Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Vegan (alt.food.vegan) This newsgroup exists to share ideas and issues of concern among vegans. We are always happy to share our recipes- perhaps especially with omnivores who are simply curious- or even better, accomodating a vegan guest for a meal! |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch dishonestly alters his opponent's replies to suit his argument
"Dutch" > wrote in message ... > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > >> >> > > >> >> >I guarantee that I could do better than whatever you > > >> >> >do while still eating animals. > > >> >> > > >> >> No, you can't. > > >> > > > >> >Yes I can. > > >> > > >> No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called guarantees. > > > > > >I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery list here. > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables purchased > indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > milk and eggs, along with some shit > that I have no clue about. > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat and tried to make it look as though I wrote it in answer to your above challenge. My original answer to your challenge was, "Fallen apples and mustard cress." [start Dutch] >I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery list here. [Me] Fallen apples and mustard cress. [end] Thanks for showing your complete lack of honesty and a readiness to alter the answers given by your opponents to suit yourself, Dutch. > > >I'll improve > > >on it by replacing some of the plant based foods with meat. > > > > > Go on then. > > Take one pound of any of it and replace it with freshly caught fish. > > There you go, read it and weep. > At what; your dishonesty? Why should I weep over that? |
|
|||
|
|||
Derek sprains his back trying to blow himself
"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
... > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > >> >> > > > >> >> >I guarantee that I could do better than whatever you > > > >> >> >do while still eating animals. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> No, you can't. > > > >> > > > > >> >Yes I can. > > > >> > > > >> No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called guarantees. > > > > > > > >I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery list here. > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables purchased > > indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > milk and eggs, along with some shit > > that I have no clue about. > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat You lied about what you eat. You snip unethically in almost every post. Your whole approach to this debate is a mockery. Now go **** yourself. |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
"Dutch" > wrote in message ... > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > I guarantee that I could do better than > > > > >> >> > whatever you do while still eating animals. > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> No, you can't. > > > > >> > > > > > >> >Yes I can. > > > > >> > > > > >> No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called > > > > >> guarantees. > > > > > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery > > > > > list here. > > > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no > > > > clue about. > > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat > > You lied about what you eat. > You have no way of knowing that, yet you wrote a list of goods which I don't eat, giving the reader an impression I have admitted to eating non-vegan food. Apart from showing your utter dishonesty, you've also shown that your original challenge and guarantee was bogus. > Now go **** yourself. > Why don't you grow up and stop lying, Dutch? |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
... > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > I guarantee that I could do better than > > > > > >> >> > whatever you do while still eating animals. > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> No, you can't. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >Yes I can. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called > > > > > >> guarantees. > > > > > > > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery > > > > > > list here. > > > > > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no > > > > > clue about. > > > > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat > > > > You lied about what you eat. > > > You have no way of knowing that, I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples and mustard cress. You lied. You have NO sense of the ethics of a forum like this. yet you wrote > a list of goods which I don't eat, giving the reader > an impression I have admitted to eating non-vegan > food. So what? You deliberately lied about your grocery list. You repeatedly snip relevant text *without noting* in order to leave the impression that I said the opposite of what I actually say. I just did it more flagrantly. > Apart from showing your utter dishonesty, > you've also shown that your original challenge and > guarantee was bogus. I showed how easy it is to make a mockery of the process here. Your arguments are corrupt, your thinking process is corrupt, and your methods are corrupt. > > Now go **** yourself. > > > Why don't you grow up and stop lying, Dutch? My challenge is still sitting there, and you'll just keep lying and using disreputable techniques to avoid addressing it. You're a disreputable, lying cocksucker. What's that like? |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
"Dutch" > wrote in message ... > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > > > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > > > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > I guarantee that I could do better than > > > > > > >> >> > whatever you do while still eating animals. > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> No, you can't. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >Yes I can. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called > > > > > > >> guarantees. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery > > > > > > > list here. > > > > > > > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables > > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > > > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no > > > > > > clue about. > > > > > > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat > > > > > > You lied about what you eat. > > > > > You have no way of knowing that, > > I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples > and mustard cress. Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food. > You lied. You have NO sense of the ethics of a forum like this. > Says the fraud who edits his opponent's replies to suit his own argument. > > yet you wrote a list of goods which I don't eat, giving > > the reader an impression I have admitted to eating > > non-vegan food. > > So what? You have no credibilty as an honest participant in Usenet debate if you alter your opponent's post. The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself proves my point even further when I say you have no credibility. > > > Apart from showing your utter dishonesty, > > you've also shown that your original challenge and > > guarantee was bogus. > > I showed how easy it is to make a mockery of the > process here. Again, that's no reason to edit your opponent's reply to include no-vegan foods. You have no excuse for it. > Your arguments are corrupt, your thinking process > is corrupt, and your methods are corrupt. > Says the fraud who edits his opponent's replies to suit his own argument. > > > Now go **** yourself. > > > > > Why don't you grow up and stop lying, Dutch? > > My challenge is still sitting there I don't think anyone need bother with your so-called challenges if all you can do is edit their responses to include non-vegan foods. This is a new low, even for you. |
|
|||
|
|||
Derek cries when things don't go his way
"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
... > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > > > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > > > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > > > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > > > > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > > > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > > > > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > I guarantee that I could do better than > > > > > > > >> >> > whatever you do while still eating animals. > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> No, you can't. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> >Yes I can. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called > > > > > > > >> guarantees. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery > > > > > > > > list here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables > > > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > > > > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no > > > > > > > clue about. > > > > > > > > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat > > > > > > > > You lied about what you eat. > > > > > > > You have no way of knowing that, > > > > I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples > > and mustard cress. > > Whether you believe my answer or not Why did you lie? What moral authority does that leave you with? > is no excuse for > dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food. It's a very good illustration of how a person can play games to make things appear not what they are. It was intended to send you a message, it did. > > You lied. You have NO sense of the ethics of a forum like this. > > > Says the fraud who edits his opponent's replies to > suit his own argument. That was too obvious to be a serious attempt at fraud. Your attempts to make us think this sock puppet ipse dixit wasn't always you is real fraud. You are the soul of hypocrisy. > > > yet you wrote a list of goods which I don't eat, giving > > > the reader an impression I have admitted to eating > > > non-vegan food. > > > > So what? > > You have no credibilty as an honest participant in > Usenet debate if you alter your opponent's post. > The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself > proves my point even further when I say you have > no credibility. No it doesn't, you're a total moron, I was yanking your chain. Typical of your methods and your superficial view of everything that you would think you can exploit it as if it were a real attempt to be dishonest. > > > Apart from showing your utter dishonesty, > > > you've also shown that your original challenge and > > > guarantee was bogus. > > > > I showed how easy it is to make a mockery of the > > process here. > > Again, that's no reason to edit your opponent's > reply to include no-vegan foods. You have no > excuse for it. I have every justification to engage in REAL deception, based on YOUR dishonest, unethical nature, but instead I made this *obvious* attempt to send a message to you. You're the complete fraud DEREK, and you're a hostile participant here, you have no right to expect to be treated ethically. I'll do it more, I'll do it all the time since it seems to annoy you. > > Your arguments are corrupt, your thinking process > > is corrupt, and your methods are corrupt. > > > Says the fraud who edits his opponent's replies to > suit his own argument. Takes a fraud to know one, Derek/Ipse Dixit/ and how many other sock puppets... > > > > > Now go **** yourself. > > > > > > > Why don't you grow up and stop lying, Dutch? > > > > My challenge is still sitting there > > I don't think anyone need bother with your so-called > challenges if all you can do is edit their responses to > include non-vegan foods. This is a new low, even for > you. What a ****ing whiny loser. You can dish it out but you sure can't take it. You long ago lost any right you ever had to be treated as a normal person. |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch feels no shame for his unethical editing of posts.
"Dutch" > wrote in message ... > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > > > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > > > > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > > > > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > > > > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > > > > > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > > > > > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > I guarantee that I could do better than > > > > > > > > >> >> > whatever you do while still eating animals. > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> No, you can't. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> >Yes I can. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called > > > > > > > > >> guarantees. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery > > > > > > > > > list here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables > > > > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > > > > > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no > > > > > > > > clue about. > > > > > > > > > > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat > > > > > > > > > > You lied about what you eat. > > > > > > > > > You have no way of knowing that, > > > > > > I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples > > > and mustard cress. > > > > Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for > > dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food. > > > > > you wrote a list of goods which I don't eat, giving > > > > the reader an impression I have admitted to eating > > > > non-vegan food. > > > > > > So what? > > > > You have no credibilty as an honest participant in > > Usenet debate if you alter your opponent's post. > > The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself > > proves my point even further when I say you have > > no credibility. > > I'll do it more, I'll do it all the time since it seems to annoy you. > I'm sure you will, because as I said before, "you have no credibilty as an honest participant in Usenet debate if all you can do is alter your opponent's posts to suit. The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself proves my point even further when I say you have no credibility. The fact that you'll do it just to annoy your opponent proves you're a troll, too. > > > > > Now go **** yourself. > > > > > > > > > Why don't you grow up and stop lying, Dutch? > > > > > > My challenge is still sitting there > > > > I don't think anyone need bother with your so-called > > challenges if all you can do is edit their responses to > > include non-vegan foods. This is a new low, even for > > you. > > What a ****ing whiny loser. What am I supposed to have lost here, Dutch? I've successfully shown that you are a cheat and a liar who's desperate enough to edit your opponent's replies in order to change the argument in your favour. I've gained a success while showing you've reached a new low. What could be better? |
|
|||
|
|||
Derek the Dirtbag snips without noting to create a false impression
"Ipse dixit" > wrote\
> "Dutch" > wrote etc.. > > > > > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery > > > > > > > > > > list here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables > > > > > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > > > > > > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no > > > > > > > > > clue about. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat > > > > > > > > > > > > You lied about what you eat. > > > > > > > > > > > You have no way of knowing that, > > > > > > > > I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples > > > > and mustard cress. > > > > > > Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for > > > dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food. Why did you snip this comment WITHOUT NOTING you shitbag? [me] "Why did you lie? What moral authority does that leave you with?" Why DID you lie? Don't snip this, you ****faced coward, answer it. > > > > > you wrote a list of goods which I don't eat, giving > > > > > the reader an impression I have admitted to eating > > > > > non-vegan food. > > > > > > > > So what? > > > > > > You have no credibilty as an honest participant in > > > Usenet debate if you alter your opponent's post. > > > The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself > > > proves my point even further when I say you have > > > no credibility. > > > > I'll do it more, I'll do it all the time since it seems to annoy you. > > > I'm sure you will, because as I said before, "you have > no credibilty as an honest participant in Usenet debate > if all you can do is alter your opponent's posts to suit. Credible arguments have no effect on you. You can't recognize them. Dishonesty is all you understand. > The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself proves > my point even further when I say you have no credibility. What do you mean I can't see it? I wrote it. Everyone can see it. > The fact that you'll do it just to annoy your opponent > proves you're a troll, too. Not "my opponent", dickwad, YOU! You are not a serious "opponent" except in the sense that I oppose idiocy. > > > > > > Now go **** yourself. > > > > > > > > > > > Why don't you grow up and stop lying, Dutch? > > > > > > > > My challenge is still sitting there > > > > > > I don't think anyone need bother with your so-called > > > challenges if all you can do is edit their responses to > > > include non-vegan foods. This is a new low, even for > > > you. > > > > What a ****ing whiny loser. > > What am I supposed to have lost here, Dutch? Good point, you have very little credibility to lose. I've > successfully shown that you are a cheat and a liar > who's desperate enough to edit your opponent's > replies in order to change the argument in your favour. > I've gained a success while showing you've reached a > new low. What could be better? You haven't done anything, except show yourself to be a liar and a cheat. My obvious ploy proves nothing about me, you know it, and so does everyone else. Why did you lie about the contents of your weekly grocery list? What are you afraid of? Why do you unethically snip your opponents' comments out of your reply without a single notation? Who the **** do you think you are? Why won't you respond honestly to anything? Why are you such an unethical dirtbag? What do you get out of it? |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 19:43:18 GMT, "Ipse dixit" >
wrote: > >"Dutch" > wrote in message ... >> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... >> > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... >> > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... >> > > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... >> > > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... >> > > > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: >> > > > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote >> > > > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: >> > > > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote >> > > > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: [snip] >> > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery >> > > > > > > list here. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables >> > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > >> > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no >> > > > > > clue about. >> > > > > >> > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat >> > > >> > > You lied about what you eat. >> > > >> > You have no way of knowing that, >> >> I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples >> and mustard cress. > >Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for >dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food. Sidebar: *If* you believed the farmer/rancher were the morally culpable "free-agent" as you claim, you'd have no concern about what others think you eat. And that aint mind-reading, -- swamp |
|
|||
|
|||
Dipsey Dreckshit lies about his diet (along with pretty mucheverything else)
Dipsey Dreckshit wrote:
> "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > >>Dipsey Dreckshit > wrote in message ... >> >>>On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: >>> >>>>Dipsey Dreckshit > wrote >>>> >>>>>On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Dipsey Dreckshit > wrote >>>>>> >>>>>>>On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I guarantee that I could do better than whatever you >>>>>>>>do while still eating animals. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>No, you can't. >>>>>> >>>>>>Yes I can. >>>>> >>>>>No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called guarantees. >>>> >>>>I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery list here. >>> >>Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables purchased >>indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > milk and eggs, along with some shit >>that I have no clue about. >> > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat No. You eat factory farm raised produce, daily. I believe you eat animal products as well, if not meat itself. |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch edits his opponent's replies to suit his "credible arguments"
"Dutch" > wrote in message ... > "Ipse dixit" > wrote\ > > "Dutch" > wrote > > etc.. > > > > > > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery > > > > > > > > > > > list here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables > > > > > > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > > > > > > > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no > > > > > > > > > > clue about. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You lied about what you eat. > > > > > > > > > > > > > You have no way of knowing that, > > > > > > > > > > I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples > > > > > and mustard cress. > > > > > > > > Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for > > > > dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food. > > Why did you snip this comment WITHOUT NOTING you shitbag? > Non sequitur. Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food. > > > > > > you wrote a list of goods which I don't eat, giving > > > > > > the reader an impression I have admitted to eating > > > > > > non-vegan food. > > > > > > > > > > So what? > > > > > > > > You have no credibilty as an honest participant in > > > > Usenet debate if you alter your opponent's post. > > > > The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself > > > > proves my point even further when I say you have > > > > no credibility. > > > > > > I'll do it more, I'll do it all the time since it seems to annoy you. > > > > > I'm sure you will, because as I said before, "you have > > no credibilty as an honest participant in Usenet debate > > if all you can do is alter your opponent's posts to suit. > > Credible arguments have no effect on you. Do you honestly think that editing your opponent's replies, as I caught you doing to mine, are "credible" arguments, Ditch? You're more delusional than you've been letting on about. > > > The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself proves > > my point even further when I say you have no credibility. > > What do you mean I can't see it? I wrote it. Everyone can see it. > Yes, they can. They can all see where you edited my reply; "Fallen apples and mustard cress" to "Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no clue about" How's about that for sheer dishonesty and a lack of any credibilty? And you call this a "Credible argument"? > > The fact that you'll do it just to annoy your opponent > > proves you're a troll, too. > > Not "my opponent", dickwad, YOU! I am your opponent, or haven't you fathomed that out yet? If your intention is but to annoy your opponent by editing his posts to include non-vegan foods in his replies to you, how would you defend this troll like behaviour as a "credible argument"? > > > > > > > Now go **** yourself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why don't you grow up and stop lying, Dutch? > > > > > > > > > > My challenge is still sitting there > > > > > > > > I don't think anyone need bother with your so-called > > > > challenges if all you can do is edit their responses to > > > > include non-vegan foods. This is a new low, even for > > > > you. > > > > > > What a ****ing whiny loser. > > > > What am I supposed to have lost here, Dutch? > > Good point, you have very little credibility to lose. > I have more credibility than those who edit their opponent's replies, so that a good virtue I've held on to. It's a pity for you you didn't hold on to yours though, but that's life. > > I've > > successfully shown that you are a cheat and a liar > > who's desperate enough to edit your opponent's > > replies in order to change the argument in your favour. > > I've gained a success while showing you've reached a > > new low. What could be better? > > You haven't done anything, except show yourself to > be a liar and a cheat. How, by editing my replies? Well done! |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
