| |
Main
Date: 27 Oct 2006 03:06:00
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
Ed Gin is a very funny fellow. I do not even look at his posts because he is
nothing but a troll - and an extremely stupid one at that. He is a shit head
from Chicagoland who once had his own website where he thought it was cute
to post nothing but pornographic images. But he might be just right for ARBR
as the members of this group are mostly shit heads also.
Tom Sherman thinks Ed Gin is the cat's meow and that he can do no wrong.
Does this not tell us everything about Tom Sherman that we will ever want to
know. A group mired in shit deserves a shit head like Ed Gin. Enjoy this
freaking troll - if you can!
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
|
| |
Date: 06 Nov 2006 15:27:04
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1162757834.885881.232680@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> [...]
> >> I never confused newsgroups and email with websites.
> >
> > You missed the point ... intentionally or otherwise (not unusual).
> > You said ... "Anything I pull up off the Internet is a website - and
> > that surely includes blogs.
>
> I wouldn't know a blog if one jumped up and bit me in the elbow.
Then I guess you shouldn't have referred to a blog as a website???
> And just where do newsgroups and email
> > reside? Email and newsgroups (a blog, a video, music, etc. ) are all
> > invoked/downloaded from whence they reside ... on the internet.
> > Consequently, by constraint of your own definition ... they are
> > classified (by you and ONLY you) as a website. In other words, you ARE
> > CONFUSED or you erred in formulating your definition. Pick one..
>
> "I never confused newsgroups and email with websites." -Ed Dolan
I already addressed this above.
> >> > You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
> >> > website hosted pornographic images.
> >>
> >> Substitute webpage for website and you will finally get up to speed.
> >
> > You are dumber than a rock. I just got done telling you that a website
> > is not the same thing as a web page and the two terms should not be
> > used interchangeably. A Web site is a collection of Web pages. For
> > example, Amazon.com is a Web site, but there are millions of Web pages
> > that make up the site. So, now you are trying to weasel out of your
> > fallacious accusation by substituting one for the other when they are
> > not one and the same???
>
> Was Ed Gin's web site made up of millions of web pages? We need to know!
We do??? Diversion duly noted weasel. This is irrelevant. What is
relevant is the basis that you have or do not have for making the
fallacious accusation that Ed Gin's website hosted pornographic images.
So far you have not provided any basis. We are still waiting for your
answer to that one. You know it and I know it. You spoke out of turn
and, like it or not, you owe Ed Gin a public apology and a retraction.
Be a man. Do the right thing. Say you were wrong. Say you're sorry.
> [...]
>
> >> The porn was on the Monkey Island webpage. Unlike you, I wasn't stupid
> >> enough to go to the HRS blog webpage since I knew what I would see there.
> >
> > And you know this how, since you admittedly never visited Monkey
> > Island? Are you in the habit of making definitive statements based on
> > lack of first-hand personal experience? Never mind. That was a
> > rhetorical question. Visiting the HRS blog has yet to be recognized as
> > a reliable measure of level of intelligence.
>
> I did look at the Monkey Island crap just once briefly. That was more than
> enough for me!
> [...]
Now wait just a minute. First (just above) you wrote ... The porn was
on the Monkey Island webpage. Unlike you, I wasn't stupid enough to go
to the HRS blog webpage since I knew what I would see there. Then you
contradicted youeself when you wrote ... I did look at the Monkey
Island crap just once briefly. That was more than enough for me! Can't
you make up your mind. Both statements cannot be either true or false.
One is true and one is false, but regardless the telling of a
falsdhood is prevaricaiton (nice word for a LIE). So much for you
credibility.
So tell us which is it?
A) I, Ed Dolan, am stupid (for having visited the Monkey Island Forum)
B) I, Ed Dolan, am a liar (for having said that I did and didn't visit
the Monkey Island Forum)
C) Both of the above
> >> Jim is absolutely the most tiresome creature God ever created.
> >> [...]
> >
> > Not really. I've got a long way to go to catch the GRATE one. Why doe
> > a self-proclaimed atheist refer to God??? The conundrum continues!!!
>
> When you think small thoughts, you become small yourself. Try to think some
> big thoughts occasionally.
When I think of you, I think small when I am contemplating my opinion
of you and big when I am contemplating what you are ... a JACKASS!!!.
Jim McNaa
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 08 Nov 2006 22:03:21
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1162855624.150855.196930@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1162757834.885881.232680@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > Edward Dolan wrote:
>> [...]
>> >> I never confused newsgroups and email with websites.
>> >
>> > You missed the point ... intentionally or otherwise (not unusual).
>> > You said ... "Anything I pull up off the Internet is a website - and
>> > that surely includes blogs.
>>
>> I wouldn't know a blog if one jumped up and bit me in the elbow.
>
> Then I guess you shouldn't have referred to a blog as a website???
>
>> And just where do newsgroups and email
>> > reside? Email and newsgroups (a blog, a video, music, etc. ) are all
>> > invoked/downloaded from whence they reside ... on the internet.
>> > Consequently, by constraint of your own definition ... they are
>> > classified (by you and ONLY you) as a website. In other words, you ARE
>> > CONFUSED or you erred in formulating your definition. Pick one..
>>
>> "I never confused newsgroups and email with websites." -Ed Dolan
>
> I already addressed this above.
>
>> >> > You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
>> >> > website hosted pornographic images.
>> >>
>> >> Substitute webpage for website and you will finally get up to speed.
>> >
>> > You are dumber than a rock. I just got done telling you that a website
>> > is not the same thing as a web page and the two terms should not be
>> > used interchangeably. A Web site is a collection of Web pages. For
>> > example, Amazon.com is a Web site, but there are millions of Web pages
>> > that make up the site. So, now you are trying to weasel out of your
>> > fallacious accusation by substituting one for the other when they are
>> > not one and the same???
>>
>> Was Ed Gin's web site made up of millions of web pages? We need to know!
>
> We do??? Diversion duly noted weasel. This is irrelevant. What is
> relevant is the basis that you have or do not have for making the
> fallacious accusation that Ed Gin's website hosted pornographic images.
> So far you have not provided any basis. We are still waiting for your
> answer to that one. You know it and I know it. You spoke out of turn
> and, like it or not, you owe Ed Gin a public apology and a retraction.
> Be a man. Do the right thing. Say you were wrong. Say you're sorry.
>
>> [...]
>>
>> >> The porn was on the Monkey Island webpage. Unlike you, I wasn't stupid
>> >> enough to go to the HRS blog webpage since I knew what I would see
>> >> there.
>> >
>> > And you know this how, since you admittedly never visited Monkey
>> > Island? Are you in the habit of making definitive statements based on
>> > lack of first-hand personal experience? Never mind. That was a
>> > rhetorical question. Visiting the HRS blog has yet to be recognized as
>> > a reliable measure of level of intelligence.
>>
>> I did look at the Monkey Island crap just once briefly. That was more
>> than
>> enough for me!
>> [...]
>
> Now wait just a minute. First (just above) you wrote ... The porn was
> on the Monkey Island webpage. Unlike you, I wasn't stupid enough to go
> to the HRS blog webpage since I knew what I would see there. Then you
> contradicted youeself when you wrote ... I did look at the Monkey
> Island crap just once briefly. That was more than enough for me! Can't
> you make up your mind. Both statements cannot be either true or false.
> One is true and one is false, but regardless the telling of a
> falsdhood is prevaricaiton (nice word for a LIE). So much for you
> credibility.
>
> So tell us which is it?
>
> A) I, Ed Dolan, am stupid (for having visited the Monkey Island Forum)
> B) I, Ed Dolan, am a liar (for having said that I did and didn't visit
> the Monkey Island Forum)
> C) Both of the above
>
>> >> Jim is absolutely the most tiresome creature God ever created.
>> >> [...]
>> >
>> > Not really. I've got a long way to go to catch the GRATE one. Why doe
>> > a self-proclaimed atheist refer to God??? The conundrum continues!!!
>>
>> When you think small thoughts, you become small yourself. Try to think
>> some
>> big thoughts occasionally.
>
> When I think of you, I think small when I am contemplating my opinion
> of you and big when I am contemplating what you are ... a JACKASS!!!.
>
> Jim McNaa
Did you say something?
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 06 Nov 2006 14:18:00
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1162770959.699872.73640@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS!
>
> > TOP POSTED TO GIVE ED SOMETHING TO BITCH ABOUT (like he needs help
> > ;^)...
> >
> > Q. Ed, what accusation did you make regarding Ed Gin and sexually
> > explicit images on his website?
> >
> > A. Ed Gin is a shit head from Chicagoland who once had his own website
> > where he thought it was cute to post nothing but pornographic images.
> >
> >
> > Q. Have you ever personally paid Ed Gin's website a visit?
> >
> > A. I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend
> > to.
> >
> >
> > Q. Both Tom Sherman and Jim McNaa have stated that Ed Gin's website
> > did not host any sexually explicit images. Since you have never
> > visited Ed Gin's website, how then can you make such an accusation? As
> > Tom Sherman would say ... where's your proof?
>
> This all hinges on the definition of a web site. However, what I would like
> to know is how many angels will fit on the tip of a needle. Answer that, if
> you can!
I'll respond to this nonsense at the bottom where you copy and pasted
this identical verbiage. I thought you only copy and pasted when
someone does not advance an argument because you didn't have infinite
patience for blathering about trivialities??? Wrong on both accounts I
see.
> > A. Tom Sherman is an enemy of mine from the early days of ARBR. He has
> > ever proven himself a coward when confronted with a criminal vandal
> > troll like Ed Gin. On this issue, he is beneath contempt. Jim
> > McNaa is a more recent antagonist of mine and is essentially nothing
> > but a stalker. He is more to be pitied than condemned. Who would you
> > rather believe a stalker, the most pitiful of all Internet creatures,
> > or Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows? This is
> > elementary my dear Watson. Tom Sherman always wants definitive proof
> > whereas a strong suspicion is more than good enough for me.
> >
> >
> > Q. Both Tom Sherman and Jim McNaa have stated that you are all about
> > argumentation and not about facts and it appears that you have only
> > suspicion and opinion to offer and no facts in evidence to corroborate
> > your assertion.
> >
> > A. Hells bells. Tom Sherman and Jim McNaa have their facts and I
> > have mine. Isn't that always the way it is when it comes to the
> > so-called facts! Like all intellectually challenged fools, they only
> > know how to fall back on their pitiful facts. Neither one of them ever
> > got beyond high school regardless of their college degrees. Tom
> > Sherman and Jim McNaa do not have a proper contempt for facts.
> > Facts are always subject to interpretation. By the way, my opinions
> > are invariably superior to most facts since my opinions come from the
> > Godhead and most facts come from nowhere.
> >
> >
> > Q. Jim McNaa has complained that you resort to copy and paste when
> > the argument appears not to be in your favor and you can't win.
> >
> > A. I only copy and paste when someone does not advance an argument.
> > I do not have infinite patience for blathering about trivialities.
>
> The above is garbled and not what I wrote.
Garbled??? Not what you wrote??? BULLSHIT!!! Is this a feeble
attempt to discredit??? This simulated interview (read parody) mirrors
quite well the flow of our debate. The above (and what follows below)
is virtually word for word what you have written (mostly in this very
thread) with minimal, minor, inconsequential changes where required to
ensure the flow of conversation in this simulated interview ... nothing
more ... nothing less..
> > Q. But Jim McNaa said that you copy and paste when you have been
> > proven to be wrong and are unable to counter an argument that has been
> > advanced. He claims that there are countless examples in your many
> > engagements with him and others, particularly Tom Sherman. I've seen
> > them myself.
> >
> > A. I only copy and paste when you someone does not advance an argument.
> > I do not have infinite patience for blathering about trivialities.
> >
> > Now, I see what Jim means.
>
> Poor Jim thinks he could have been a lawyer when he can't even get his
> quotations right!
Poor Ed thinks he is intelligent and an excellent writer and debater.
We all know better. The verbiage immediately above that is being
objected to is word for word (copy and pasted). Please note that no
quotation ks were employed even though the text that was copy an
pasted throughout this simulated interview can readily be found (most
of it in this very thread). Ed just doesn't appreciate parody when it
is at his expense. Ed would have you believe that he has been
misquoted, but those who have followed this thread know otherwise.
> > Q. As Jim McNaa would say, this is opinion stated as fact, and
> > opinion and fact are not synonyms!
> >
> > A. This is getting tiresome, this business about opinion as fact. You
> > don't know how to conduct an interview anymore than Jim McNaa and
> > Tom Sherman know how to debate (contest) an opinion. Too bad for all
> > of you!
>
> The above is just one of many misquotations as I don't believe I ever said
> "how to conduct an interview."
You can believe whatever you want. Your statements stand in testimony.
The first sentence is word for word (copy and pasted). "You don't know
how to conduct an interview" was literary license for the purpose of
the flow of conversation in concluding this simulated interview. "Jim
McNaa and Tom Sherman" were substituted for "you" (again literary
license), but the remainder of the sentence was was word for word (copy
and pasted).
> > Q. Ed, it is apparent that you have failed to corroborate your
> > accusation that Ed Gin's website hosted sexually explicit images. Tom
> > Sherman and Jim McNaa are right when they say you are all about
> > argumentation and not facts. Facts are instrumental in constructing a
> > sound argument. When you recognize that, perhaps then you will learn
> > the art of debate, and will stop whining about how your opinions are
> > all that matters. No wonder Tom and Jim can so easily make a fool of
> > you. This interview is over!
>
> "This all hinges on the definition of a web site. However, what I would like
> to know is how many angels will fit on the tip of a needle. Answer that, if
> you can!" - Ed Dolan
And, I provided you with that definition... WEBSITE - site (location)
on the World Wide Web. A website is a comprised of a collection of web
pages and other data such as images, sound, and video files that are
typically common to a particular domain name or subdomain on the World
Wide Web. Each Web site contains a home page, which is the first
document users see when they enter the site.
Of utmost significance, however is that the fact that if the retired
librarian (read Ed Dolan) did not know what a website was then he
should have put his librarian skills to good use before running off at
the mouth, making misstatements that he could not substantiate or
defend. To my way of thinking a retraction is in order as is a public
apology to Ed Gin for the false accusation that was made. Show that
you've got it in you, Ed. Say you're sorry.
As for your question, do you really want an answer??? Are you ready???
Well hear it is. The answer is that your question is irrelevant to
the discussion and your diversion is duly noted.
Jim McNaa
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 08 Nov 2006 22:06:18
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1162851480.428944.89940@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1162770959.699872.73640@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS!
>>
>> > TOP POSTED TO GIVE ED SOMETHING TO BITCH ABOUT (like he needs help
>> > ;^)...
>> >
>> > Q. Ed, what accusation did you make regarding Ed Gin and sexually
>> > explicit images on his website?
>> >
>> > A. Ed Gin is a shit head from Chicagoland who once had his own website
>> > where he thought it was cute to post nothing but pornographic images.
>> >
>> >
>> > Q. Have you ever personally paid Ed Gin's website a visit?
>> >
>> > A. I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend
>> > to.
>> >
>> >
>> > Q. Both Tom Sherman and Jim McNaa have stated that Ed Gin's website
>> > did not host any sexually explicit images. Since you have never
>> > visited Ed Gin's website, how then can you make such an accusation? As
>> > Tom Sherman would say ... where's your proof?
>>
>> This all hinges on the definition of a web site. However, what I would
>> like
>> to know is how many angels will fit on the tip of a needle. Answer that,
>> if
>> you can!
>
> I'll respond to this nonsense at the bottom where you copy and pasted
> this identical verbiage. I thought you only copy and pasted when
> someone does not advance an argument because you didn't have infinite
> patience for blathering about trivialities??? Wrong on both accounts I
> see.
>
>> > A. Tom Sherman is an enemy of mine from the early days of ARBR. He has
>> > ever proven himself a coward when confronted with a criminal vandal
>> > troll like Ed Gin. On this issue, he is beneath contempt. Jim
>> > McNaa is a more recent antagonist of mine and is essentially nothing
>> > but a stalker. He is more to be pitied than condemned. Who would you
>> > rather believe a stalker, the most pitiful of all Internet creatures,
>> > or Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows? This is
>> > elementary my dear Watson. Tom Sherman always wants definitive proof
>> > whereas a strong suspicion is more than good enough for me.
>> >
>> >
>> > Q. Both Tom Sherman and Jim McNaa have stated that you are all about
>> > argumentation and not about facts and it appears that you have only
>> > suspicion and opinion to offer and no facts in evidence to corroborate
>> > your assertion.
>> >
>> > A. Hells bells. Tom Sherman and Jim McNaa have their facts and I
>> > have mine. Isn't that always the way it is when it comes to the
>> > so-called facts! Like all intellectually challenged fools, they only
>> > know how to fall back on their pitiful facts. Neither one of them ever
>> > got beyond high school regardless of their college degrees. Tom
>> > Sherman and Jim McNaa do not have a proper contempt for facts.
>> > Facts are always subject to interpretation. By the way, my opinions
>> > are invariably superior to most facts since my opinions come from the
>> > Godhead and most facts come from nowhere.
>> >
>> >
>> > Q. Jim McNaa has complained that you resort to copy and paste when
>> > the argument appears not to be in your favor and you can't win.
>> >
>> > A. I only copy and paste when someone does not advance an argument.
>> > I do not have infinite patience for blathering about trivialities.
>>
>> The above is garbled and not what I wrote.
>
> Garbled??? Not what you wrote??? BULLSHIT!!! Is this a feeble
> attempt to discredit??? This simulated interview (read parody) mirrors
> quite well the flow of our debate. The above (and what follows below)
> is virtually word for word what you have written (mostly in this very
> thread) with minimal, minor, inconsequential changes where required to
> ensure the flow of conversation in this simulated interview ... nothing
> more ... nothing less..
>
>> > Q. But Jim McNaa said that you copy and paste when you have been
>> > proven to be wrong and are unable to counter an argument that has been
>> > advanced. He claims that there are countless examples in your many
>> > engagements with him and others, particularly Tom Sherman. I've seen
>> > them myself.
>> >
>> > A. I only copy and paste when you someone does not advance an argument.
>> > I do not have infinite patience for blathering about trivialities.
>> >
>> > Now, I see what Jim means.
>>
>> Poor Jim thinks he could have been a lawyer when he can't even get his
>> quotations right!
>
> Poor Ed thinks he is intelligent and an excellent writer and debater.
> We all know better. The verbiage immediately above that is being
> objected to is word for word (copy and pasted). Please note that no
> quotation ks were employed even though the text that was copy an
> pasted throughout this simulated interview can readily be found (most
> of it in this very thread). Ed just doesn't appreciate parody when it
> is at his expense. Ed would have you believe that he has been
> misquoted, but those who have followed this thread know otherwise.
>
>> > Q. As Jim McNaa would say, this is opinion stated as fact, and
>> > opinion and fact are not synonyms!
>> >
>> > A. This is getting tiresome, this business about opinion as fact. You
>> > don't know how to conduct an interview anymore than Jim McNaa and
>> > Tom Sherman know how to debate (contest) an opinion. Too bad for all
>> > of you!
>>
>> The above is just one of many misquotations as I don't believe I ever
>> said
>> "how to conduct an interview."
>
> You can believe whatever you want. Your statements stand in testimony.
> The first sentence is word for word (copy and pasted). "You don't know
> how to conduct an interview" was literary license for the purpose of
> the flow of conversation in concluding this simulated interview. "Jim
> McNaa and Tom Sherman" were substituted for "you" (again literary
> license), but the remainder of the sentence was was word for word (copy
> and pasted).
>
>> > Q. Ed, it is apparent that you have failed to corroborate your
>> > accusation that Ed Gin's website hosted sexually explicit images. Tom
>> > Sherman and Jim McNaa are right when they say you are all about
>> > argumentation and not facts. Facts are instrumental in constructing a
>> > sound argument. When you recognize that, perhaps then you will learn
>> > the art of debate, and will stop whining about how your opinions are
>> > all that matters. No wonder Tom and Jim can so easily make a fool of
>> > you. This interview is over!
>>
>> "This all hinges on the definition of a web site. However, what I would
>> like
>> to know is how many angels will fit on the tip of a needle. Answer that,
>> if
>> you can!" - Ed Dolan
>
> And, I provided you with that definition... WEBSITE - site (location)
> on the World Wide Web. A website is a comprised of a collection of web
> pages and other data such as images, sound, and video files that are
> typically common to a particular domain name or subdomain on the World
> Wide Web. Each Web site contains a home page, which is the first
> document users see when they enter the site.
