| |
Main
Date: 23 Nov 2006 01:39:12
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: ARBR Characters I have known by Ed Dolan - Part II
|
I am shortly going to take my leave of the cycling newgroups forever, but
not before I have posted a few choice reks about various characters I
have encountered here. These messages will be posted in several parts so as
not to overwhelm you.
2. Jim McNaa. Jim is one of a kind. He is mostly sane, but he cannot take
criticism. Nope, he just does not want to hear it. He will tell you to shut
up and if you don't he will keep on you like forever.
I first encountered Jim when his feud with Ed Gin was brought to ARBR some
years ago. Jim is feud prone and everything is personal with him. He could
post general messages to the group, but he hardly ever does. All he does is
feud, one on one as if no one else in the world matters. Jim thinks trolls
are quite an evil thing, never realizing that a stalker (which is what he
is) is by far worse.
Jim has been around computers and Usenet like forever and he is no doubt fed
up with it by now. Jim only pretends to be a net nanny. He is really ever
only interested in himself. As such, he is limited no matter how well he
sometimes writes. Jim will meet you half way, but he will never make the
first move himself. Just another very insecure person if you ask me.
3. Jon Meinecke. Jon is a net nanny, but an ineffectual one. When Ed Gin
showed his ugly face on ARBR, he took a powder just like all the others. But
more was expected of Jon, since he seemed to have the broader interests of
the group at heart.
Jon would have made an excellent moderator for ARBR. I would trust his
judgment and his intelligence. He has never really said anything dumb,
unlike all the rest of us. It is too bad he is so thin-skinned as the group
could have benefited more from his input, but he got pissed and left us to
ourselves. His loyalty to the group was only skin deep.
Well, that is enough for Part II. Other Parts will come forth in the
following weeks. So far on my list are Freewheeling (Scott),
Wayne Leggett (the Poet of ARBR), Gary G, Jeff Grippe, Bill Baka, Little
Meow, NYC, Larry Varney, Byron Ball, Perry Butler, Cletus Lee, Just this
Guy, Peter Clinch - and yes, even Slugger among many others. Stay tuned.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
|
| |
Date: 24 Dec 2006 14:36:27
From:
Subject: Re: An ARBR character I have known... head swollen, Ed Dolan
|
Nooooo! I want Ed! This group won't be worth shit without him!
Please, Ed, don't go away!
|
| | |
Date: 24 Dec 2006 20:07:25
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: An ARBR character I have known... head swollen, Ed Dolan
|
<bcrowell@excite.com > wrote in message
news:1166999787.865747.69420@n51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS!
> Nooooo! I want Ed! This group won't be worth shit without him!
> Please, Ed, don't go away!
Well, I may make a note of this fellow since he is one of the very few who
is not castigating me for being an idiot, a scoundrel and a jerk like so
many others constantly do. Yea, it takes a quality person to appreciate
another quality person.
But my Greatness is on display in well over 8000 messages to various
newsgroups (mainly ARBR) for all to read and to vel at. Once you have
done that, you will be up to speed on my essential Greatness and also on my
Great Saintliness - and begin to see why I refer to myself as Saint Edward
the Great.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 25 Dec 2006 00:00:58
From: vernon
Subject: Re: An ARBR character I have known... head swollen, Ed Dolan
|
<bcrowell@excite.com > wrote in message
news:1166999787.865747.69420@n51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Nooooo! I want Ed! This group won't be worth shit without him!
> Please, Ed, don't go away!
>
And which **one** of the cross posted groups might that be?
|
| | | |
Date: 24 Dec 2006 20:09:26
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: An ARBR character I have known... head swollen, Ed Dolan
|
"vernon" <public@privacy.net > wrote in message
news:Y5idnXKa2sEQiRLYnZ2dnUVZ8tyqnZ2d@bt.com...
>
> <bcrowell@excite.com> wrote in message
> news:1166999787.865747.69420@n51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> Nooooo! I want Ed! This group won't be worth shit without him!
>> Please, Ed, don't go away!
>>
> And which **one** of the cross posted groups might that be?
What does it matter since one group is as stupid as the next.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 23 Dec 2006 08:37:28
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: An ARBR character I have known... head swollen, Ed Dolan
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1166730881.875419.136900@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...
>
> > It remains yet to be seen if Ed Dolan will abide by his word and leave
> > the newsgroups never to return, but for now ARBR's quintessential
> > TROLL is somewhat less active at least. I am long past due to will
> > respond to his comments about me, with reasonable certainty that Ed
> > Dolan will read and respond not that it much matters one way or the
> > other.
> >
> > As concerns CRITICISM, there is a significant difference between
> > constructive criticism and criticism merely for the sake of criticism
> > and Ed Dolan doesn't recognize the none too subtle difference. Ed is
> > not constructive when imposing criticism. What Ed considers to be an
> > acceptable form of criticism is that which most reasonable persons
> > would consider to be unacceptable. No matter how many times Ed Dolan's
> > errant criticism is countered and demonstrated to be fallacious and no
> > matter how many times Ed Dolan is informed that his opinions matter
> > not, unrelenting ... he persists. This is what I object to and it is
> > this that has in part motivated me to take Ed Dolan on. For this, he
> > labeled me a stalker.
>
> Jim wants to help others in so far as he can. I don't. I assume that any =
and
> all who post to a newsgroup are either idiots, scoundrels or jerks - or a=
ll
> three. And that is how I treat them.
>
> Poor Jim has never learned that opinions are all a newsgroup are about and
> of course my opinions are far superior to any others. That is why I am Ed
> Dolan the Great and he is merely JimmyMac.