"swamp" > wrote in message ... > On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 19:43:18 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > wrote: > >"Dutch" > wrote in message ... > >> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > >> > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > >> > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > >> > > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > >> > > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > >> > > > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > >> > > > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > >> > > > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > >> > > > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > >> > > > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > [snip] > > >> > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery > >> > > > > > > list here. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables > >> > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > > >> > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no > >> > > > > > clue about. > >> > > > > > >> > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat > >> > > > >> > > You lied about what you eat. > >> > > > >> > You have no way of knowing that, > >> > >> I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples > >> and mustard cress. > > > >Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for > >dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food. > > Sidebar: > > *If* you believed the farmer/rancher were the morally culpable > "free-agent" as you claim, you'd have no concern about what others > think you eat. > This is irrelevant to my complaint about Dutch's editing of my replies to include non-vegan foods. He has no excuse for using dishonest tactics to help weaken his opponent's position in this way. It's a new low for him and shows he is thoroughly incapable. |
|
|||
|
|||
Honour amongst liars, cheats and trolls
"Bill" > wrote in message ink.net... > "Ipse dixit" wrote: > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > >>"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > >>>On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > >>>>"Ipse > wrote > >>>>>On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > >>>>>>Dipsey Dreckshit > wrote > >>>>>>>On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>I guarantee that I could do better than > >>>>>>>>whatever you do while still eating animals. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>No, you can't. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Yes I can. > >>>>> > >>>>>No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called > >>>>>guarantees. > >>>> > >>>>I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery > >>>>list here. > >>> > >>Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables > >>purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > >>milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no > >>clue about. > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat > > No. My original answer was, "Fallen apples and mustard cress", but, as you can see for yourself, Dutch has removed my reply and replaced it with a list of non-vegan foods. You know this already, but as usual you can't stop yourself from lying and making a fool of yourself. I'm not surprised you don't find any fault in Dutch's dishonest tactics, because it was only a short while ago when you were caught forging your opponents posts by using their identity. Honour amongst liars, cheats and trolls - is that it? |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch edits his opponent's replies to suit his "credible arguments"
"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > snippage... > > Do you honestly think that editing your opponent's > replies, as I caught you doing to mine, are "credible" > arguments, Ditch? You're more delusional than you've > been letting on about. ======================= What a hoot! The ignorant king of unethical snipping is complaining about somebody's annotated snips!!! You really are too much, twits... Too ignorant, too stupid, too lazy, too full of lys.... snippage... |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch edits his opponent's replies to suit his "credible arguments"
"rick etter" > wrote in message ... > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > "Do you accept that the *general* production, storage, and distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral deaths, Rick Etter?" |
|
|||
|
|||
Honour amongst liars, cheats and trolls
"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > snippage... > > I'm not surprised you don't find any fault in Dutch's > dishonest tactics, ===================== bwahahahahahahah What a hoot! You're the blackest pot in the group, you ignorant, hypocritical fool! because it was only a short while > ago when you were caught forging your opponents > posts by using their identity. Honour amongst liars, > cheats and trolls - is that it? > > |
|
|||
|
|||
Dreck can dish it out but he can't take it.
"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
... > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote\ > > > "Dutch" > wrote > > > > etc.. > > > > > > > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery > > > > > > > > > > > > list here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables > > > > > > > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > > > > > > > > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no > > > > > > > > > > > clue about. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You lied about what you eat. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You have no way of knowing that, > > > > > > > > > > > > I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples > > > > > > and mustard cress. > > > > > > > > > > Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for > > > > > dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food. > > > > Why did you snip this comment WITHOUT NOTING you shitbag? > > > Non sequitur. It's completely relevant shitbag. > Whether you believe my answer or not Your answer is a lie. > is no > excuse for dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan > food. It's a perfectly good reason, as if I need one. Your unethical snippage, misrepresentations, and all the rest of your dishonest behaviour are enough reason. You have NO business complaining about anything, shitbag. > > > > > > > > you wrote a list of goods which I don't eat, giving > > > > > > > the reader an impression I have admitted to eating > > > > > > > non-vegan food. > > > > > > > > > > > > So what? > > > > > > > > > > You have no credibilty as an honest participant in > > > > > Usenet debate if you alter your opponent's post. > > > > > The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself > > > > > proves my point even further when I say you have > > > > > no credibility. > > > > > > > > I'll do it more, I'll do it all the time since it seems to annoy you. > > > > > > > I'm sure you will, because as I said before, "you have > > > no credibilty as an honest participant in Usenet debate > > > if all you can do is alter your opponent's posts to suit. > > > > Credible arguments have no effect on you. > > Do you honestly think that editing your opponent's > replies, as I caught you doing to mine, are "credible" > arguments, Ditch? You're more delusional than you've > been letting on about. That's not what I said, moron. > > > The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself proves > > > my point even further when I say you have no credibility. > > > > What do you mean I can't see it? I wrote it. Everyone can see it. > > > Yes, they can. They can all see where you edited my reply; > > "Fallen apples and mustard cress" > > to > > "Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables purchased > indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, milk and eggs, along with > some shit that I have no clue about" > > How's about that for sheer dishonesty and a lack of > any credibilty? And