>
> Of utmost significance, however is that the fact that if the retired
> librarian (read Ed Dolan) did not know what a website was then he
> should have put his librarian skills to good use before running off at
> the mouth, making misstatements that he could not substantiate or
> defend. To my way of thinking a retraction is in order as is a public
> apology to Ed Gin for the false accusation that was made. Show that
> you've got it in you, Ed. Say you're sorry.
>
> As for your question, do you really want an answer??? Are you ready???
> Well hear it is. The answer is that your question is irrelevant to
> the discussion and your diversion is duly noted.
>
> Jim McNaa
Did you say something?
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 06 Nov 2006 13:19:33
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1162764384.001636.224450@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> [...]
> >> I am only going by what you have previously told me about Ed Gin both on
> >> these newsgroups and by email. Others have also confirmed over and over
> >> who
> >> was posting under various false names and addresses.
> >
> > I never told you that Ed Gin's website hosted pornographic images
> > either via email or newsgroups. Prove me wrong. - Jim McNaa
>
> My opinion of Ed Gin was formed on my own from viewing the Monkey Island web
> page (once!) and from posts of his under various false names to ARBR. You
> only confirmed my very bad opinion of him. He is human scum and is nothing
> but a criminal vandal troll. The less said about him the better!
Thank you for refuting your assertion that I was the source of
information upon which you based your fallacious accusation regarding
the hosting of pornographic images on Ed Gin's website. At least we
got that cleared up. - Jim McNaa
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 06 Nov 2006 13:06:43
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
JimmyMac wrote:
> Edward Dolan wrote:
> > "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:1162688248.258712.76050@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > >
> > > Edward Dolan wrote:
> > >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > >> news:1162648319.359077.235730@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> > >> >
> > >> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> > >> [...]
> > >> >> The Monkey Island and the HRS blog websites were all about Ed Gin
> > >> >> doing
> > >> >> his
> > >> >> thing. Therefore, my reference to "his own website" was surely nor far
> > >> >> off
> > >> >> the k. There is something wrong with the way your brain works.
> > >> >
> > >> > Your reference to Ed Gin's website was surely not far off the k???
> > >> > Opinion stated as fact. You failed miserably in your attempt to weasel
> > >> >> >>> > out of this one. Monkey Island and HRS were not (by definition)
> > >> > websites and labeling them as such does not in any way alter what they
> > >> > were. Look up the definition ... librarian. There is something wrong
> > >> > with the way my brain works??? I didn't know you did standup!!!
> > >>
> > >> Anything I pull up off the Internet is a website - and that surely
> > >> includes
> > >> blogs.
> > >
> > > I see you've run out of wiggle room again. If anything you pulled off
> > > the internet were a website, then Usenet newsgroups and email would be
> > > websitee, by your errant definition, and they morst certainly are not.
> > > Let me help you out here...
> > >
> > > BLOG - short for "Web log", a blog refers to publicly accessible online
> > > journal entries posted on a personal web page.
> > >
> > > WEBSITE - site (location) on the World Wide Web. A website is a
> > > comprised of a collection of web pages and other data such as images,
> > > sound, and video files that are typically common to a particular domain
> > > name or subdomain on the World Wide Web. Each Web site contains a home
> > > page, which is the first document users see when they enter the site.
> > >
> > > A website is not the same thing as a web page and the two terms should
> > > not be used interchangeably. A Web site is a collection of Web pages.
> > > For example, Amazon.com is a Web site, but there are millions of Web
> > > pages that make up the site.
> >
> > I suspect Jim is right about all of this and I will defer to him on the
> > subject of websites vs. webpages. I never knew there was any difference.
>
> I am right. Now was that so hard? Your next step in this progression
> is to admit when you are wrong. Then, progress will truly have been
> made.
>
> > > I'll leave "Usenet newsgroup" and "email" for you to look up. That's
> > > what librarians do best. They sure can't debate worth a damn.
> >
> > I never confused newsgroups and email with websites.
> You missed the point ... intentionally or otherwise (not unusual).
> You said ... "Anything I pull up off the Internet is a website - and
> that surely includes blogs. And just where do newsgroups and email
> reside? Email and newsgroups (a blog, a video, music, etc. ) are all
> invoked/downloaded from whence they reside ... on the internet.
> Consequently, by constraint of your own definition ... they are
> classified (by you and ONLY you) as a website. In other words, you ARE
> CONFUSED or you erred in formulating your definition. Pick one..
I should have added the videos you view, the music you listen to, the
Window's update you make, the virus definition updates that you
download all conform to your restrictive definition of what
constitutes a website. It has been duly noted that give the option to
PICK ONE, that you abstained. Checkmate.
> > > You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
> > > website hosted pornographic images.
> >
> > Substitute webpage for website and you will finally get up to speed.
>
> You are dumber than a rock. I just got done telling you that a website
> is not the same thing as a web page and the two terms should not be
> used interchangeably. A Web site is a collection of Web pages. For
> example, Amazon.com is a Web site, but there are millions of Web pages
> that make up the site. So, now you are trying to weasel out of your
> fallacious accusation by substituting one for the other when they are
> not one and the same???
I'll consider you silence in this matter as recognition and submission.
> You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
> website hosted pornographic images.
>
> > [...]
> >
> > >> I only copy and paste when you do not advance the argument. Unlike you, I
> > >> do
> > >> not have infinite patience for blathering about trivialities. You go
> > >> round
> > >> and round to no purpose. That is not my style.
> > >
> > > Read that translation once again. You copy and paste whenever you have
> > > been proven to be wrong an are unable to counter an argument that has
> > > been advanced. There are countless examples in many of our engagements
> > > as well as your engagements with others, particularly Tom Sherman.
> > >
> > > You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
> > > website hosted pornographic images.
> >
> > The porn was on the Monkey Island webpage. Unlike you, I wasn't stupid
> > enough to go to the HRS blog webpage since I knew what I would see there.
>
> And you know this how, since you admittedly never visited Monkey
> Island? Are you in the habit of making definitive statements based on
> lack of first-hand personal experience? Never mind. That was a
> rhetorical question. Visiting the HRS blog has yet to be recognized as
> a reliable measure of level of intelligence.
The silence is deafening.
> > [...]
> >
> > >> The only charge I made that matters was that Ed Gin was a scoundrel and a
> > >> knave
> > >> based on what he was posting to ARBR and a few other cycling newsgroups.
> > >> It
> > >> is irrelevant whether he was connected with a website of his own or the
> > >> Monkey Island or HRS websites.
> > >
> > > I will agree with your assessment of Ed Gin, but this is not about Ed
> > > Gin. This is about you assertion (read fallacious accusation). The
> > > specific charge that you made was that Ed Gin's website contained
> > > pornographic images and it most certainly did not and it is relevant.
> > > You made the Ed Gin website connection relevant when you made your
> > > accusation. Good that you were a librarian as you would have been a
> > > lousy attorney.
> >
> > Jim is absolutely the most tiresome creature God ever created.
> > [...]
>
> Not really. I've got a long way to go to catch the GRATE one. Why does
> a self-proclaimed atheist refer to God??? The conundrum continues!!!
>
> You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
> website hosted pornographic images.
>
> Jim McNaa
>
> > Regards,
> >
> > Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> > aka
> > Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 08 Nov 2006 22:04:15
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1162847203.434210.307230@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> JimmyMac wrote:
>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> > "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> > news:1162688248.258712.76050@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> > >
>> > > Edward Dolan wrote:
>> > >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> > >> news:1162648319.359077.235730@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Edward Dolan wrote:
>> > >> [...]
>> > >> >> The Monkey Island and the HRS blog websites were all about Ed Gin
>> > >> >> doing
>> > >> >> his
>> > >> >> thing. Therefore, my reference to "his own website" was surely
>> > >> >> nor far
>> > >> >> off
>> > >> >> the k. There is something wrong with the way your brain works.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Your reference to Ed Gin's website was surely not far off the
>> > >> > k???
>> > >> > Opinion stated as fact. You failed miserably in your attempt to
>> > >> > weasel
>> > >> >> >>> > out of this one. Monkey Island and HRS were not (by
>> > >> >> >>> > definition)
>> > >> > websites and labeling them as such does not in any way alter what
>> > >> > they
>> > >> > were. Look up the definition ... librarian. There is something
>> > >> > wrong
>> > >> > with the way my brain works??? I didn't know you did standup!!!
>> > >>
>> > >> Anything I pull up off the Internet is a website - and that surely
>> > >> includes
>> > >> blogs.
>> > >
>> > > I see you've run out of wiggle room again. If anything you pulled
>> > > off
>> > > the internet were a website, then Usenet newsgroups and email would
>> > > be
>> > > websitee, by your errant definition, and they morst certainly are
>> > > not.
>> > > Let me help you out here...
>> > >
>> > > BLOG - short for "Web log", a blog refers to publicly accessible
>> > > online
>> > > journal entries posted on a personal web page.
>> > >
>> > > WEBSITE - site (location) on the World Wide Web. A website is a
>> > > comprised of a collection of web pages and other data such as images,
>> > > sound, and video files that are typically common to a particular
>> > > domain
>> > > name or subdomain on the World Wide Web. Each Web site contains a
>> > > home
>> > > page, which is the first document users see when they enter the site.
>> > >
>> > > A website is not the same thing as a web page and the two terms
>> > > should
>> > > not be used interchangeably. A Web site is a collection of Web
>> > > pages.
>> > > For example, Amazon.com is a Web site, but there are millions of Web
>> > > pages that make up the site.
>> >
>> > I suspect Jim is right about all of this and I will defer to him on the
>> > subject of websites vs. webpages. I never knew there was any
>> > difference.
>>
>> I am right. Now was that so hard? Your next step in this progression
>> is to admit when you are wrong. Then, progress will truly have been
>> made.
>>
>> > > I'll leave "Usenet newsgroup" and "email" for you to look up. That's
>> > > what librarians do best. They sure can't debate worth a damn.
>> >
>> > I never confused newsgroups and email with websites.
>
>> You missed the point ... intentionally or otherwise (not unusual).
>> You said ... "Anything I pull up off the Internet is a website - and
>> that surely includes blogs. And just where do newsgroups and email
>> reside? Email and newsgroups (a blog, a video, music, etc. ) are all
>> invoked/downloaded from whence they reside ... on the internet.
>> Consequently, by constraint of your own definition ... they are
>> classified (by you and ONLY you) as a website. In other words, you ARE
>> CONFUSED or you erred in formulating your definition. Pick one..
>
> I should have added the videos you view, the music you listen to, the
> Window's update you make, the virus definition updates that you
> download all conform to your restrictive definition of what
> constitutes a website. It has been duly noted that give the option to
> PICK ONE, that you abstained. Checkmate.
>
>> > > You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
>> > > website hosted pornographic images.
>> >
>> > Substitute webpage for website and you will finally get up to speed.
>>
>> You are dumber than a rock. I just got done telling you that a website
>> is not the same thing as a web page and the two terms should not be
>> used interchangeably. A Web site is a collection of Web pages. For
>> example, Amazon.com is a Web site, but there are millions of Web pages
>> that make up the site. So, now you are trying to weasel out of your
>> fallacious accusation by substituting one for the other when they are
>> not one and the same???
>
> I'll consider you silence in this matter as recognition and submission.
>
>> You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
>> website hosted pornographic images.
>>
>> > [...]
>> >
>> > >> I only copy and paste when you do not advance the argument. Unlike
>> > >> you, I
>> > >> do
>> > >> not have infinite patience for blathering about trivialities. You go
>> > >> round
>> > >> and round to no purpose. That is not my style.
>> > >
>> > > Read that translation once again. You copy and paste whenever you
>> > > have
>> > > been proven to be wrong an are unable to counter an argument that has
>> > > been advanced. There are countless examples in many of our
>> > > engagements
>> > > as well as your engagements with others, particularly Tom Sherman.
>> > >
>> > > You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
>> > > website hosted pornographic images.
>> >
>> > The porn was on the Monkey Island webpage. Unlike you, I wasn't stupid
>> > enough to go to the HRS blog webpage since I knew what I would see
>> > there.
>>
>> And you know this how, since you admittedly never visited Monkey
>> Island? Are you in the habit of making definitive statements based on
>> lack of first-hand personal experience? Never mind. That was a
>> rhetorical question. Visiting the HRS blog has yet to be recognized as
>> a reliable measure of level of intelligence.
>
> The silence is deafening.
>
>> > [...]
>> >
>> > >> The only charge I made that matters was that Ed Gin was a scoundrel
>> > >> and a
>> > >> knave
>> > >> based on what he was posting to ARBR and a few other cycling
>> > >> newsgroups.
>> > >> It
>> > >> is irrelevant whether he was connected with a website of his own or
>> > >> the
>> > >> Monkey Island or HRS websites.
>> > >
>> > > I will agree with your assessment of Ed Gin, but this is not about Ed
>> > > Gin. This is about you assertion (read fallacious accusation). The
>> > > specific charge that you made was that Ed Gin's website contained
>> > > pornographic images and it most certainly did not and it is relevant.
>> > > You made the Ed Gin website connection relevant when you made your
>> > > accusation. Good that you were a librarian as you would have been a
>> > > lousy attorney.
>> >
>> > Jim is absolutely the most tiresome creature God ever created.
>> > [...]
>>
>> Not really. I've got a long way to go to catch the GRATE one. Why does
>> a self-proclaimed atheist refer to God??? The conundrum continues!!!
>>
>> You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
>> website hosted pornographic images.
>>
>> Jim McNaa
Did you say something?
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | |
Date: 27 Nov 2006 13:26:58
From: Chris Foster
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in
news:IZGdnQb-AcZUNc_YnZ2dnUVZ_vidnZ2d@prairiewave.com:
>
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1162847203.434210.307230@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> JimmyMac wrote:
>>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>> > "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> > news:1162688248.258712.76050@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>> > >
>>> > > Edward Dolan wrote:
>>> > >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> > >> news:1162648319.359077.235730@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > Edward Dolan wrote:
>>> > >> [...]
>>> > >> >> The Monkey Island and the HRS blog websites were all about
>>> > >> >> Ed Gin doing
>>> > >> >> his
>>> > >> >> thing. Therefore, my reference to "his own website" was
>>> > >> >> surely nor far
>>> > >> >> off
>>> > >> >> the k. There is something wrong with the way your brain
>>> > >> >> works.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > Your reference to Ed Gin's website was surely not far off the
>>> > >> > k???
>>> > >> > Opinion stated as fact. You failed miserably in your attempt
>>> > >> > to weasel
>>> > >> >> >>> > out of this one. Monkey Island and HRS were not (by
>>> > >> >> >>> > definition)
>>> > >> > websites and labeling them as such does not in any way alter
>>> > >> > what they
>>> > >> > were. Look up the definition ... librarian. There is
>>> > >> > something wrong
>>> > >> > with the way my brain works??? I didn't know you did
>>> > >> > standup!!!
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Anything I pull up off the Internet is a website - and that
>>> > >> surely includes
>>> > >> blogs.
>>> > >
>>> > > I see you've run out of wiggle room again. If anything you
>>> > > pulled off
>>> > > the internet were a website, then Usenet newsgroups and email
>>> > > would be
>>> > > websitee, by your errant definition, and they morst certainly
>>> > > are not.
>>> > > Let me help you out here...
>>> > >
>>> > > BLOG - short for "Web log", a blog refers to publicly accessible
>>> > > online
>>> > > journal entries posted on a personal web page.
>>> > >
>>> > > WEBSITE - site (location) on the World Wide Web. A website is a
>>> > > comprised of a collection of web pages and other data such as
>>> > > images, sound, and video files that are typically common to a
>>> > > particular domain
>>> > > name or subdomain on the World Wide Web. Each Web site contains
>>> > > a home
>>> > > page, which is the first document users see when they enter the
>>> > > site.
>>> > >
>>> > > A website is not the same thing as a web page and the two terms
>>> > > should
>>> > > not be used interchangeably. A Web site is a collection of Web
>>> > > pages.
>>> > > For example, Amazon.com is a Web site, but there are millions of
>>> > > Web pages that make up the site.
>>> >
>>> > I suspect Jim is right about all of this and I will defer to him
>>> > on the subject of websites vs. webpages. I never knew there was
>>> > any difference.
>>>
>>> I am right. Now was that so hard? Your next step in this
>>> progression is to admit when you are wrong. Then, progress will
>>> truly have been made.
>>>
>>> > > I'll leave "Usenet newsgroup" and "email" for you to look up.
>>> > > That's what librarians do best. They sure can't debate worth a
>>> > > damn.
>>> >
>>> > I never confused newsgroups and email with websites.
>>
>>> You missed the point ... intentionally or otherwise (not unusual).
>>> You said ... "Anything I pull up off the Internet is a website - and
>>> that surely includes blogs. And just where do newsgroups and email
>>> reside? Email and newsgroups (a blog, a video, music, etc. ) are
>>> all invoked/downloaded from whence they reside ... on the internet.
>>> Consequently, by constraint of your own definition ... they are
>>> classified (by you and ONLY you) as a website. In other words, you
>>> ARE CONFUSED or you erred in formulating your definition. Pick
>>> one..
>>
>> I should have added the videos you view, the music you listen to, the
>> Window's update you make, the virus definition updates that you
>> download all conform to your restrictive definition of what
>> constitutes a website. It has been duly noted that give the option
>> to PICK ONE, that you abstained. Checkmate.
>>
>>> > > You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed
>>> > > Gin's website hosted pornographic images.
>>> >
>>> > Substitute webpage for website and you will finally get up to
>>> > speed.
>>>
>>> You are dumber than a rock. I just got done telling you that a
>>> website is not the same thing as a web page and the two terms should
>>> not be used interchangeably. A Web site is a collection of Web
>>> pages. For example, Amazon.com is a Web site, but there are millions
>>> of Web pages that make up the site. So, now you are trying to
>>> weasel out of your fallacious accusation by substituting one for the
>>> other when they are not one and the same???
>>
>> I'll consider you silence in this matter as recognition and
>> submission.
>>
>>> You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
>>> website hosted pornographic images.
>>>
>>> > [...]
>>> >
>>> > >> I only copy and paste when you do not advance the argument.
>>> > >> Unlike you, I
>>> > >> do
>>> > >> not have infinite patience for blathering about trivialities.
>>> > >> You go round
>>> > >> and round to no purpose. That is not my style.
>>> > >
>>> > > Read that translation once again. You copy and paste whenever
>>> > > you have
>>> > > been proven to be wrong an are unable to counter an argument
>>> > > that has been advanced. There are countless examples in many of
>>> > > our engagements
>>> > > as well as your engagements with others, particularly Tom
>>> > > Sherman.
>>> > >
>>> > > You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed
>>> > > Gin's website hosted pornographic images.
>>> >
>>> > The porn was on the Monkey Island webpage. Unlike you, I wasn't
>>> > stupid enough to go to the HRS blog webpage since I knew what I
>>> > would see there.
>>>
>>> And you know this how, since you admittedly never visited Monkey
>>> Island? Are you in the habit of making definitive statements based
>>> on lack of first-hand personal experience? Never mind. That was a
>>> rhetorical question. Visiting the HRS blog has yet to be recognized
>>> as a reliable measure of level of intelligence.
>>
>> The silence is deafening.
>>
>>> > [...]
>>> >
>>> > >> The only charge I made that matters was that Ed Gin was a
>>> > >> scoundrel and a
>>> > >> knave
>>> > >> based on what he was posting to ARBR and a few other cycling
>>> > >> newsgroups.
>>> > >> It
>>> > >> is irrelevant whether he was connected with a website of his
>>> > >> own or the
>>> > >> Monkey Island or HRS websites.
>>> > >
>>> > > I will agree with your assessment of Ed Gin, but this is not
>>> > > about Ed Gin. This is about you assertion (read fallacious
>>> > > accusation). The specific charge that you made was that Ed
>>> > > Gin's website contained pornographic images and it most
>>> > > certainly did not and it is relevant. You made the Ed Gin
>>> > > website connection relevant when you made your accusation. Good
>>> > > that you were a librarian as you would have been a lousy
>>> > > attorney.
>>> >
>>> > Jim is absolutely the most tiresome creature God ever created.
