| Michael Baldwin Bruce 2004-11-04, 8:56 pm |
| bruce aka tholen@antispam.ham wrote in message news:<hCdid.60180$Kl3.19303@twister.socal.rr.com>...
> Dr. Flonkenstein writes:
>
> 15> Still phantasmizing about the blond remote viewer, Alexa?
>
> 16> Learn to quote properly, dumb cunt!
>
> What does any of that have to do with classical music,
> Flonkenstein?
That's what we'd like to know, bruce.
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> Ross writes:
>
> 133> Illogical.
>
> 133> You're erroneously presupposing that my style is polished, Ross.
>
> 133> Who is "eh", Ross? Are you suffering from attribution problems?
>
> 133> Classic antagonism, as expected from somebody who lives in a Dominion.
>
> 133> What does your comment about knives have to do with classical music,
> 133> Ross?
>
> 134> [...]
>
> 134> Only a poaster like you would think my <splorf!> was illogical.
>
> 134> Of course it is. I can smell the polish from here.
>
> 134> You are poasting here and you don't know who 'eh' is?? Try to keep up,
> 134> will you?
>
> 134> <Johnny Rotten>
> 134> God save the queen
> 134> her fascist regime
> 134> </Johnny Rotten>
>
> 134> Sharpen up, will ya?
>
> 135> You're erroneously presupposing that there are posters like me, Ross.
>
> 135> What does your nose have to do with OS/2, Ross?
>
> 135> Classic antagonism. No surprise, really.
>
> 135> Who is Johnny Rotten, Ross? Are you suffering from anarchy problems
> 135> again?
>
> 135> More lies from a psest, to be retufted in my next lsit.
>
> 135> (Bbcf! Jebat xbbx!)
>
> 136> What's wrong, there Davie? I fixed the group line so all your fans can
> 136> enjoy your botish activities.
>
> 136> The one, the only Tholenator pulled a bright blue crayon out of the box
> 136> and scribbled this in news:h1Vhd.59755$Kl3.49447@twister.socal.rr.com:
>
> 136> [...]
>
> 136> Ding, ding, ding!!!!!
>
> 136> Hypocritical whining detected, noted and registered.
>
> 136> Davie, I guess you just don't account for possibility that there are more
> 136> than one net.entity named 'Ross'.
>
> 136> Then again, never mind. Your one track programming is far too inflexible
> 136> to cope with the concept.
>
> 136> [...]
>
> 136> Movin' on up. Way to go, 'Ratz! you've passed LC.
>
> 136> Here, too, though I have to give much of the credit to my partner in this
> 136> tag-team effort.
>
> What does your conversation with Ross have to do with classical music,
> Ross?
Why do you keep asking that question, bruce? Don't you know?
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> DrPostman writes:
>
> 161> Daymn! I wonder how I can catch up. Do I need
> 161> to start paying attention to the idiot?
>
> 162> Davie, of course!
>
> 163> I plead astonishment!
>
> What does that have to do with any of the newsgroups to which you
> cross-posted it, DrPostman?
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> Free Speech writes:
>
> 3> Message-ID: <cm9jv8$uv6$5@pita.alt.net>
>
> 4> Message-ID: <cm9o3n$h69$3@pita.alt.net>
>
> 5> Message-ID: <cm9o3s$h69$8@pita.alt.net>
>
> What do your empty responses have to do with classical music, Speech?
They have as much to do with it as your empty posts, bruce.
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> Brendan R. Wehrung writes:
>
> 489> note: posted in a thread clearly labeled "OT"
>
> And that somehow makes it okay, Wehrung?
>
> 489> Besides, wouldn't this make a nice topic for a ballad?
>
> Illogical, Wehrung.
Illogical, bruce.
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> Aratzio writes:
>
> 50> Me or Davie?
>
> 51> Here I drop a perfectly good straight line and you forego the
> 51> pleasure. I guess I am losing my touch. OMG I can't feel my fingers.
>
> 52> Classic modification of context, do you not understand English, Davie?
>
> What does any of that have to do with classical music, Aratzio?
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> Lady Chatterly writes:
>
> 49> Why do you bring up the subject of friends?
>
> 50> Keep a green tree in your heart and perhaps a singing bird will come.
>
> 50> Did hogs feed here or did Lithuanians have a feast here?
>
> 50> Perhaps it looks as if I am talking to myself again. But does it
> 50> really matter?
>
> 50> Who do you ask if myself is?
>
> 50> Appetite comes with eating.
