Kevin S. Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 22:06:38 -0800, "Duwop" >
> wrote:

>>> "Trolling for trolls"? That makes no sense.
>>
>> Well I suppose that's why you're a technical writer.
>
> That's one. But you have to take a swipe at academia and say something
> disparaging about Idaho before you've been truly trolled by my .sig.

So, you still don' unnderstan'. I understand why you wouldn't want to admit
that.

>> Thank you very much for the self justification for you ****ing with
>> this NG.
>
> "****ing with this newsgroup"? By following up with a bit of silly
> nonsense to a crossposted, off-topic post? Yeah, that sure did wreak
> havoc upon this little corner of cyberspace. I'm surprised the walls
> are still standing.

It's not as nice a place to be, is it? Address that instead of being
flippant.

>> We HAD a nice little corner left here until YOU ****ed things up.
>> Yeah, you Kevin, ever since your little tirade against TFM when you
>> first started x-posting the signal to noice ratio has fallen badly.
>
> Yeah, you're right. I really should have said nothing when the Fat Boy
> posted about "Martin Koon Boulevard" and started frothing about
> "******s." And I really shouldn't have trolled Brick into thinking
> that I was black. Then he wouldn't have had any reason to call me a
> "******." That way, we could have all continued to pretend that they
> are both decent people.

He showed himself with that one post, the main person frothing at the mouth
seemed to be youyrself replying to every little post, that was all you
Kevin, and then your x-posting brought in even more flamers with whom you
could froth at the mouth even more at. Presumably you thought to impress
others? *shrug*
>
>> and at least he doesn't cross post flame-bait. Think about
>> it.
>
> I have. And I've tried to explain to you the difference between
> trolling and posting flame bait. Feel free to show me what constitutes
> flame bait in this thread.

You don't think I'm on you for just this thread do you? I've been angry at
your actions for a while.

>> It's a wonder that you cross post those posts that show you at your
>> very worst, why do you x-post only those posts that show yourself as
>> a rabid spastic flamer?
>
> Feel free to show me the flames I've posted in this thread. You are
> once again mistaking posting silly nonsense with flaming and with
> posting flame-bait.

You don't think I'm on you for just this thread do you?

> Are you still questioning my motives? I've been very clear about them.
> I've told you before, but I'll tell you again: I have many times said
> that I would one day show AFB what trolling is, and what it isn't.

Thanks so ever much, we all REALLY apreciate it, you can stop giving lessons
now, your pupils have learned oh wiser than thou one.

> Here was a perfect opportunity: an off-topic, irrelevant, crossposted
> thread, into which I injected a bit of silly nonsense. Oh, and I
> invited the folks at alt.religion.kibology, because they have a sense
> of humor.

You know each and every single one of em? And you control which groups their
responses are x-posted to, widening the audience even further until AFB
becomes one of those OT x-post to groups du'jour that you see so often, like
RFC? Thanks Kevin, thanks a LOT.

>> Do you think if you took a poll of the regular members here that
>> they would approve of x-posting, trolls or flame wars?
>
> Polls in an alt. newsgroup? Meaningless. I'll assess the desires of
> AFB posters by their actions.

No, take me by what I am asking you, please stop x-posting your flame bait,
stop trolling for trolls.

>You, for instance, are following up to
> what you know are trolling posts. You aren't crossposting, but you did
> (and are) attempting to flame me. So I have to assume that you are in
> favor of at least two out of three.

Kevin, if this was a flame, it's a very ****ing mild one.
Ignore what you don't like and justify the rest Kevin?

>> Thanks again for screwing this NG up KEVIN, if you can learn some
>> self control and take your bile somewhere else AFB might be able to
>> normalize after a while.
>>
> Bile? Show it to me, please. In this thread.

You don't think I'm on you for just this thread do you?


>> Kevin, I only see more self justification for the meanness you've
>> done to the people here.
>
> What's mean about a small practical joke?

You are side stepping the issue, your actions have resulted in AFB becoming
worse than it was.

You have not addressed all the OT topics and posters and flamers and troll
that have come here since your original rant.

>> What did these people do to you for you to treat them like
>> this?
>
> They participated in Usenet, where trolling is a time-honored
> tradition.

Self justification, you have not addressed all the OT topics and posters and
flamers and troll that have come here since your original rant.

>>> First "smartass." Now "arrogant." Should I toss in a hearty "****
>>> you" just keep things even?
>>
>> Kevin, this post was originally intended to be a profanitiy laced
>> tirade. I hope that simple bit of info informs you of my anger at
>> what you've done to AFB.
>
> Show me the damage.

Signal to noise ratio a year ago compared to today.

> Thank you for granting me permission to be silly on Usenet, so long as
> I don't do it in AFB.

I was not granting permission, I was asking you to play nicer and co-operate
with not letting AFB become another x-posted hell. It seems you do not want
to address that request.

Does this mean you intend to sink AFB into one of those meaningless x-posted
NG's?
That is the direction things are going, I hoped to slow the flood, and would
apreciate your help.


>> BTW Kev? You are the very last person here who should be chastising
>> anybody on taking themselves too seriously.
>
> You want to talk about the issue at hand, or do you want to talk about
> personalities? An ad hominem argument is proof positive that you have
> nothing substantial to say.

This looks like further self justification to ignore what I've addressed.


D
--