you call this a "Credible argument"? > > > > The fact that you'll do it just to annoy your opponent > > > proves you're a troll, too. > > > > Not "my opponent", dickwad, YOU! > > I am your opponent, or haven't you fathomed that out > yet? If your intention is but to annoy your opponent by > editing his posts to include non-vegan foods in his > replies to you, how would you defend this troll like > behaviour as a "credible argument"? You're an idiot. > > > > > > > > Now go **** yourself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why don't you grow up and stop lying, Dutch? > > > > > > > > > > > > My challenge is still sitting there > > > > > > > > > > I don't think anyone need bother with your so-called > > > > > challenges if all you can do is edit their responses to > > > > > include non-vegan foods. This is a new low, even for > > > > > you. > > > > > > > > What a ****ing whiny loser. > > > > > > What am I supposed to have lost here, Dutch? > > > > Good point, you have very little credibility to lose. > > > I have more credibility than those who edit their > opponent's replies, so that a good virtue I've held > on to. It's a pity for you you didn't hold on to yours > though, but that's life. You have ZERO, naught, nada. Nobody on either side cares what you say. > > > > I've > > > successfully shown that you are a cheat and a liar > > > who's desperate enough to edit your opponent's > > > replies in order to change the argument in your favour. > > > I've gained a success while showing you've reached a > > > new low. What could be better? > > > > You haven't done anything, except show yourself to > > be a liar and a cheat. > > How, by editing my replies? Well done! You're even more incoherent than usual. Better change those meds. |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
news > > "swamp" > wrote in message ... > > On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 19:43:18 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > wrote: > > >"Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > >> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > >> > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > >> > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > >> > > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > >> > > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > >> > > > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > >> > > > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > >> > > > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > >> > > > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > >> > > > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > > >> > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery > > >> > > > > > > list here. > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables > > >> > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > > > >> > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no > > >> > > > > > clue about. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat > > >> > > > > >> > > You lied about what you eat. > > >> > > > > >> > You have no way of knowing that, > > >> > > >> I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples > > >> and mustard cress. > > > > > >Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for > > >dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food. > > > > Sidebar: > > > > *If* you believed the farmer/rancher were the morally culpable > > "free-agent" as you claim, you'd have no concern about what others > > think you eat. > > > This is irrelevant to my complaint about Dutch's editing > of my replies to include non-vegan foods. He has no > excuse for using dishonest tactics to help weaken his > opponent's position in this way. Even if your position could get any weaker, that wouldn't have done it. It was obvious, it was never intended to be anything but an obvious taking the **** and you know it. Do you think you're talking to children Dreck? It's a new low for him > and shows he is thoroughly incapable. You're pathetic Dreck. |
|
|||
|
|||
Dreck wallows, chapter XXXVVII
"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > "Bill" > wrote in message ink.net... > > "Ipse dixit" wrote: > > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > >>"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > >>>On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > >>>>"Ipse > wrote > > >>>>>On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > >>>>>>Dipsey Dreckshit > wrote > > >>>>>>>On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>I guarantee that I could do better than > > >>>>>>>>whatever you do while still eating animals. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>No, you can't. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>Yes I can. > > >>>>> > > >>>>>No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called > > >>>>>guarantees. > > >>>> > > >>>>I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery > > >>>>list here. > > >>> > > >>Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables > > >>purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > > >>milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no > > >>clue about. > > > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat > > > > No. > > My original answer was, "Fallen apples and mustard > cress", but, as you can see for yourself, Dutch has > removed my reply and replaced it with a list of > non-vegan foods. You know this already, but as usual > you can't stop yourself from lying and making a fool of > yourself. > > I'm not surprised you don't find any fault in Dutch's > dishonest tactics, because it was only a short while > ago when you were caught forging your opponents > posts by using their identity. Honour amongst liars, > cheats and trolls - is that it? I was taking the **** Dreck, thumbing my nose at your constant unethical editing, everyone knows it. You're getting waaay too easy. |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
"Dutch" > wrote in message ... > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message news > > "swamp" > wrote in message ... > > > On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 19:43:18 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > wrote: > > > >"Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > > >> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > >> > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > > >> > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > >> > > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > > >> > > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > >> > > > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > > >> > > > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > > >> > > > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery > > > >> > > > > > > list here. > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables > > > >> > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > > > >> > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no > > > >> > > > > > clue about. > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat > > > >> > > > > > >> > > You lied about what you eat. > > > >> > > > > > >> > You have no way of knowing that, > > > >> > > > >> I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples > > > >> and mustard cress. > > > > > > > >Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for > > > >dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food. > > > > > > Sidebar: > > > > > > *If* you believed the farmer/rancher were the morally culpable > > > "free-agent" as you claim, you'd have no concern about what others > > > think you eat. > > > > > This is irrelevant to my complaint about Dutch's editing > > of my replies to include non-vegan foods. He has no > > excuse for using dishonest tactics to help weaken his > > opponent's position in this way. > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that wouldn't have done it. It > was obvious, it was never intended to be anything but an obvious taking the > **** and you know it. > That's very easy to say after been shown your dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being caught while forging posts using their opponent's identity. There is no excuse for editing your opponent's replies, in the same way that there is no excuse to forge posts using an apponent's identity. You're all as dishonest as each other. |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > snippage... > > > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that wouldn't have done it. It > > was obvious, it was never intended to be anything but an obvious taking the > > **** and you know it. > > > That's very easy to say after been shown your > dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being > caught while forging posts using their opponent's > identity. There is no excuse for editing your > opponent's replies, ======================== maybe you should follow your own advice there fool. You really are that stupid, aren't you? in the same way that there is > no excuse to forge posts using an apponent's > identity. You're all as dishonest as each other. > > |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
