco.
> Rather ironic, coming from a hypocrite, the evidence of which appears
> at the end of the grantco portion of the digest.
>
> 1778> Evidence for Tholen's lies.
>
> You're erroneously presupposing some lies on my part, grantco.
> Rather ironic, coming from a liar, the evidence of which appears
> at the end of the grantco portion of the digest.
>
> 1778> (further evidence for Tholen's hypocrisy and lies of course is
> 1778> forthcoming when Tholen again dishonestly removes his quoted text
> 1778> above)
>
> You're erroneously presupposing some hypocrisy and lies on my part,
> grantco. Rather ironic, coming from a hypocrite and liar, the evidence
> of which appears at the end of the grantco portion of the digest.
>
> 1778> Would you not continue, Tholen?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1778> Its sooooooo easy yet you can't do it, can you?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1778> Poor pathetic Dr. Tholen, the pride of astrologers everywhere.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition, coupled with an unsubstantiated and
> erroneous claim.
>
> 1778> Would you not continue, Tholen?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1779> Of course you are correct. Yet amazingly (and of course
> 1779> hypocritically) if you, I or anyone else merely added the words
> 1779> "classical music," to our post, Tholen would not consider the post to
> 1779> be on-topic.
>
> On what basis do you speak for me, grantco?
>
> 1779> Such logic only works for trolling lying hypocrites.
>
> Which explains why you continue to use it, grantco.
>
> 1779> Luckily for Tholen he meets the criteria. :-)
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> Evidence that grantco is a fool:
>
> "As always you erroneously assume that the foolishness
> of these exchanges with you is not apparent to me. I
> acknowledge the foolishness."
> --grantco
>
> "My threads are in the postings."
> --grantco
>
> Evidence for grantco's hypocrisy:
>
> "Actually I care little about a waste of bandwidth."
> --grantco
>
> "Just don't reply Tholen."
> --grantco
>
> "I've told him all he would have to do is literally ASK
> for me not to continue and I would do it."
> --grantco
>
> [36] Would you not continue, grantco?
>
> Above is evidence that grantco lied, given that I did ask (35 times)
> for him not to continue.
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> Brendan R. Wehrung writes:
>
> 487> Dave has been largely absent from this group,
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 487> and not in any trollish manner when present, for quite a while.
>
> For more than "quite a while", Wehrung. I've not been a troll at any
> time, which is more than I can say for you, Wehrung.
is that right, bruce? You claim to to be a troll? On what basis do you
make that claim, troll?
>
> 487> You on the other hand...
>
> What do Freud's trolls have to do with classical music, Wehrung?
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> Nightingale writes:
>
> 1795> Apparently he doesn't need to - all he needs to do is wait for your
> 1795> newest stalker to cross post it here.
>
> 1796> Why don't you just plonk him? Unlike Tholen, Freud has never had
> 1796> anything interesting or useful to say.
>
> What does any of that have to do with classical music, nightingale?
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> alias # today total last year
> -------------- ------- ----- ---------
> bruce 7 226 0
> nightingale 2 183 1613
> bisectional 165 0
> cypherpunk 165 578
> grantco 2 115 229
> greycloud 91 0
> zwar 1 86 349
> kohl 84 2192
> dizzy 82 522
> patterson 72 135
> fields 66 678
> chatterly 48 0
> aratzio 47 0
> wehrung 1 42 262
> elizabot 41 0
> ross 36 10
> daniels 34 165
> karttunen 1 33 97
> haslam 30 675
> drpostman 27 54
> hertz 27 0
> lockhart 25 60
> drysdale 24 0
> bloggs 21 200
> freud 21 44
> diogenes 20 0
> th@len 20 0
> ah 19 0
> chrisv 17 0
> edwin 15 0
> deus 14 0
> phoenix 14 18
> relic 14 0
> parsnip 13 0
> jaakko 12 99
> kolle 12 264
> beck 11 239
> bostonblackie 10 0
> penso 10 172
> flonkenstein 9 0
> kadaitcha 9 0
> ranger 9 0
> hgj 8 0
> logical 8 0
> "nightingale" 8 0
> bornfeld 6 14
> charlie 6 0
> rickenbacker 6 0
> prai jei 5 11
> snit 5 0
> yyyiiinnnggg 5 0
> concerned 4 0
> donna 4 0
> extreme 4 0
> qasim 4 0
> hucker 4 2
> alex 3 0
> andrews 3 1
> antispim.him 3 0
> casa 3 0
> g&p 3 0
> invalid 3 0
> jazz guy 3 3
> jim 3 0
> marty 3 0
> sutton 3 1
> ?ho|en 2 0
> ? 2 0
> ada9 2 0
> adam 2 13
> balaam 2 0
> braves fan 2 0
> deco 2 0
> dodel 2 0
> harrington 2 64
> hernandez 2 0
> js 2 0
> kennedy 2 3
> marshall 2 0
> molybdenum 2 0
> n 2 0
> schultz 2 5
> toughlin 2 0
> tweet 2 7
> wiser 2 3
> . 1 0
> afoklala 1 0
> akhen 1 0
> antagonismo 1 90
> antagonist 1 0
> blonko 1 0
> bob 1 1
> briggs 1 20
> burtner 1 0
> cargle 1 0
> catroo 1 108
> cohen 1 0
> commentator 1 0
> creevey 1 69
> daveb 1 0
> durante 1 0
> emperor 1 0
> ende 1 0
> fischer 1 0
> gactimus 1 0
> gamble 1 13
> girouard 1 2
> god 1 0
> gorden 1 0
> granzeau 1 0
> h 1 0
> highwood 1 12
> homie 1 1
> ilechko 1 0
> koehlmann 1 0
> lawrence 1 1
> learned 1 0
> liath 1 0
> lysaght 1 0
> martin 1 0
> mirah 1 0
> mitzel 1 0
> monkey 1 1
> muething 1 5
> o'brien 1 0
> o'donoghue 1 0
> osterwald 1 0
> ot 1 0
> pinups 1 0
> ploni 1 4
> porky 1 16
> pragmatist 1 0
> refutebot 1 0
> rice 1 0
> rick 1 0
> roberts 1 8
> steiner 1 0
> stratford 1 1
> straussvogel 1 0
> sutton 1 1
> tuan 1 0
> voege 1 0
> weinkam 1 0
> whitney 1 0
> -------------- ------- ----- ---------
> 144 14 2223 10033
more evidence that this Hawaiian kook is a troll.
|