| |
Main
Date: 25 May 2006 08:20:07
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
My God! My universe is starting to fall apart! Where the f*** is Tom
Sherman? He has left ARBR and I have not been able to find him on any of the
other newsgroups. I did a Google search and came up with nothing.
Maybe some of you more sophisticated in the ways of the computer than I
could find out for me if Tom Sherman is anywhere to be found. He was my
principal adversary for over 3 years. I would log on to ARBR mainly in order
to read him - and slam him. Now I am feeling quite bad since I may have
caused him to leave. Surely he has got to know that I regarded him as the
best of all my many enemies.
My mind needs someone like him to contend with. There are no others who
pissed me off the way he did. I am thirsting for blood and only Tom Sherman
can slake my blood lust. Damn it all to hell, I need someone to beat up on
who is worthy of me!
So I plead with all you denizens of these cycling newsgroup to find Tom
Sherman for me. He is surely out there in cyber space somewhere spouting his
usual noxious left wing liberal screwball nonsense.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
|
| |
Date: 21 Jun 2006 08:19:19
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1150744025.951564.43850@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1150589018.854084.141320@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
> >>
> >> [newsgroups trimmed]
> >>
> >> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> [...]
> >> >> >> As long as off-topic posts do not interfere with those that are
> >> >> >> on-topic
> >> >> >> it
> >> >> >> does not matter. Your good buddy Ed Gin knew how to interfere with
> >> >> >> every
> >> >> >> post no matter whether it was on-topic or off-topic. That is
> >> >> >> because
> >> >> >> he
> >> >> >> was
> >> >> >> a troll with his insane drivel. That is something Tom Sherman and I
> >> >> >> never
> >> >> >> were. Too bad you can't tell the difference.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Now who is taking liberty with netiquette??? Off-topic by
> >> >> > definition
> >> >> > is just that ... off-topic no matter what kind of spin you vainly
> >> >> > attemnpt to put on it. Don't confuse the issue by introducing
> >> >> > irrelevant information regaridng the diferrences between Gin, you
> >> >> > and
> >> >> > Sherman that isn't even accurate. Tom Sherman might be accused of
> >> >> > drivel, but a troll he was not. You and Gin both qualify as trolls
> >> >> > who
> >> >> > employed insane drivel. Too bad you can't tell the difference
> >> >> > between
> >> >> > on-topic, off-topic and what is appropriate in terms of netiquette.
> >> >> > I
> >> >> > refer you to my previous explanation. Perhaps if you read it a
> >> >> > second
> >> >> > time, it will sink in.
> >>
> >> Nope, other newsgroups are just chock full of off-topic drivel. Your only
> >> complaint is that my drivel is better than your drivel.
> >
> > And I made this complaint where pray tell? Where is you evidence in
> > support of this fabfication?
>
> The complaint is there underlying your every sentence. It was like that with
> Ed Gin and Tom Sherman too. You need to find your own topics and not be
> sponging off others all the time.
What a pitiful retort. I have never stated explicity or implitiy
(complained) that your drivel is better than my drivel. Unlke you, I
don't even regard what I write as drivel. Prove me wrong and cite a
specific example to corroborate yout unsubstantiated assertion. You
cna't can you.
> >> >> I know exactly what is on-topic and what is off-topic. I choose to
> >> >> post
> >> >> mainly to off-topic threads and I will create off-topic subjects on an
> >> >> on-topic thread that has exhausted itself. I do this to provide some
> >> >> interest and some amusement to the poor earnest members of ARBR.
> >> >> However,
> >> >> much of what I do falls under the category of housekeeping which is
> >> >> really
> >> >> not off-topic. It is quite necessary to have someone around like me
> >> >> who
> >> >> will
> >> >> look after the best interests of the group. I am Mr. ARBR himself
> >> >> because
> >> >> of
> >> >> my general concern for the group.
> >> >
> >> > You know not the meaning of the word netiquette and houskeeping is
> >> > merely a euphemistic rationalization for your off-topic banter. If you
> >> > were genuinely concerned for ARBR, you'd take leave of the forum as
> >> > many have requested you to. No one except Mike Vandeman appreciates
> >> > your presence here.
> >>
> >> ARBR is now as dead as a door nail. If I weren't here, the undertakers
> >> might
> >> as well as be called in and put us all under the ground. Anyone but me
> >> notice how dead ARBR has become since NYC is no longer posting here?