"rick etter" > wrote in message ... > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > > > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that > > > wouldn't have done it. It was obvious, it was never > > > intended to be anything but an obvious taking the > > > **** and you know it. > > > > > That's very easy to say after been shown your > > dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and > > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being > > caught while forging posts using their opponent's > > identity. There is no excuse for editing your > > opponent's replies, > ======================== > maybe you should follow your own advice there I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong to the anti side of these animal related groups. |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > "rick etter" > wrote in message ... > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > > > > > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that > > > > wouldn't have done it. It was obvious, it was never > > > > intended to be anything but an obvious taking the > > > > **** and you know it. > > > > > > > That's very easy to say after been shown your > > > dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and > > > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being > > > caught while forging posts using their opponent's > > > identity. There is no excuse for editing your > > > opponent's replies, > > ======================== > > maybe you should follow your own advice there > > I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument > or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong > to the anti side of these animal related groups. ===================== Unethical, unannotated snipping is just as deceitful, you ignorant fool. It's part-n-parcel of thye same thing. You've been caught, you're a lazy, ignorant hypocritical killer. Go have that nice blood-drenched dinner, killer... |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
"rick etter" > wrote in message ... > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > >> > "rick etter" > wrote in message ... > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > > > > > > > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that > > > > > wouldn't have done it. It was obvious, it was never > > > > > intended to be anything but an obvious taking the > > > > > **** and you know it. > > > > > > > > > That's very easy to say after been shown your > > > > dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and > > > > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being > > > > caught while forging posts using their opponent's > > > > identity. There is no excuse for editing your > > > > opponent's replies, > > > ======================== > > > maybe you should follow your own advice there > > > > I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument > > or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong > > to the anti side of these animal related groups. > ===================== > Unethical, unannotated snipping is just as deceitful Snipping away irrelevant parts of a discussion is usual and perfectly legitimate. Dutch edited my reply to his challenge from; "Fallen apples and mustard cress" to "Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no clue about" Now that's unethical. He tried to cheat and include a list of non-vegan foods in place of the list I provided. He has no credibility. |
|
|||
|
|||
Derek cries like a baby with poopy pants
"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > Even if your position could get any weaker, that wouldn't have done it. It > > was obvious, it was never intended to be anything but an obvious taking the > > **** and you know it. > > > That's very easy to say after been shown your > dishonesty, There was no attempt to conceal it, moron, unlike your shady snipping and nym-shifting. > and I remember that Jonathan and > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being > caught while forging posts using their opponent's > identity. There is no excuse for editing your > opponent's replies, in the same way that there is > no excuse to forge posts using an apponent's > identity. You're all as dishonest as each other. Give it up ding-dong. You're WAAAAY too unethical a poster to be whining about such things. |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > "rick etter" > wrote in message ... > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > >> > "rick etter" > wrote in message ... > > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > > > > > > > > > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that > > > > > > wouldn't have done it. It was obvious, it was never > > > > > > intended to be anything but an obvious taking the > > > > > > **** and you know it. > > > > > > > > > > > That's very easy to say after been shown your > > > > > dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and > > > > > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being > > > > > caught while forging posts using their opponent's > > > > > identity. There is no excuse for editing your > > > > > opponent's replies, > > > > ======================== > > > > maybe you should follow your own advice there > > > > > > I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument > > > or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong > > > to the anti side of these animal related groups. > > ===================== > > Unethical, unannotated snipping is just as deceitful > > Snipping away irrelevant parts of a discussion is > usual and perfectly legitimate. ==================== Not when it is unannotaed, and made to look like that was the complete reply. That's the same as changing the remarks, you ignorant dolt. Dutch edited my > reply to his challenge from; ===================== LOL If it's perfectly OK, then why did you rant about what he had done, you ignorant fool? > > "Fallen apples and mustard cress" > > to > > "Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, milk > and eggs, along with some shit that I have no clue > about" > > Now that's unethical. He tried to cheat and include > a list of non-vegan foods in place of the list I provided. > He has no credibility. > > |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:05:08 GMT, "Ipse dixit" >
wrote: > >"rick etter" > wrote in message ... >> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... >> > > >> > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that >> > > wouldn't have done it. It was obvious, it was never >> > > intended to be anything but an obvious taking the >> > > **** and you know it. >> > > >> > That's very easy to say after been shown your >> > dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and >> > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being >> > caught while forging posts using their opponent's >> > identity. There is no excuse for editing your >> > opponent's replies, >> ======================== >> maybe you should follow your own advice there > >I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument >or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong >to the anti side of these animal related groups. I'd say neither "side" has a monopoly on those antics, however in this case I interpretted Dutch's response as a barb, and not offered as an accurate description of your grocery list. *If* I'm following the discussion correctly, neither your claim of "fallen apples and mustard cress" nor his response of "factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no clue about" were meant to be taken seriously. Tongue-in-cheek remarks aren't lies or dishonesty. Your hesitance to reveal the true contents of the list, otoh, suggest you're hiding something. -- swamp |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