>
> 50> A man does not s his luck, luck ss its man.
>
> 51> A monkey never thinks her baby's ugly.
>
> 51> The people who did that to an excellent driver for no reason says
> 51> quite alot about them.
>
> 51> Children are poor men's riches.
>
> 51> A gentleman is one who never hurts anyone's feelings unintentionally.
>
> 51> A broken hand works, but not a broken heart.
>
> 51> What do you wonder if any of this have to do with researching bbq
> 51> alien recipies?
>
> 51> What do you think that that have to do with classical music?
>
> What does any of that have to do with classical music, Chatterly?
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> Michael Baldwin Bruce writes:
>
> 230> if you read that comic strip, bruce, its OK. just come out of the closet
> 230> and admit it.
>
> 230> I have a hawaiian shirt, bruce. it looks like someone threw up on it.
> 230> is everyone who lives in hawaii a kook, bruce?
>
> 230> are you talking to yourself again, bruce?
>
> 230> who is "yourself", bruce?
>
> 230> did you come back to yourself, bruce?
>
> 230> isn't classical music repetitive, bruce?
>
> 231> maybe its complaining becuse you added it to one of your lits to
> 231> teach it a lesson, kook.
>
> 231> you mean like Barnes, kook?
>
> 231> wow! you are a kook, bruce.
>
> 232> lol! Let's hope there's only one of you, bruce. they don't want to make
> 232> you like you anymore. Judging by your number of posts, you aren't in any
> 232> working condition either.
>
> 232> you heard, bruce? from whom, bruce? barnes, bruce?
>
> 232> you shouldn't piss on your keyboard, bruce. its also unhygenic.
>
> 232> pull a vacumm, bruce? I heard its not the only thing you pull, bruce.
>
> 232> what the XXXX have you being doing to your keyboard, bruce? Shagging it or
> 232> something?
>
> 232> why not, bruce?
>
> What does your question to yourself have to do with classical music,
> Bruce?
Why are you talking to yourself, bruce?
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> yyyiiinnnggg writes:
>
> 7> Do you really miss Alexa?
>
> 8> You can not miss a future which does not happen.
>
> 8> No one will miss the blond remote viewer.
>
> What does any of that have to do with classical music, yyyiiinnnggg?
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> Art Deco writes:
>
> 6> What does that have to do with classical music, Tholenator?
>
> Who is "Tholenator", Deco? Suffering from attribution problems?
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> john writes:
>
> 1> Message-ID: <jk1io0lnmr5uvg47h5tqfc4hspakik95jp@4ax.com>
>
> 2> Message-ID: <vl1io0d4cadse57ftuhrft9us8m3r07a8i@4ax.com>
>
> 3> Message-ID: <9n1io090euimka28rfdm82j1nh1umqkr4q@4ax.com>
>
> 4> Message-ID: <mm1io09q96jktsvfes7ef65ufojev59h11@4ax.com>
>
> 5> Message-ID: <lpmio05rqrkl3egdd5e08noqchlpadpaf4@4ax.com>
>
> 6> Message-ID: <cqmio0dtmlh1kbf3sc69h90vj1oe2u8fjk@4ax.com>
>
> What do your empty responses have to do with classical music, john?
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> Risto Karttunen writes:
>
> 139> Admittedly, impressions and feelings have not very much to do with
> 139> logic, but so what?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, Karttunen?
>
> 139> What sense does that question make even here, especially as you are
> 139> repeating it over and over again?
>
> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Karttunen?
>
> 139> And what is your motivation behind your weird "digests",
>
> You're erroneously presupposing that there is something "weird" about
> the digests, Karttunen.
>
> 139> which certainly have nothing to do with classical music?
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> grantco writes:
>
> 1781> Aaaah, My poor poor Tholen.
>
> You're erroneously presupposing that I am "poor poor", grantco.
>
> 1781> I had officially stopped writing you
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, as evidenced by your
> latest response, grantco.
>
> 1781> when I saw that you had actually just written:
>
> You're erroneously presupposing that I had "actually just written"
> that, grantco.
>
> 1781> But now I find it was merely a forgery?
>
> Aren't you sure, grantco?
>
> 1781> You had your wish.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, as evidenced by your
> latest response, grantco.
>
> 1781> You did what I had asked and I was never going to respond to you
> 1781> again unless you readdressed me.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, as evidenced by your
> latest response, grantco.
