In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> engagement and wrote:
>
> > In article t>,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> >>engagement and wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>In article >,
> >>> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Scented Nectar wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>He is responsible for the content of the headers of
> >>>>>>where he posts. He's unnecessarily angering the
> >>>>>>commodores and admirals, and he's responsible for it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Who did the misdeed of crossposting
> >>>>
> >>>>in Ron's posts? Ron did.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>I open, select reply, and click "post" in all cases.
> >>
> >>You have been asked politely to remove an unwanted
> >>crosspost. You are responsible for your posts
> >>containing rec.boats.
> >>
> >>You are an asshole.
> >
> >
> > Rudy,
>
> No, RON: Stop crossposting.

I am reading and responding from one newsgroup. Any cross posts are the
issue of the originator of the thread and those who add other groups.

In case you hadn't notice, the rest can determine who was the child of
mischief and put the cross post there. If asked, I'll surely direct them
back to the ISP or to you.

uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
engagement and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:

> In article et>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
>>engagement and wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In article >,
>>> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Scented Nectar wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>Who did the misdeed of crossposting
>>>>>>
>>>>>>in Ron's posts? Ron did.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>You started it.
>>>>
>>>>Ron has it in his power to stop it as far as his posts go.
>>>
>>>
>>>Who is
>>
>>continuing the crossposts? Ron is. He's an asshole.
>
>
> As does

Stop trying to shift responsibility for your actions.

uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
engagement and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:

> In article et>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
>>engagement and wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>Ron is responsible for the headers of his posts.
>>>
>>>
>>>Ron is responsible
>>
>>for not acceding to a polite request made of him. Ron
>>is a shitbag.
>
>
> Come on

Stop trying to disavow responsibility for your actions.

uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
engagement and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:

> In article t>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
>>engagement and wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>You have been asked politely to trim rec.boats. Your
>>>>failure to do it is a willful wish to antagonize people
>>>>you don't even know who have been civil to you.
>>>>
>>>>You are an asshole. Deliberately.
>>>
>>>
>>>You don't believe what I say
>>
>>Because you're a documented and demonstrated liar. A
>>shitty liar, but a liar all the same.
>>
>>You are responsible for your actions.
>
>
> Liar! Yikes. Human tell the truth and humans lie.

You only lie. Stop it.

In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> engagement and wrote:
>
> > In article t>,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> >>engagement and wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>He can't remove the crossposts from the headers of your
> >>>>posts when you're composing the posts, Ron. You'd have
> >>>>to do that.
> >>>>
> >>>>You like to antagonize people.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>He can remove them from his end.
> >>
> >>He cannot. They originate on your end, shitbag.
> >
> >
> > Of course, you attribute responsibility to me
>
> because the content of your posts IS your
> responsibility. You are fully responsible for every
> bit and byte of your posts, Ron.

I am responsible for what I type. Thank you very much.

uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
engagement and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:

> In article et>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
>>engagement and wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>I open, select reply, and click "post" in all cases.
>>>>
>>>>You have been asked politely to remove an unwanted
>>>>crosspost. You are responsible for your posts
>>>>containing rec.boats.
>>>>
>>>>You are an asshole.
>>>
>>>
>>>Rudy,
>>
>>No, RON: Stop crossposting.
>
>
> I am reading and responding

and leaving a crosspost in that you have been politely
asked to take out. You're a shitbag.

uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
engagement and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:

> In article et>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
>>engagement and wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>>You like to antagonize people.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>He can remove them from his end.
>>>>
>>>>He cannot. They originate on your end, shitbag.
>>>
>>>
>>>Of course, you attribute responsibility to me
>>
>>because the content of your posts IS your
>>responsibility. You are fully responsible for every
>>bit and byte of your posts, Ron.
>
>
> I am responsible for what I type.

You are responsible for what you SEND. Stop trying to
disclaim your responsibility, Ron.

If the requester from rec.boats had obtained a court
order telling one and all to remove the group from the
headers of any replies, and you knew of the order and
knew that you would face painful legal consequences for
continuing to crosspost to the group, you would remove
the group from your headers. Your refusal to behave
decently is based solely on your knowledge that you can
continue to behave indecently without fear of any
negative consequences. You are a shitbag.