Is this not an opinion that that newsgroups are all about opinions?
Why offer an opinion when you have already gone on record to state ...
"I frankly do not have the slightest idea what newsgroups are all
about." If you don't know what newsgroups are about, hw then can you
formulate and/or offer and opinion? The conundrum continues.
> > As concerns FEUDS, Ed would have you believe that I am feud prone
> > whereas only a select few have ever garnered my focused attention.
> > They can be counted on one hand and Ed Dolan is one of the
> > "privileged". Ed Dolan earned and should not be deprived of the
> > attention that he so justly deserved and received.
>
> Jim brought his feud with Ed Gin to this newsgroup and made a total fool =
of
> himself.
Opinion stated as fact.
> Ed Gin is an idiot, a scoundrel and a jerk of course, but Jim is a
> na=EFf - which is even a worse sin on Usenet.
Opinion stated as fact.
> > As concerns TROLLS BEING EVIL, Ed Dolan once wrote ... "I think there
> > are good trolls and there are bad trolls. It goes without saying of
> > course that I am a good troll." There is nothing either explicit or
> > implicit in the definition of a troll that can possibly be misconstrued
> > as good. GOOD TROLL is an oxymoron. The American Psychiatric
> > Association considers the Internet troll personality to be a mental
> > disorder. Is there anything good about that? Trolls are often
> > socially disenfranchised, devoid of interpersonal interaction skills.
> > They generally have no substantive connection to the cyber-community
> > they troll and view the Internet as a convenient, delocalized
> > communication conduit for their bizarre anti-social behavior. The
> > Internet is their cyber-playpen ... a mirror into which they can gaze
> > in narcissistic rapture. A troll delights in upsetting people and
> > creating discord. Trolls post inflammatory, rude, offensive,
> > repetitious messages deliberately crafted to annoy, antagonize and
> > infuriate or to disrupt the flow of discussion. Trolls post
> > attention-seeking, provocative messages hoping to bait and entice other
> > users into angry and/or fruitless responses. Trolls are impervious to
> > criticism. One cannot negotiate with a troll. One cannot cause a
> > troll to feel shame, compassion or remorse. Trolls do not feel that
> > they are bound or constrained by rules of courtesy or social
> > responsibility. If this sounds like a portrait of Ed Dolan, it very
> > well should. His own words betray his malicious intentions ... "I am
> > merely a gadfly buzzing about this group ever striving to create some
> > mayhem."
>
> Yea, I delight in kicking ass that needs to be kicked! The only sin on
> Usenet is to be boring.
Did you just call yourself a sinner?
> > As concerns STALKING, Ed who wrote ... "Name calling is just so
> > infantile that I hate to do it even in retaliation", and yet Ed labeled
> > me a stalker. Ed Dolan has only himself to blame for any "stalking" to
> > which he fell victim from me or any number of other adversaries. Ed
> > Dolan intentionally went trolling for fights. When he encountered a
> > tenacious, formidable adversary, and found himself hopelessly embroiled
> > in an embarrassing no-win cyber-skirmish, in desperation, he vainly
> > attempted to disencumber himself by seeking to discredit and dismiss
> > his adversary by labeling him or her as a stalker. This thinly
> > disguised ploy failed countless times. If he sincerely wanted to
> > escape his self-inflicted dilemma, then he should do as he has has
> > threatened ... take leave of Usenet newsgroups in order to spare himself
> > further embarrassment.
>
> Here is Jim trying to deny that he is a stalker. I have never stalked any=
one
> but take on one and all equally as my over 8000 posts to ARBR will attest.
> However, I can understand how lesser mortals might stalk me because of my
> Greatness.
That's not exactly what was said or implied. Your reading
comprehension skills are in need of some fine tuning.
> > As concerns PRETENDING TO BE A NET NANNY, I am not, nor have I ever
> > pretend to be a net nanny, but these are the self-incriminating words
> > of net nanny Ed Dolan ... "I am Mr. ARBR himself because of my general
> > concern for the group. It is quite necessary to have someone around
> > like me who will look after the best interests of the group. Much of
> > what I do falls under the category of housekeeping. All a housekeeper
> > does is sweep up after the rascals and the scoundrels."
>
> All newsgroups need someone who will insist on some order. An unpoliced
> group is nothing but a mob.
Your departure would be a step in the right direction.
> > As concerns the doddering, geriatric juvenile, it would be more prudent
> > for him keep his mouth shut and pass for a fool rather than open it and
> > remove any and all doubt. Ed Dolan subscribes to the mistaken notion
> > that the readership savored his opinionated drivel whereas in reality
> > the only person who valued what the man wrote was the author himself.
> > Ed Dolan has little more than Usenet newsgroups from which to derive
> > meaning in his pathetic life. In particular, ARBR assumed an
> > exaggerated stature of relevance and emerged as the source from which
> > Ed derives a sense of accomplishment and self-esteem. Regardless of
> > his expressed opinion of the readership, without the lifeblood of the
> > Usenet newsgroup audience to sustain him, Ed Dolan is nothing. He is
> > an incorrigible curmudgeon intoxicated by his own cerebral flatulence
> > ... enraptured by his own vacuous gibberish. His screeds (read Gospels
> > according to St. Edward) are legendary. Usenet is the showcase of his
> > unharnessed ego ... a repository for his monotonous, regurgitated
> > mantra. Ed Dolan is an enigma, disenfranchised from reality, a victim
> > of an egocentric, self-indulgent persona. Consumed by warped fixations
> > and driven by a profusion of myopic perceptions and twisted
> > misconceptions, Ed Dolan conspicuously demonstrates that he is
> > possessed by an unrestrained and enormously distended sense of
> > self-importance. He is a complex amalgam of absurd contradiction ... a
> > bigoted, emotionally challenged, egomaniacal misanthrope in dire need
> > of a therapist. Of himself, Ed Dolan said it best ... "When I am on
> > Usenet I try to be the biggest idiot, asshole and jerk of them all. I
> > set the standard for one and all. I believe I can state with absolute
> > assurance that I am the Greatest Idiot, the Greatest Asshole and the
> > Greatest Jerk that Usenet has ever known in its' long and dishonored
> > history." I'll not enter into a debate with Ed on this one.