>>> > [...]
>>>
>>> Not really. I've got a long way to go to catch the GRATE one. Why
>>> does a self-proclaimed atheist refer to God??? The conundrum
>>> continues!!!
>>>
>>> You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
>>> website hosted pornographic images.
>>>
>>> Jim McNaa
>
> Did you say something?
>
Its Mikey junior! Is DUH next??
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
>
>
>
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| |
Date: 05 Nov 2006 15:55:59
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
TOP POSTED TO GIVE ED SOMETHING TO BITCH ABOUT (like he needs help
;^)...
Q. Ed, what accusation did you make regarding Ed Gin and sexually
explicit images on his website?
A. Ed Gin is a shit head from Chicagoland who once had his own website
where he thought it was cute to post nothing but pornographic images.
Q. Have you ever personally paid Ed Gin's website a visit?
A. I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend
to.
Q. Both Tom Sherman and Jim McNaa have stated that Ed Gin's website
did not host any sexually explicit images. Since you have never
visited Ed Gin's website, how then can you make such an accusation? As
Tom Sherman would say ... where's your proof?
A. Tom Sherman is an enemy of mine from the early days of ARBR. He has
ever proven himself a coward when confronted with a criminal vandal
troll like Ed Gin. On this issue, he is beneath contempt. Jim
McNaa is a more recent antagonist of mine and is essentially nothing
but a stalker. He is more to be pitied than condemned. Who would you
rather believe a stalker, the most pitiful of all Internet creatures,
or Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows? This is
elementary my dear Watson. Tom Sherman always wants definitive proof
whereas a strong suspicion is more than good enough for me.
Q. Both Tom Sherman and Jim McNaa have stated that you are all about
argumentation and not about facts and it appears that you have only
suspicion and opinion to offer and no facts in evidence to corroborate
your assertion.
A. Hells bells. Tom Sherman and Jim McNaa have their facts and I
have mine. Isn't that always the way it is when it comes to the
so-called facts! Like all intellectually challenged fools, they only
know how to fall back on their pitiful facts. Neither one of them ever
got beyond high school regardless of their college degrees. Tom
Sherman and Jim McNaa do not have a proper contempt for facts.
Facts are always subject to interpretation. By the way, my opinions
are invariably superior to most facts since my opinions come from the
Godhead and most facts come from nowhere.
Q. Jim McNaa has complained that you resort to copy and paste when
the argument appears not to be in your favor and you can't win.
A. I only copy and past when you someone does not advance an argument.
I do not have infinite patience for blathering about trivialities.
Q. But Jim McNaa said that you copy and paste when you have been
proven to be wrong and are unable to counter an argument that has been
advanced. He claims that there are countless examples in your many
engagements with him and others, particularly Tom Sherman. I've seen
them myself.
A. I only copy and past when you someone does not advance an argument.
I do not have infinite patience for blathering about trivialities.
Now, I see what Jim means.
Q. As Jim McNaa would say, this is opinion stated as fact, and
opinion and fact are not synonyms!
A. This is getting tiresome, this business about opinion as fact. You
don't know how to conduct an interview anymore than Jim McNaa and
Tom Sherman know how to debate (contest) an opinion. Too bad for all
of you!
Q. Ed, it is apparent that you have failed to corroborate your
accusation that Ed Gin's website hosted sexually explicit images. Tom
Sherman and Jim McNaa are right when they say you are all about
argumentation and not facts. Facts are instrumental in constructing a
sound argument. When you recognize that, perhaps then you will learn
the art of debate, and will stop whining about how your opinions are
all that matters. No wonder Tom and Jim can so easily make a fool of
you. This interview is over!
A. But...
But nothing! This is not an unmoderated Usenet forum ... your
cyber-playpen ... a showcase for your unrestrained ego. Nurse, we're
done here. Time for Mr. Dolan's meds.
Jim McNaa
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1162688248.258712.76050@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1162648319.359077.235730@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> >> >
> >> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> [...]
> >> >> The Monkey Island and the HRS blog websites were all about Ed Gin
> >> >> doing
> >> >> his
> >> >> thing. Therefore, my reference to "his own website" was surely nor far
> >> >> off
> >> >> the k. There is something wrong with the way your brain works.
> >> >
> >> > Your reference to Ed Gin's website was surely not far off the k???
> >> > Opinion stated as fact. You failed miserably in your attempt to weasel
> >> >> >>> > out of this one. Monkey Island and HRS were not (by definition)
> >> > websites and labeling them as such does not in any way alter what they
> >> > were. Look up the definition ... librarian. There is something wrong
> >> > with the way my brain works??? I didn't know you did standup!!!
> >>
> >> Anything I pull up off the Internet is a website - and that surely
> >> includes
> >> blogs.
> >
> > I see you've run out of wiggle room again. If anything you pulled off
> > the internet were a website, then Usenet newsgroups and email would be
> > websitee, by your errant definition, and they morst certainly are not.
> > Let me help you out here...
> >
> > BLOG - short for "Web log", a blog refers to publicly accessible online
> > journal entries posted on a personal web page.
> >
> > WEBSITE - site (location) on the World Wide Web. A website is a
> > comprised of a collection of web pages and other data such as images,
> > sound, and video files that are typically common to a particular domain
> > name or subdomain on the World Wide Web. Each Web site contains a home
> > page, which is the first document users see when they enter the site.
> >
> > A website is not the same thing as a web page and the two terms should
> > not be used interchangeably. A Web site is a collection of Web pages.
> > For example, Amazon.com is a Web site, but there are millions of Web
> > pages that make up the site.
>
> I suspect Jim is right about all of this and I will defer to him on the
> subject of websites vs. webpages. I never knew there was any difference.
>
> > I'll leave "Usenet newsgroup" and "email" for you to look up. That's
> > what librarians do best. They sure can't debate worth a damn.
>
> I never confused newsgroups and email with websites.
>
> > You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
> > website hosted pornographic images.
>
> Substitute webpage for website and you will finally get up to speed.
> [...]
>
> >> I only copy and paste when you do not advance the argument. Unlike you, I
> >> do
> >> not have infinite patience for blathering about trivialities. You go
> >> round
> >> and round to no purpose. That is not my style.
> >
> > Read that translation once again. You copy and paste whenever you have
> > been proven to be wrong an are unable to counter an argument that has
> > been advanced. There are countless examples in many of our engagements
> > as well as your engagements with others, particularly Tom Sherman.
> >
> > You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
> > website hosted pornographic images.
>
> The porn was on the Monkey Island webpage. Unlike you, I wasn't stupid
> enough to go to the HRS blog webpage since I knew what I would see there.
> [...]
>
> >> The only charge I made that matters was that Ed Gin was a scoundrel and a
> >> knave
> >> based on what he was posting to ARBR and a few other cycling newsgroups.
> >> It
> >> is irrelevant whether he was connected with a website of his own or the
> >> Monkey Island or HRS websites.
> >
> > I will agree with your assessment of Ed Gin, but this is not about Ed
> > Gin. This is about you assertion (read fallacious accusation). The
> > specific charge that you made was that Ed Gin's website contained
> > pornographic images and it most certainly did not and it is relevant.
> > You made the Ed Gin website connection relevant when you made your
> > accusation. Good that you were a librarian as you would have been a
> > lousy attorney.
>
> Jim is absolutely the most tiresome creature God ever created.
> [...]
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 06 Nov 2006 04:02:15
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1162770959.699872.73640@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS!
> TOP POSTED TO GIVE ED SOMETHING TO BITCH ABOUT (like he needs help
> ;^)...
>
> Q. Ed, what accusation did you make regarding Ed Gin and sexually
> explicit images on his website?
>
> A. Ed Gin is a shit head from Chicagoland who once had his own website
> where he thought it was cute to post nothing but pornographic images.
>
>
> Q. Have you ever personally paid Ed Gin's website a visit?
>
> A. I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend
> to.
>
>
> Q. Both Tom Sherman and Jim McNaa have stated that Ed Gin's website
> did not host any sexually explicit images. Since you have never
> visited Ed Gin's website, how then can you make such an accusation? As
> Tom Sherman would say ... where's your proof?
This all hinges on the definition of a web site. However, what I would like
to know is how many angels will fit on the tip of a needle. Answer that, if
you can!
> A. Tom Sherman is an enemy of mine from the early days of ARBR. He has
> ever proven himself a coward when confronted with a criminal vandal
> troll like Ed Gin. On this issue, he is beneath contempt. Jim
> McNaa is a more recent antagonist of mine and is essentially nothing
> but a stalker. He is more to be pitied than condemned. Who would you
> rather believe a stalker, the most pitiful of all Internet creatures,
> or Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows? This is
> elementary my dear Watson. Tom Sherman always wants definitive proof
> whereas a strong suspicion is more than good enough for me.
>
>
> Q. Both Tom Sherman and Jim McNaa have stated that you are all about
> argumentation and not about facts and it appears that you have only
> suspicion and opinion to offer and no facts in evidence to corroborate
> your assertion.
>
> A. Hells bells. Tom Sherman and Jim McNaa have their facts and I
> have mine. Isn't that always the way it is when it comes to the
> so-called facts! Like all intellectually challenged fools, they only
> know how to fall back on their pitiful facts. Neither one of them ever
> got beyond high school regardless of their college degrees. Tom
> Sherman and Jim McNaa do not have a proper contempt for facts.
> Facts are always subject to interpretation. By the way, my opinions
> are invariably superior to most facts since my opinions come from the
> Godhead and most facts come from nowhere.
>
>
> Q. Jim McNaa has complained that you resort to copy and paste when
> the argument appears not to be in your favor and you can't win.
>
> A. I only copy and paste when you someone does not advance an argument.
> I do not have infinite patience for blathering about trivialities.
The above is garbled and not what I wrote.
> Q. But Jim McNaa said that you copy and paste when you have been
> proven to be wrong and are unable to counter an argument that has been
> advanced. He claims that there are countless examples in your many
> engagements with him and others, particularly Tom Sherman. I've seen
> them myself.
>
> A. I only copy and paste when you someone does not advance an argument.
> I do not have infinite patience for blathering about trivialities.
>
> Now, I see what Jim means.
Poor Jim thinks he could have been a lawyer when he can't even get his
quotations right!
> Q. As Jim McNaa would say, this is opinion stated as fact, and
> opinion and fact are not synonyms!
>
> A. This is getting tiresome, this business about opinion as fact. You
> don't know how to conduct an interview anymore than Jim McNaa and
> Tom Sherman know how to debate (contest) an opinion. Too bad for all
> of you!
The above is just one of many misquotations as I don't believe I ever said
"how to conduct an interview."
> Q. Ed, it is apparent that you have failed to corroborate your
> accusation that Ed Gin's website hosted sexually explicit images. Tom
> Sherman and Jim McNaa are right when they say you are all about
> argumentation and not facts. Facts are instrumental in constructing a
> sound argument. When you recognize that, perhaps then you will learn
> the art of debate, and will stop whining about how your opinions are
> all that matters. No wonder Tom and Jim can so easily make a fool of
> you. This interview is over!
"This all hinges on the definition of a web site. However, what I would like
to know is how many angels will fit on the tip of a needle. Answer that, if
you can!" - Ed Dolan
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 05 Nov 2006 14:06:24
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1162040343.425934.278920@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> >> Mr. Ed Dolan the Grate wrote:
> >> > Ed Gin is a very funny fellow. I do not even look at his posts because
> >> > he is
> >> > nothing but a troll - and an extremely stupid one at that. He is a shit
> >> > head
> >> > from Chicagoland who once had his own website where he thought it was
> >> > cute
> >> > to post nothing but pornographic images....
> >>
> >> The former Chicagoland Recumbent Riders website hosted by Ed Gin never
> >> had any sexually explicit images on it.
> >>
> >> If you are referred to the late "Monkey Island" web forum, it is common
> >> knowledge that it was hosted by someone with the initials SJ and not
> >> EG.
>
> Ed Gin never used his real name except ever so briefly when he was calling
> Jim McNaa a vandal (something about linseed oil) so who can say who was
> who. Certainly not you!
>
> >> Yet again, Mr. Ed can not get his posts factually correct.
>
> Tom Sherman always want defintive proof whereas a strong suspicion is more
> than good enough for me. Ed Gin has never denied that he is the criminal
> vandal troll of ARBR and the other cycling newsgroups. Only Tom Sherman has
> ever tried to defend him, mainly by caterwauling about a lack of proof.
>
> > Ed ... Tom is correct. Ed Gin's website may have been self-serving,
> > but it never had any sexually explicit images. I think you are
> > confusing his website with either the late Monkey Island forum or the
> > tasteless HRS blog. Since, by your own admission, you have never paid
> > any of these a visit, how can you possibly have an informed opinion or
> > express an uninformed opinion that anyone would take seriously. - Jim
> > McNaa
>
> I am only going by what you have previously told me about Ed Gin both on
> these newsgroups and by email. Others have also confirmed over and over who
> was posting under various false names and addresses.
I never told you that Ed Gin's website hosted pornographic images
either via email or newsgroups. Prove me wrong. - Jim McNaa
> I regard anyone who was even associated with Monkey Island as being nothing
> but a shit head. It was indisputable that Johnny NoCom was Ed Gin and that
> he was associated with Monkey Island as well as the HRS blog.
>
> You cannot go by what Tom Sherman thinks about any of this. He is
> permanently prejudiced and is blind as a bat, but why are you making excuses
> for Ed Gin when everyone one on these cycling newgroups knows he was the
> biggest scoundrel of them all. I can't believe you are falling for Tom
> Sherman's obfuscation.
>
> Tom Sherman likes to pride himself on being factually correct, but he likes
> to go slumming on these newsgroups from time to time. That is why he does
> not object to criminal vandal trolls like Ed Gin - as long as he is not the
> object of course. He could easily be taught a lesson in this regard, but
> frankly I do not have the stomach to be a criminal vandal troll like Ed Gin.
>
> Tom Sherman is indeed right when he says I am all about argumentation and I
> do not give a damn about whatever facts he wants to dredge up. He has his
> facts and I have mine. Isn't that always the way it is when it comes to the
> so-called facts!
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 06 Nov 2006 04:37:12
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1162764384.001636.224450@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
>> I am only going by what you have previously told me about Ed Gin both on
>> these newsgroups and by email. Others have also confirmed over and over
>> who
>> was posting under various false names and addresses.
>
> I never told you that Ed Gin's website hosted pornographic images
> either via email or newsgroups. Prove me wrong. - Jim McNaa
My opinion of Ed Gin was formed on my own from viewing the Monkey Island web
page (once!) and from posts of his under various false names to ARBR. You
only confirmed my very bad opinion of him. He is human scum and is nothing
but a criminal vandal troll. The less said about him the better!
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 05 Nov 2006 12:17:14
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1162688248.258712.76050@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1162648319.359077.235730@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> >> >
> >> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> [...]
> >> >> The Monkey Island and the HRS blog websites were all about Ed Gin
> >> >> doing
> >> >> his
> >> >> thing. Therefore, my reference to "his own website" was surely nor far
> >> >> off
> >> >> the k. There is something wrong with the way your brain works.
> >> >
> >> > Your reference to Ed Gin's website was surely not far off the k???
> >> > Opinion stated as fact. You failed miserably in your attempt to weasel
> >> >> >>> > out of this one. Monkey Island and HRS were not (by definition)
> >> > websites and labeling them as such does not in any way alter what they
> >> > were. Look up the definition ... librarian. There is something wrong
> >> > with the way my brain works??? I didn't know you did standup!!!
> >>
> >> Anything I pull up off the Internet is a website - and that surely
> >> includes
> >> blogs.
> >
> > I see you've run out of wiggle room again. If anything you pulled off
> > the internet were a website, then Usenet newsgroups and email would be
> > websitee, by your errant definition, and they morst certainly are not.
> > Let me help you out here...
> >
> > BLOG - short for "Web log", a blog refers to publicly accessible online
> > journal entries posted on a personal web page.
> >
> > WEBSITE - site (location) on the World Wide Web. A website is a
> > comprised of a collection of web pages and other data such as images,
> > sound, and video files that are typically common to a particular domain
> > name or subdomain on the World Wide Web. Each Web site contains a home
> > page, which is the first document users see when they enter the site.
> >
> > A website is not the same thing as a web page and the two terms should
> > not be used interchangeably. A Web site is a collection of Web pages.
> > For example, Amazon.com is a Web site, but there are millions of Web
> > pages that make up the site.
>
> I suspect Jim is right about all of this and I will defer to him on the
> subject of websites vs. webpages. I never knew there was any difference.
I am right. Now was that so hard? Your next step in this progression
is to admit when you are wrong. Then progress will truly have been
made.
> > I'll leave "Usenet newsgroup" and "email" for you to look up. That's
> > what librarians do best. They sure can't debate worth a damn.
>
> I never confused newsgroups and email with websites.
You missed the point ... intentionally or otherwise (not unusual).
You said ... "Anything I pull up off the Internet is a website - and
that surely includes blogs. And just where do newsgroups and email
reside? Email and newsgroups (a blog, a video, music, etc. ) are all
invoked/downloaded from whence they reside ... on the internet.
Consequently, by constraint of your own definition ... they are
classified (by you and ONLY you) as a website. In other words, you ARE
CONFUSED or you erred in formulating your definition. Pick one..
> > You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
> > website hosted pornographic images.
>
> Substitute webpage for website and you will finally get up to speed.
You are dumber than a rock. I just got done telling you that a website
is not the same thing as a web page and the two terms should not be
used interchangeably. A Web site is a collection of Web pages. For
example, Amazon.com is a Web site, but there are millions of Web pages
that make up the site. So, now you are trying to weasel out of your
fallacious accusation by substituting one for the other when they are
not one and the same???
You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
website hosted pornographic images.
> [...]
>
> >> I only copy and paste when you do not advance the argument. Unlike you, I
> >> do
> >> not have infinite patience for blathering about trivialities. You go
> >> round
> >> and round to no purpose. That is not my style.
> >
> > Read that translation once again. You copy and paste whenever you have
> > been proven to be wrong an are unable to counter an argument that has
> > been advanced. There are countless examples in many of our engagements
> > as well as your engagements with others, particularly Tom Sherman.
> >
> > You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
> > website hosted pornographic images.
>
> The porn was on the Monkey Island webpage. Unlike you, I wasn't stupid
> enough to go to the HRS blog webpage since I knew what I would see there.
And you know this how, since you admittedly never visited Monkey
Island? Are you in the habit of making definitive statements based on
lack of first-hand personal experience? Never mind. That was a
rhetorical question. Visiting the HRS blog has yet to be recognized as
a reliable measure of level of intelligence.
> [...]
>
> >> The only charge I made that matters was that Ed Gin was a scoundrel and a
> >> knave
> >> based on what he was posting to ARBR and a few other cycling newsgroups.
> >> It
> >> is irrelevant whether he was connected with a website of his own or the
> >> Monkey Island or HRS websites.
> >
> > I will agree with your assessment of Ed Gin, but this is not about Ed
> > Gin. This is about you assertion (read fallacious accusation). The
> > specific charge that you made was that Ed Gin's website contained
> > pornographic images and it most certainly did not and it is relevant.
> > You made the Ed Gin website connection relevant when you made your
> > accusation. Good that you were a librarian as you would have been a
> > lousy attorney.
>
> Jim is absolutely the most tiresome creature God ever created.
> [...]
Not really. I've got a long way to go to catch the GRATE one. Why doe
a self-proclaimed atheist refer to God??? The conundrum continues!!!
You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
website hosted pornographic images.
Jim McNaa
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 06 Nov 2006 03:46:33
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1162757834.885881.232680@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
>> I never confused newsgroups and email with websites.
>
> You missed the point ... intentionally or otherwise (not unusual).
> You said ... "Anything I pull up off the Internet is a website - and
> that surely includes blogs.
I wouldn't know a blog if one jumped up and bit me in the elbow.
And just where do newsgroups and email
> reside? Email and newsgroups (a blog, a video, music, etc. ) are all
> invoked/downloaded from whence they reside ... on the internet.
> Consequently, by constraint of your own definition ... they are
> classified (by you and ONLY you) as a website. In other words, you ARE
> CONFUSED or you erred in formulating your definition. Pick one..
"I never confused newsgroups and email with websites." -Ed Dolan
>> > You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
>> > website hosted pornographic images.
>>
>> Substitute webpage for website and you will finally get up to speed.
