"Derek" > wrote in message ...
> On Wed, 1 Aug 2007 11:49:07 +0100, "pearl" > wrote:
> >"Derek" > wrote in message ...
> >> On Wed, 1 Aug 2007 11:16:01 +0100, "pearl" > wrote:
> >> >"Derek" > wrote in message news > >> >> On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 01:17:16 -0700, Rupert > wrote:
> >> >> >On Aug 1, 5:17 pm, Derek > wrote:
> >> >> >> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 19:30:39 -0700, Rupert > wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> [..]
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >Why?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Because he hasn't given you his permission. Take it down.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Could you elaborate? Is this a legal argument, or a moral argument?
> >> >>
> >> >> A moral one. Keep your arguments with him on Usenet, not on a web
> >> >> page which includes photographs and details of his whereabouts. You
> >> >> want to go down Lesley's spiteful little road?
> >> >
> >> >Threads can appear on quite a few forums as searchable web pages.
> >> >There is nothing "spiteful" about my web page.
> >>
> >> [Spiteful implies a mean or malicious desire for (often petty) revenge.]
> >> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/spiteful
> >
> >I do know what the word "spiteful" means. Not on my path.
> >
> >> >Ball has continually,
> >> >spitefully, and IMMORALLY slandered many people on these groups
> >> >over the years, myself included obviously, and my web page is a fun
> >> >and convenient way to let others know exactly what we're dealing with.
> >>
> >> I used to think of it in that way, but I've come to think of it as
> >> spiteful,
> >> [a desire to inflict a wrong or injury on someone, usually in
> >> return for one received.]
> >> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/spiteful
> >
> >And you'll no doubt choose to continue to think of it in that way
>
> Of course, because there's no doubt that your web page
> is spiteful,

No. You are (spitefully) choosing to see it in that way.

> [Spiteful implies a mean or malicious desire for (often petty)
> revenge.]
>
> [a desire to inflict a wrong or injury on someone, usually in
> return for one received.]
>
> >due to *your* spiteful feelings towards me. So more projection.
>
> No, due to the given definition of the term "spiteful", not due
> to my feelings toward you. Like you say, "And [I'll] no doubt
> choose to continue to think of it in THAT WAY." Rupert
> should no better than to give in to "petty revenge". You, well,
> maybe you don't know any better and can be excused.

The definition(s) apply only in your imagination. Neither Rupert
or I lack valid arguments or require "revenge". And *why* are
you trying to defend the person who inflicts a wrong or injury?