>
> The above is too longwinded to comment on. Besides, no one is going to re=
ad
> it, not even me!
>
> > Ed Dolan also wrote ... "The Great Ed Dolan is shortly going to leave
> > all you numskulls to yourselves. Chat away all you morons until the
> > cows come home. No one intelligent would ever be found dead on your
> > wretched groups. Yes, I know it was your pleasure to know ME and that
> > you were honored to be in My Presence, but you were unworthy of ME. My
> > Greatness will no longer permit My August Personage in your humble
> > environs." Ed, in your departure you should have taken this thought
> > with you ... no one will ever mourn your absence (try to ignore the
> > deafening celebratory cheers). The only regret that the readership
> > will ever have is when you break your word and return again to infest
> > and infect the newsgroups anew!!!
>
> Nonsense, parting is such sweet sorrow that we have to do it many times -
> over and over!
>
> > Conflict and adversity introduces us to ourselves in a manner most
> > revealing. I suspect that in his cyber-skirmishes Ed Dolan was less
> > than enamored of his psyche's reflection.
>
> My ego is as secure as the gold in Fort Knox. Would that yours were!
Opinion stated as fact.
Jim
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> I am shortly going to take my leave of the cycling newgroups forever, =
but
> >> not before I have posted a few choice reks about various characters=
I
> >> have encountered here. These messages will be posted in several parts =
so
> >> as
> >> not to overwhelm you.
> >>
> >> 2. Jim McNaa. Jim is one of a kind. He is mostly sane, but he cannot
> >> take
> >> criticism. Nope, he just does not want to hear it. He will tell you to
> >> shut
> >> up and if you don't he will keep on you like forever.
> >>
> >> I first encountered Jim when his feud with Ed Gin was brought to ARBR
> >> some
> >> years ago. Jim is feud prone and everything is personal with him. He
> >> could
> >> post general messages to the group, but he hardly ever does. All he do=
es
> >> is
> >> feud, one on one as if no one else in the world matters. Jim thinks
> >> trolls
> >> are quite an evil thing, never realizing that a stalker (which is what=
he
> >> is) is by far worse.
> >>
> >> Jim has been around computers and Usenet like forever and he is no dou=
bt
> >> fed
> >> up with it by now. Jim only pretends to be a net nanny. He is really e=
ver
> >> only interested in himself. As such, he is limited no matter how well =
he
> >> sometimes writes. Jim will meet you half way, but he will never make t=
he
> >> first move himself. Just another very insecure person if you ask me.
> >>
> >> 3. Jon Meinecke. Jon is a net nanny, but an ineffectual one. When Ed G=
in
> >> showed his ugly face on ARBR, he took a powder just like all the other=
s=2E
> >> But
> >> more was expected of Jon, since he seemed to have the broader interests
> >> of
> >> the group at heart.
> >>
> >> Jon would have made an excellent moderator for ARBR. I would trust his
> >> judgment and his intelligence. He has never really said anything dumb,
> >> unlike all the rest of us. It is too bad he is so thin-skinned as the
> >> group
> >> could have benefited more from his input, but he got pissed and left us
> >> to
> >> ourselves. His loyalty to the group was only skin deep.
> >>
> >> Well, that is enough for Part II. Other Parts will come forth in the
> >> following weeks. So far on my list are Freewheeling (Scott),
> >> Wayne Leggett (the Poet of ARBR), Gary G, Jeff Grippe, Bill Baka, Litt=
le
> >> Meow, NYC, Larry Varney, Byron Ball, Perry Butler, Cletus Lee, Just th=
is
> >> Guy, Peter Clinch - and yes, even Slugger among many others. Stay tune=
d=2E
|
| |
Date: 21 Dec 2006 22:15:38
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: An ARBR character I have known... head swollen, Ed Dolan
|
Alan Erskine wrote:
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:T4OdnfejNoAHphbYnZ2dnUVZ_uuqnZ2d@prairiewave.com...
> >
> > "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:1166730881.875419.136900@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > > It remains yet to be seen if Ed Dolan will abide by his word and leave
> > > the newsgroups never to return, but for now ARBR's quintessential
> > > TROLL is somewhat less active at least.
>
> <PLONK> both of you.
>
> If Jim had not mentioned the Dolan troll, he wouldn't have replied. It's
> been quiet in here for weeks and that fuckwit just couldn't help stirring up
> trouble.
If Alan hadn't mentioned Jim, then maybe Jim wouldn't reply to ...
Alan. You'll probably hear from Dolan too, so then you are stirring up
trouble yourself for having mentioned the both of us have you not? It
has been quiet around here? Have you not see the vile spam post. Why
have you not complained about that... you halfwit fuckwit?