In article t>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> engagement and wrote:
>
> > In article et>,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> >>engagement and wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>It's bullshit.
> >>>>
> >>>>He's responsible for ****ing off those boat owners
> >>>>whenever he puts up a post that contains a crosspost to
> >>>>rec.boats. It's his action.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Boat owners are
> >>
> >>You are responsible for refusing to respond to a polite
> >>request. You are an asshole.
> >
> >
> > I have the option of complying with a request
>
> and you have no good reason not to comply with this one
> except that you like to antagonize deliberately people
> who have made a polite request of you.

Ah, the reality of logical problems. There are many reasons that I do
the things that I do. Assuming a singular cause is rather limited
thinking in scope.

Since you mention it though, please stop antagonizing Scented. I'm
making a polite request. Pleaset stop insulting pearl. In fact, a polite
request is to stop insulting the other users of this newsgroup.

For me, let me have your best shot.

uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
engagement and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:

> In article t>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
>>engagement and wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>You are responsible for refusing to respond to a polite
>>>>request. You are an asshole.
>>>
>>>
>>>I have the option of complying with a request
>>
>>and you have no good reason not to comply with this one
>>except that you like to antagonize deliberately people
>>who have made a polite request of you.
>
>
> Ah, the reality

The reality is, you are refusing to comply with a
polite request because you're an asshole.

In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> Ron wrote:
>
> > In article et>,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> >>engagement and wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>In article et>,
> >>> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> >>>>engagement and wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>Ron continues to leave the cross post in, despite the
> >>>>>>polite request of the admiral to take it out. He is
> >>>>>>responsible.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>If the admiral would like the crosspost removed, I consider it his
> >>>>>responsibility to remove it.
> >>>>
> >>>>You are the one posting with rec.boats in your headers.
> >>>>You are responsible for where your posts go.
> >>>>
> >>>>Why are you trying to blame others for your actions, Ron?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Correction. My ISP is responsible
> >>
> >>Stop trying to shuck off responsibility for your
> >>actions, shitbag.
> >
> >
> > My ISP
>
> You are responsible for your actions, Ron. Stop
> blaming your ISP.

Yes. We agree. My actions were interrupted by the admiral's actions and
he then assumes responsibility for where his actions intervened. He
opened the post. He became annoyed. He is responsible for his choice to
open the post. He is responsible for his feelings.

uncurious Marginal Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really
want adult engagement and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:

> In article et>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>uncurious Marginal Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult engagement
>>and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:
>>
>>
>>>>>Correction. My ISP is responsible
>>>>
>>>>Stop trying to shuck off responsibility for your
>>>>actions, shitbag.
>>>
>>>
>>>My ISP
>>
>>You are responsible for your actions, Ron. Stop
>>blaming your ISP.
>
>
> Yes. We agree.

No, we seem not to agree. You are blaming your ISP for
your failure to be responsible, and I'm encouraging you
to behave as an adult and accept that you are
responsible for your actions.

We do not agree, Ron. It is almost inconceivable we
could agree. All the other participants in this
newsgroup do agree with me that you're a marginal, a
mental defective, and a shitbag.

In article t>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> Scented Nectar wrote:
>
> >>>You're the defective one, Rudy.
> >>
> >>Nope.
> >
> >
> > Considering your fantasies
>
> No fantasies. Homo Ron ****ed his grandfather's
> corpse, nonstop for three days.

This is your best. What an amateur.

Come on Rudy. If you're gonna waste out time at least do it well. If you
are going to be abusive, at least do a good job. These half-assess
attempts are really pathetic. Mediocrity rules for some people.

In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> engagement and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:
>
> > In article et>,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> >>engagement and wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>He was politely asked to take an action to trim the
> >>>>headers. He pointedly refuses.
> >>>>
> >>>>He is responsible for the content of the headers of
> >>>>where he posts. He's unnecessarily angering the
> >>>>commodores and admirals, and he's responsible for it.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>I am
> >>
> >>Trying to shove your responsibility onto someone else.
> >
> >
> > Unfortunately,
>
> Unfortunately, you are developmentally retarded and
> have an inability to accept responsibility for your
> actions.