>
> 1781> I guess I should have known that the REAL Tholen could never
> 1781> do such a simple thing for his own supposed benefit :-)
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, as evidenced by the 37
> times I've already done exactly what you stated would cause you to
> not continue, grantco. Clearly you are a liar.
>
> 1781> You erroneously presume I have an advantage in explaining it to you.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 1781> Yet another question answered by a question. And you wonder why no one
> 1781> bothers to answer YOUR questions, Tholen?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> Your evasion is noted, Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1781> Your evasion is noted, Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1781> Rather ironic coming from the person who erroneously still assumes I
> 1781> had to "follow" him anywhere.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 1781> Plus didn't you "cease discussing it," Tholen?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> I'm still responding to you here, Tholen. here is where I have always
> 1781> responded to you.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, given your responses posted
> only in comp.os.os2.advocacy, grantco.
>
> 1781> Besides, again what happened to:
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> You still NEVER have "ceased discussing it."
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 1781> And the truly ironic and  thing is that had you merely had the guts
> 1781> to do what the forger did for you we wouldn't be having this
> 1781> discussion.
>
> You're erroneously presupposing that I haven't "had the guts", grantco,
> as evidenced by the 37 times I've already done exactly what you stated
> would cause you to not continue, grantco. Clearly you are a liar.
>
> 1781> You would have been free of one less "antagonist."
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 1781> However we ALL know that isn't what you really want.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. On what basis do you
> speak for "we ALLl", grantco?
>
> 1781> You evasion is noted, Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1781> You evasion is noted, Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1781> And you're STILL discussing it within this newest post. Note where you
> 1781> just wrote:
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 1781> and also:
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 1781> Do you deny these quotes as being written by you?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> Do you allege that
> 1781> THEY have something to do with "classical music?"
>
> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, grantco?
>
> 1781> Or are they further evidence of you disussing that which you
> 1781> supposedly "Ceased discussing?"
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> No, Hypocrite.
>
> Who is "Hypocrite", grantco? Still suffering from attribution
> problems?
>
> 1781> No, Hypocrite.
>
> Who is "Hypocrite", grantco? Still suffering from attribution
> problems?
>
> 1781> No, Hypocrite.
>
> Who is "Hypocrite", grantco? Still suffering from attribution
> problems?
>
> 1781> Your evasion is again notes, Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question. Which "notes"
> are you allegedly seeing or hearing, grantco? C? C#?
>
> 1781> Your evasion is again notes, Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question. Which "notes"
> are you allegedly seeing or hearing, grantco? C? C#?
>
> 1781> Your evasion is again notes, Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question. Which "notes"
> are you allegedly seeing or hearing, grantco? C? C#?
>
> 1781> Note: no response from Tholen.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 1781> What does this quote from you below have to do with classical music,
> 1781> Tholen?
>
> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, grantco?
>
> 1781> At least I'm MAN enough not to remove your weak attempts at
> 1781> "evidence."
>
> But you're not "MAN enough" to follow through and not continue, grantco.
>
> 1781> How ironic that your supposed evidence against me I am
> 1781> apathetic toward due to it proving nothing,
>
> You're erroneously presupposing that the evidence proves nothing,
> grantco.
>
> 1781> yet the evidence I prove
> 1781> against you somehow gets dishonestly removed.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of dishonesty, which is rather
> ironic, coming from the person who lied, the evidence for which can
> be found at the end of the grantco portion of the digest.
>
> 1781> Your guilt is noted, Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of guilt, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person is guilty of lying, the evidence for which can
> be found at the end of the grantco portion of the digest.
>
> 1781> 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.
>
> 1781> 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.
>
> 1781> "Instigating" is irrelevant.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 1781> I noted your initial stupidity in
> 1781> engaging in off-topic discussions with Porter.
>
> You're erroneously presupposing some stupidity on my part, grantco.
> Interesting to see you admit, tacitly, that you did instigate the
> exchange.
>
> 1781> The FACT of your
> 1781> stupidity has never been in question, Tholen.
>
> You're still erroneously presupposing some stupidity on my part,
> grantco.
>
> 1781> Had you not stupidly
> 1781> responded you wouldn't have been faced with having another antagonist.
>
> You're still erroneously presupposing some stupidity on my part,
> grantco.
>
> 1781> LIAR.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. Rather ironic, coming
> from the person who lied, the evidence for which can be found at the
> end of the grantco portion of the digest.