> >> [...]
> >
> > You succeeded in killing it. The job having been accomplished, you can
> > now take leave of the place.
>
> Did you not notice how ARBR revived when NYC was posting to it? All it takes
> is a few live wires and ARBR can be back to where it was. I think however
> that we will have to get rid of all the threads having to do with mountain
> biking and hiking trails as that is not really germane to this group.
DiIersion duly noted. Be cautious. You are about to alienate the ONLY
ally that you have ... Mikey V., but I have to agree that mountain
biking is not germane to this group. It is most peculiar though for
you recognize that mountain biking is off-topic and yet fail to also
recognize that your nonsense, not even remotely related to cycling, as
accptable rather than not germane. This exceeds literary licenseby any
standards. The conundrum continues.
> >> >> Yes, and you are wrong as usual. I am not a troll. I say outrageous
> >> >> things
> >> >> in order to get some kind of a response, but that is not the same
> >> >> thing
> >> >> as
> >> >> being a troll.
> >> >
> >> > Oh but it is. A troll is someone who invades an established online
> >> > forum, and posts inflammatory, rude or offensive messages designed
> >> > intentionally to annoy and antagonize the existing members or disrupt
> >> > the flow of discussion ... and, that's precisely what you do.
> >>
> >> Jim is finally saying something of substance which deserves a serious
> >> reply.
> >>
> >> Newsgroups that stay too strictly on-topic are impossibly boring and
> >> tedious. There is only so much that can be said on any topic. All
> >> conversations tend to wander a bit and when they do I am here to jump in
> >> on
> >> it and provide some interest and amusement.
> >
> > Pure rationalization at its finest.
> >
> >> Rudeness and offensiveness are in the eye of the beholder. All is tit for
> >> tat with me, but I do like to provoke - there can be no doubt about that.
> >> But I assume we are all adults here and can take it. Those who have such
> >> extreme sensitivities that they can't take a bit of contention should not
> >> be
> >> here in the first place.
> >
> > Opinion stated as fact.
> >
> >> Jim, take a closer look at RBM. That group is composed of mostly nothing
> >> but
> >> idiots. They are all over the map on their topics. It is just chock full
> >> of
> >> mindless chit-chat. Certain members of that group are clubby types who
> >> NEVER
> >> say anything the least bit interesting or amusing. Very many other
> >> newsgroups are exactly like RBM. The Aussie one and the UK one for
> >> example.
> >
> > Forget the diversion. Other newsgroups are not the focal point of this
> > discussion and as such are irrelevant.
>
> We can learn a lot by looking at other newsgroups. There is nothing unique
> about ARBR. We are subject to all the foibles that other newsgroups are
> subject to. The only thing we don't have on ARBR are a lot of teenage punks
> with their obscenity laden and testosterone driven chit-chat.
>
> >> I just hate that kind of mindless chit-chat. It belongs on email, not
> >> newsgroups.
> >
> > Then why must you engage in chit-chat on ARBR?. This is not
> > alt.mindless.chit-chat. dominated.by.Ed.Dolan!
>
> I am a side dish here on ARBR. I do not interfere with on topic posts.
Yes at the very best you a subordinate to the main course and as such
have little relevancy. As an admitted side dish, you are a TROLL who
is the purveyor of off-topic bibberish (read mindless chit-chat).
> >> I will always try to broaden my comments so as to make them
> >> interesting to the general reader. You should try to do the same yourself
> >> instead of pursing your various vendettas and stalking behavior. It does
> >> not become you at all. That is what kids do, not 60 year old men of the
> >> world.
> >> [...]
> >
> > I repeat...i didn't ask for your advice...don't value your advice...
> > will not heed your adivce.
>
> I NEVER am writing just for you on ARBR. I am writing for a universe of
> unknown readers. It is really quite pitiful that you are unable to think in
> these broader terms. It is why no one finds your posts interesting.
In responding to my post, you are responding to me no matter what kind
of spin you vainly attempt to put on it. As concerns interest in your
posts vs min, I could care less, however I again invite you take a
poll. Strange how you never avail yourself of such suggestions. Could
it be that you don't wnat to see your unpopularity in expressed in the
raw numbers and precision of mathematics?
Jim McNaa
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 21 Jun 2006 16:46:17
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1150903159.315581.27160@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
>> >> Nope, other newsgroups are just chock full of off-topic drivel. Your
>> >> only
>> >> complaint is that my drivel is better than your drivel.