These generalizations only lead us to suspect projection, as Pearl as
graciously supplied information about.

I am fully aware of my actions. But thank you for being concerned about
my well-being.

In article t>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> Scented Nectar wrote:
>
> >>>Considering your fantasies
> >>
> >>No fantasies. Homo Ron ****ed his grandfather's
> >>corpse, nonstop for three days.
> >
> >
> > We, all the readers of this, know
>
> that Ron engaged in necrophilia.
>
> He's revolting.

While I do admire your skill at manipulation, you are pathetic when it
comes to being abusive. You are even a failure at being abusive.
Mediocrity rules.

In article t>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> engagement and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:
>
> > In article et>,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> >>engagement and wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>In article >,
> >>> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Scented Nectar wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>Who did the misdeed of crossposting
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>in Ron's posts? Ron did.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>You started it.
> >>>>
> >>>>Ron has it in his power to stop it as far as his posts go.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Who is
> >>
> >>continuing the crossposts? Ron is. He's an asshole.
> >
> >
> > As does
>
> Stop trying to shift responsibility for your actions.

come on Rudy. If you are going to waste our time. Do a good job it.
These half-assed attempts are quite pitiful.

In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> engagement and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:
>
> > In article et>,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> >>engagement and wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>Ron is responsible for the headers of his posts.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Ron is responsible
> >>
> >>for not acceding to a polite request made of him. Ron
> >>is a shitbag.
> >
> >
> > Come on
>
> Stop trying to disavow responsibility for your actions.

I fear I gave you too much credit. You are amateurish in your ability to
be abusive, or a time waster.

uncurious Marginal Ron AGAIN showed he gets sick sexual
pleasure from being abused in usenet and wrote:

> In article t>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>Scented Nectar wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>You're the defective one, Rudy.
>>>>
>>>>Nope.
>>>
>>>
>>>Considering your fantasies
>>
>>No fantasies. Homo Ron ****ed his grandfather's
>>corpse, nonstop for three days.
>
>
> This is

The truth. You boned your grandfather's corpse.

uncurious Marginal Ron AGAIN showed he gets sick sexual
pleasure from being abused in usenet and wrote:

> In article et>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
>>engagement and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:
>>
>>
>>>>>I am
>>>>
>>>>Trying to shove your responsibility onto someone else.
>>>
>>>
>>>Unfortunately,
>>
>>Unfortunately, you are developmentally retarded and
>>have an inability to accept responsibility for your
>>actions.
>
>
> These generalizations

Are factually based and sound.

uncurious Marginal Ron AGAIN showed he gets sick sexual
pleasure from being abused in usenet and wrote:

> In article t>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>Scented Nectar wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>Considering your fantasies
>>>>
>>>>No fantasies. Homo Ron ****ed his grandfather's
>>>>corpse, nonstop for three days.
>>>
>>>
>>>We, all the readers of this, know
>>
>>that Ron engaged in necrophilia.
>>
>>He's revolting.
>
>
> While I do admire your skill at manipulation

No manipulation. You lied.

uncurious Marginal Ron AGAIN showed he gets sick sexual
pleasure from being abused in usenet and wrote:

> In article et>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
>>engagement and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>He's one sick homo.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Wait a minute.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>No. You're a sick homo who ****ed his dead grandfather
>>>>>>up the ass for three days solid, and has no remorse.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Unless
>>>>
>>>>You're a sick homo who ****ed his dead grandfather. No
>>>>"unless" about it.
>>>
>>>
>>>Ah,
>>
>>You're a sick homo.
>
>
> ro

You're a sick homo, Ron. A pathetic, low-life-quality,
zero-time-value sick homo. You'll be dead of AIDS soon.

uncurious Marginal Ron AGAIN showed he gets sick sexual
pleasure from being abused in usenet and wrote:

> In article t>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
>>engagement and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:
>>
>>
>>>>>Who is
>>>>
>>>>continuing the crossposts? Ron is. He's an asshole.
>>>
>>>
>>>As does
>>
>>Stop trying to shift responsibility for your actions.
>
>
> come on