> Alan Erskine
> Alanerskine1@bigpond.com
|
| | |
Date: 22 Dec 2006 18:44:28
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: An ARBR character I have known... head swollen, Ed Dolan
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1166768138.586951.132250@42g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
>
> Alan Erskine wrote:
>> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
>> news:T4OdnfejNoAHphbYnZ2dnUVZ_uuqnZ2d@prairiewave.com...
>> >
>> > "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> > news:1166730881.875419.136900@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > > It remains yet to be seen if Ed Dolan will abide by his word and
>> > > leave
>> > > the newsgroups never to return, but for now ARBR's quintessential
>> > > TROLL is somewhat less active at least.
>>
>> <PLONK> both of you.
>>
>> If Jim had not mentioned the Dolan troll, he wouldn't have replied. It's
>> been quiet in here for weeks and that fuckwit just couldn't help stirring
>> up
>> trouble.
>
> If Alan hadn't mentioned Jim, then maybe Jim wouldn't reply to ...
> Alan. You'll probably hear from Dolan too, so then you are stirring up
> trouble yourself for having mentioned the both of us have you not? It
> has been quiet around here? Have you not see the vile spam post. Why
> have you not complained about that... you halfwit fuckwit?
Well said Jim! In fact, I couldn't have said it better myself. However, it
may be that the SPAMMING TROLL'S posts are not appearing on AB and the other
cycling newsgroups. It seems only ARBR ever gets stuck with the worst of the
worst.
I am not bothering looking in on the other cycling newsgroups anymore since
they are all composed exclusively of idiots, scoundrels and jerks. None of
them are worthy of My Greatness.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 21 Dec 2006 18:27:11
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: An ARBR character I have known... head swollen, Ed Dolan
|
In article <1166730881.875419.136900@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com >,
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > writes:
> It remains yet to be seen if E* D**** will abide by his word and leave
> the newsgroups never to return
Sewage treatment plants have settling basins, in which
eels reside. Usually the eels are pretty happy, swimming
around and being able to see where they're going in the
unmurkified water.
But every now and then an asshole eel will take a notion
to stick his tail in the sediment and stir things up.
Those ones are known as "shit disturbers".
They're lower and more base than the sediment
they agitate.
--
Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca
|
| | |
Date: 21 Dec 2006 20:49:29
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: An ARBR character I have known... head swollen, Ed Dolan
|
"Tom Keats" <tkeats2005@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:vpffme.ctf.ln@bud.garden.local...
> In article <1166730881.875419.136900@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com>,
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> writes:
>> It remains yet to be seen if E* D**** will abide by his word and leave
>> the newsgroups never to return
>
> Sewage treatment plants have settling basins, in which
> eels reside. Usually the eels are pretty happy, swimming
> around and being able to see where they're going in the
> unmurkified water.
>
> But every now and then an asshole eel will take a notion
> to stick his tail in the sediment and stir things up.
>
> Those ones are known as "shit disturbers".
> They're lower and more base than the sediment
> they agitate.
This from someone who works on the docks of Vancouver as a longshoreman.
Well, what did you expect? Tom Keats is self-educated no doubt which
accounts for his immersion in shit. I think they might have a college or two
there in soggy old Vancouver, but like all self-educated working slobs, he
thinks he already knows enough - even though it is all just shit.
But overall, a typical post from RBM, a newsgroup that is just chock full of
idiots, scoundrels and jerks.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 21 Dec 2006 11:54:41
From: JimmyMac
Subject: An ARBR character I have known... head swollen, Ed Dolan
|
It remains yet to be seen if Ed Dolan will abide by his word and leave
the newsgroups never to return, but for now ARBR's quintessential
TROLL is somewhat less active at least. I am long past due to will
respond to his comments about me, with reasonable certainty that Ed
Dolan will read and respond not that it much matters one way or the
other.
As concerns CRITICISM, there is a significant difference between
constructive criticism and criticism merely for the sake of criticism
and Ed Dolan doesn't recognize the none too subtle difference. Ed is
not constructive when imposing criticism. What Ed considers to be an
acceptable form of criticism is that which most reasonable persons
would consider to be unacceptable. No matter how many times Ed Dolan's
errant criticism is countered and demonstrated to be fallacious and no
matter how many times Ed Dolan is informed that his opinions matter
not, unrelenting ... he persists. This is what I object to and it is
this that has in part motivated me to take Ed Dolan on. For this, he
labeled me a stalker.
As concerns FEUDS, Ed would have you believe that I am feud prone
whereas only a select few have ever garnered my focused attention.
They can be counted on one hand and Ed Dolan is one of the
"privileged". Ed Dolan earned and should not be deprived of the
attention that he so justly deserved and received.
As concerns TROLLS BEING EVIL, Ed Dolan once wrote ... "I think there
are good trolls and there are bad trolls. It goes without saying of
course that I am a good troll." There is nothing either explicit or
implicit in the definition of a troll that can possibly be misconstrued
as good. GOOD TROLL is an oxymoron. The American Psychiatric
Association considers the Internet troll personality to be a mental
disorder. Is there anything good about that? Trolls are often
socially disenfranchised, devoid of interpersonal interaction skills.
They generally have no substantive connection to the cyber-community
they troll and view the Internet as a convenient, delocalized
communication conduit for their bizarre anti-social behavior. The
Internet is their cyber-playpen ... a mirror into which they can gaze
in narcissistic rapture. A troll delights in upsetting people and
creating discord. Trolls post inflammatory, rude, offensive,
repetitious messages deliberately crafted to annoy, antagonize and
infuriate or to disrupt the flow of discussion. Trolls post
attention-seeking, provocative messages hoping to bait and entice other
users into angry and/or fruitless responses. Trolls are impervious to
criticism. One cannot negotiate with a troll. One cannot cause a
troll to feel shame, compassion or remorse. Trolls do not feel that
they are bound or constrained by rules of courtesy or social
responsibility. If this sounds like a portrait of Ed Dolan, it very
well should. His own words betray his malicious intentions ... "I am
merely a gadfly buzzing about this group ever striving to create some
mayhem."