>
> You are dumber than a rock. I just got done telling you that a website
> is not the same thing as a web page and the two terms should not be
> used interchangeably. A Web site is a collection of Web pages. For
> example, Amazon.com is a Web site, but there are millions of Web pages
> that make up the site. So, now you are trying to weasel out of your
> fallacious accusation by substituting one for the other when they are
> not one and the same???
Was Ed Gin's web site made up of millions of web pages? We need to know!
[...]
>> The porn was on the Monkey Island webpage. Unlike you, I wasn't stupid
>> enough to go to the HRS blog webpage since I knew what I would see there.
>
> And you know this how, since you admittedly never visited Monkey
> Island? Are you in the habit of making definitive statements based on
> lack of first-hand personal experience? Never mind. That was a
> rhetorical question. Visiting the HRS blog has yet to be recognized as
> a reliable measure of level of intelligence.
I did look at the Monkey Island crap just once briefly. That was more than
enough for me!
[...]
>> Jim is absolutely the most tiresome creature God ever created.
>> [...]
>
> Not really. I've got a long way to go to catch the GRATE one. Why doe
> a self-proclaimed atheist refer to God??? The conundrum continues!!!
When you think small thoughts, you become small yourself. Try to think some
big thoughts occasionally.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 04 Nov 2006 16:57:28
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1162648319.359077.235730@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> [...]
> >> The Monkey Island and the HRS blog websites were all about Ed Gin doing
> >> his
> >> thing. Therefore, my reference to "his own website" was surely nor far
> >> off
> >> the k. There is something wrong with the way your brain works.
> >
> > Your reference to Ed Gin's website was surely not far off the k???
> > Opinion stated as fact. You failed miserably in your attempt to weasel
> >> >>> > out of this one. Monkey Island and HRS were not (by definition)
> > websites and labeling them as such does not in any way alter what they
> > were. Look up the definition ... librarian. There is something wrong
> > with the way my brain works??? I didn't know you did standup!!!
>
> Anything I pull up off the Internet is a website - and that surely includes
> blogs.
I see you've run out of wiggle room again. If anything you pulled off
the internet were a website, then Usenet newsgroups and email would be
websitee, by your errant definition, and they morst certainly are not.
Let me help you out here...
BLOG - short for "Web log", a blog refers to publicly accessible online
journal entries posted on a personal web page.
WEBSITE - site (location) on the World Wide Web. A website is a
comprised of a collection of web pages and other data such as images,
sound, and video files that are typically common to a particular domain
name or subdomain on the World Wide Web. Each Web site contains a home
page, which is the first document users see when they enter the site.
A website is not the same thing as a web page and the two terms should
not be used interchangeably. A Web site is a collection of Web pages.
For example, Amazon.com is a Web site, but there are millions of Web
pages that make up the site.
I'll leave "Usenet newsgroup" and "email" for you to look up. That's
what librarians do best. They sure can't debate worth a damn.
You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
website hosted pornographic images.
> >> > How many times must you be told that repetition is not a substitute for
> >> > argumentation??? Regardless of how many times you repeat something, it
> >> > does not and cannot become any truer than it was with the initial
> >> > iteration (logical fallacy - Argumentum ad nauseam). When you are
> >> > cornered and you are unable to argue your way out, you resort to
> >> > parroting the selfsame response over and over. In most instances, the
> >> > regurgitated, cut and paste reply has already been countered and proven
> >> > to be wrong as it has in this particular instance where you
> >> > categorically
> >> > denied your own previously written words.
> >>
> >> Nope ... the reason being that your reasoning is circular - and so must
> >> mine
> >> be. You expend time and energy on arguments that are essentially trivial.
> >> I
> >> refuse to do that.
> >
> > I come at you straight on. Your reasoning is what is what is circular.
> > And now for a TRANSLATION ... I , Ed Dolan, when confronted with an
> > argument that I cannot win, will post cut and paste nonsense already
> > countered and proved to be wrong rather than pursue and argument that I
> > cannot win and when confronted about this tactic will label the
> > argument as trivial even though it was important enough for me to have
> > rendered an opinion (stated as fact) that initiated said argument.
>
> I only copy and past when you do not advance the argument. Unlike you, I do
> not have infinite patience for blathering about trivialities. You go round
> and round to no purpose. That is not my style.
Read that translation once again. You copy and paste whenever you have
been proven to be wrong an are unable to counter an argument that has
been advanced. There are countless examples in many of our engagements
as well as your engagements with others, particularly Tom Sherman.
You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
website hosted pornographic images.
> [...]
>
> >> By the way, Tom Sherman would never make the mistake that you are
> >> presently
> >> making. He has already understood where the slight discrepancy lies and
> >> he
> >> does not make a fuss about it. He has gone on to better things. You
> >> should
> >> emulate him.
> >> [...]
> >
> > Labeling it such does not make the discrepancy slight. It is like
> > calling a truck a car and then stating that you are not far of the k
> > because the discrepancy is slight. Nonsense ... dunderhead. Tom has
> > already indicated that Monkey Island was not Ed Gin's creation although
> > he was a participant. He even provided the author's initials (S.J.).
> > Tom also has repeatedly requested that you prove that Ed Gin was the
> > author of the HRS blog. Tom also emphatically stated that there were no
> > sexually explicit images posted on Ed Gin's website, contrary to your
> > unsubstantiated accusation. Tom understood the "slight discrepancy",
> > countered it, said what needed to be said and moved on preferring not
> > to waste any more time on you. I hung in there to hammer home a point
> > much to your chagrin. The fact remain that a charge was made by you
> > that was both inaccurate and fallacious. My point having been made,
> > with your assistance, I think the time is now opportune to grant you
> > your request, emulate Tom and move on from this topic at least.
>
> The only charge I made that matters was that Ed Gin was a scoundrel and a
> knave
> based on what he was posting to ARBR and a few other cycling newsgroups. It
> is irrelevant whether he was connected with a website of his own or the
> Monkey Island or HRS websites.
I will agree with your assessment of Ed Gin, but this is not about Ed
Gin. This is about you assertion (read fallacious accusation). The
specific charge that you made was that Ed Gin's website contained
pornographic images and it most certainly did not and it is relevant.
You made the Ed Gin website connection relevant when you made your
accusation. Good that you were a librarian as you would have been a
lousy attorney.
You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
website hosted pornographic images.
> By the way, I do not pay the slightest attention to Tom Sherman on any of
> this as he has ever proven himself a coward when confronted with a criminal
> vandal troll like Ed Gin. On this issue, he is beneath contempt.
I noticed your inane post ... A Short History of ARBR According to Ed
Dolan. I suppose I should feel slighted for not having been mentioned
as a key player in putting up a fight as should several others, but who
cares. There is much more to ARBR or any Usenet newsgroup than you
myopic, Lilliputian conceptualization would lead one to believe.
You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
website hosted pornographic images.
> >> >> Yes, but you do not know how to debate an opinion anymore than Tom
> >> >> Sherman
> >> >> does. Like all intellectually challenged fools, you only know how to
> >> >> fall
> >> >> back on your pitiful facts. Neither one of you ever got beyond high
> >> >> school
> >> >> no matter your college degrees.
> >> >
> >> > Opinion state as fact. You really have difficulty discerning the
> >> > difference between the two, don't you??? Apparently, you never really
> >> > progressed beyond a gram school level of education despite you
> >> > unsubstantiated assertion of intellectual superiority.
> >>
> >> The above is getting tiresome, that business about opinion as fact. Only
> >> you
> >> believe it. The fact is that you do not know how to debate (contest) an
> >> opinion. Too bad for you!
> >
> > OPINION STATED AS FACT!!! I too would find it tiresome if I were in you
> > shoes. You know not the difference between opinion and fact. You debate
> > poorly. You are incapable of admitting when you are wrong because you
> > consider defeat a character flaw ... an indication of inferiority.
>
> I am NEVER wrong when it comes to YOU! Now you know why I am Great - and
> you aren't!
OPINION STATED AS FACT!!!
You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
website hosted pornographic images.
> > FACT: Opinion and fact by definition are not synonyms and everyone
> > realizes that except Conan the librarian.
> >
> > FACT: Your style of debate is rife with logical fallacies as I have
> > often indicated by way of explanation and even by Latin name. As Tom
> > Sherman so rightly pointed out ...you are all about argumentation, not
> > facts. You love to argue, but know preciously little about the art of
> > debate.
>
> You confuse your pitiful facts with argument. They are two different things
> entirely. I can have all my facts wrong and still win an argument. You can
> have all your facts right and still lose an argument. Yes, life is not fair!
You confuse your pitiful opinions with argument. You also thing that a
sound argument can be formulated with errant opinion. I know what
argument is and I realize that facts are instrumental in constructing a
sound argument. When you learn that, perhaps then you will be able to
learn how to debate instead of whining how your opinions are all that
matters. You remind me of the little kid who when he couldn't have
things his way, took his ball and went home. Grow up. The world does
not revolve around the "great" Ed Dolan!!!
Did I mention that you still have failed to corroborate your accusation
that Ed Gin's website hosted pornographic images.
Jim McNaa
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 05 Nov 2006 06:45:26
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1162688248.258712.76050@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1162648319.359077.235730@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > Edward Dolan wrote:
>> [...]
>> >> The Monkey Island and the HRS blog websites were all about Ed Gin
>> >> doing
>> >> his
>> >> thing. Therefore, my reference to "his own website" was surely nor far
>> >> off
>> >> the k. There is something wrong with the way your brain works.
>> >
>> > Your reference to Ed Gin's website was surely not far off the k???
>> > Opinion stated as fact. You failed miserably in your attempt to weasel
>> >> >>> > out of this one. Monkey Island and HRS were not (by definition)
>> > websites and labeling them as such does not in any way alter what they
>> > were. Look up the definition ... librarian. There is something wrong
>> > with the way my brain works??? I didn't know you did standup!!!
>>
>> Anything I pull up off the Internet is a website - and that surely
>> includes
>> blogs.
>
> I see you've run out of wiggle room again. If anything you pulled off
> the internet were a website, then Usenet newsgroups and email would be
> websitee, by your errant definition, and they morst certainly are not.
> Let me help you out here...
>
> BLOG - short for "Web log", a blog refers to publicly accessible online
> journal entries posted on a personal web page.
>
> WEBSITE - site (location) on the World Wide Web. A website is a
> comprised of a collection of web pages and other data such as images,
> sound, and video files that are typically common to a particular domain
> name or subdomain on the World Wide Web. Each Web site contains a home
> page, which is the first document users see when they enter the site.
>
> A website is not the same thing as a web page and the two terms should
> not be used interchangeably. A Web site is a collection of Web pages.
> For example, Amazon.com is a Web site, but there are millions of Web
> pages that make up the site.
I suspect Jim is right about all of this and I will defer to him on the
subject of websites vs. webpages. I never knew there was any difference.
> I'll leave "Usenet newsgroup" and "email" for you to look up. That's
> what librarians do best. They sure can't debate worth a damn.
I never confused newsgroups and email with websites.
> You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
> website hosted pornographic images.
Substitute webpage for website and you will finally get up to speed.
[...]
>> I only copy and paste when you do not advance the argument. Unlike you, I
>> do
>> not have infinite patience for blathering about trivialities. You go
>> round
>> and round to no purpose. That is not my style.
>
> Read that translation once again. You copy and paste whenever you have
> been proven to be wrong an are unable to counter an argument that has
> been advanced. There are countless examples in many of our engagements
> as well as your engagements with others, particularly Tom Sherman.
>
> You still have failed to corroborate your accusation that Ed Gin's
> website hosted pornographic images.
The porn was on the Monkey Island webpage. Unlike you, I wasn't stupid
enough to go to the HRS blog webpage since I knew what I would see there.
[...]
>> The only charge I made that matters was that Ed Gin was a scoundrel and a
>> knave
>> based on what he was posting to ARBR and a few other cycling newsgroups.
>> It
>> is irrelevant whether he was connected with a website of his own or the
>> Monkey Island or HRS websites.
>
> I will agree with your assessment of Ed Gin, but this is not about Ed
> Gin. This is about you assertion (read fallacious accusation). The
> specific charge that you made was that Ed Gin's website contained
> pornographic images and it most certainly did not and it is relevant.
> You made the Ed Gin website connection relevant when you made your
> accusation. Good that you were a librarian as you would have been a
> lousy attorney.
Jim is absolutely the most tiresome creature God ever created.
[...]
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 04 Nov 2006 05:51:59
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1162563752.995784.89940@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> >> "I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to.
> >> My reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
> >> dunderhead!" - Ed Dolan
> >
> > Unlike you, I'll respond but only once to this your final, identical
> > and deliberately misleading (read erroneous) cut and paste reply.
> >
> > You have unconditionally denied that which you have written in this
> > very thread. In effect, you have undermined your own credibility and
> > certified yourself to be prevaricator. Referring to Ed Gin, you wrote
> > ... "he is nothing but a troll - and an extremely stupid one at that.
> > He is a shit head from Chicagoland who once had his own website where
> > he thought it was cute to post nothing but pornographic images". Please
> > note that you did not refer to either the Monkey Island forum of the
> > HRS blog. In fact, I introduced those tow into the argument ... not
> > you. No wonder you hate facts since you can't ever seem to get the
> > facts straight.
>
> The Monkey Island and the HRS blog websites were all about Ed Gin doing his
> thing. Therefore, my reference to "his own website" was surely nor far off
> the k. There is something wrong with the way your brain works.
Your reference to Ed Gin's website was surely not far off the k???
Opinion stated as fact. You failed miserably in your attempt to weasel
out of this one. Monkey Island and HRS were not (by definition)
websites and labeling them as such does not in any way alter what they
were. Look up the definition ... librarian. There is something wrong
with the way my brain works??? I didn't know you did stadup!!!
> > How many times must you be told that repetition is not a substitute for
> > argumentation??? Regardless of how many times you repeat something, it
> > does not and cannot become any truer than it was with the initial
> > iteration (logical fallacy - Argumentum ad nauseam). When you are
> > cornered and you are unable to argue your way out, you resort to
> > parroting the selfsame response over and over. In most instances, the
> > regurgitated, cut and paste reply has already been countered and proven
> > to be wrong as it has in this particular instance where you categorically
> > denied your own previously written words.
>
> Nope ... the reason being that your reasoning is circular - and so must mine
> be. You expend time and energy on arguments that are essentially trivial. I
> refuse to do that.
I come at you straight on. Your reasoning is what is what is circular.
And now for a TRANSLATION ... I , Ed Dolan, when confronted with an
argument that I cannot win, will post cut and paste nonsense already
countered and proved to be wrong rather than pursue and argument that I
cannot win and when confronted about this tactic will label the
argument as trivial even though it was important enough for me to have
rendered an opinion (stated as fact) that initiated said argument.
> > It should be noted that the question I previously posed, still remains
> > unanswered. If, as you have admitted, you never looked at Ed Gin's
> > website, then how could you emphatically state that it contained
> > nothing but pornographic images??? Apparently, you are unable to
> > counter Tom's and my contention that your accusation was fallacious.
> > Tom is correct in his assessment. You are all about argumentation, not
> > facts. Furthermore you aren't even very proficient at it and
> > consequently, you have been made to look foolish.
>
> "The Monkey Island and the HRS blog websites were all about Ed Gin doing his
> thing. Therefore, my reference to "his own website" was surely nor far off
> the k. There is something wrong with the way your brain works." - Ed
> Dolan
Thanks for proving my contention regarding regurgitated cut an paste
replies when you are unable to mount an argument. In this regard, I
refer you to my two most recent replies in this thread.
> By the way, Tom Sherman would never make the mistake that you are presently
> making. He has already understood where the slight discrepancy lies and he
> does not make a fuss about it. He has gone on to better things. You should
> emulate him.
> [...]
Labeling it such does not make the discrepancy slight. It is like
calling a truck a car and then stating that you are not far of the k
because the discrepancy is slight. Nonsense ... dunderhead. Tom has
already indicated that Monkey Island was not Ed Gin's creation although
he was a participant. He even provided the author's initials (S.J.).
Tom also has repeatedly requested that you prove that Ed Gin was the
author of the HRS blog. Tom also emphatically stated that there were no
sexually explicit images posted on Ed Gin's website, contrary to your
unsubstantiated accusation. Tom understood the "slight discrepancy",
countered it, said what needed to be said and moved on preferring not
to waste any more time on you. I hung in there to hammer home a point
much to your chagrin. The fact remain that a charge was made by you
that was both inaccurate and fallacious. My point having been made,
with your assistance, I think the time is now opportune to grant you
your request, emulate Tom and move on from this topic at least.
> >> Yes, but you do not know how to debate an opinion anymore than Tom
> >> Sherman
> >> does. Like all intellectually challenged fools, you only know how to fall
> >> back on your pitiful facts. Neither one of you ever got beyond high
> >> school
> >> no matter your college degrees.
> >
> > Opinion state as fact. You really have difficulty discerning the
> > difference between the two, don't you??? Apparently, you never really
> > progressed beyond a gram school level of education despite you
> > unsubstantiated assertion of intellectual superiority.
>
> The above is getting tiresome, that business about opinion as fact. Only you
> believe it. The fact is that you do not know how to debate (contest) an
> opinion. Too bad for you!
OPINION STATED AS FAST!!! I too would find it tiresome if I were in you
shoes. You know not the difference between opinion and fact. You debate
poorly. You are incapable of admitting when you are wrong because you
consider defeat a character flaw ... an indication of inferiority.
FACT: Opinion and fact by definition are not synonyms and everyone
realizes that except Conan the librarian.
FACT: Your style of debate is rife with logical fallacies as I have
often indicated by way of explanation and even by Latin name. As Tom
Sherman so rightly pointed out ...you are all about argumentation, not
facts. You love to argue, but know preciously little about the art of
debate..
Jim McNaa
> [...]
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 04 Nov 2006 10:07:47
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1162648319.359077.235730@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
>> The Monkey Island and the HRS blog websites were all about Ed Gin doing
>> his
>> thing. Therefore, my reference to "his own website" was surely nor far
>> off
>> the k. There is something wrong with the way your brain works.
>
> Your reference to Ed Gin's website was surely not far off the k???
> Opinion stated as fact. You failed miserably in your attempt to weasel
> out of this one. Monkey Island and HRS were not (by definition)
> websites and labeling them as such does not in any way alter what they
> were. Look up the definition ... librarian. There is something wrong
> with the way my brain works??? I didn't know you did stadup!!!
Anything I pull up off the Internet is a website - and that surely includes
blogs.
>> > How many times must you be told that repetition is not a substitute for
>> > argumentation??? Regardless of how many times you repeat something, it
>> > does not and cannot become any truer than it was with the initial
>> > iteration (logical fallacy - Argumentum ad nauseam). When you are
>> > cornered and you are unable to argue your way out, you resort to
>> > parroting the selfsame response over and over. In most instances, the
>> > regurgitated, cut and paste reply has already been countered and proven
>> > to be wrong as it has in this particular instance where you
>> > categorically
>> > denied your own previously written words.
>>
>> Nope ... the reason being that your reasoning is circular - and so must
>> mine
>> be. You expend time and energy on arguments that are essentially trivial.
>> I
>> refuse to do that.
>
> I come at you straight on. Your reasoning is what is what is circular.
> And now for a TRANSLATION ... I , Ed Dolan, when confronted with an
> argument that I cannot win, will post cut and paste nonsense already
> countered and proved to be wrong rather than pursue and argument that I
> cannot win and when confronted about this tactic will label the
> argument as trivial even though it was important enough for me to have
> rendered an opinion (stated as fact) that initiated said argument.
I only copy and past when you do not advance the argument. Unlike you, I do
not have infinite patience for blathering about trivialities. You go round
and round to no purpose. That is not my style.
[...]
>> By the way, Tom Sherman would never make the mistake that you are
>> presently
>> making. He has already understood where the slight discrepancy lies and
>> he
>> does not make a fuss about it. He has gone on to better things. You
>> should
>> emulate him.
>> [...]
>
> Labeling it such does not make the discrepancy slight. It is like
> calling a truck a car and then stating that you are not far of the k
> because the discrepancy is slight. Nonsense ... dunderhead. Tom has
> already indicated that Monkey Island was not Ed Gin's creation although
> he was a participant. He even provided the author's initials (S.J.).