>> >
>> > And I made this complaint where pray tell? Where is you evidence in
>> > support of this fabfication?
>>
>> The complaint is there underlying your every sentence. It was like that
>> with
>> Ed Gin and Tom Sherman too. You need to find your own topics and not be
>> sponging off others all the time.
>
> What a pitiful retort. I have never stated explicity or implitiy
> (complained) that your drivel is better than my drivel. Unlke you, I
> don't even regard what I write as drivel. Prove me wrong and cite a
> specific example to corroborate yout unsubstantiated assertion. You
> cna't can you.
You are tedious in the extreme Jim. I strongly advise you to get your own
topics and not to be constantly sponging off of others who do not really
have any interest in you. Usenet is a cold cruel world and it is mainly made
up of nothing but bastards. The sooner you know this, the better.
[...]
>> Did you not notice how ARBR revived when NYC was posting to it? All it
>> takes
>> is a few live wires and ARBR can be back to where it was. I think however
>> that we will have to get rid of all the threads having to do with
>> mountain
>> biking and hiking trails as that is not really germane to this group.
>
> DiIersion duly noted. Be cautious. You are about to alienate the ONLY
> ally that you have ... Mikey V., but I have to agree that mountain
> biking is not germane to this group. It is most peculiar though for
> you recognize that mountain biking is off-topic and yet fail to also
> recognize that your nonsense, not even remotely related to cycling, as
> accptable rather than not germane. This exceeds literary licenseby any
> standards. The conundrum continues.
I have already explained in another post what I was trying to do. The
trouble is that ARBR is mostly made up of Fred types who have no imagination
and do not know how to run with a subject. Yes, I am out of my element, but
hope springs eternal in the human breast. I feel sorry for all the Freds in
the world who simply have no idea of how much fun it can be to engage with
others in intellectual discourse. The main fun of any newsgroup is getting
off topic. To stay on topic all the time is deadly. No half way bright
person would ever want to stay on topic for more than 2 minutes.
Vandeman is no doubt happy on his own newsgroups and has no interest in our
groups. He is mostly a one-note Johnny and is unlike me that way. He is
never off of his topic. You would be hard put to say what my topic is other
than tweaking everybody.
[...]
>> I am a side dish here on ARBR. I do not interfere with on topic posts.
>
> Yes at the very best you a subordinate to the main course and as such
> have little relevancy. As an admitted side dish, you are a TROLL who
> is the purveyor of off-topic bibberish (read mindless chit-chat).
Think of me as an entertainer and you will have it exactly right. But an
entertainer that can jab you to the quick of your soul!
[...]
>> I NEVER am writing just for you on ARBR. I am writing for a universe of
>> unknown readers. It is really quite pitiful that you are unable to think
>> in
>> these broader terms. It is why no one finds your posts interesting.
>
> In responding to my post, you are responding to me no matter what kind
> of spin you vainly attempt to put on it. As concerns interest in your
> posts vs min, I could care less, however I again invite you take a
> poll. Strange how you never avail yourself of such suggestions. Could
> it be that you don't wnat to see your unpopularity in expressed in the
> raw numbers and precision of mathematics?
I gage my popularity by the quantity and the quality of the posts that I get
in response. You should do the same. It seems the only time you are able to
engage anyone is when you are one on one with a single adversary, i.e., a
vendetta. I do not like to be limited to that.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 19 Jun 2006 12:07:06
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1150589018.854084.141320@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
>
> [newsgroups trimmed]
>
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> [...]
> >> >> As long as off-topic posts do not interfere with those that are
> >> >> on-topic
> >> >> it
> >> >> does not matter. Your good buddy Ed Gin knew how to interfere with
> >> >> every
> >> >> post no matter whether it was on-topic or off-topic. That is because
> >> >> he
> >> >> was
> >> >> a troll with his insane drivel. That is something Tom Sherman and I
> >> >> never
> >> >> were. Too bad you can't tell the difference.
> >> >
> >> > Now who is taking liberty with netiquette??? Off-topic by definition
> >> > is just that ... off-topic no matter what kind of spin you vainly
> >> > attemnpt to put on it. Don't confuse the issue by introducing
> >> > irrelevant information regaridng the diferrences between Gin, you and
> >> > Sherman that isn't even accurate. Tom Sherman might be accused of
> >> > drivel, but a troll he was not. You and Gin both qualify as trolls who
> >> > employed insane drivel. Too bad you can't tell the difference between
> >> > on-topic, off-topic and what is appropriate in terms of netiquette. I
> >> > refer you to my previous explanation. Perhaps if you read it a second
> >> > time, it will sink in.