As concerns STALKING, Ed who wrote ... "Name calling is just so
infantile that I hate to do it even in retaliation", and yet Ed labeled
me a stalker. Ed Dolan has only himself to blame for any "stalking" to
which he fell victim from me or any number of other adversaries. Ed
Dolan intentionally went trolling for fights. When he encountered a
tenacious, formidable adversary, and found himself hopelessly embroiled
in an embarrassing no-win cyber-skirmish, in desperation, he vainly
attempted to disencumber himself by seeking to discredit and dismiss
his adversary by labeling him or her as a stalker. This thinly
disguised ploy failed countless times. If he sincerely wanted to
escape his self-inflicted dilemma, then he should do as he has has
threatend ... take leave of Usenet newsgroups in order to spare himself
further embarrassment.
As concerns PRETENDING TO BE A NET NANNY, I am not, nor have I ever
pretend to be a net nanny, but these are the self-incriminating words
of net nanny Ed Dolan ... "I am Mr. ARBR himself because of my general
concern for the group. It is quite necessary to have someone around
like me who will look after the best interests of the group. Much of
what I do falls under the category of housekeeping. All a housekeeper
does is sweep up after the rascals and the scoundrels."
As concerns the doddering, geriatric juvenile, it would be more prudent
for him keep his mouth shut and pass for a fool rather than open it and
remove any and all doubt. Ed Dolan subscribes to the mistaken notion
that the readership savored his opinionated drivel whereas in reality
the only person who valued what the man wrote was the author himself.
Ed Dolan has little more than Usenet newsgroups from which to derive
meaning in his pathetic life. In particular, ARBR assumed an
exaggerated stature of relevance and emerged as the source from which
Ed derives a sense of accomplishment and self-esteem. Regardless of
his expressed opinion of the readership, without the lifeblood of the
Usenet newsgroup audience to sustain him, Ed Dolan is nothing. He is
an incorrigible curmudgeon intoxicated by his own cerebral flatulence
... enraptured by his own vacuous gibberish. His screeds (read Gospels
according to St. Edward) are legendary. Usenet is the showcase of his
unharnessed ego ... a repository for his monotonous, regurgitated
mantra. Ed Dolan is an enigma, disenfranchised from reality, a victim
of an egocentric, self-indulgent persona. Consumed by warped fixations
and driven by a profusion of myopic perceptions and twisted
misconceptions, Ed Dolan conspicuously demonstrates that he is
possessed by an unrestrained and enormously distended sense of
self-importance. He is a complex amalgam of absurd contradiction ... a
bigoted, emotionally challenged, egomaniacal misanthrope in dire need
of a therapist. Of himself, Ed Dolan said it best ... "When I am on
Usenet I try to be the biggest idiot, asshole and jerk of them all. I
set the standard for one and all. I believe I can state with absolute
assurance that I am the Greatest Idiot, the Greatest Asshole and the
Greatest Jerk that Usenet has ever known in its' long and dishonored
history." I'll not enter into a debate with Ed on this one.
Ed Dolan also wrote ... "The Great Ed Dolan is shortly going to leave
all you numskulls to yourselves. Chat away all you morons until the
cows come home. No one intelligent would ever be found dead on your
wretched groups. Yes, I know it was your pleasure to know ME and that
you were honored to be in My Presence, but you were unworthy of ME. My
Greatness will no longer permit My August Personage in your humble
environs." Ed, in your departure you should have taken this thought
with you ... no one will ever mourn your absence (try to ignore the
deafening celebratory cheers). The only regret that the readership
will ever have is when you break your word and return again to infest
and infect the newsgroups anew!!!
Conflict and adversity introduces us to ourselves in a manner most
revealing. I suspect that in his cyber-skirmishes Ed Dolan was less
than enamored of his psyche's reflection.
Jim McNaa
Edward Dolan wrote:
> I am shortly going to take my leave of the cycling newgroups forever, but
> not before I have posted a few choice reks about various characters I
> have encountered here. These messages will be posted in several parts so as
> not to overwhelm you.
>
> 2. Jim McNaa. Jim is one of a kind. He is mostly sane, but he cannot take
> criticism. Nope, he just does not want to hear it. He will tell you to shut
> up and if you don't he will keep on you like forever.
>
> I first encountered Jim when his feud with Ed Gin was brought to ARBR some
> years ago. Jim is feud prone and everything is personal with him. He could
> post general messages to the group, but he hardly ever does. All he does is
> feud, one on one as if no one else in the world matters. Jim thinks trolls
> are quite an evil thing, never realizing that a stalker (which is what he
> is) is by far worse.
>
> Jim has been around computers and Usenet like forever and he is no doubt fed
> up with it by now. Jim only pretends to be a net nanny. He is really ever
> only interested in himself. As such, he is limited no matter how well he
> sometimes writes. Jim will meet you half way, but he will never make the
> first move himself. Just another very insecure person if you ask me.
>
> 3. Jon Meinecke. Jon is a net nanny, but an ineffectual one. When Ed Gin
> showed his ugly face on ARBR, he took a powder just like all the others. But
> more was expected of Jon, since he seemed to have the broader interests of
> the group at heart.