> Tom also has repeatedly requested that you prove that Ed Gin was the
> author of the HRS blog. Tom also emphatically stated that there were no
> sexually explicit images posted on Ed Gin's website, contrary to your
> unsubstantiated accusation. Tom understood the "slight discrepancy",
> countered it, said what needed to be said and moved on preferring not
> to waste any more time on you. I hung in there to hammer home a point
> much to your chagrin. The fact remain that a charge was made by you
> that was both inaccurate and fallacious. My point having been made,
> with your assistance, I think the time is now opportune to grant you
> your request, emulate Tom and move on from this topic at least.
The only charge I made that matters was that Ed Gin was a scoundrel and a
knave
based on what he was posting to ARBR and a few other cycling newsgroups. It
is irrelevant whether he was connected with a website of his own or the
Monkey Island or HRS websites.
By the way, I do not pay the slightest attention to Tom Sherman on any of
this as he has ever proven himself a coward when confronted with a criminal
vandal troll like Ed Gin. On this issue, he is beneath contempt.
>> >> Yes, but you do not know how to debate an opinion anymore than Tom
>> >> Sherman
>> >> does. Like all intellectually challenged fools, you only know how to
>> >> fall
>> >> back on your pitiful facts. Neither one of you ever got beyond high
>> >> school
>> >> no matter your college degrees.
>> >
>> > Opinion state as fact. You really have difficulty discerning the
>> > difference between the two, don't you??? Apparently, you never really
>> > progressed beyond a gram school level of education despite you
>> > unsubstantiated assertion of intellectual superiority.
>>
>> The above is getting tiresome, that business about opinion as fact. Only
>> you
>> believe it. The fact is that you do not know how to debate (contest) an
>> opinion. Too bad for you!
>
> OPINION STATED AS FACT!!! I too would find it tiresome if I were in you
> shoes. You know not the difference between opinion and fact. You debate
> poorly. You are incapable of admitting when you are wrong because you
> consider defeat a character flaw ... an indication of inferiority.
I am NEVER wrong when it comes to YOU! Now you know why I am Great - and
you aren't!
> FACT: Opinion and fact by definition are not synonyms and everyone
> realizes that except Conan the librarian.
>
> FACT: Your style of debate is rife with logical fallacies as I have
> often indicated by way of explanation and even by Latin name. As Tom
> Sherman so rightly pointed out ...you are all about argumentation, not
> facts. You love to argue, but know preciously little about the art of
> debate..
You confuse your pitiful facts with argument. They are two different things
entirely. I can have all my facts wrong and still win an argument. You can
have all your facts right and still lose an argument. Yes, life is not fair!
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 03 Nov 2006 06:22:33
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1162217139.861986.322240@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1162132432.008769.276230@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >> >
> >> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:1162040343.425934.278920@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> >> >> >> Mr. Ed Dolan the Grate wrote:
> >> >> >> > Ed Gin is a very funny fellow. I do not even look at his posts
> >> >> >> > because
> > >> >> > he is
> >> >> >> > nothing but a troll - and an extremely stupid one at that. He is
> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> > shit
> >> >> >> > head
> >> >> >> > from Chicagoland who once had his own website where he thought it
> >> >> >> > was
> >> >> >> > cute
> >> >> >> > to post nothing but pornographic images....
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> The former Chicagoland Recumbent Riders website hosted by Ed Gin
> >> >> >> never
> >> >> >> had any sexually explicit images on it.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> If you are referred to the late "Monkey Island" web forum, it is
> >> >> >> common
> >> >> >> knowledge that it was hosted by someone with the initials SJ and
> >> >> >> not
> >> >> >> EG.
> >> >>
> >> >> Ed Gin never used his real name except ever so briefly when he was
> >> >> calling
> >> >> Jim McNaa a vandal (something about linseed oil) so who can say who
> >> >> was
> >> >> who. Certainly not you!
> >> >>
> >> >> >> Yet again, Mr. Ed can not get his posts factually correct.
> >> >>
> >> >> Tom Sherman always want defintive proof whereas a strong suspicion is
> >> >> more
> >> >> than good enough for me. Ed Gin has never denied that he is the
> >> >> criminal
> >> >> vandal troll of ARBR and the other cycling newsgroups. Only Tom
> >> >> Sherman
> >> >> has
> >> >> ever tried to defend him, mainly by caterwauling about a lack of
> >> >> proof.
> >> >>
> >> >> > Ed ... Tom is correct. Ed Gin's website may have been self-serving,
> >> >> > but it never had any sexually explicit images. I think you are
> >> >> > confusing his website with either the late Monkey Island forum or
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > tasteless HRS blog. Since, by your own admission, you have never
> >> >> > paid
> >> >> > any of these a visit, how can you possibly have an informed opinion
> >> >> > or
> >> >> > express an uninformed opinion that anyone would take seriously. -
> >> >> > Jim
> >> >> > McNaa
> >> >>
> >> >> I am only going by what you have previously told me about Ed Gin both
> >> >> on
> >> >> these newsgroups and by email. Others have also confirmed over and
> >> >> over
> >> >> who
> >> >> was posting under various false names and addresses.
> >> >
> >> > And this has what to do with you assertion regarding sexually explicit
> >> > images on Ed Gin's website? Diversion duly noted. My comment regarding
> >> > informed opinion referred only to your fallacious accusation regarding
> >> > sexually explicit images on Ed Gin's former website.
> >>
> >> I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to. My
> >> reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
> >> dunderhead!
> >
> > What I said previously was that you never looked at the Monkey Island
> > forum, HRS blog or HRS blog ... dunderhead!!! Ed gin's website no
> > longer exists as Tom and I pointed out, so you can no longer look at it
> > ... dunderhead??? If you never looked at Ed Gin's website, then how
> > could you emphatically state that it contained sexually explicit images
> > ... dunderhead??? You are as perceptive as the average tree stump!!!
>
> "I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to. My
> reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
> dunderhead!" - Ed Dolan
>
> >> >> I regard anyone who was even associated with Monkey Island as being
> >> >> nothing
> >> >> but a shit head. It was indisputable that Johnny NoCom was Ed Gin and
> >> >> that
> >> >> he was associated with Monkey Island as well as the HRS blog.
> >> >>
> >> >> You cannot go by what Tom Sherman thinks about any of this. He is
> >> >> permanently prejudiced and is blind as a bat, but why are you making
> >> >> excuses
> >> >> for Ed Gin when everyone one on these cycling newgroups knows he was
> >> >> the
> >> >> biggest scoundrel of them all. I can't believe you are falling for Tom
> >> >> Sherman's obfuscation.
> >> >
> >> > Obfuscation??? Your reasoning process is flawed. I am not going by what
> >> > Tom Sherman thinks. I am going by what I have personally observed and
> >> > not observed on Ed Gin's former website ... nothing more ... nothing
> >> > less. Furthermore, stating that Ed Gin did not have sexually explicit
> >> > images on his website is merely an observation and should not be
> >> > misconstrued as my making excuses for Ed Gin. It should be obvious that
> >> > I detest the guy, but unlike you or him will not lie about someone
> >> > else. That is dishonorable. The bottom line is that you are reading
> >> > into what I said, that which isn't there or you are deliberately
> >> > twisting that meaning of my words ... pick one.
I made it easy for you, but you still failed to pick one.
> >> I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to. My
> >> reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
> >> dunderhead!
> >
> > You did not address anything that I said above (not unusual). What I
> > said previously was that you never looked at the Monkey Island forum,
> > HRS blog or HRS blog ... dunderhead!!! Ed gin's website is no longer
> > exists as Tom and I pointed out, so you can no longer look at it ...
> > dunderhead??? If you never looked at Ed Gin's website, then how could
> > you emphatically state that it contained sexually explicit images ...
> > dunderhead???
>
> "I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to. My
> reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
> dunderhead!" - Ed Dolan
>
> >> >> Tom Sherman likes to pride himself on being factually correct,
> >> >
> >> > And in this particular instance, I can state that he is being factual
> >> > and you are not.
> >> >
> >> >> but he likes
> >> >> to go slumming on these newsgroups from time to time.
> >
> > But, in this particular instance, I can state that Tom was being
> > factual and you were not.
> >
> >> > And you don't?
> >
> > Diversion duly noted.
> >
> >> >> That is why he does
> >> >> not object to criminal vandal trolls like Ed Gin - as long as he is
> >> >> not
> >> >> the
> >> >> object of course.
> >> >
> >> > Your conclusion does not strictly follow from the premise (Non
> >> > Seqitor).
> >>
> >> Ah, but it does.
> >
> > Repetition is no substitute argument. Regardless of how many times you
> > repeat something, it will not become any more or less true than it was
> > in the first place. Saying something again and again, does not make it
> > so (Argumentum ad nauseam).
> >
> >> I charge Tom Sherman with not only being a coward, but also
> >> being a moral cretin You have never fallen into either of those
> >> categories
> >> to your credit. But if you pal around with Tom Sherman long enough some
> >> of
> >> his excrement may rub off on you.
> >
> > Agreeing with Tom on a particular point does not make us pals. If that
> > were then case, then the galvanized response of the readership with
> > regard to you would make us all pals here.
> >
> >> >> He could easily be taught a lesson in this regard, but
> >> >> frankly I do not have the stomach to be a criminal vandal troll like
> >> >> Ed
> >> >> Gin.
> >> >>
> >> >> Tom Sherman is indeed right when he says I am all about argumentation
> >> >> and
> >> >> I
> >> >> do not give a damn about whatever facts he wants to dredge up.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for the confirmation. that is all that was being said in
> >> > reference to your fallacious accusation concerning sexually explicit
> >> > images on Ed Gin's website.
> >>
> >> I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to. My
> >> reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
> >> dunderhead!
> >
> > Apparently you are unable to counter Tom's and my accusation that your
> > accusation was fallacious, your are about argumentation, not facts and
> > were made to like foolish. What I said previously was that you never
> > looked at the Monkey Island forum, HRS blog or HRS blog ...
> > dunderhead!!! Ed gin's website is no longer exists as Tom and I
> > pointed out, more as both Tom and I have pointed out, so you can no
> > longer look at it ... dunderhead??? If you never looked at Ed Gin's
> > website, then how could you emphatically state that it contained
> > sexually explicit images ... dunderhead??? You are as perceptive as
> > the average tree stump!!!
>
> "I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to. My
> reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
> dunderhead!" - Ed Dolan
Unlike you, I'll respond but only once to this your final, identical
and deliberately misleading (read erroneous) cut and paste reply.
You have unconditionally denied that which you have written in this
very thread. In effect, you have undermined your own credibility and
certified yourself to be prevaricator. Referring to Ed Gin, you wrote
... "he is nothing but a troll - and an extremely stupid one at that.
He is a shit head from Chicagoland who once had his own website where
he thought it was cute to post nothing but pornographic images". Please
note that you did not refer to either the Monkey Island forum of the
HRS blog. In fact, I introduced those tow into the argument ... not
you. No wonder you hate facts since you can't ever seem to get the
facts straight.
How many times must you be told that repetition is not a substitute for
argumentation??? Regardless of how many times you repeat something, it
does not and cannot become any truer than it was with the initial
iteration (logical fallacy - Argumentum ad nauseam). When you are
cornered and you are unable to argue your way out, you resort to
parroting the selfsame response over and over. In most instances, the
regurgitated, cut and paste reply has already been countered and proven
to be wrong as it has in this particular instance where you
categorically denied your own previously written words.
It should be noted that the question I previously posed, still remains
unanswered. If, as you have admitted, you never looked at Ed Gin's
website, then how could you emphatically state that it contained
nothing but pornographic images??? Apparently, you are unable to
counter Tom's and my contention that your accusation was fallacious.
Tom is correct in his assessment. You are all about argumentation, not
facts. Furthermore you aren't even very proficient at it and
consequently, you have been made to look foolish.
> >> >> He has his
> >> >> facts and I have mine. Isn't that always the way it is when it comes
> >> >> to
> >> >> the
> >> >> so-called facts!
> >> >
> >> > No. You are confusing fact and opinion and Conan the Librarian should
> >> > know that fact and opinion are not synonyms.
> >>
> >> Tom Sherman and Jim McNaa do not have a proper contempt for facts.
> >> Facts
> >> are always subject to interpretation. That is what I am here for.
> >
> > Confused aren't you??? What I have contempt for is your opinions stated
> > as facts. Opinions are subject to interpretation and debate, however,
> > by definition ... facts are not. Time for you to hit the dictionary
> > ... librarian.
>
> Yes, but you do not know how to debate an opinion anymore than Tom Sherman
> does. Like all intellectually challenged fools, you only know how to fall
> back on your pitiful facts. Neither one of you ever got beyond high school
> no matter your college degrees.
Opinion state as fact. You really have difficulty discerning the
difference between the two, don't you??? Apparently, you never really
progressed beyond a gram school level of education despite you
unsubstantiated assertion of intellectual superiority.
> >> By the way, my opinions are invariably superior to most facts since my
> >> opinions come from the Godhead and most facts come from nowhere.
>
> Ed, I couldn't agree with you more. You are truly inspired compared to all
> the idiots, morons and cretins who infest these cycling newsgroups.
And now, you are writing to yourself about yourself, agreeing with
yourself??? That's more than just a bit peculiar. You must be on the
brink of losing it!!! On the other hand you may just as well agree
with yourself since no one else does. The conundrum continues!!!
Jim McNaa
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 04 Nov 2006 02:32:46
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1162563752.995784.89940@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to.
>> My
>> reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
>> dunderhead!" - Ed Dolan
>
> Unlike you, I'll respond but only once to this your final, identical
> and deliberately misleading (read erroneous) cut and paste reply.
>
> You have unconditionally denied that which you have written in this
> very thread. In effect, you have undermined your own credibility and
> certified yourself to be prevaricator. Referring to Ed Gin, you wrote
> ... "he is nothing but a troll - and an extremely stupid one at that.
> He is a shit head from Chicagoland who once had his own website where
> he thought it was cute to post nothing but pornographic images". Please
> note that you did not refer to either the Monkey Island forum of the
> HRS blog. In fact, I introduced those tow into the argument ... not
> you. No wonder you hate facts since you can't ever seem to get the
> facts straight.
The Monkey Island and the HRS blog websites were all about Ed Gin doing his
thing. Therefore, my reference to "his own website" was surely nor far off
the k. There is something wrong with the way your brain works.
> How many times must you be told that repetition is not a substitute for
> argumentation??? Regardless of how many times you repeat something, it
> does not and cannot become any truer than it was with the initial
> iteration (logical fallacy - Argumentum ad nauseam). When you are
> cornered and you are unable to argue your way out, you resort to
> parroting the selfsame response over and over. In most instances, the
> regurgitated, cut and paste reply has already been countered and proven
> to be wrong as it has in this particular instance where you
> categorically denied your own previously written words.
Nope ... the reason being that your reasoning is circular - and so must mine
be. You expend time and energy on arguments that are essentially trivial. I
refuse to do that.
> It should be noted that the question I previously posed, still remains
> unanswered. If, as you have admitted, you never looked at Ed Gin's
> website, then how could you emphatically state that it contained
> nothing but pornographic images??? Apparently, you are unable to
> counter Tom's and my contention that your accusation was fallacious.
> Tom is correct in his assessment. You are all about argumentation, not
> facts. Furthermore you aren't even very proficient at it and
> consequently, you have been made to look foolish.
"The Monkey Island and the HRS blog websites were all about Ed Gin doing his
thing. Therefore, my reference to "his own website" was surely nor far off
the k. There is something wrong with the way your brain works." - Ed
Dolan
By the way, Tom Sherman would never make the mistake that you are presently
making. He has already understood where the slight discrepancy lies and he
does not make a fuss about it. He has gone on to better things. You should
emulate him.
[...]
>> Yes, but you do not know how to debate an opinion anymore than Tom
>> Sherman
>> does. Like all intellectually challenged fools, you only know how to fall
>> back on your pitiful facts. Neither one of you ever got beyond high
>> school
>> no matter your college degrees.
>
> Opinion state as fact. You really have difficulty discerning the
> difference between the two, don't you??? Apparently, you never really
> progressed beyond a gram school level of education despite you
> unsubstantiated assertion of intellectual superiority.
The above is getting tiresome, that business about opinion as fact. Only you
believe it. The fact is that you do not know how to debate (contest) an
opinion. Too bad for you!
[...]
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 31 Oct 2006 12:45:06
From: ed_dolan_jimmy_macnamara
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan - the supreme asshole of ARBR?
|
OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE
IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME
OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR
BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH
DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE
TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO
EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR
DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT
SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE
TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO
EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR
DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT
SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE
TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO
EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR
DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT
SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE
TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO
EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR
DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT
SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE
TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO
EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR
DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT
SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE
TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO
EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR
DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT
SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE
TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO
EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR
DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT
SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE
TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO
EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR
DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT
SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE
TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO
EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR
DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT
SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE
TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO
EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR
DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT
SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE
TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO
EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR
DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT
SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE
TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO
EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR
DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT
SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE
TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO
EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR
DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT
SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE
TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO
EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR
DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT
SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE
TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO
EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR
DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT
SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE
TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO
EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR
DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT
SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE
TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO
EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR
DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT
SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE
TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO
EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR
DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT
SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE
TROLLED THOUSANDS OF TIMES ON THE USENET. HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO
EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AT MY HOME. SEND ME SOME OF THAT WHITE POWDER OR
DRIED UP BUDS AND PLANTS THAT SMELL FUNKY. OR BETTER YET, HOW ABOUT
SOME CLAY LIKE SUBSTANCES THAT WORK WELL WITH DETONATORS?
NOTE MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR ALL TO
UTILIZE.
JAMES L. MACNAA
4863 W. GREGORY ST.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60630
773 282 9874
I AM YOUR BUTTHOLE TO DO AS YOU PLEASE - JIMMY MACNAA (DON'T MIND
THE MISSPELLED NAME, MY ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER ARE ACCURATE)
_____________________________________________
JimmyMac wrote:
> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> > JimmyMac aka Jim McNaa wrote:
> > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> > > > Alan Erskine wrote:
> > > > > "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > > > news:1161995945.986224.29590@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > > > > > The former Chicagoland Recumbent Riders website hosted by Ed Gin never
> > > > > > had any sexually explicit images on it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you are referred to the late "Monkey Island" web forum, it is common
> > > > > > knowledge that it was hosted by someone with the initials SJ and not
> > > > > > EG.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yet again, Mr. Ed can not get his posts factually correct.
> > > > >
> > > > > You expect better from a troll?
> > > >
> > > > I believe that I can take most of the credit for demonstrating through
> > > > discussion that Mr. Ed is all about argumentation and not facts.
> > >
> > > > Tom Sherman - Here, not there.
> > >
> > > Well ... credit for sure, but "most" might be a stretch. I believe that
> > > I am due some credit in this regard. I feel that no one has
> > > demonstrated more than have Tom and I that Ed Dolan is all (or at least
> > > mostly) about argumentation and not facts. I constantly castigate Ed
> > > for running his mouth (writing) when he does not have his facts in
> > > order. Ed submits his errant opinions as if they were indisputable
> > > facts requiring no evidence or substantiation, something that I have
> > > taken issue with countless times.
> >
> > Jim,
> >
> > Read through this thread from February 26, 2003 to August 2, 2003 and
> > see if you still have the same opinion:
> > <http://groups.google.com/group/alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent/browse_frm/thread/e543438ebd2cd4a5/3f22e4cc19a8a59c?lnk=gst&q=flammable+dolan&rnum=1#3f22e4cc19a8a59c>.
> >
> > I disagree with your posting due to the chronology of events, not your
> > interpretation of the ones you are referring to.
>
> Tom, since you did not initially refer to any particular thread or
> chronology, I'm not sure just what you mean. I would gladly accommodate
> your request if it were not fort he fact that this thread consists of
> 599 posts to plow through! Regardless, my opinion wouldn't change based
> on only a single thread.regardless its length. As for chronology, your
> encounters with Ed Dolan certainly precede mine, but Ed's propensity
> for argumentation regardless of facts in evidence is not limited to a
> single thread or single temporal order. Although a given thread of
> particular chronology may serve as a fitting example this
> characteristic trait of Eds is not confined to a single thread nor it
> is limited to a particular chronology. Like you, I have demonstrated
> through discussion that Ed Dolan is all about argumentation and not
> facts and felt that I deserved some recogniton in that respect. That's
> all I was saying..