"swamp" > wrote in message
... > On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:05:08 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > > wrote: > > > > >"rick etter" > wrote in message ... > >> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > >> > > > >> > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that > >> > > wouldn't have done it. It was obvious, it was never > >> > > intended to be anything but an obvious taking the > >> > > **** and you know it. > >> > > > >> > That's very easy to say after been shown your > >> > dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and > >> > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being > >> > caught while forging posts using their opponent's > >> > identity. There is no excuse for editing your > >> > opponent's replies, > >> ======================== > >> maybe you should follow your own advice there > > > >I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument > >or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong > >to the anti side of these animal related groups. > > I'd say neither "side" has a monopoly on those antics, however in this > case I interpretted Dutch's response as a barb, It was intended to convey my displeasure with his unethical snipping habits. > and not offered as an > accurate description of your grocery list. Actually, I believe it *was* accurate, certainly much closer to the truth than his effort. > *If* I'm following the > discussion correctly, neither your claim of "fallen apples and mustard > cress" nor his response of "factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and > vegetables purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, milk and > eggs, along with some shit that I have no clue about" were meant to be > taken seriously. Tongue-in-cheek remarks aren't lies or dishonesty. He knows that, he's a desperate, wanking slob. > Your hesitance to reveal the true contents of the list, otoh, suggest > you're hiding something. I'm guessing Nash is a full-on omnivore. He's probably having veal cutlets for dinner tonight. |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
"swamp" > wrote in message ... > On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:05:08 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > wrote: > >"rick etter" > wrote in message ... > >> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > >> > > > >> > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that > >> > > wouldn't have done it. It was obvious, it was never > >> > > intended to be anything but an obvious taking the > >> > > **** and you know it. > >> > > > >> > That's very easy to say after been shown your > >> > dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and > >> > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being > >> > caught while forging posts using their opponent's > >> > identity. There is no excuse for editing your > >> > opponent's replies, > >> ======================== > >> maybe you should follow your own advice there > > > >I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument > >or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong > >to the anti side of these animal related groups. > > I'd say neither "side" has a monopoly on those antics, Then give an example where the AR side in these animal related groups have forged posts using their opponent's identity. > however in this case I interpretted Dutch's response > as a barb, and not offered as an accurate description > of your grocery list. I don't care how you interpret it, Swamp. The fact is that Dutch edited my reply to a challenge he offered from this; "Fallen apples and mustard cress" to "Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no clue about" That's about as dishonest as you can get. > Your hesitance to reveal the true contents of the list, otoh, suggest > you're hiding something. > I have no desire to discuss my weekly grocery lists with the likes of you or Dutch. My answer was irrelevant since I could've insisted I was fasting, for instance, and didn't have a grocery list to offer. Dutch's editing of my list, whatever I chose to put in it, is a dishonest cheat on his part and shows his total lack of any honour or credibility. |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > "swamp" > wrote in message ... > > On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:05:08 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > wrote: > > >"rick etter" > wrote in message ... > > >> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > >> > > > > >> > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that > > >> > > wouldn't have done it. It was obvious, it was never > > >> > > intended to be anything but an obvious taking the > > >> > > **** and you know it. > > >> > > > > >> > That's very easy to say after been shown your > > >> > dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and > > >> > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being > > >> > caught while forging posts using their opponent's > > >> > identity. There is no excuse for editing your > > >> > opponent's replies, > > >> ======================== > > >> maybe you should follow your own advice there > > > > > >I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument > > >or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong > > >to the anti side of these animal related groups. > > > > I'd say neither "side" has a monopoly on those antics, > > Then give an example where the AR side in these > animal related groups have forged posts using > their opponent's identity. > > > > however in this case I interpretted Dutch's response > > as a barb, and not offered as an accurate description > > of your grocery list. > > I don't care how you interpret it, Swamp. The > fact is that Dutch edited my reply to a challenge > he offered from this; > > "Fallen apples and mustard cress" > > to > > "Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no > clue about" > > That's about as dishonest as you can get. My post was an obvious poke in the eye, there was nothing dishonest about it.. Yours was a blatant lie. > > Your hesitance to reveal the true contents of the list, otoh, suggest > > you're hiding something. > > > I have no desire to discuss my weekly grocery > lists with the likes of you or Dutch. Then you should have said, "I respectfully decline to reveal what I eat on the grounds it may incriminate me." > My answer > was irrelevant since I could've insisted I was > fasting, for instance, and didn't have a grocery > list to offer. Yes, being a reflexive liar you could have said almost anything. > Dutch's editing of my list, whatever > I chose to put in it, is a dishonest cheat on his > part and shows his total lack of any honour or > credibility. You wish. |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:01:17 GMT, "Ipse dixit" >