>
> Jon would have made an excellent moderator for ARBR. I would trust his
> judgment and his intelligence. He has never really said anything dumb,
> unlike all the rest of us. It is too bad he is so thin-skinned as the group
> could have benefited more from his input, but he got pissed and left us to
> ourselves. His loyalty to the group was only skin deep.
>
> Well, that is enough for Part II. Other Parts will come forth in the
> following weeks. So far on my list are Freewheeling (Scott),
> Wayne Leggett (the Poet of ARBR), Gary G, Jeff Grippe, Bill Baka, Little
> Meow, NYC, Larry Varney, Byron Ball, Perry Butler, Cletus Lee, Just this
> Guy, Peter Clinch - and yes, even Slugger among many others. Stay tuned.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 21 Dec 2006 19:57:45
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: An ARBR character I have known... head swollen, Ed Dolan
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1166730881.875419.136900@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...
> It remains yet to be seen if Ed Dolan will abide by his word and leave
> the newsgroups never to return, but for now ARBR's quintessential
> TROLL is somewhat less active at least. I am long past due to will
> respond to his comments about me, with reasonable certainty that Ed
> Dolan will read and respond not that it much matters one way or the
> other.
>
> As concerns CRITICISM, there is a significant difference between
> constructive criticism and criticism merely for the sake of criticism
> and Ed Dolan doesn't recognize the none too subtle difference. Ed is
> not constructive when imposing criticism. What Ed considers to be an
> acceptable form of criticism is that which most reasonable persons
> would consider to be unacceptable. No matter how many times Ed Dolan's
> errant criticism is countered and demonstrated to be fallacious and no
> matter how many times Ed Dolan is informed that his opinions matter
> not, unrelenting ... he persists. This is what I object to and it is
> this that has in part motivated me to take Ed Dolan on. For this, he
> labeled me a stalker.
Jim wants to help others in so far as he can. I don't. I assume that any and
all who post to a newsgroup are either idiots, scoundrels or jerks - or all
three. And that is how I treat them.
Poor Jim has never learned that opinions are all a newsgroup are about and
of course my opinions are far superior to any others. That is why I am Ed
Dolan the Great and he is merely JimmyMac.
> As concerns FEUDS, Ed would have you believe that I am feud prone
> whereas only a select few have ever garnered my focused attention.
> They can be counted on one hand and Ed Dolan is one of the
> "privileged". Ed Dolan earned and should not be deprived of the
> attention that he so justly deserved and received.
Jim brought his feud with Ed Gin to this newsgroup and made a total fool of
himself. Ed Gin is an idiot, a scoundrel and a jerk of course, but Jim is a
naïf - which is even a worse sin on Usenet.
> As concerns TROLLS BEING EVIL, Ed Dolan once wrote ... "I think there
> are good trolls and there are bad trolls. It goes without saying of
> course that I am a good troll." There is nothing either explicit or
> implicit in the definition of a troll that can possibly be misconstrued
> as good. GOOD TROLL is an oxymoron. The American Psychiatric
> Association considers the Internet troll personality to be a mental
> disorder. Is there anything good about that? Trolls are often
> socially disenfranchised, devoid of interpersonal interaction skills.
> They generally have no substantive connection to the cyber-community
> they troll and view the Internet as a convenient, delocalized
> communication conduit for their bizarre anti-social behavior. The
> Internet is their cyber-playpen ... a mirror into which they can gaze
> in narcissistic rapture. A troll delights in upsetting people and
> creating discord. Trolls post inflammatory, rude, offensive,
> repetitious messages deliberately crafted to annoy, antagonize and
> infuriate or to disrupt the flow of discussion. Trolls post
> attention-seeking, provocative messages hoping to bait and entice other
> users into angry and/or fruitless responses. Trolls are impervious to
> criticism. One cannot negotiate with a troll. One cannot cause a
> troll to feel shame, compassion or remorse. Trolls do not feel that
> they are bound or constrained by rules of courtesy or social
> responsibility. If this sounds like a portrait of Ed Dolan, it very
> well should. His own words betray his malicious intentions ... "I am
> merely a gadfly buzzing about this group ever striving to create some
> mayhem."
Yea, I delight in kicking ass that needs to be kicked! The only sin on
Usenet is to be boring.
> As concerns STALKING, Ed who wrote ... "Name calling is just so
> infantile that I hate to do it even in retaliation", and yet Ed labeled
> me a stalker. Ed Dolan has only himself to blame for any "stalking" to
> which he fell victim from me or any number of other adversaries. Ed
> Dolan intentionally went trolling for fights. When he encountered a
> tenacious, formidable adversary, and found himself hopelessly embroiled
> in an embarrassing no-win cyber-skirmish, in desperation, he vainly
> attempted to disencumber himself by seeking to discredit and dismiss
> his adversary by labeling him or her as a stalker. This thinly
> disguised ploy failed countless times. If he sincerely wanted to
> escape his self-inflicted dilemma, then he should do as he has has
> threatend ... take leave of Usenet newsgroups in order to spare himself
> further embarrassment.
Here is Jim trying to deny that he is a stalker. I have never stalked anyone
but take on one and all equally as my over 8000 posts to ARBR will attest.
However, I can understand how lesser mortals might stalk me because of my
Greatness.
> As concerns PRETENDING TO BE A NET NANNY, I am not, nor have I ever
> pretend to be a net nanny, but these are the self-incriminating words
> of net nanny Ed Dolan ... "I am Mr. ARBR himself because of my general
> concern for the group. It is quite necessary to have someone around
> like me who will look after the best interests of the group. Much of
> what I do falls under the category of housekeeping. All a housekeeper
> does is sweep up after the rascals and the scoundrels."