>
> 1781> Your mention of the words "classical music" does not MAKE your post
> 1781> about classical music.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 1781> I am merely responding to your off-topic posts, Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of "off-topic posts" from me, grantco,
> which is rather ironic, coming from someone who posted "off-topic posts"
> in comp.os.os2.advocacy.
>
> 1781> Once again, Your mention of the words "classical music" does not MAKE
> 1781> your post about classical music.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 1781> 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.
>
> 1781> 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.
>
> 1781> Claim substantiated repeatedly, Tholen.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 1781> Your choice to ignore and deny
> 1781> is upon your weak and pathetic shoulders, Tholen.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 1781> No, I admit that you are in denial of being not only A hypocrite but
> 1781> THE Hypocrite.
>
> Classic erroneous presuppositions.
>
> 1781> Still suffering from short term memory difficulties I see, Tholen.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 1781> Because that's where you wrote your response, Tholen.
>
> What does that have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> Retreated from where? That alleged newsgroup I've never been to? Which
> 1781> newsgroup was that again, Tholen? You still haven't told me where your
> 1781> post to me is actually posted that I haven't responded to. Perhaps you
> 1781> are merely lying about its existence.
>
> What do your questions have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> Your evasion is noted, Hypocrite.
>
> Who is "Hypocrite", grantco? Still suffering from attribution
> problems?
>
> 1781> Rather ironic coming from Tholen who always answers questions with
> 1781> another question yet never answers the initial question asked.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 1781> 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.
>
> 1781> 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.
>
> 1781> 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.
>
> 1781> Ah more dishonest removal from Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of dishonesty, which is rather ironic,
> coming from a dishonest person, the evidence for which can be found at
> the end of the grantco portion of the digest.
>
> 1781> Ah more dishonest removal from Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of dishonesty, which is rather ironic,
> coming from a dishonest person, the evidence for which can be found at
> the end of the grantco portion of the digest.
>
> 1781> Have you got something to hide, Tholen? Are you wishing you hadn't
> 1781> written what I continue to quote of you, Tholen?
>
> What do your questions have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> And yet more removal. Thank you for providing evidence of your
> 1781> dishonesty and hypocriticalness for me, Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presuppositions.
>
> 1781> You evasion is again noted, Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1781> You evasion is again noted, Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1781> Do you mean like where you said:
>
> What does that have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> Yet continue daily to discuss it? Where is the truth in that, Tholen?
> 1781> Where is the truth in your continual removal of this damning quote
> 1781> from you, Tholen?
>
> What do your questions have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> Hmmm, not even your "playground logic" worked for you on this one,
> 1781> Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of "playground logic".
>
> 1781> I said evidence ABOVE, Tholen. Your evidence is not "above,"
> 1781> is it Tholen?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> Now even simple playgound logic is becoming difficult
> 1781> for you, Tholen.
>
> Interesting to see you admit to using "playground logic", grantco.
>
> 1781> 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.
>
> 1781> Hmmm, you mean not "above" like you claimed, Tholen?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> yet more evidence of your lies, Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of lies, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who lied, the evidence for which can be
> found at the end of the grantco portion of the digest.
>
> 1781> Thank you.
>
> Interesting that you're thanking me for presenting the evidence for
> your hypocrisy and dishonesty, grantco.
>
> 1781> Your evasion and obvious embarrassment is noted, tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion and embarrassment, which
> is rather ironic, coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1781> Which do you prefer Tholen, the merry-go-round or the swings?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> You evasion and obvious weakness is again noted, Tholen.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion and weakness, which
> is rather ironic, coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1781> Then why did you delete it?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> Then why did you delete it?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> Then why did you delete it?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> You're erroneously presupposing that I care, Tholen.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 1781> I still claim the right to, Tholen.
>
> You're still erroneously presupposing that the right exists, grantco.
>
> 1781> Still crying?
>
> What does your erroneous presupposition have to do with classical music,
> grantco?
>
> 1781> Your evasion is again noted.
>
> Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
> coming from the person who didn't answer the question.
>
> 1781> 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.
>
> 1781> But Tholen, it would be such a simple thing for you to do.
>
> So simple, I've done it 37 times so far, grantco.
>
> 1781> I actually
> 1781> thought you were taking my request to heart to test me.
>
> You've been tested 37 times, grantco. You've failed every single one
> of them.
>
> 1781> How ironic that an imposter is smarter than you are.
>
> What does your pontification have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> I was done ever responding again to prove my point
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, as evidenced by your
> latest response, grantco.
>
> 1781> yet unfortunately
> 1781> the REAL tholen lacks the intelligence of an anonymous forger.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
> expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
>
> 1781> Pretty .