>
> Nope, other newsgroups are just chock full of off-topic drivel. Your only
> complaint is that my drivel is better than your drivel.
And I made this complaint where pray tell? Where is you evidence in
support of this fabfication?
> >> I know exactly what is on-topic and what is off-topic. I choose to post
> >> mainly to off-topic threads and I will create off-topic subjects on an
> >> on-topic thread that has exhausted itself. I do this to provide some
> >> interest and some amusement to the poor earnest members of ARBR. However,
> >> much of what I do falls under the category of housekeeping which is
> >> really
> >> not off-topic. It is quite necessary to have someone around like me who
> >> will
> >> look after the best interests of the group. I am Mr. ARBR himself because
> >> of
> >> my general concern for the group.
> >
> > You know not the meaning of the word netiquette and houskeeping is
> > merely a euphemistic rationalization for your off-topic banter. If you
> > were genuinely concerned for ARBR, you'd take leave of the forum as
> > many have requested you to. No one except Mike Vandeman appreciates
> > your presence here.
>
> ARBR is now as dead as a door nail. If I weren't here, the undertakers might
> as well as be called in and put us all under the ground. Anyone but me
> notice how dead ARBR has become since NYC is no longer posting here?
> [...]
You succeeded in killing it. The job having been accomplished, you can
now take leave of the place.
> >> Yes, and you are wrong as usual. I am not a troll. I say outrageous
> >> things
> >> in order to get some kind of a response, but that is not the same thing
> >> as
> >> being a troll.
> >
> > Oh but it is. A troll is someone who invades an established online
> > forum, and posts inflammatory, rude or offensive messages designed
> > intentionally to annoy and antagonize the existing members or disrupt
> > the flow of discussion ... and, that's precisely what you do.
>
> Jim is finally saying something of substance which deserves a serious reply.
>
> Newsgroups that stay too strictly on-topic are impossibly boring and
> tedious. There is only so much that can be said on any topic. All
> conversations tend to wander a bit and when they do I am here to jump in on
> it and provide some interest and amusement.
Pure rationaliaation at it finest.
> Rudeness and offensiveness are in the eye of the beholder. All is tit for
> tat with me, but I do like to provoke - there can be no doubt about that.
> But I assume we are all adults here and can take it. Those who have such
> extreme sensitivities that they can't take a bit of contention should not be
> here in the first place.
Opinion stated as fact.
> Jim, take a closer look at RBM. That group is composed of mostly nothing but
> idiots. They are all over the map on their topics. It is just chock full of
> mindless chit-chat. Certain members of that group are clubby types who NEVER
> say anything the least bit interesting or amusing. Very many other
> newsgroups are exactly like RBM. The Aussie one and the UK one for example.
Forget the diversion. Other newsgroups are not the focal point of this
discussion and as such are irrelevant.
> I just hate that kind of mindless chit-chat. It belongs on email, not
> newsgroups.
Then why must you engage in chit-chat on ARBR?. This is not
alt.mindless.chit-chat. dominated.by.Ed.Dolan!
> I will always try to broaden my comments so as to make them
> interesting to the general reader. You should try to do the same yourself
> instead of pursing your various vendettas and stalking behavior. It does
> not become you at all. That is what kids do, not 60 year old men of the
> world.
> [...]
I repeat...i didn't ask for your advice...don't value your advice...
will not heed your adivce.
P.S. The definition of a troll fits you right nicely ... don't you
think???
Jim McNaa
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 20 Jun 2006 14:46:58
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1150744025.951564.43850@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1150589018.854084.141320@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> [newsgroups trimmed]
>>
>> > Edward Dolan wrote:
>> [...]
>> >> >> As long as off-topic posts do not interfere with those that are
>> >> >> on-topic
>> >> >> it
>> >> >> does not matter. Your good buddy Ed Gin knew how to interfere with
>> >> >> every
>> >> >> post no matter whether it was on-topic or off-topic. That is
>> >> >> because
>> >> >> he
>> >> >> was
>> >> >> a troll with his insane drivel. That is something Tom Sherman and I
>> >> >> never
>> >> >> were. Too bad you can't tell the difference.