Stop trying to shift responsibility for your actions, Ron.

uncurious Marginal Ron AGAIN showed he gets sick sexual
pleasure from being abused in usenet and wrote:

> In article et>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
>>engagement and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:
>>
>>
>>>>>Ron is responsible
>>>>
>>>>for not acceding to a polite request made of him. Ron
>>>>is a shitbag.
>>>
>>>
>>>Come on
>>
>>Stop trying to disavow responsibility for your actions.
>
>
> I fear

You fear an end to being abused in usenet. It's your
sole source of pleasure in life.

In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> engagement and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:
>
> > In article t>,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> >>engagement and wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>You have been asked politely to trim rec.boats. Your
> >>>>failure to do it is a willful wish to antagonize people
> >>>>you don't even know who have been civil to you.
> >>>>
> >>>>You are an asshole. Deliberately.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>You don't believe what I say
> >>
> >>Because you're a documented and demonstrated liar. A
> >>shitty liar, but a liar all the same.
> >>
> >>You are responsible for your actions.
> >
> >
> > Liar! Yikes. Human tell the truth and humans lie.
>
> You only lie. Stop it.

Okay, I'll tell the truth. The pitfall of time wasters is that they
become addicted to the feeling of power. Of course, feelings of power
are only feelings and therefore illusory.

As a result, someone like me can keep them going for awhile and this
reinforces their false sense of power. As a result of their
unwillingness to be without that feeling, they become locked into a
pattern of behaviour and are unable and unwilling to break that pattern
-- like any addiction.

Like the junkie you are, I will now shut off your supply. Let's watch
you jones.

In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> engagement and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:
>
> > In article et>,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> >>engagement and wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>>>You like to antagonize people.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>He can remove them from his end.
> >>>>
> >>>>He cannot. They originate on your end, shitbag.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Of course, you attribute responsibility to me
> >>
> >>because the content of your posts IS your
> >>responsibility. You are fully responsible for every
> >>bit and byte of your posts, Ron.
> >
> >
> > I am responsible for what I type.
>
> You are responsible for what you SEND. Stop trying to
> disclaim your responsibility, Ron.
>
> If the requester from rec.boats had obtained a court
> order telling one and all to remove the group from the
> headers of any replies, and you knew of the order and
> knew that you would face painful legal consequences for
> continuing to crosspost to the group, you would remove
> the group from your headers. Your refusal to behave
> decently is based solely on your knowledge that you can
> continue to behave indecently without fear of any
> negative consequences. You are a shitbag.

And you a minor player when it comes to abuse. Can you do anything well,
Rudy?

uncurious Marginal Ron AGAIN showed he gets sick sexual
pleasure from being abused in usenet and wrote:

> In article et>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
>>engagement and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:
>>
>>
>>>>You are responsible for your actions.
>>>
>>>
>>>Liar! Yikes. Human tell the truth and humans lie.
>>
>>You only lie. Stop it.
>
>
> Okay, I'll tell the truth. The pitfall of time wasters is that they
> become addicted to the feeling of power. Of course, feelings of power
> are only feelings and therefore illusory.

That describes you perfectly.

uncurious Marginal Ron AGAIN showed he gets sick sexual
pleasure from being abused in usenet and wrote:

> In article et>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
>>engagement and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:
>>
>>
>>>>because the content of your posts IS your
>>>>responsibility. You are fully responsible for every
>>>>bit and byte of your posts, Ron.
>>>
>>>
>>>I am responsible for what I type.
>>
>>You are responsible for what you SEND. Stop trying to
>>disclaim your responsibility, Ron.
>>
>>If the requester from rec.boats had obtained a court
>>order telling one and all to remove the group from the
>>headers of any replies, and you knew of the order and
>>knew that you would face painful legal consequences for
>>continuing to crosspost to the group, you would remove
>>the group from your headers. Your refusal to behave
>>decently is based solely on your knowledge that you can
>>continue to behave indecently without fear of any
>>negative consequences. You are a shitbag.
>
>
> [juvenile sarcasm]

You are choosing to offend the participants in rec.boats.