wrote: > >"swamp" > wrote in message ... >> On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:05:08 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > wrote: >> >"rick etter" > wrote in message ... >> >> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... >> >> > > >> >> > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that >> >> > > wouldn't have done it. It was obvious, it was never >> >> > > intended to be anything but an obvious taking the >> >> > > **** and you know it. >> >> > > >> >> > That's very easy to say after been shown your >> >> > dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and >> >> > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being >> >> > caught while forging posts using their opponent's >> >> > identity. There is no excuse for editing your >> >> > opponent's replies, >> >> ======================== >> >> maybe you should follow your own advice there >> > >> >I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument >> >or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong >> >to the anti side of these animal related groups. >> >> I'd say neither "side" has a monopoly on those antics, > >Then give an example where the AR side in these >animal related groups have forged posts using >their opponent's identity. You edit your opponent's replies to suit your argument on a regular basis, and this is one of them. You need to because your position is poor. Then there's "Pete" and "Malcolm" who've attempted to forge, incompetently. Then there's the nymshifters like yourself and "pearl." >> however in this case I interpretted Dutch's response >> as a barb, and not offered as an accurate description >> of your grocery list. > >I don't care how you interpret it, Swamp. And I don't care if you care how I interpret it, Derek. Can it be put any more simply than that? Your argument is weak, which explains your hesitance and desperation. My grocery list: 1 gal. milk (homogenized, full fat) 6 tomatoes (romas in season, otherwise vinas) 2 lb ground chuck 1 lb hot italian sausage 1 8 oz. can tomato paste 1 28 oz. can pinto beans 1 28 oz. can kidney beans 2 15 oz, cans crushed tomatoes 2 onions (sweet in season) 4 carrots 6 eggs (free range [I pay the extra]) 4 zucchini 2 potatoes (the big brown guys) 1 loaf wheat bread 1 12-pack Pacifico beer 18 oz. salsa fresca (mercado local, sabrosa) 1 8 oz. can El Pato Salsa Mexicana I hate rice. Fried, Mexican, steamed, Chinese whatever. Not for ar/ev reasons. Just don't like it. >The fact is that Dutch edited my reply to a challenge >he offered from this; > >"Fallen apples and mustard cress" > >to > >"Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables >purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, >milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no >clue about" > >That's about as dishonest as you can get. No, it wasn't, and you know full well it wasn't. Post your own list if you're really feeling so aggrieved, and provide details as to how your local farmer avoids CDs. Your avoidance of this issue is as dishonest as one can get. Dutch was just giving you the business. >> Your hesitance to reveal the true contents of the list, otoh, suggest >> you're hiding something. >> >I have no desire to discuss my weekly grocery >lists with the likes of you or Dutch. The "likes of...? " Whatever you say, Ms. Dolittle. >My answer was irrelevant As usual... >since I could've insisted I was >fasting, for instance, and didn't have a grocery >list to offer. But you eat, and you know what you eat. This local farmer who assures no CDs isn't flying either, as no farmer can make that guarantee. Pony up. >Dutch's editing of my list, whatever >I chose to put in it, is a dishonest cheat on his >part and shows his total lack of any honour or >credibility. Coming from someone w/ a history of dishonest editting your credibility questioning is duly ignored. I trust Dutch's integrity much more than yours. -- swamp |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
"swamp" > wrote in message ... > On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:01:17 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > wrote: > >> >I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument > >> >or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong > >> >to the anti side of these animal related groups. > >> > >> I'd say neither "side" has a monopoly on those antics, > > > >Then give an example where the AR side in these > >animal related groups have forged posts using > >their opponent's identity. > > You edit your opponent's replies to suit your argument on a regular > basis, and this is one of them. You need to because your position is > poor. Then there's "Pete" and "Malcolm" who've attempted to forge, > incompetently. Right, you lying ****, show where I have EVER forged a post using "Pete" or Malcom's" identities. |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 06:50:33 GMT, "Ipse dixit" >
wrote: > >"swamp" > wrote in message ... >> On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:01:17 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > wrote: > >> >> >I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument >> >> >or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong >> >> >to the anti side of these animal related groups. >> >> >> >> I'd say neither "side" has a monopoly on those antics, >> > >> >Then give an example where the AR side in these >> >animal related groups have forged posts using >> >their opponent's identity. >> >> You edit your opponent's replies to suit your argument on a regular >> basis, and this is one of them. You need to because your position is >> poor. Then there's "Pete" and "Malcolm" who've attempted to forge, >> incompetently. > >Right, you lying ****, show where I have EVER forged >a post using "Pete" or Malcom's" identities. I didn't say you forged; I said you selectively editted which you've done once again. Thanks for another example. Pete and Malcolm are the incompetent forgers. You're an incompetent editor. Your grocery list...? -- swamp |
|
|||
|
|||
Dutch shows his utter dishonesty and a penchant for altering his opponent's comments to suit.
"swamp" > wrote in message ... > On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 06:50:33 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > > wrote: > > > > >"swamp" > wrote in message ... > >> On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:01:17 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > wrote: > > > >> >> >I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument > >> >> >or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong > >> >> >to the anti side of these animal related groups. > >> >> > >> >> I'd say neither "side" has a monopoly on those antics, > >> > > >> >Then give an example where the AR side in these > >> >animal related groups have forged posts using > >> >their opponent's identity. > >> > >> You edit your opponent's replies to suit your argument on a regular > >> basis, and this is one of them. You need to because your position is > >> poor. Then there's "Pete" and "Malcolm" who've attempted to forge, > >> incompetently. > > > >Right, you lying ****, show where I have EVER forged > >a post using "Pete" or Malcom's" identities. > > I didn't say you forged; I said you selectively editted which you've > done once again. Thanks for another example. Pete and Malcolm are the > incompetent forgers. Show where, you ****ing liar. |
|
|||
|
|||
Ipse dixit wrote:
> "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > >> >> > > > >> >> >I guarantee that I could do better than whatever you > > > >> >> >do while still eating animals. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> No, you can't. > > > >> > > > > >> >Yes I can. > > > >> > > > >> No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called guarantees. > > > > > > > >I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery list here. > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables purchased > > indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > milk and eggs, along with some shit > > that I have no clue about. > > > [...] My original answer to your > challenge was, "Fallen apples and mustard cress." Which was an utter lie, so ANYTHING said in response to it is justified. Shitbag. |
|
|||
|
|||
Ipse dixit wrote:
> "Dutch" > wrote in message ... > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ... > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote: > > > >> >> > > > >> >> >I guarantee that I could do better than whatever you > > > >> >> >do while still eating animals. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> No, you can't. > > > >> > > > > >> >Yes I can. > > > >> > > > >> No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called guarantees. > > > > > > > >I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery list here. > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables purchased > > indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > milk and eggs, along with some shit > > that I have no clue about. > > > [...] My original answer to your > challenge was, "Fallen apples and mustard cress." Which was an utter lie, so ANYTHING said in response to it is justified. Shitbag. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Thanks for all the replies . . . | General Cooking | |||
OT my blank replies | General Cooking | |||
"usual suspect" alters his Christian beliefs to be an Anti. | Vegan | |||
Dutch dishonestly changes his opponent's replies to help his lack of argument | Vegan |