>> >> >
>> >> > Now who is taking liberty with netiquette??? Off-topic by
>> >> > definition
>> >> > is just that ... off-topic no matter what kind of spin you vainly
>> >> > attemnpt to put on it. Don't confuse the issue by introducing
>> >> > irrelevant information regaridng the diferrences between Gin, you
>> >> > and
>> >> > Sherman that isn't even accurate. Tom Sherman might be accused of
>> >> > drivel, but a troll he was not. You and Gin both qualify as trolls
>> >> > who
>> >> > employed insane drivel. Too bad you can't tell the difference
>> >> > between
>> >> > on-topic, off-topic and what is appropriate in terms of netiquette.
>> >> > I
>> >> > refer you to my previous explanation. Perhaps if you read it a
>> >> > second
>> >> > time, it will sink in.
>>
>> Nope, other newsgroups are just chock full of off-topic drivel. Your only
>> complaint is that my drivel is better than your drivel.
>
> And I made this complaint where pray tell? Where is you evidence in
> support of this fabfication?
The complaint is there underlying your every sentence. It was like that with
Ed Gin and Tom Sherman too. You need to find your own topics and not be
sponging off others all the time.
>> >> I know exactly what is on-topic and what is off-topic. I choose to
>> >> post
>> >> mainly to off-topic threads and I will create off-topic subjects on an
>> >> on-topic thread that has exhausted itself. I do this to provide some
>> >> interest and some amusement to the poor earnest members of ARBR.
>> >> However,
>> >> much of what I do falls under the category of housekeeping which is
>> >> really
>> >> not off-topic. It is quite necessary to have someone around like me
>> >> who
>> >> will
>> >> look after the best interests of the group. I am Mr. ARBR himself
>> >> because
>> >> of
>> >> my general concern for the group.
>> >
>> > You know not the meaning of the word netiquette and houskeeping is
>> > merely a euphemistic rationalization for your off-topic banter. If you
>> > were genuinely concerned for ARBR, you'd take leave of the forum as
>> > many have requested you to. No one except Mike Vandeman appreciates
>> > your presence here.
>>
>> ARBR is now as dead as a door nail. If I weren't here, the undertakers
>> might
>> as well as be called in and put us all under the ground. Anyone but me
>> notice how dead ARBR has become since NYC is no longer posting here?
>> [...]
>
> You succeeded in killing it. The job having been accomplished, you can
> now take leave of the place.
Did you not notice how ARBR revived when NYC was posting to it? All it takes
is a few live wires and ARBR can be back to where it was. I think however
that we will have to get rid of all the threads having to do with mountain
biking and hiking trails as that is not really germane to this group.
>> >> Yes, and you are wrong as usual. I am not a troll. I say outrageous
>> >> things
>> >> in order to get some kind of a response, but that is not the same
>> >> thing
>> >> as
>> >> being a troll.
>> >
>> > Oh but it is. A troll is someone who invades an established online
>> > forum, and posts inflammatory, rude or offensive messages designed
>> > intentionally to annoy and antagonize the existing members or disrupt
>> > the flow of discussion ... and, that's precisely what you do.
>>
>> Jim is finally saying something of substance which deserves a serious
>> reply.
>>
>> Newsgroups that stay too strictly on-topic are impossibly boring and
>> tedious. There is only so much that can be said on any topic. All
>> conversations tend to wander a bit and when they do I am here to jump in
>> on
>> it and provide some interest and amusement.
>
> Pure rationaliaation at it finest.
>
>> Rudeness and offensiveness are in the eye of the beholder. All is tit for
>> tat with me, but I do like to provoke - there can be no doubt about that.
>> But I assume we are all adults here and can take it. Those who have such
>> extreme sensitivities that they can't take a bit of contention should not
>> be
>> here in the first place.
>
> Opinion stated as fact.
>
>> Jim, take a closer look at RBM. That group is composed of mostly nothing
>> but
>> idiots. They are all over the map on their topics. It is just chock full
>> of
>> mindless chit-chat. Certain members of that group are clubby types who
>> NEVER
>> say anything the least bit interesting or amusing. Very many other
>> newsgroups are exactly like RBM. The Aussie one and the UK one for
>> example.
>
> Forget the diversion. Other newsgroups are not the focal point of this
> discussion and as such are irrelevant.
