Skanky Hoser wrote:
> [--snip--]
>
>
>>No. You look. Go read the posts I made to Skanky starting on the third
>>of December in response to her wild accusations about me. She replied by
>>suggesting that her malice was warranted because of what she'd read me
>>write to others. I noted to her in response that
>>In nearly every instance, it's with someone with whom I've had
>>dealings which preceded your recent appearance in this group.
>>
>>SHE sought to inflame ME. I didn't flame her. That came later after I'd
>>given her second, third, fourth, etc., chances to repent. I gave you the
>>same offer of an olive branch. You've declined it. You get what you
>>deserve, Jim, whether it's a ****ed off girlfriend who wonders why
>>you're such an asshole or a usenet adversary who knows why you're one.
>
>
> First off, look at the name you
> call me, "Skanky".

It's more fitting than "Skunky."

> You are the abusive one here.

Since when did telling the truth become "abusive"?

> Unless one
> ignores all your jabs and talks
> polite back to you anyways, like
> Shevek does, you blow up.

Not true.

> I've seen you incite things in posts
> to him which he chose to ignore.

Examples, please.

> Face it name-caller,

Look who's talking -- why, it's the dopey slut who called me a troll
before ever engaging in any kind of substantive discussion despite my
repeated attempts to have one.