All newsgroups need someone who will insist on some order. An unpoliced
group is nothing but a mob.
> As concerns the doddering, geriatric juvenile, it would be more prudent
> for him keep his mouth shut and pass for a fool rather than open it and
> remove any and all doubt. Ed Dolan subscribes to the mistaken notion
> that the readership savored his opinionated drivel whereas in reality
> the only person who valued what the man wrote was the author himself.
> Ed Dolan has little more than Usenet newsgroups from which to derive
> meaning in his pathetic life. In particular, ARBR assumed an
> exaggerated stature of relevance and emerged as the source from which
> Ed derives a sense of accomplishment and self-esteem. Regardless of
> his expressed opinion of the readership, without the lifeblood of the
> Usenet newsgroup audience to sustain him, Ed Dolan is nothing. He is
> an incorrigible curmudgeon intoxicated by his own cerebral flatulence
> ... enraptured by his own vacuous gibberish. His screeds (read Gospels
> according to St. Edward) are legendary. Usenet is the showcase of his
> unharnessed ego ... a repository for his monotonous, regurgitated
> mantra. Ed Dolan is an enigma, disenfranchised from reality, a victim
> of an egocentric, self-indulgent persona. Consumed by warped fixations
> and driven by a profusion of myopic perceptions and twisted
> misconceptions, Ed Dolan conspicuously demonstrates that he is
> possessed by an unrestrained and enormously distended sense of
> self-importance. He is a complex amalgam of absurd contradiction ... a
> bigoted, emotionally challenged, egomaniacal misanthrope in dire need
> of a therapist. Of himself, Ed Dolan said it best ... "When I am on
> Usenet I try to be the biggest idiot, asshole and jerk of them all. I
> set the standard for one and all. I believe I can state with absolute
> assurance that I am the Greatest Idiot, the Greatest Asshole and the
> Greatest Jerk that Usenet has ever known in its' long and dishonored
> history." I'll not enter into a debate with Ed on this one.
The above is too longwinded to comment on. Besides, no one is going to read
it, not even me!
> Ed Dolan also wrote ... "The Great Ed Dolan is shortly going to leave
> all you numskulls to yourselves. Chat away all you morons until the
> cows come home. No one intelligent would ever be found dead on your
> wretched groups. Yes, I know it was your pleasure to know ME and that
> you were honored to be in My Presence, but you were unworthy of ME. My
> Greatness will no longer permit My August Personage in your humble
> environs." Ed, in your departure you should have taken this thought
> with you ... no one will ever mourn your absence (try to ignore the
> deafening celebratory cheers). The only regret that the readership
> will ever have is when you break your word and return again to infest
> and infect the newsgroups anew!!!
Nonsense, parting is such sweet sorrow that we have to do it many times -
over and over!
> Conflict and adversity introduces us to ourselves in a manner most
> revealing. I suspect that in his cyber-skirmishes Ed Dolan was less
> than enamored of his psyche's reflection.
My ego is as secure as the gold in Fort Knox. Would that yours were!
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> I am shortly going to take my leave of the cycling newgroups forever, but
>> not before I have posted a few choice reks about various characters I
>> have encountered here. These messages will be posted in several parts so
>> as
>> not to overwhelm you.
>>
>> 2. Jim McNaa. Jim is one of a kind. He is mostly sane, but he cannot
>> take
>> criticism. Nope, he just does not want to hear it. He will tell you to
>> shut
>> up and if you don't he will keep on you like forever.
>>
>> I first encountered Jim when his feud with Ed Gin was brought to ARBR
>> some
>> years ago. Jim is feud prone and everything is personal with him. He
>> could
>> post general messages to the group, but he hardly ever does. All he does
>> is
>> feud, one on one as if no one else in the world matters. Jim thinks
>> trolls
>> are quite an evil thing, never realizing that a stalker (which is what he
>> is) is by far worse.
>>
>> Jim has been around computers and Usenet like forever and he is no doubt
>> fed
>> up with it by now. Jim only pretends to be a net nanny. He is really ever
>> only interested in himself. As such, he is limited no matter how well he
>> sometimes writes. Jim will meet you half way, but he will never make the
>> first move himself. Just another very insecure person if you ask me.
>>
>> 3. Jon Meinecke. Jon is a net nanny, but an ineffectual one. When Ed Gin
>> showed his ugly face on ARBR, he took a powder just like all the others.
>> But
>> more was expected of Jon, since he seemed to have the broader interests
>> of
>> the group at heart.
>>
>> Jon would have made an excellent moderator for ARBR. I would trust his
>> judgment and his intelligence. He has never really said anything dumb,
>> unlike all the rest of us. It is too bad he is so thin-skinned as the
>> group
>> could have benefited more from his input, but he got pissed and left us
>> to
>> ourselves. His loyalty to the group was only skin deep.
>>
>> Well, that is enough for Part II. Other Parts will come forth in the
>> following weeks. So far on my list are Freewheeling (Scott),
>> Wayne Leggett (the Poet of ARBR), Gary G, Jeff Grippe, Bill Baka, Little
>> Meow, NYC, Larry Varney, Byron Ball, Perry Butler, Cletus Lee, Just this
>> Guy, Peter Clinch - and yes, even Slugger among many others. Stay tuned.
|
| | | |
Date: 22 Dec 2006 03:15:36
From: Alan Erskine
Subject: Re: An ARBR character I have known... head swollen, Ed Dolan
|
"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:T4OdnfejNoAHphbYnZ2dnUVZ_uuqnZ2d@prairiewave.com...