In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> uncurious Marginal Ron AGAIN showed he gets sick sexual
> pleasure from being abused in usenet and wrote:
>
> > In article et>,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> >>engagement and wrote more juvenile sarcasm:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>>>>>He's one sick homo.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Wait a minute.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>No. You're a sick homo who ****ed his dead grandfather
> >>>>>>up the ass for three days solid, and has no remorse.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Unless
> >>>>
> >>>>You're a sick homo who ****ed his dead grandfather. No
> >>>>"unless" about it.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Ah,
> >>
> >>You're a sick homo.
> >
> >
> > ro
>
> You're a sick homo, Ron. A pathetic, low-life-quality,
> zero-time-value sick homo. You'll be dead of AIDS soon.

lol. I do feel the need to apologize. By allowing you to think that you
win, I have allowed you to further your addiction for power. Your
chances of resisting are like that of the heroin addict.

In article >,
"Scented Nectar" > wrote:

> > > You're the defective one, Rudy.
> >
> > Nope.
>
> Considering your fantasies, from pedophilia
> to necrophilia and that they both have anal
> penetration in common, I'd say that your
> a little off the normal paths.

Hi inner-homo is calling out to us.

In article >,
"Scented Nectar" > wrote:

> > Considering your fantasies, from pedophilia
> > to necrophilia and that they both have anal
> > penetration in common, I'd say that your
> > a little off the normal paths.
>
> Oh, and did I mention that both your exposed
> fantasies were males as the receivers of the
> penetration. Is there something you're trying
> to say?

Rudy and bottom are synonymous.

uncurious Marginal Ron AGAIN showed he gets sick sexual
pleasure from being abused in usenet and wrote:

> In article et>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>uncurious Marginal Ron AGAIN showed he gets sick sexual
>>pleasure from being abused in usenet and wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>>>Unless
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You're a sick homo who ****ed his dead grandfather. No
>>>>>>"unless" about it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Ah,
>>>>
>>>>You're a sick homo.
>>>
>>>
>>>ro
>>
>>You're a sick homo, Ron. A pathetic, low-life-quality,
>>zero-time-value sick homo. You'll be dead of AIDS soon.
>
>
> I do feel the need to apologize.

No need to apologize for anything, powerless little
time-waster. You've done the groups a tremendous
public service by showing that sick little homos are
deserving of the contempt they universally receive.

uncurious Marginal Ron AGAIN showed he gets sick sexual
pleasure from being abused in usenet and wrote:

> In article >,
> "Scented Nectar" > wrote:
>
>
>>>>You're the defective one, Rudy.
>>>
>>>Nope.
>>
>>Considering your fantasies, from pedophilia
>>to necrophilia and that they both have anal
>>penetration in common, I'd say that your
>>a little off the normal paths.
>
>
> [juvenile sarcasm]

Why don't you have anything better to do, homo Ron?
Why don't you engage in some productive adult
activities instead of posting silly juvenile sarcasm to
usenet?

In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> uncurious Marginal Ron AGAIN showed he gets sick sexual
> pleasure from being abused in usenet and wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > "Scented Nectar" > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>>You're the defective one, Rudy.
> >>>
> >>>Nope.
> >>
> >>Considering your fantasies, from pedophilia
> >>to necrophilia and that they both have anal
> >>penetration in common, I'd say that your
> >>a little off the normal paths.
> >
> >
> > [juvenile sarcasm]
>
> Why don't you have anything better to do, homo Ron?
> Why don't you engage in some productive adult
> activities instead of posting silly juvenile sarcasm to
> usenet?

Bait, bait, bait. He's jonesing now.

uncurious Marginal Ron AGAIN showed he gets sick sexual
pleasure from being abused in usenet and wrote:

> In article et>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>uncurious Marginal Ron AGAIN showed he gets sick sexual
>>pleasure from being abused in usenet and wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>>You're the defective one, Rudy.
>>>>>
>>>>>Nope.
>>>>
>>>>Considering your fantasies, from pedophilia
>>>>to necrophilia and that they both have anal
>>>>penetration in common, I'd say that your
>>>>a little off the normal paths.
>>>
>>>
>>>[juvenile sarcasm]
>>
>>Why don't you have anything better to do, homo Ron?
>>Why don't you engage in some productive adult
>>activities instead of posting silly juvenile sarcasm to
>>usenet?
>
>
> Bait,

I guess you don't have anything better to do. Empty
life you lead, Ron.