>
> Jim McNaa
>
> >
> > --
> > Tom Sherman - Here, not there.
|
| |
Date: 30 Oct 2006 06:05:39
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1162132432.008769.276230@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1162040343.425934.278920@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >> >
> >> > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> >> >> Mr. Ed Dolan the Grate wrote:
> >> >> > Ed Gin is a very funny fellow. I do not even look at his posts
> >> >> > because
>> >> > he is
> >> >> > nothing but a troll - and an extremely stupid one at that. He is a
> >> >> > shit
> >> >> > head
> >> >> > from Chicagoland who once had his own website where he thought it
> >> >> > was
> >> >> > cute
> >> >> > to post nothing but pornographic images....
> >> >>
> >> >> The former Chicagoland Recumbent Riders website hosted by Ed Gin never
> >> >> had any sexually explicit images on it.
> >> >>
> >> >> If you are referred to the late "Monkey Island" web forum, it is
> >> >> common
> >> >> knowledge that it was hosted by someone with the initials SJ and not
> >> >> EG.
> >>
> >> Ed Gin never used his real name except ever so briefly when he was
> >> calling
> >> Jim McNaa a vandal (something about linseed oil) so who can say who
> >> was
> >> who. Certainly not you!
> >>
> >> >> Yet again, Mr. Ed can not get his posts factually correct.
> >>
> >> Tom Sherman always want defintive proof whereas a strong suspicion is
> >> more
> >> than good enough for me. Ed Gin has never denied that he is the criminal
> >> vandal troll of ARBR and the other cycling newsgroups. Only Tom Sherman
> >> has
> >> ever tried to defend him, mainly by caterwauling about a lack of proof.
> >>
> >> > Ed ... Tom is correct. Ed Gin's website may have been self-serving,
> >> > but it never had any sexually explicit images. I think you are
> >> > confusing his website with either the late Monkey Island forum or the
> >> > tasteless HRS blog. Since, by your own admission, you have never paid
> >> > any of these a visit, how can you possibly have an informed opinion or
> >> > express an uninformed opinion that anyone would take seriously. - Jim
> >> > McNaa
> >>
> >> I am only going by what you have previously told me about Ed Gin both on
> >> these newsgroups and by email. Others have also confirmed over and over
> >> who
> >> was posting under various false names and addresses.
> >
> > And this has what to do with you assertion regarding sexually explicit
> > images on Ed Gin's website? Diversion duly noted. My comment regarding
> > informed opinion referred only to your fallacious accusation regarding
> > sexually explicit images on Ed Gin's former website.
>
> I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to. My
> reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
> dunderhead!
What I said previously was that you never looked at the Monkey Island
forum, HRS blog or HRS blog ... dunderhead!!! Ed gin's website no
longer exists as Tom and I pointed out, so you can no longer look at it
... dunderhead??? If you never looked at Ed Gin's website, then how
could you emphatically state that it contained sexually explicit images
... dunderhead??? You are as perceptive as the average tree stump!!!
> >> I regard anyone who was even associated with Monkey Island as being
> >> nothing
> >> but a shit head. It was indisputable that Johnny NoCom was Ed Gin and
> >> that
> >> he was associated with Monkey Island as well as the HRS blog.
> >>
> >> You cannot go by what Tom Sherman thinks about any of this. He is
> >> permanently prejudiced and is blind as a bat, but why are you making
> >> excuses
> >> for Ed Gin when everyone one on these cycling newgroups knows he was the
> >> biggest scoundrel of them all. I can't believe you are falling for Tom
> >> Sherman's obfuscation.
> >
> > Obfuscation??? Your reasoning process is flawed. I am not going by what
> > Tom Sherman thinks. I am going by what I have personally observed and
> > not observed on Ed Gin's former website ... nothing more ... nothing
> > less. Furthermore, stating that Ed Gin did not have sexually explicit
> > images on his website is merely an observation and should not be
> > misconstrued as my making excuses for Ed Gin. It should be obvious that
> > I detest the guy, but unlike you or him will not lie about someone
> > else. That is dishonorable. The bottom line is that you are reading
> > into what I said, that which isn't there or you are deliberately
> > twisting that meaning of my words ... pick one..
>
> I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to. My
> reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
> dunderhead!
You did not address anything that I said above (not unusual). What I
said previously was that you never looked at the Monkey Island forum,
HRS blog or HRS blog ... dunderhead!!! Ed gin's website is no longer
exists as Tom and I pointed out, so you can no longer look at it ...
dunderhead??? If you never looked at Ed Gin's website, then how could
you emphatically state that it contained sexually explicit images ...
dunderhead???
> >> Tom Sherman likes to pride himself on being factually correct,
> >
> > And in this particular instance, I can state that he is being factual
> > and you are not.
> >
> >> but he likes
> >> to go slumming on these newsgroups from time to time.
But, in this particular instance, I can state that Tom was being
factual and you were not.
> > And you don't?
Diversion duly noted.
> >> That is why he does
> >> not object to criminal vandal trolls like Ed Gin - as long as he is not
> >> the
> >> object of course.
> >
> > Your conclusion does not strictly follow from the premise (Non
> > Seqitor).
>
> Ah, but it does.
Repetition is no substitute argument. Regardless of how many times you
repeat something, it will not become any more or less true than it was
in the first place. Saying something again and again, does not make it
so (Argumentum ad nauseam).
> I charge Tom Sherman with not only being a coward, but also
> being a moral cretin You have never fallen into either of those categories
> to your credit. But if you pal around with Tom Sherman long enough some of
> his excrement may rub off on you.
Agreeing with Tom on a particular point does not make us pals. If that
were then case, then the galvanized response of the readership with
regard to you would make us all pals here.
> >> He could easily be taught a lesson in this regard, but
> >> frankly I do not have the stomach to be a criminal vandal troll like Ed
> >> Gin.
> >>
> >> Tom Sherman is indeed right when he says I am all about argumentation and
> >> I
> >> do not give a damn about whatever facts he wants to dredge up.
> >
> > Thanks for the confirmation. that is all that was being said in
> > reference to your fallacious accusation concerning sexually explicit
> > images on Ed Gin's website.
>
> I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to. My
> reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
> dunderhead!
Apparently you are unable to counter Tom's and my accusation that your
accusation was fallacious, your are about argumentation, not facts and
were made to like foolish. What I said previously was that you never
looked at the Monkey Island forum, HRS blog or HRS blog ...
dunderhead!!! Ed gin's website is no longer exists as Tom and I
pointed out, more as both Tom and I have pointed out, so you can no
longer look at it ... dunderhead??? If you never looked at Ed Gin's
website, then how could you emphatically state that it contained
sexually explicit images ... dunderhead??? You are as perceptive as
the average tree stump!!!
> >> He has his
> >> facts and I have mine. Isn't that always the way it is when it comes to
> >> the
> >> so-called facts!
> >
> > No. You are confusing fact and opinion and Conan the Librarian should
> > know that fact and opinion are not synonyms.
>
> Tom Sherman and Jim McNaa do not have a proper contempt for facts. Facts
> are always subject to interpretation. That is what I am here for.
Confused aren't you??? What I have contempt for is your opinions stated
as facts. Opinions are subject to interpretation and debate, however,
by definition ... facts are not. Time for you to hit the dictionary
... librarian.
> By the way, my opinions are invariably superior to most facts since my
> opinions come from the Godhead and most facts come from nowhere.
Look up MEGALOMANIA while you're at it!!! You'll find you picture
right next to the definition.
Jim McNaa
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 02 Nov 2006 19:58:42
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1162217139.861986.322240@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1162132432.008769.276230@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > Edward Dolan wrote:
>> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:1162040343.425934.278920@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> >> >
>> >> > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>> >> >> Mr. Ed Dolan the Grate wrote:
>> >> >> > Ed Gin is a very funny fellow. I do not even look at his posts
>> >> >> > because
> >> >> > he is
>> >> >> > nothing but a troll - and an extremely stupid one at that. He is
>> >> >> > a
>> >> >> > shit
>> >> >> > head
>> >> >> > from Chicagoland who once had his own website where he thought it
>> >> >> > was
>> >> >> > cute
>> >> >> > to post nothing but pornographic images....
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The former Chicagoland Recumbent Riders website hosted by Ed Gin
>> >> >> never
>> >> >> had any sexually explicit images on it.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> If you are referred to the late "Monkey Island" web forum, it is
>> >> >> common
>> >> >> knowledge that it was hosted by someone with the initials SJ and
>> >> >> not
>> >> >> EG.
>> >>
>> >> Ed Gin never used his real name except ever so briefly when he was
>> >> calling
>> >> Jim McNaa a vandal (something about linseed oil) so who can say who
>> >> was
>> >> who. Certainly not you!
>> >>
>> >> >> Yet again, Mr. Ed can not get his posts factually correct.
>> >>
>> >> Tom Sherman always want defintive proof whereas a strong suspicion is
>> >> more
>> >> than good enough for me. Ed Gin has never denied that he is the
>> >> criminal
>> >> vandal troll of ARBR and the other cycling newsgroups. Only Tom
>> >> Sherman
>> >> has
>> >> ever tried to defend him, mainly by caterwauling about a lack of
>> >> proof.
>> >>
>> >> > Ed ... Tom is correct. Ed Gin's website may have been self-serving,
>> >> > but it never had any sexually explicit images. I think you are
>> >> > confusing his website with either the late Monkey Island forum or
>> >> > the
>> >> > tasteless HRS blog. Since, by your own admission, you have never
>> >> > paid
>> >> > any of these a visit, how can you possibly have an informed opinion
>> >> > or
>> >> > express an uninformed opinion that anyone would take seriously. -
>> >> > Jim
>> >> > McNaa
>> >>
>> >> I am only going by what you have previously told me about Ed Gin both
>> >> on
>> >> these newsgroups and by email. Others have also confirmed over and
>> >> over
>> >> who
>> >> was posting under various false names and addresses.
>> >
>> > And this has what to do with you assertion regarding sexually explicit
>> > images on Ed Gin's website? Diversion duly noted. My comment regarding
>> > informed opinion referred only to your fallacious accusation regarding
>> > sexually explicit images on Ed Gin's former website.
>>
>> I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to. My
>> reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
>> dunderhead!
>
> What I said previously was that you never looked at the Monkey Island
> forum, HRS blog or HRS blog ... dunderhead!!! Ed gin's website no
> longer exists as Tom and I pointed out, so you can no longer look at it
> ... dunderhead??? If you never looked at Ed Gin's website, then how
> could you emphatically state that it contained sexually explicit images
> ... dunderhead??? You are as perceptive as the average tree stump!!!
"I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to. My
reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
dunderhead!" - Ed Dolan
>> >> I regard anyone who was even associated with Monkey Island as being
>> >> nothing
>> >> but a shit head. It was indisputable that Johnny NoCom was Ed Gin and
>> >> that
>> >> he was associated with Monkey Island as well as the HRS blog.
>> >>
>> >> You cannot go by what Tom Sherman thinks about any of this. He is
>> >> permanently prejudiced and is blind as a bat, but why are you making
>> >> excuses
>> >> for Ed Gin when everyone one on these cycling newgroups knows he was
>> >> the
>> >> biggest scoundrel of them all. I can't believe you are falling for Tom
>> >> Sherman's obfuscation.
>> >
>> > Obfuscation??? Your reasoning process is flawed. I am not going by what
>> > Tom Sherman thinks. I am going by what I have personally observed and
>> > not observed on Ed Gin's former website ... nothing more ... nothing
>> > less. Furthermore, stating that Ed Gin did not have sexually explicit
>> > images on his website is merely an observation and should not be
>> > misconstrued as my making excuses for Ed Gin. It should be obvious that
>> > I detest the guy, but unlike you or him will not lie about someone
>> > else. That is dishonorable. The bottom line is that you are reading
>> > into what I said, that which isn't there or you are deliberately
>> > twisting that meaning of my words ... pick one..
>>
>> I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to. My
>> reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
>> dunderhead!
>
> You did not address anything that I said above (not unusual). What I
> said previously was that you never looked at the Monkey Island forum,
> HRS blog or HRS blog ... dunderhead!!! Ed gin's website is no longer
> exists as Tom and I pointed out, so you can no longer look at it ...
> dunderhead??? If you never looked at Ed Gin's website, then how could
> you emphatically state that it contained sexually explicit images ...
> dunderhead???
"I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to. My
reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
dunderhead!" - Ed Dolan
>> >> Tom Sherman likes to pride himself on being factually correct,
>> >
>> > And in this particular instance, I can state that he is being factual
>> > and you are not.
>> >
>> >> but he likes
>> >> to go slumming on these newsgroups from time to time.
>
> But, in this particular instance, I can state that Tom was being
> factual and you were not.
>
>> > And you don't?
>
> Diversion duly noted.
>
>> >> That is why he does
>> >> not object to criminal vandal trolls like Ed Gin - as long as he is
>> >> not
>> >> the
>> >> object of course.
>> >
>> > Your conclusion does not strictly follow from the premise (Non
>> > Seqitor).
>>
>> Ah, but it does.
>
> Repetition is no substitute argument. Regardless of how many times you
> repeat something, it will not become any more or less true than it was
> in the first place. Saying something again and again, does not make it
> so (Argumentum ad nauseam).
>
>> I charge Tom Sherman with not only being a coward, but also
>> being a moral cretin You have never fallen into either of those
>> categories
>> to your credit. But if you pal around with Tom Sherman long enough some
>> of
>> his excrement may rub off on you.
>
> Agreeing with Tom on a particular point does not make us pals. If that
> were then case, then the galvanized response of the readership with
> regard to you would make us all pals here.
>
>> >> He could easily be taught a lesson in this regard, but
>> >> frankly I do not have the stomach to be a criminal vandal troll like
>> >> Ed
>> >> Gin.
>> >>
>> >> Tom Sherman is indeed right when he says I am all about argumentation
>> >> and
>> >> I
>> >> do not give a damn about whatever facts he wants to dredge up.
>> >
>> > Thanks for the confirmation. that is all that was being said in
>> > reference to your fallacious accusation concerning sexually explicit
>> > images on Ed Gin's website.
>>
>> I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to. My
>> reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
>> dunderhead!
>
> Apparently you are unable to counter Tom's and my accusation that your
> accusation was fallacious, your are about argumentation, not facts and
> were made to like foolish. What I said previously was that you never
> looked at the Monkey Island forum, HRS blog or HRS blog ...
> dunderhead!!! Ed gin's website is no longer exists as Tom and I
> pointed out, more as both Tom and I have pointed out, so you can no
> longer look at it ... dunderhead??? If you never looked at Ed Gin's
> website, then how could you emphatically state that it contained
> sexually explicit images ... dunderhead??? You are as perceptive as
> the average tree stump!!!
"I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to. My
reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
dunderhead!" - Ed Dolan
>> >> He has his
>> >> facts and I have mine. Isn't that always the way it is when it comes
>> >> to
>> >> the
>> >> so-called facts!
>> >
>> > No. You are confusing fact and opinion and Conan the Librarian should
>> > know that fact and opinion are not synonyms.
>>
>> Tom Sherman and Jim McNaa do not have a proper contempt for facts.
>> Facts
>> are always subject to interpretation. That is what I am here for.
>
> Confused aren't you??? What I have contempt for is your opinions stated
> as facts. Opinions are subject to interpretation and debate, however,
> by definition ... facts are not. Time for you to hit the dictionary
> ... librarian.
Yes, but you do not know how to debate an opinion anymore than Tom Sherman
does. Like all intellectually challenged fools, you only know how to fall
back on your pitiful facts. Neither one of you ever got beyond high school
no matter your college degrees.
>> By the way, my opinions are invariably superior to most facts since my
>> opinions come from the Godhead and most facts come from nowhere.
Ed, I couldn't agree with you more. You are truly inspired compared to all
the idiots, morons and cretins who infest these cycling newsgroups.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 21:55:15
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: And now for something completely different...
|
Mr. Ed Dolan the Grate wrote:
> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1162136580.778835.103220@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > dkahn400 wrote:
> >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> >>
> >> > I believe that I can take most of the credit for demonstrating through
> >> > discussion that Mr. Ed is all about argumentation and not facts.
> >>
> >> As if he cared. It would be far more effective if you simply ignored
> >> him. No-one takes anything he posts seriously. Please try to resist the
> >> temptation to reply to him.
> >
> > Dave,
> >
> > When Ed Dolan first appeared on Usenet, he did not seem an unreasonable
> > person. However, since he was promoting a pro-war, pro-government
> > violence agenda, I provided him with sufficient rope to hang himself.
> >
> > Note that was over three years ago, and in recent times I have ignored
> > most of Ed Dolan's trolls as not worthy of response, except when he
> > libels others.
>
> Tom Sherman has been what has been mostly wrong with this group from its
> inception. He is a liberal left wing nut and screwball (all one word) who
> thought he had a God given right to express his nutty opinions on this
> newsgroup (ARBR) unopposed. I soon put a stop to that kind of idiocy.
>
> Tom Sherman is a peacenik, a socialist (bordering on communist), a coward
> and a traitor to America and all it stands for in the world. He will not
> defend this country against its enemies and he even thinks the Palestinians
> are an OK people who have every right to murder Israeli civilians. He lives
> in a world where everything equates morally. The one thing that never
> equates for him is the truth. He is an ideologue and a propagandist for
> every failed social policy of the past century. I despise him for his views.
> He just does not equate with me at all.
>
> His cowardice is on display for all to see when it comes to Ed Gin. Tom
> Sherman knows how to be a weasel when it suits his purpose. But why he wants
> to kowtow to Ed Gin is one of the supreme mysteries since Ed Gin is nothing
> but a criminal vandal troll who has ruined ARBR.
Mr. Ed makes my point yet again. ;)
--
Tom Sherman - Here, not there.
|
| | |
Date: 30 Oct 2006 06:48:39
From: Alan Erskine
Subject: Re: And now for something completely different...
|
"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1162187715.475335.141940@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Mr. Ed makes my point yet again. ;)
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - Here, not there.
It's interesting to note that it's only two "yahooligans" (you and McNaa)
who are responding regularly to the Dolan troll. Are you and McNaa
related perchance?
--
Alan Erskine
Alanerskine1@bigpond.com
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Oct 2006 00:58:11
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: And now for something completely different...
|
"Alan Erskine" <alanerskine1@bigpond.com > wrote in message
news:bfh1h.55673$rP1.25675@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1162187715.475335.141940@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>> Mr. Ed makes my point yet again. ;)
>>
>> --
>> Tom Sherman - Here, not there.
>
> It's interesting to note that it's only two "yahooligans" (you and
> McNaa)
> who are responding regularly to the Dolan troll. Are you and McNaa
> related perchance?
Tom Sherman is an enemy of mine from the early days of ARBR. He mostly lies
low these days because he knows I have run out of patience with him.
Jim McNaa is a more recent antagonist of mine who is essentially nothing
but a stalker. He is more to be pitied than condemned.
They are both sad cases and neither one of them ever says anything that any
members find the least bit interesting. Only the Great Ed Dolan knows how to
write interesting messages that all the world wants to read with bated
breath. It is why I am so Great and all the rest of you are nullities.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 07:43:00
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan - the supreme asshole of ARBR?
|
dkahn400 wrote:
> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>
> > I believe that I can take most of the credit for demonstrating through
> > discussion that Mr. Ed is all about argumentation and not facts.
>
> As if he cared. It would be far more effective if you simply ignored
> him. No-one takes anything he posts seriously. Please try to resist the
> temptation to reply to him.
Dave,
When Ed Dolan first appeared on Usenet, he did not seem an unreasonable
person. However, since he was promoting a pro-war, pro-government
violence agenda, I provided him with sufficient rope to hang himself.
Note that was over three years ago, and in recent times I have ignored
most of Ed Dolan's trolls as not worthy of response, except when he
libels others.
--
Tom Sherman - Here, not there.
|
| | |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 23:38:55
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Tom Sherman - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1162136580.778835.103220@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>
> dkahn400 wrote:
>> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>>
>> > I believe that I can take most of the credit for demonstrating through
>> > discussion that Mr. Ed is all about argumentation and not facts.
>>
>> As if he cared. It would be far more effective if you simply ignored
>> him. No-one takes anything he posts seriously. Please try to resist the
>> temptation to reply to him.