>
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1166730881.875419.136900@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...
>
> > It remains yet to be seen if Ed Dolan will abide by his word and leave
> > the newsgroups never to return, but for now ARBR's quintessential
> > TROLL is somewhat less active at least.
<PLONK > both of you.
If Jim had not mentioned the Dolan troll, he wouldn't have replied. It's
been quiet in here for weeks and that fuckwit just couldn't help stirring up
trouble.
--
Alan Erskine
Alanerskine1@bigpond.com
|
| | |
Date: 21 Dec 2006 20:32:27
From: Colin Nelson
Subject: Re: An ARBR character I have known... head swollen, Ed Dolan
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1166730881.875419.136900@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...
> It remains yet to be seen if Ed Dolan will abide by his word and leave
> the newsgroups never to return, but for now ARBR's quintessential
> TROLL is somewhat less active at least.
Snip, snip, snip ... and ....Plonk!
Colin N.
|
| | | |
Date: 21 Dec 2006 17:17:05
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: An ARBR character I have known... head swollen, Ed Dolan
|
Colin Nelson wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1166730881.875419.136900@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...
>> It remains yet to be seen if Ed Dolan will abide by his word and
>> leave the newsgroups never to return, but for now ARBR's
>> quintessential TROLL is somewhat less active at least.
>
> Snip, snip, snip ... and ....Plonk!
Good idea. Done as well.
|
| | | | |
Date: 21 Dec 2006 20:04:02
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: An ARBR character I have known... head swollen, Ed Dolan
|
"Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me > wrote in message
news:458b3217$0$4933$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Colin Nelson wrote:
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1166730881.875419.136900@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...
>>> It remains yet to be seen if Ed Dolan will abide by his word and
>>> leave the newsgroups never to return, but for now ARBR's
>>> quintessential TROLL is somewhat less active at least.
>>
>> Snip, snip, snip ... and ....Plonk!
>
> Good idea. Done as well.
Bill Sornson is the ultimate Chat Room type of nerd. I have never known him
to write an extended message. He is into nothing but quips, ever the last
refuge of scoundrels. Newsgroups need these kind of characters like we need
another hole in our heads. But RBM is full of jerks like him.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | | | |
Date: 21 Dec 2006 23:18:05
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: An ARBR character I have known... head swollen, Ed Dolan
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me> wrote in message
> news:458b3217$0$4933$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>> Colin Nelson wrote:
>>> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1166730881.875419.136900@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...
>>>> It remains yet to be seen if Ed Dolan will abide by his word and
>>>> leave the newsgroups never to return, but for now ARBR's
>>>> quintessential TROLL is somewhat less active at least.
>>>
>>> Snip, snip, snip ... and ....Plonk!
>>
>> Good idea. Done as well.
>
> Bill Sornson is the ultimate Chat Room type of nerd. I have never
> known him to write an extended message. He is into nothing but quips,
> ever the last refuge of scoundrels. Newsgroups need these kind of
> characters like we need another hole in our heads. But RBM is full of
> jerks like him.
You're such a moronic, small-minded hypocrite, "Ed". I'm the same person
you effusively praised for explaining a simple grammatical matter to you
(how to know whether to use 'I' or 'me' IIRC, as in "he's a better climber
than *I*" not *me*).
I decided to plonk JMac because all I ever see are weird posts (mostly about
YOU) from him.
Why don't you at least /try/ to keep posters straight so you know which to
flame for legitimate, consistent reasons.
On second thought, don't bother. You're just a bot.
BS (yup)
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 22 Dec 2006 18:34:17
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: An ARBR character I have known... head swollen, Ed Dolan
|
"Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me > wrote in message
news:458b86b0$0$4857$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me> wrote in message
>> news:458b3217$0$4933$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>> Colin Nelson wrote:
>>>> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:1166730881.875419.136900@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...
>>>>> It remains yet to be seen if Ed Dolan will abide by his word and
>>>>> leave the newsgroups never to return, but for now ARBR's
>>>>> quintessential TROLL is somewhat less active at least.
>>>>
>>>> Snip, snip, snip ... and ....Plonk!
>>>
>>> Good idea. Done as well.
>>
>> Bill Sornson is the ultimate Chat Room type of nerd. I have never
>> known him to write an extended message. He is into nothing but quips,
>> ever the last refuge of scoundrels. Newsgroups need these kind of
>> characters like we need another hole in our heads. But RBM is full of
>> jerks like him.
>
> You're such a moronic, small-minded hypocrite, "Ed". I'm the same person
> you effusively praised for explaining a simple grammatical matter to you
> (how to know whether to use 'I' or 'me' IIRC, as in "he's a better climber
> than *I*" not *me*).
Every time you post one of your insignificant quips, make sure it has some
wit to it. I am sick to death of messages which say absolutely nothing.
> I decided to plonk JMac because all I ever see are weird posts (mostly
> about YOU) from him.
Yes, Jim is a stalker and that is about all he is. But still he is not a bad
writer, even though longwinded.
> Why don't you at least /try/ to keep posters straight so you know which to
> flame for legitimate, consistent reasons.
Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds. Every post is sui generis with
me. I can't be bothered trying to remember who said what in the past. I live
in an eternal present when it comes to Usenet.
> On second thought, don't bother. You're just a bot.
Since you are always a man of so few words, just make sure there is some wit
connected to them. Otherwise, why bother?
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
|