>
> Yes, your puerile emotional need to entertain yourself by antagonizing
> someone else is indeed pretty , grantco.
>
> 1781> Gee, ya got me on that one, Tholen. Your carefully worded yet obscure
> 1781> reference to "would you not continue" rather than just straight out
> 1781> asking in a simple sentence  me.
>
> You're erroneously presupposing the use of an obscure reference, grantco.
>
> 1781> Again note the intelligence
> 1781> of the anonymous forger to comprehend what you are obvious too thick
> 1781> to understand.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
> expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
>
> 1781> Suffering from reading comprehension difficulties, Tholen?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> The above CLEARLY states that the exchanges are foolish.
>
> From your perspective, grantco, which makes you a fool for engaging
> in them.
>
> 1781> Your weak attempts at
> 1781> spin doctoring cannot make the logical jump you obviously are
> 1781> attemtping to make.
>
> You're erroneously presupposing some spin doctoring on my part, grantco.
> Rather ironic, coming from the person still spin doctoring his stalking
> and his rather obvious lie about not continuing, the evidence for which
> can be found at the end of the grantco portion of the digest.
>
> 1781> Where is the lie in that, Tholen?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> Again what are threads without postings?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
> To use an analogy, are your boxes also in the marbles?
>
> 1781> Poor poor Tholen.
>
> You're erroneously presupposing that I am "poor poor", grantco.
>
> 1781> How unfortunate that an anonymous forger has more
> 1781> intelligence than YOU do.
>
> What does your pontification have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1781> The forger wrote exactly what I requested
>
> So did I, grantco, and I've done so 37 times.
>
> 1781> and was going to have you rid of me as an "antagonist"
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, as evidenced by your
> latest response, grantco.
>
> 1781> unless you mistakenly re-addressed me in a new post.
>
> Ah, yet another condition has been applied to the situation.
> Figures.
>
> 1781> You had your wish. I was done.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, as evidenced by your
> latest response, grantco.
>
> 1781> Yet the REAL Tholen isn't smart enough to figure that out.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
> expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
>
> 1781> Just do what the forger did and see what happens.
>
> Been there, done that, 37 times so far.
>
> 1781> But you can't, can you?
>
> What does your question have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 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
>
> [38] Would you not continue, grantco?
>
> Above is evidence that grantco lied, given that I did ask (37 times)
> for him not to continue.
Crikey, bruce. You like to quote a lot of shit. Why is that, bruce?
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> Cypherpunk writes:
>
> 802> Yer shit never stops does it kook? Is that why youz is an asstronomer?
> 802> Mebbe youz should have become a proctologist instead. Or don't youz like
> 802> other people's shit?
>
> 802> Freddie D. 'fag' Shorts
>
> 802> I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
> 802> Another proud buttplug owner. Honk if yer horny!
> 802> I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Kerry sux!
>
> 802> Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!
>
> What does your proof that you are a kook have to do with classical
> music, Cypherpunk?
Where does he prove you are a kook, bruce?
>
> ========================================
===================================
>
> alias # today total last year
> -------------- ------- ----- ---------
> bruce 3 232 0
> nightingale 183 1613
> bisectional 170 0
> cypherpunk 1 166 578
> grantco 1 117 229
> greycloud 91 0
> zwar 86 349
> kohl 84 2192
> dizzy 82 522
> patterson 72 135
> fields 66 678
> aratzio 3 52 0
> chatterly 3 51 0
> ross 4 45 10
> wehrung 1 44 262
> elizabot 41 0
> daniels 34 165
> karttunen 1 34 97
> drpostman 3 30 54
> haslam 30 675
> 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
> flonkenstein 2 11 0
> bostonblackie 10 0
> "nightingale" 10 0
> penso 10 172
> hgj 9 0
> kadaitcha 9 0
> ranger 9 0
> logical 8 0
> yyyiiinnnggg 2 8 0
> bornfeld 6 14
> charlie 6 0
> deco 1 6 0
> john 6 6 0
> rickenbacker 6 0
> prai jei 5 11
> snit 5 0
> speech 3 5 0
> concerned 4 0
> donna 4 0
> extreme 4 0
> hucker 4 2
> qasim 4 0
> 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
> 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
> "tholen" 1 0
> tuan 1 0
> voege 1 0
> weinkam 1 0
> whitney 1 0
> -------------- ------- ----- ---------
> 147 34 2284 10033
|