"Scented Nectar" > wrote
>> > Good, then stop fixating on me.
>>
>> You love the attention, otherwise you would stop responding.
>
> My responding has nothing to do with
> the fact he was fixated.

I beg to differ. Your responses are all that are visible here, without them
nobody will have anything on which to fixate. You're thriving on all the
attention, admit it.

"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message
news
>> He has a point. I asked you to agree to compare all available foods
> against
>> one another, regardless of food type or category, a very reasonable
> request,
>> and something one would think a person in your position would be
> anxious to
>> do. You refused. Your excuse was that it "isn't fair", but nobody is
> buying
>> that. Just as with this survey, you are afraid that you won't like the
>> results.
>
> First of all, there's no data telling us
> the death toll of individual foods.

I realize that, I am propsing we use reasonable, mutually agreeable
estimates.

> Next
> you consistantly only want to compare
> the 'best' of meats to the 'worst' of vegan.

That is a lie and you know it. Proposing that ALL food be compared *by
definition* is comparing ALL food, *not* only best vs worst.

But let's examine that objection further. It is very plausible that in a
real world situation one might be presented with that very choice. If you
live in a relatively remote or northern community, the very choice you would
have would be the worst of vegan foods or the best of non-vegan foods. This
is a *real world* scenario that you REFUSE to consider in any way. You just
shut your eyes tight and cry NANANANANANANANA! What do you hope to gain by
doing that?

> When you want to compare like to like,
> I'll play the game too.

OK, as I have said before, I will gladly compare like to like, I am not
refusing ANY comparison. Now will you agree to compare all food, just as it
exists in the real world?

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Dutch" >
> wrote:
>
>> "Ron" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article et>,
>> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Scented Nectar wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >>>Incorrect. The person who placed the crosspost is the one who
>> >> >>>wanted
>> >> >
>> >> > it
>> >> >
>> >> >>>there and is the one who hoped to see some irritation in another.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>FOLLOWING the polite request to remove it, Ron, you
>> >> >>have it within your power to do so. Why do you
>> >> >>deliberately aggravate the rec.boat readers by not
>> >> >>removing it, when you've been politely asked to remove it?
>> >> >>
>> >> >>You're responsible, Ron.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > You Rudy are the one who crossposted this
>> >> > to the boats group.
>> >>
>> >> Ron continues to leave the cross post in, despite the
>> >> polite request of the admiral to take it out. He is
>> >> responsible.
>> >
>> > If the admiral would like the crosspost removed, I consider it his
>> > responsibility to remove it.
>>
>> You want him to remove crossposts from YOUR posts? How is he supposed to
>> do
>> that?
>
> A nice alteration.

That won't work.

> He is the one experiencing the difficulty. It is up
> to him to decide on how he proceeds or what his actions will be as a
> result of his difficulty. Of course, he can end his experience of the
> crossposting in several ways.

"removing the crosspost" isn't one of them.

