On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 20:50:15 -0600, Lentil wrote:

>> Hi Hooknose,
>>
>> All good points there, you clearly have known lucas for some time.
>
> Longer than I have wanted to.
>
>> Given the lengths lucas will go to for approval/acceptance - I wouldnt
>> put it past him to be making the bulk of 'forged' posts himself.
>
> He has been caught playing that game in the past.

Yup. It backfired each time too, yet he thinks it'll work here... not in
the long term it wont.

>> In particular, all the so-called 'Bevan' posts... something is just not
>> right about them. Not in terms of being fake, but in terms of their
>> appearance and timing. It's as though lucas kept on referring to Bevan,
>> even though there were clearly no posts originating from the person.
>> Then, lo and behold, he gets his 'wish' of his imaginary nemesis. The
>> posts in question are quite distinct and do contain certain lucas
>> traits. Food for thought.
>
> I think Lucas protests entirely too much over the Bevan posts. Obviously
> Lucas is busy trying to cover his deeds of the past. The really funny
> part is watching him post positive proof of his technical prowess by
> posting IP addresses. Too damned funny. I think he's even too stupid to
> realize someone could actually steal his IP and use it. And yet he
> thinks he's a header reading genius.

He's also dead easy to mislead as well - one thing that has always worked
for me is to let him 'find' a post, or 'accidentally' sent email to
Usenet, or general information that he thinks he's found independently
without being led to it (because he stalks his perceived 'enemies'
relentlessly).

Peter - even though you've now read this little bit of handy info, I'm so
confident that your poisoned personality will betray you, that I *know* I
can *still* use this technique on you <G>.