>
> Dave,
>
> When Ed Dolan first appeared on Usenet, he did not seem an unreasonable
> person. However, since he was promoting a pro-war, pro-government
> violence agenda, I provided him with sufficient rope to hang himself.
>
> Note that was over three years ago, and in recent times I have ignored
> most of Ed Dolan's trolls as not worthy of response, except when he
> libels others.
Tom Sherman has been what has been mostly wrong with this group from its
inception. He is a liberal left wing nut and screwball (all one word) who
thought he had a God given right to express his nutty opinions on this
newsgroup (ARBR) unopposed. I soon put a stop to that kind of idiocy.
Tom Sherman is a peacenik, a socialist (bordering on communist), a coward
and a traitor to America and all it stands for in the world. He will not
defend this country against its enemies and he even thinks the Palestinians
are an OK people who have every right to murder Israeli civilians. He lives
in a world where everything equates morally. The one thing that never
equates for him is the truth. He is an ideologue and a propagandist for
every failed social policy of the past century. I despise him for his views.
He just does not equate with me at all.
His cowardice is on display for all to see when it comes to Ed Gin. Tom
Sherman knows how to be a weasel when it suits his purpose. But why he wants
to kowtow to Ed Gin is one of the supreme mysteries since Ed Gin is nothing
but a criminal vandal troll who has ruined ARBR.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 07:39:13
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan - the supreme asshole of ARBR?
|
JimmyMac aka Jim McNaa wrote:
> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> > JimmyMac aka Jim McNaa wrote:
> > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> > > > Alan Erskine wrote:
> > > > > "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > > > news:1161995945.986224.29590@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > > > > > The former Chicagoland Recumbent Riders website hosted by Ed Gin never
> > > > > > had any sexually explicit images on it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you are referred to the late "Monkey Island" web forum, it is common
> > > > > > knowledge that it was hosted by someone with the initials SJ and not
> > > > > > EG.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yet again, Mr. Ed can not get his posts factually correct.
> > > > >
> > > > > You expect better from a troll?
> > > >
> > > > I believe that I can take most of the credit for demonstrating through
> > > > discussion that Mr. Ed is all about argumentation and not facts.
> > >
> > > > Tom Sherman - Here, not there.
> > >
> > > Well ... credit for sure, but "most" might be a stretch. I believe that
> > > I am due some credit in this regard. I feel that no one has
> > > demonstrated more than have Tom and I that Ed Dolan is all (or at least
> > > mostly) about argumentation and not facts. I constantly castigate Ed
> > > for running his mouth (writing) when he does not have his facts in
> > > order. Ed submits his errant opinions as if they were indisputable
> > > facts requiring no evidence or substantiation, something that I have
> > > taken issue with countless times.
> >
> > Jim,
> >
> > Read through this thread from February 26, 2003 to August 2, 2003 and
> > see if you still have the same opinion:
> > <http://groups.google.com/group/alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent/browse_frm/thread/e543438ebd2cd4a5/3f22e4cc19a8a59c?lnk=gst&q=flammable+dolan&rnum=1#3f22e4cc19a8a59c>.
> >
> > I disagree with your posting due to the chronology of events, not your
> > interpretation of the ones you are referring to.
>
> Tom, since you did not initially refer to any particular thread or
> chronology, I'm not sure just what you mean.
Only that it had been demonstrated that Ed Dolan is about argumentation
and not facts and logic long before Jim McNaa's first discussion
with Ed Dolan appeared on Usenet.
> I would gladly accommodate your request if it were not fort he fact that this thread
> consists of 599 posts to plow through!
Hey, it was fun at the time! :)
> Regardless, my opinion wouldn't change based
> on only a single thread.regardless its length. As for chronology, your
> encounters with Ed Dolan certainly precede mine, but Ed's propensity
> for argumentation regardless of facts in evidence is not limited to a
> single thread or single temporal order. Although a given thread of
> particular chronology may serve as a fitting example this
> characteristic trait of Eds is not confined to a single thread nor it
> is limited to a particular chronology. Like you, I have demonstrated
> through discussion that Ed Dolan is all about argumentation and not
> facts and felt that I deserved some recogniton in that respect. That's
> all I was saying..
I do not disagree with the gist of the above paragraph.
--
Tom Sherman - Here, not there.
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 06:59:37
From: dkahn400
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> I believe that I can take most of the credit for demonstrating through
> discussion that Mr. Ed is all about argumentation and not facts.
As if he cared. It would be far more effective if you simply ignored
him. No-one takes anything he posts seriously. Please try to resist the
temptation to reply to him.
--
Dave...
|
| | |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 23:13:18
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
"dkahn400" <dkahn400@googlemail.com > wrote in message
news:1162133977.345059.303450@e64g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>
>> I believe that I can take most of the credit for demonstrating through
>> discussion that Mr. Ed is all about argumentation and not facts.
>
> As if he cared. It would be far more effective if you simply ignored
> him. No-one takes anything he posts seriously. Please try to resist the
> temptation to reply to him.
>
> Dave...
Just plain Dave... takes everything the Great Ed Dolan says with the utmost
seriousness. How could he not since he is mired in a newsgroup (AB) which
consists of nothing but idiots, morons and imbeciles - many of them
Aborigines. I do not think just plain Dave... is an a Aborigine himself but
he comes close to them in his overall mentality. Well, that is what you get
when you hang out with the darkies.
Has Flying Dutch and Tamyka Bell gotten hitched yet?
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 06:57:15
From: ken
Subject: GAY Alan Erskine & GAY marty wallace the supreme assholes of ARBR!
|
Alan Erskine wrote:
> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1161995945.986224.29590@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > The former Chicagoland Recumbent Riders website hosted by Ed Gin never
> > had any sexually explicit images on it.
> >
> > If you are referred to the late "Monkey Island" web forum, it is common
> > knowledge that it was hosted by someone with the initials SJ and not
> > EG.
> >
> > Yet again, Mr. Ed can not get his posts factually correct.
>
GAY Alan Erskine & GAY ty wallace the supreme assholes of ARBR!
> You expect better from a troll like me GAY Alan Erskine & GAY ty wallace?
I think we all know a real troll when we encounter one. Thankfully
they are few and far between. In all my years on ARBR, there has only
been
one troll who constituted a danger to the group. In fact, he pretty
much
destroyed the group.
that's what ty wallace said because
his mom droped him on his head two many
times when it was a baby- that was 2 years ago.
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=%22ty+wallace%22&start=0&...
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&q=%22ty+wallace%22++%...
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&q=%22ty+wallace%22
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=%22ty+wallace%22++%22sue%...
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&q=%22ty+wallace%22++%...
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=%22ty+wallace%22++%22sue+...
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 06:56:54
From: ken
Subject: GAY Alan Erskine & GAY marty wallace the supreme assholes of ARBR!
|
Alan Erskine wrote:
> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1161995945.986224.29590@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > The former Chicagoland Recumbent Riders website hosted by Ed Gin never
> > had any sexually explicit images on it.
> >
> > If you are referred to the late "Monkey Island" web forum, it is common
> > knowledge that it was hosted by someone with the initials SJ and not
> > EG.
> >
> > Yet again, Mr. Ed can not get his posts factually correct.
>
GAY Alan Erskine & GAY ty wallace the supreme assholes of ARBR!
> You expect better from a troll like me GAY Alan Erskine & GAY ty wallace?
I think we all know a real troll when we encounter one. Thankfully
they are few and far between. In all my years on ARBR, there has only
been
one troll who constituted a danger to the group. In fact, he pretty
much
destroyed the group.
that's what ty wallace said because
his mom droped him on his head two many
times when it was a baby- that was 2 years ago.
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=%22ty+wallace%22&start=0&...
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&q=%22ty+wallace%22++%...
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&q=%22ty+wallace%22
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=%22ty+wallace%22++%22sue%...
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&q=%22ty+wallace%22++%...
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=%22ty+wallace%22++%22sue+...
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 06:33:52
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1162040343.425934.278920@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> >> Mr. Ed Dolan the Grate wrote:
> >> > Ed Gin is a very funny fellow. I do not even look at his posts because
> >> > he is
> >> > nothing but a troll - and an extremely stupid one at that. He is a shit
> >> > head
> >> > from Chicagoland who once had his own website where he thought it was
> >> > cute
> >> > to post nothing but pornographic images....
> >>
> >> The former Chicagoland Recumbent Riders website hosted by Ed Gin never
> >> had any sexually explicit images on it.
> >>
> >> If you are referred to the late "Monkey Island" web forum, it is common
> >> knowledge that it was hosted by someone with the initials SJ and not
> >> EG.
>
> Ed Gin never used his real name except ever so briefly when he was calling
> Jim McNaa a vandal (something about linseed oil) so who can say who was
> who. Certainly not you!
>
> >> Yet again, Mr. Ed can not get his posts factually correct.
>
> Tom Sherman always want defintive proof whereas a strong suspicion is more
> than good enough for me. Ed Gin has never denied that he is the criminal
> vandal troll of ARBR and the other cycling newsgroups. Only Tom Sherman has
> ever tried to defend him, mainly by caterwauling about a lack of proof.
>
> > Ed ... Tom is correct. Ed Gin's website may have been self-serving,
> > but it never had any sexually explicit images. I think you are
> > confusing his website with either the late Monkey Island forum or the
> > tasteless HRS blog. Since, by your own admission, you have never paid
> > any of these a visit, how can you possibly have an informed opinion or
> > express an uninformed opinion that anyone would take seriously. - Jim
> > McNaa
>
> I am only going by what you have previously told me about Ed Gin both on
> these newsgroups and by email. Others have also confirmed over and over who
> was posting under various false names and addresses.
And this has what to do with you assertion regarding sexually explicit
images on Ed Gin's website? Diversion duly noted. My comment regarding
informed opinion referred only to your fallacious accusation regarding
sexually explicit images on Ed Gin's former website.
> I regard anyone who was even associated with Monkey Island as being nothing
> but a shit head. It was indisputable that Johnny NoCom was Ed Gin and that
> he was associated with Monkey Island as well as the HRS blog.
>
> You cannot go by what Tom Sherman thinks about any of this. He is
> permanently prejudiced and is blind as a bat, but why are you making excuses
> for Ed Gin when everyone one on these cycling newgroups knows he was the
> biggest scoundrel of them all. I can't believe you are falling for Tom
> Sherman's obfuscation.
Obfuscation??? Your reasoning process is flawed. I am not going by what
Tom Sherman thinks. I am going by what I have personally observed and
not observed on Ed Gin's former website ... nothing more ... nothing
less. Furthermore, stating that Ed Gin did not have sexually explicit
images on his website is merely an observation and should not be
misconstrued as my making excuses for Ed Gin. It should be obvious that
I detest the guy, but unlike you or him will not lie about someone
else. That is dishonorable. The bottom line is that you are reading
into what I said, that which isn't there or you are deliberately
twisting that meaning of my words ... pick one..
> Tom Sherman likes to pride himself on being factually correct,
And in this particular instance, I can state that he is being factual
and you are not.
> but he likes
> to go slumming on these newsgroups from time to time.
And you don't?
> That is why he does
> not object to criminal vandal trolls like Ed Gin - as long as he is not the
> object of course.
Your conclusion does not strictly follow from the premise (Non
Seqitor).
> He could easily be taught a lesson in this regard, but
> frankly I do not have the stomach to be a criminal vandal troll like Ed Gin.
>
> Tom Sherman is indeed right when he says I am all about argumentation and I
> do not give a damn about whatever facts he wants to dredge up.
Thanks for the confirmation. that is all that was being said in
reference to your fallacious accusation concerning sexually explicit
images on Ed Gin's website.
> He has his
> facts and I have mine. Isn't that always the way it is when it comes to the
> so-called facts!
No. You are confusing fact and opinion and Conan the Librarian should
know that fact and opinion are not synonyms.
Jim McNaa
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 10 Nov 2006 04:03:04
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1163077245.963561.296180@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > Top posted, because I know just how much you appreciate things up
> > front...
> >
> > YES. I said something you wisely chose to ignore. In your three
> > previous posts comprised of identical content, you have served to
> > demonstrate my you point, admirably. When you cannot win an argument,
> > and you have proven to be wrong, and you cannot offer anything in your
> > own defense, you resort to meaningless copy and paste gibberish.
> >
> > Ed, your very own written words often return to haunt and betray you...
> >
> > "There is always substance in my posts no matter how I craft them. I
> > will stand by every message I have ever posted to Usenet, bar none.
> > Some of my posts will require some explanation no doubt, but I can
> > defend and justify everything I have ever said to anyone."
> >
> > As concerns the SUBSTANCE of your posts in this thread, they could be
> > best sumized as irresponsible dissemination of an errant assertion
> > (read disinformation). As concerns DEFENSE and JUSTIFICATION, you did
> > not and cannot JUSTIFY your public prevarication and you did not and
> > cannot DEFEND the indefensible.
> >
> > It has been demonstrated that...
> >
> > - You made an accusation that is know to be fallacious.
> > - You were unable to substantiate your accusation.
> > - You are unwilling to admit to wrongdoing.
> > - You are unwilling to retract your accusation.
> > - You are unwilling to issue a public apology.
> > - Our cyber skirmishes have displeased some of the readership.
> > - Our cyber skirmishes have attracted the attention of a "spamming"
> > TROLL.
> > - It is now opportune and prudent to call it quits in the hope that
> > these Usenet newsgroups will eventually return to a state of normalcy,
> > as normal as can be expected with the continued infestation from your
> > incorrigible, obnoxious presence and your interminable cerebral,
> > flatulence.
>
> Did you say something?
Actually, I WROTE something ... you READ everything, but you were
incapable of offering an intelligible, meaningful response, hence the
repetitive copy and paste gibberish. You've been caught with you pants
down on this issue and everyone is tired of looking at your sorry ass.
Having made my point, I'll give this a rest. You can pulls your pants
back up and move on or move on out ...preferably the latter..
Jim McNaa
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 23:58:33
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1162132432.008769.276230@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1162040343.425934.278920@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>> >> Mr. Ed Dolan the Grate wrote:
>> >> > Ed Gin is a very funny fellow. I do not even look at his posts
>> >> > because
>> >> > he is
>> >> > nothing but a troll - and an extremely stupid one at that. He is a
>> >> > shit
>> >> > head
>> >> > from Chicagoland who once had his own website where he thought it
>> >> > was
>> >> > cute
>> >> > to post nothing but pornographic images....
>> >>
>> >> The former Chicagoland Recumbent Riders website hosted by Ed Gin never
>> >> had any sexually explicit images on it.
>> >>
>> >> If you are referred to the late "Monkey Island" web forum, it is
>> >> common
>> >> knowledge that it was hosted by someone with the initials SJ and not
>> >> EG.
>>
>> Ed Gin never used his real name except ever so briefly when he was
>> calling
>> Jim McNaa a vandal (something about linseed oil) so who can say who
>> was
>> who. Certainly not you!
>>
>> >> Yet again, Mr. Ed can not get his posts factually correct.
>>
>> Tom Sherman always want defintive proof whereas a strong suspicion is
>> more
>> than good enough for me. Ed Gin has never denied that he is the criminal
>> vandal troll of ARBR and the other cycling newsgroups. Only Tom Sherman
>> has
>> ever tried to defend him, mainly by caterwauling about a lack of proof.
>>
>> > Ed ... Tom is correct. Ed Gin's website may have been self-serving,
>> > but it never had any sexually explicit images. I think you are
>> > confusing his website with either the late Monkey Island forum or the
>> > tasteless HRS blog. Since, by your own admission, you have never paid
>> > any of these a visit, how can you possibly have an informed opinion or
>> > express an uninformed opinion that anyone would take seriously. - Jim
>> > McNaa
>>
>> I am only going by what you have previously told me about Ed Gin both on
>> these newsgroups and by email. Others have also confirmed over and over
>> who
>> was posting under various false names and addresses.
>
> And this has what to do with you assertion regarding sexually explicit
> images on Ed Gin's website? Diversion duly noted. My comment regarding
> informed opinion referred only to your fallacious accusation regarding
> sexually explicit images on Ed Gin's former website.
I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to. My
reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
dunderhead!
>> I regard anyone who was even associated with Monkey Island as being
>> nothing
>> but a shit head. It was indisputable that Johnny NoCom was Ed Gin and
>> that
>> he was associated with Monkey Island as well as the HRS blog.
>>
>> You cannot go by what Tom Sherman thinks about any of this. He is
>> permanently prejudiced and is blind as a bat, but why are you making
>> excuses
>> for Ed Gin when everyone one on these cycling newgroups knows he was the
>> biggest scoundrel of them all. I can't believe you are falling for Tom
>> Sherman's obfuscation.
>
> Obfuscation??? Your reasoning process is flawed. I am not going by what
> Tom Sherman thinks. I am going by what I have personally observed and
> not observed on Ed Gin's former website ... nothing more ... nothing
> less. Furthermore, stating that Ed Gin did not have sexually explicit
> images on his website is merely an observation and should not be
> misconstrued as my making excuses for Ed Gin. It should be obvious that
> I detest the guy, but unlike you or him will not lie about someone
> else. That is dishonorable. The bottom line is that you are reading
> into what I said, that which isn't there or you are deliberately
> twisting that meaning of my words ... pick one..
I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to. My
reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
dunderhead!
>> Tom Sherman likes to pride himself on being factually correct,
>
> And in this particular instance, I can state that he is being factual
> and you are not.
>
>> but he likes
>> to go slumming on these newsgroups from time to time.
>
> And you don't?
>
>> That is why he does
>> not object to criminal vandal trolls like Ed Gin - as long as he is not
>> the
>> object of course.
>
> Your conclusion does not strictly follow from the premise (Non
> Seqitor).
Ah, but it does. I charge Tom Sherman with not only being a coward, but also
being a moral cretin You have never fallen into either of those categories
to your credit. But if you pal around with Tom Sherman long enough some of
his excrement may rub off on you.
>> He could easily be taught a lesson in this regard, but
>> frankly I do not have the stomach to be a criminal vandal troll like Ed
>> Gin.
>>
>> Tom Sherman is indeed right when he says I am all about argumentation and
>> I
>> do not give a damn about whatever facts he wants to dredge up.
>
> Thanks for the confirmation. that is all that was being said in
> reference to your fallacious accusation concerning sexually explicit
> images on Ed Gin's website.
I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend to. My
reference was to the Monkey Island website and the HRS blog website, you
dunderhead!
>> He has his
>> facts and I have mine. Isn't that always the way it is when it comes to
>> the
>> so-called facts!
>
> No. You are confusing fact and opinion and Conan the Librarian should
> know that fact and opinion are not synonyms.
Tom Sherman and Jim McNaa do not have a proper contempt for facts. Facts
are always subject to interpretation. That is what I am here for.
By the way, my opinions are invariably superior to most facts since my
opinions come from the Godhead and most facts come from nowhere.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 05:59:00
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan - the supreme asshole of ARBR?
|
Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> JimmyMac aka Jim McNaa wrote:
> > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> > > Alan Erskine wrote:
> > > > "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:1161995945.986224.29590@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > > > > The former Chicagoland Recumbent Riders website hosted by Ed Gin never
> > > > > had any sexually explicit images on it.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you are referred to the late "Monkey Island" web forum, it is common
> > > > > knowledge that it was hosted by someone with the initials SJ and not
> > > > > EG.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yet again, Mr. Ed can not get his posts factually correct.
> > > >
> > > > You expect better from a troll?
> > >
> > > I believe that I can take most of the credit for demonstrating through
> > > discussion that Mr. Ed is all about argumentation and not facts.
> >
> > > Tom Sherman - Here, not there.
> >
> > Well ... credit for sure, but "most" might be a stretch. I believe that
> > I am due some credit in this regard. I feel that no one has
> > demonstrated more than have Tom and I that Ed Dolan is all (or at least
> > mostly) about argumentation and not facts. I constantly castigate Ed
> > for running his mouth (writing) when he does not have his facts in
> > order. Ed submits his errant opinions as if they were indisputable
> > facts requiring no evidence or substantiation, something that I have
> > taken issue with countless times.
>
> Jim,
>
> Read through this thread from February 26, 2003 to August 2, 2003 and
> see if you still have the same opinion:
> <http://groups.google.com/group/alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent/browse_frm/thread/e543438ebd2cd4a5/3f22e4cc19a8a59c?lnk=gst&q=flammable+dolan&rnum=1#3f22e4cc19a8a59c>.