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Dutch" >
> wrote:
>
>> "Ron" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article et>,
>> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>> >
>> >> uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
>> >> engagement and wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > In article t>,
>> >> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult engagement
>> >> >>and
>> >> >>wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>>I think it the responsibility of the person who places the
>> >> >>>crosspost
>> >> >>>there to remove the cross post. That is the reason I don't trim
>> >> >>>headers.
>> >> >>>They put it there, let them remove it. If they didn't want it
>> >> >>>there,
>> >> >>>they wouldn't have placed it there.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>This is interesting, Ron. Someone in rec.boats asks to
>> >> >>have his group removed. You COULD do it, easily, but
>> >> >>you choose not to do it. You **** off someone you
>> >> >>don't even know by refusing to acceded to his polite
>> >> >>request. You are now in the position of DIRECTLY doing
>> >> >>something that antagonizes someone, but you disclaim
>> >> >>any responsibility for it.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Incorrect. The person who placed the crosspost is the one who wanted
>> >> > it
>> >> > there and is the one who hoped to see some irritation in another.
>> >>
>> >> FOLLOWING the polite request to remove it, Ron, you
>> >> have it within your power to do so. Why do you
>> >> deliberately aggravate the rec.boat readers by not
>> >> removing it, when you've been politely asked to remove it?
>> >>
>> >> You're responsible, Ron.
>> >
>> > Why should I do for others what they can do for themselves? Anyone not
>> > wanting the posts in rec.boat can easily trim the header and send it
>> > back and avoid the continuation of the post being viewed in that
>> > newsgroup.
>>
>> You have a knack for getting EVERYTHING wrong Ron. At least you're an
>> expert
>> at something.
>
> I'm human. What I do seem to have ability to get RIGHT is to assess
> responsibility accurately.

That is one of the things you get the most WRONG.

> Admiral has many means at his disposal to
> address his dislike. Which include but are not limited to, killing the
> thread, the author, the newsgroup, not opening the thread, removing the
> crosspost when he opens it, refraining from reading the newsgroup,
> refraining from using all newsgroups, and so on.

Immaterial, you proposed an illogical solution and I pointed it out.

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article et>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>> uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
>> engagement and wrote:
>>
>> > In article et>,
>> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >>Scented Nectar wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>>>Incorrect. The person who placed the crosspost is the one who wanted
>> >>>>>it there and is the one who hoped to see some irritation in another.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>FOLLOWING the polite request to remove it, Ron, you
>> >>>>have it within your power to do so. Why do you
>> >>>>deliberately aggravate the rec.boat readers by not
>> >>>>removing it, when you've been politely asked to remove it?
>> >>>>
>> >>>>You're responsible, Ron.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>You Rudy are the one who crossposted this
>> >>>to the boats group.
>> >>
>> >>Ron continues to leave the cross post in, despite the
>> >>polite request of the admiral to take it out. He is
>> >>responsible.
>> >
>> >
>> > If the admiral would like the crosspost removed, I consider it his
>> > responsibility to remove it.
>>
>> You are the one posting with rec.boats in your headers.
>> You are responsible for where your posts go.
>>
>> Why are you trying to blame others for your actions, Ron?
>
> Correction. My ISP is responsible for where they route the responses
> that I post.

Blaming others again Ron?

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Scented Nectar" > wrote:
>
>> > He has a point. I asked you to agree to compare all available foods
>> against
>> > one another, regardless of food type or category, a very reasonable
>> request,
>> > and something one would think a person in your position would be
>> anxious to
>> > do. You refused. Your excuse was that it "isn't fair", but nobody is
>> buying
>> > that. Just as with this survey, you are afraid that you won't like the
>> > results.
>>
>> First of all, there's no data telling us
>> the death toll of individual foods. Next
>> you consistantly only want to compare
>> the 'best' of meats to the 'worst' of vegan.
>> When you want to compare like to like,
>> I'll play the game too.
>
> They are relentless, aren't they?

No more relentless in our search to uncover the truth than her determination
to hide from it.

"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message
...
> "Ron" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In article >,
>> "Scented Nectar" > wrote:
>>
>> > > He has a point. I asked you to agree to compare all available
> foods
>> > against
>> > > one another, regardless of food type or category, a very
> reasonable
>> > request,
>> > > and something one would think a person in your position would be
>> > anxious to
>> > > do. You refused. Your excuse was that it "isn't fair", but nobody
> is
>> > buying
>> > > that. Just as with this survey, you are afraid that you won't like
> the
>> > > results.
>> >
>> > First of all, there's no data telling us
>> > the death toll of individual foods. Next
>> > you consistantly only want to compare
>> > the 'best' of meats to the 'worst' of vegan.
>> > When you want to compare like to like,
>> > I'll play the game too.
>>
>> They are relentless, aren't they?
>
> They go in circles and my head spins!
> All that misspent energy.

If you weren't hiding from the truth your head would be clear as a bell.