>
> I disagree with your posting due to the chronology of events, not your
> interpretation of the ones you are referring to.
Tom, since you did not initially refer to any particular thread or
chronology, I'm not sure just what you mean. I would gladly accommodate
your request if it were not fort he fact that this thread consists of
599 posts to plow through! Regardless, my opinion wouldn't change based
on only a single thread.regardless its length. As for chronology, your
encounters with Ed Dolan certainly precede mine, but Ed's propensity
for argumentation regardless of facts in evidence is not limited to a
single thread or single temporal order. Although a given thread of
particular chronology may serve as a fitting example this
characteristic trait of Eds is not confined to a single thread nor it
is limited to a particular chronology. Like you, I have demonstrated
through discussion that Ed Dolan is all about argumentation and not
facts and felt that I deserved some recogniton in that respect. That's
all I was saying..
Jim McNaa
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - Here, not there.
|
| |
Date: 28 Oct 2006 15:43:17
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Ed Dolan - the supreme asshole of ARBR?
|
JimmyMac aka Jim McNaa wrote:
> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> > Alan Erskine wrote:
> > > "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > news:1161995945.986224.29590@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > > > The former Chicagoland Recumbent Riders website hosted by Ed Gin never
> > > > had any sexually explicit images on it.
> > > >
> > > > If you are referred to the late "Monkey Island" web forum, it is common
> > > > knowledge that it was hosted by someone with the initials SJ and not
> > > > EG.
> > > >
> > > > Yet again, Mr. Ed can not get his posts factually correct.
> > >
> > > You expect better from a troll?
> >
> > I believe that I can take most of the credit for demonstrating through
> > discussion that Mr. Ed is all about argumentation and not facts.
>
> > Tom Sherman - Here, not there.
>
> Well ... credit for sure, but "most" might be a stretch. I believe that
> I am due some credit in this regard. I feel that no one has
> demonstrated more than have Tom and I that Ed Dolan is all (or at least
> mostly) about argumentation and not facts. I constantly castigate Ed
> for running his mouth (writing) when he does not have his facts in
> order. Ed submits his errant opinions as if they were indisputable
> facts requiring no evidence or substantiation, something that I have
> taken issue with countless times.
Jim,
Read through this thread from February 26, 2003 to August 2, 2003 and
see if you still have the same opinion:
<http://groups.google.com/group/alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent/browse_frm/thread/e543438ebd2cd4a5/3f22e4cc19a8a59c?lnk=gst&q=flammable+dolan&rnum=1#3f22e4cc19a8a59c >.
I disagree with your posting due to the chronology of events, not your
interpretation of the ones you are referring to.
--
Tom Sherman - Here, not there.
|
| |
Date: 28 Oct 2006 11:32:48
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> Alan Erskine wrote:
> > "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:1161995945.986224.29590@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > > The former Chicagoland Recumbent Riders website hosted by Ed Gin never
> > > had any sexually explicit images on it.
> > >
> > > If you are referred to the late "Monkey Island" web forum, it is common
> > > knowledge that it was hosted by someone with the initials SJ and not
> > > EG.
> > >
> > > Yet again, Mr. Ed can not get his posts factually correct.
> >
> > You expect better from a troll?
>
> I believe that I can take most of the credit for demonstrating through
> discussion that Mr. Ed is all about argumentation and not facts.
> Tom Sherman - Here, not there.
Well ... credit for sure, but "most" might be a stretch. I believe that
I am due some credit in this regard. I feel that no one has
demonstrated more than have Tom and I that Ed Dolan is all (or at least
mostly) about argumentation and not facts. I constantly castigate Ed
for running his mouth (writing) when he does not have his facts in
order. Ed submits his errant opinions as if they were indisputable
facts requiring no evidence or substantiation, something that I have
taken issue with countless times.
Jim McNaa
|
| |
Date: 28 Oct 2006 06:27:44
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
Alan Erskine wrote:
> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1161995945.986224.29590@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > The former Chicagoland Recumbent Riders website hosted by Ed Gin never
> > had any sexually explicit images on it.
> >
> > If you are referred to the late "Monkey Island" web forum, it is common
> > knowledge that it was hosted by someone with the initials SJ and not
> > EG.
> >
> > Yet again, Mr. Ed can not get his posts factually correct.
>
> You expect better from a troll?
I believe that I can take most of the credit for demonstrating through
discussion that Mr. Ed is all about argumentation and not facts.
--
Tom Sherman - Here, not there.
|
| |
Date: 28 Oct 2006 05:59:03
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> Mr. Ed Dolan the Grate wrote:
> > Ed Gin is a very funny fellow. I do not even look at his posts because he is
> > nothing but a troll - and an extremely stupid one at that. He is a shit head
> > from Chicagoland who once had his own website where he thought it was cute
> > to post nothing but pornographic images....
>
> The former Chicagoland Recumbent Riders website hosted by Ed Gin never
> had any sexually explicit images on it.
>
> If you are referred to the late "Monkey Island" web forum, it is common
> knowledge that it was hosted by someone with the initials SJ and not
> EG.
>
> Yet again, Mr. Ed can not get his posts factually correct.
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - Here, not there.
Ed ... Tom is correct. Ed Gin's website may have been self-serving,
but it never had any sexually explicit images. I think you are
confusing his website with either the late Monkey Island forum or the
tasteless HRS blog. Since, by your own admission, you have never paid
any of these a visit, how can you possibly have an informed opinion or
express an uninformed opinion that anyone would take seriously. - Jim
McNaa
|
| | |
Date: 09 Nov 2006 05:00:46
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
Top posted, because I know just how much you appreciate things up
front...
YES. I said something you wisely chose to ignore. In your three
previous posts comprised of identical content, you have served to
demonstrate my you point, admirably. When you cannot win an argument,
and you have proven to be wrong, and you cannot offer anything in your
own defense, you resort to meaningless copy and paste gibberish.
Ed, your very own written words often return to haunt and betray you...
"There is always substance in my posts no matter how I craft them. I
will stand by every message I have ever posted to Usenet, bar none.
Some of my posts will require some explanation no doubt, but I can
defend and justify everything I have ever said to anyone."
As concerns the SUBSTANCE of your posts in this thread, they could be
best sumized as irresponsible dissemination of an errant assertion
(read disinformation). As concerns DEFENSE and JUSTIFICATION, you did
not and cannot JUSTIFY your public prevarication and you did not and
cannot DEFEND the indefensible.
It has been demonstrated that...
- You made an accusation that is know to be fallacious.
- You were unable to substantiate your accusation.
- You are unwilling to admit to wrongdoing.
- You are unwilling to retract your accusation.
- You are unwilling to issue a public apology.
- Our cyber skirmishes have displeased some of the readership.
- Our cyber skirmishes have attracted the attention of a "spamming"
TROLL.
- It is now opportune and prudent to call it quits in the hope that
these Usenet newsgroups will eventually return to a state of normalcy,
as normal as can be expected with the continued infestation from your
incorrigible, obnoxious presence and your interminable cerebral,
flatulence.
Jim McNaa
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1162851480.428944.89940@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1162770959.699872.73640@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >>
> >> ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS!
> >>
> >> > TOP POSTED TO GIVE ED SOMETHING TO BITCH ABOUT (like he needs help
> >> > ;^)...
> >> >
> >> > Q. Ed, what accusation did you make regarding Ed Gin and sexually
> >> > explicit images on his website?
> >> >
> >> > A. Ed Gin is a shit head from Chicagoland who once had his own website
> >> > where he thought it was cute to post nothing but pornographic images.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Q. Have you ever personally paid Ed Gin's website a visit?
> >> >
> >> > A. I never looked at Ed Gin's website in my life nor do I ever intend
> >> > to.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Q. Both Tom Sherman and Jim McNaa have stated that Ed Gin's website
> >> > did not host any sexually explicit images. Since you have never
> >> > visited Ed Gin's website, how then can you make such an accusation? As
> >> > Tom Sherman would say ... where's your proof?
> >>
> >> This all hinges on the definition of a web site. However, what I would
> >> like
> >> to know is how many angels will fit on the tip of a needle. Answer that,
> >> if
> >> you can!
> >
> > I'll respond to this nonsense at the bottom where you copy and pasted
> > this identical verbiage. I thought you only copy and pasted when
> > someone does not advance an argument because you didn't have infinite
> > patience for blathering about trivialities??? Wrong on both accounts I
> > see.
> >
> >> > A. Tom Sherman is an enemy of mine from the early days of ARBR. He has
> >> > ever proven himself a coward when confronted with a criminal vandal
> >> > troll like Ed Gin. On this issue, he is beneath contempt. Jim
> >> > McNaa is a more recent antagonist of mine and is essentially nothing
> >> > but a stalker. He is more to be pitied than condemned. Who would you
> >> > rather believe a stalker, the most pitiful of all Internet creatures,
> >> > or Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows? This is
> >> > elementary my dear Watson. Tom Sherman always wants definitive proof
> >> > whereas a strong suspicion is more than good enough for me.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Q. Both Tom Sherman and Jim McNaa have stated that you are all about
> >> > argumentation and not about facts and it appears that you have only
> >> > suspicion and opinion to offer and no facts in evidence to corroborate
> >> > your assertion.
> >> >
> >> > A. Hells bells. Tom Sherman and Jim McNaa have their facts and I
> >> > have mine. Isn't that always the way it is when it comes to the
> >> > so-called facts! Like all intellectually challenged fools, they only
> >> > know how to fall back on their pitiful facts. Neither one of them ever
> >> > got beyond high school regardless of their college degrees. Tom
> >> > Sherman and Jim McNaa do not have a proper contempt for facts.
> >> > Facts are always subject to interpretation. By the way, my opinions
> >> > are invariably superior to most facts since my opinions come from the
> >> > Godhead and most facts come from nowhere.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Q. Jim McNaa has complained that you resort to copy and paste when
> >> > the argument appears not to be in your favor and you can't win.
> >> >
> >> > A. I only copy and paste when someone does not advance an argument.
> >> > I do not have infinite patience for blathering about trivialities.
> >>
> >> The above is garbled and not what I wrote.
> >
> > Garbled??? Not what you wrote??? BULLSHIT!!! Is this a feeble
> > attempt to discredit??? This simulated interview (read parody) mirrors
> > quite well the flow of our debate. The above (and what follows below)
> > is virtually word for word what you have written (mostly in this very
> > thread) with minimal, minor, inconsequential changes where required to
> > ensure the flow of conversation in this simulated interview ... nothing
> > more ... nothing less..
> >
> >> > Q. But Jim McNaa said that you copy and paste when you have been
> >> > proven to be wrong and are unable to counter an argument that has been
> >> > advanced. He claims that there are countless examples in your many
> >> > engagements with him and others, particularly Tom Sherman. I've seen
> >> > them myself.
> >> >
> >> > A. I only copy and paste when you someone does not advance an argument.
> >> > I do not have infinite patience for blathering about trivialities.
> >> >
> >> > Now, I see what Jim means.
> >>
> >> Poor Jim thinks he could have been a lawyer when he can't even get his
> >> quotations right!
> >
> > Poor Ed thinks he is intelligent and an excellent writer and debater.
> > We all know better. The verbiage immediately above that is being
> > objected to is word for word (copy and pasted). Please note that no
> > quotation ks were employed even though the text that was copy an
> > pasted throughout this simulated interview can readily be found (most
> > of it in this very thread). Ed just doesn't appreciate parody when it
> > is at his expense. Ed would have you believe that he has been
> > misquoted, but those who have followed this thread know otherwise.
> >
> >> > Q. As Jim McNaa would say, this is opinion stated as fact, and
> >> > opinion and fact are not synonyms!
> >> >
> >> > A. This is getting tiresome, this business about opinion as fact. You
> >> > don't know how to conduct an interview anymore than Jim McNaa and
> >> > Tom Sherman know how to debate (contest) an opinion. Too bad for all
> >> > of you!
> >>
> >> The above is just one of many misquotations as I don't believe I ever
> >> said
> >> "how to conduct an interview."
> >
> > You can believe whatever you want. Your statements stand in testimony.
> > The first sentence is word for word (copy and pasted). "You don't know
> > how to conduct an interview" was literary license for the purpose of
> > the flow of conversation in concluding this simulated interview. "Jim
> > McNaa and Tom Sherman" were substituted for "you" (again literary
> > license), but the remainder of the sentence was was word for word (copy
> > and pasted).
> >
> >> > Q. Ed, it is apparent that you have failed to corroborate your
> >> > accusation that Ed Gin's website hosted sexually explicit images. Tom
> >> > Sherman and Jim McNaa are right when they say you are all about
> >> > argumentation and not facts. Facts are instrumental in constructing a
> >> > sound argument. When you recognize that, perhaps then you will learn
> >> > the art of debate, and will stop whining about how your opinions are
> >> > all that matters. No wonder Tom and Jim can so easily make a fool of
> >> > you. This interview is over!
> >>
> >> "This all hinges on the definition of a web site. However, what I would
> >> like
> >> to know is how many angels will fit on the tip of a needle. Answer that,
> >> if
> >> you can!" - Ed Dolan
> >
> > And, I provided you with that definition... WEBSITE - site (location)
> > on the World Wide Web. A website is a comprised of a collection of web
> > pages and other data such as images, sound, and video files that are
> > typically common to a particular domain name or subdomain on the World
> > Wide Web. Each Web site contains a home page, which is the first
> > document users see when they enter the site.
> >
> > Of utmost significance, however is that the fact that if the retired
> > librarian (read Ed Dolan) did not know what a website was then he
> > should have put his librarian skills to good use before running off at
> > the mouth, making misstatements that he could not substantiate or
> > defend. To my way of thinking a retraction is in order as is a public
> > apology to Ed Gin for the false accusation that was made. Show that
> > you've got it in you, Ed. Say you're sorry.
> >
> > As for your question, do you really want an answer??? Are you ready???
> > Well hear it is. The answer is that your question is irrelevant to
> > the discussion and your diversion is duly noted.
> >
> > Jim McNaa
>
> Did you say something?
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | |
Date: 09 Nov 2006 21:24:31
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1163077245.963561.296180@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS!
[...]
> - Our cyber skirmishes have attracted the attention of a "spamming"
> TROLL.
Ah, if only all spamming trolls were this stupid! He is easy to ignore
because he is so transparent. I frankly do not care if all the newsgroups
were reduced to nothing but spamming trolls. It is what they deserve for not
insisting on a moderator. A group without a moderator truly deserves nothing
but spamming trolls.
[...]
> - It is now opportune and prudent to call it quits in the hope that
> these Usenet newsgroups will eventually return to a state of normalcy,
> as normal as can be expected with the continued infestation from your
> incorrigible, obnoxious presence and your interminable cerebral,
> flatulence.
The Great Ed Dolan provides the only off-topic interest these groups have.
Anyone who comes to the groups for only bike related information is just too
stupid for me to comprehend.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | |
Date: 09 Nov 2006 20:37:27
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1163077245.963561.296180@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Top posted, because I know just how much you appreciate things up
> front...
>
> YES. I said something you wisely chose to ignore. In your three
> previous posts comprised of identical content, you have served to
> demonstrate my you point, admirably. When you cannot win an argument,
> and you have proven to be wrong, and you cannot offer anything in your
> own defense, you resort to meaningless copy and paste gibberish.
>
> Ed, your very own written words often return to haunt and betray you...
>
> "There is always substance in my posts no matter how I craft them. I
> will stand by every message I have ever posted to Usenet, bar none.
> Some of my posts will require some explanation no doubt, but I can
> defend and justify everything I have ever said to anyone."
>
> As concerns the SUBSTANCE of your posts in this thread, they could be
> best sumized as irresponsible dissemination of an errant assertion
> (read disinformation). As concerns DEFENSE and JUSTIFICATION, you did
> not and cannot JUSTIFY your public prevarication and you did not and
> cannot DEFEND the indefensible.
>
> It has been demonstrated that...
>
> - You made an accusation that is know to be fallacious.
> - You were unable to substantiate your accusation.
> - You are unwilling to admit to wrongdoing.
> - You are unwilling to retract your accusation.
> - You are unwilling to issue a public apology.
> - Our cyber skirmishes have displeased some of the readership.
> - Our cyber skirmishes have attracted the attention of a "spamming"
> TROLL.
> - It is now opportune and prudent to call it quits in the hope that
> these Usenet newsgroups will eventually return to a state of normalcy,
> as normal as can be expected with the continued infestation from your
> incorrigible, obnoxious presence and your interminable cerebral,
> flatulence.
Did you say something?
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 28 Oct 2006 21:42:11
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1162040343.425934.278920@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>> Mr. Ed Dolan the Grate wrote:
>> > Ed Gin is a very funny fellow. I do not even look at his posts because
>> > he is
>> > nothing but a troll - and an extremely stupid one at that. He is a shit
>> > head
>> > from Chicagoland who once had his own website where he thought it was
>> > cute
>> > to post nothing but pornographic images....
>>
>> The former Chicagoland Recumbent Riders website hosted by Ed Gin never
>> had any sexually explicit images on it.
>>
>> If you are referred to the late "Monkey Island" web forum, it is common
>> knowledge that it was hosted by someone with the initials SJ and not
>> EG.
Ed Gin never used his real name except ever so briefly when he was calling
Jim McNaa a vandal (something about linseed oil) so who can say who was
who. Certainly not you!
>> Yet again, Mr. Ed can not get his posts factually correct.
Tom Sherman always want defintive proof whereas a strong suspicion is more
than good enough for me. Ed Gin has never denied that he is the criminal
vandal troll of ARBR and the other cycling newsgroups. Only Tom Sherman has
ever tried to defend him, mainly by caterwauling about a lack of proof.
> Ed ... Tom is correct. Ed Gin's website may have been self-serving,
> but it never had any sexually explicit images. I think you are
> confusing his website with either the late Monkey Island forum or the
> tasteless HRS blog. Since, by your own admission, you have never paid
> any of these a visit, how can you possibly have an informed opinion or
> express an uninformed opinion that anyone would take seriously. - Jim
> McNaa
I am only going by what you have previously told me about Ed Gin both on
these newsgroups and by email. Others have also confirmed over and over who
was posting under various false names and addresses.
I regard anyone who was even associated with Monkey Island as being nothing
but a shit head. It was indisputable that Johnny NoCom was Ed Gin and that
he was associated with Monkey Island as well as the HRS blog.
You cannot go by what Tom Sherman thinks about any of this. He is
permanently prejudiced and is blind as a bat, but why are you making excuses
for Ed Gin when everyone one on these cycling newgroups knows he was the
biggest scoundrel of them all. I can't believe you are falling for Tom
Sherman's obfuscation.
Tom Sherman likes to pride himself on being factually correct, but he likes
to go slumming on these newsgroups from time to time. That is why he does
not object to criminal vandal trolls like Ed Gin - as long as he is not the
object of course. He could easily be taught a lesson in this regard, but
frankly I do not have the stomach to be a criminal vandal troll like Ed Gin.
Tom Sherman is indeed right when he says I am all about argumentation and I
do not give a damn about whatever facts he wants to dredge up. He has his
facts and I have mine. Isn't that always the way it is when it comes to the
so-called facts!
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 27 Oct 2006 17:39:06
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
Mr. Ed Dolan the Grate wrote:
> Ed Gin is a very funny fellow. I do not even look at his posts because he is
> nothing but a troll - and an extremely stupid one at that. He is a shit head
> from Chicagoland who once had his own website where he thought it was cute
> to post nothing but pornographic images....
The former Chicagoland Recumbent Riders website hosted by Ed Gin never
had any sexually explicit images on it.
If you are referred to the late "Monkey Island" web forum, it is common
knowledge that it was hosted by someone with the initials SJ and not
EG.
Yet again, Mr. Ed can not get his posts factually correct.
--
Tom Sherman - Here, not there.
|
| | |
Date: 28 Oct 2006 04:29:23
From: Alan Erskine
Subject: Re: Ed Gin - the supreme asshole of ARBR!
|
"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1161995945.986224.29590@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> The former Chicagoland Recumbent Riders website hosted by Ed Gin never
> had any sexually explicit images on it.
>
> If you are referred to the late "Monkey Island" web forum, it is common
> knowledge that it was hosted by someone with the initials SJ and not
> EG.
>
> Yet again, Mr. Ed can not get his posts factually correct.
You expect better from a troll?
--
Alan Erskine
Alanerskine1@bigpond.com
|
|