We can learn a lot by looking at other newsgroups. There is nothing unique
about ARBR. We are subject to all the foibles that other newsgroups are
subject to. The only thing we don't have on ARBR are a lot of teenage punks
with their obscenity laden and testosterone driven chit-chat.
>> I just hate that kind of mindless chit-chat. It belongs on email, not
>> newsgroups.
>
> Then why must you engage in chit-chat on ARBR?. This is not
> alt.mindless.chit-chat. dominated.by.Ed.Dolan!
I am a side dish here on ARBR. I do not interfere with on topic posts.
>> I will always try to broaden my comments so as to make them
>> interesting to the general reader. You should try to do the same yourself
>> instead of pursing your various vendettas and stalking behavior. It does
>> not become you at all. That is what kids do, not 60 year old men of the
>> world.
>> [...]
>
> I repeat...i didn't ask for your advice...don't value your advice...
> will not heed your adivce.
I NEVER am writing just for you on ARBR. I am writing for a universe of
unknown readers. It is really quite pitiful that you are unable to think in
these broader terms. It is why no one finds your posts interesting.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 17 Jun 2006 17:03:38
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1150178331.580689.15320@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Jim McNaa has finally learned how to post correctly, but now he needs to
> learn how to edit. I will show him how if he cares to learn by following my
> example.
I alwasy knew how. It is just that Google Groups is finally working
correctly for a change ... nothing more .... nothing less. As for
editing, I could care less and will never follow your example. I
repeat ... I have not asked for your advice ... don't need your advice
... and will never heed your advice. Your opinion matters not.
> [...]
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> >> >> What does it matter if the message is on-topic or off-topic. All that
> >> >> matters is that it be interesting.
> >> >
> >> > Fiddle-faddle ... rubbish. If it mattered not, then there would be
> >> > need for only a single newsgroup, whereas in fact there is an
> >> > established hierarchy with many groups focused on a limited, specific
> >> > topics. It is generally accepted that posters are expected to confine
> >> > themselves to the groups intended subject matter. Off-topic posts are
> >> > considered inappropriate. This is an elementary concept that you
> >> > apparently do not comprehend or at least have no intention of abiding
> >> > by.
> >>
> >> As long as off-topic posts do not interfere with those that are on-topic
> >> it
> >> does not matter. Your good buddy Ed Gin knew how to interfere with every
> >> post no matter whether it was on-topic or off-topic. That is because he
> >> was
> >> a troll with his insane drivel. That is something Tom Sherman and I never
> >> were. Too bad you can't tell the difference.
> >
> > Now who is taking liberty with netiquette??? Off-topic by definition
> > is just that ... off-topic no matter what kind of spin you vainly
> > attemnpt to put on it. Don't confuse the issue by introducing
> > irrelevant information regaridng the diferrences between Gin, you and
> > Sherman that isn't even accurate. Tom Sherman might be accused of
> > drivel, but a troll he was not. You and Gin both qualify as trolls who
> > employed insane drivel. Too bad you can't tell the difference between
> > on-topic, off-topic and what is appropriate in terms of netiquette. I
> > refer you to my previous explanation. Perhaps if you read it a second
> > time, it will sink in.
>
> I know exactly what is on-topic and what is off-topic. I choose to post
> mainly to off-topic threads and I will create off-topic subjects on an
> on-topic thread that has exhausted itself. I do this to provide some
> interest and some amusement to the poor earnest members of ARBR. However,
> much of what I do falls under the category of housekeeping which is really
> not off-topic. It is quite necessary to have someone around like me who will
> look after the best interests of the group. I am Mr. ARBR himself because of
> my general concern for the group.
You know not the meaning of the word netiquette and houskeeping is
merely a euphemistic rationalization for your off-topic banter. If you
were genuinely concerned for ARBR, you'd take leave of the forum as
many have requested you to. No one except Mike Vandeman appreciates
your presence here.
> Both Tom Sherman and myself would get somewhat stupid when we were dealing
> with others who were stupid. It is a self defense mechanism. I would prefer
> to only engage in conversation with my fellow geniuses, but such are few and
> far between.
>
> Ed Gin was singular in every sense of the word. He was a troll who was also
> a vandal who was also a criminal. You, Tom and I were never any of those
> things. All three of us were mostly off-topic most of the time. As long as
> we did not interfere with on-topic posts, there was absolutely nothing wrong
> with being off-topic. Some of us just enjoy it for its' own sake. We can't
> all be dullards like most of the members. After all, there is only so much
> that can be said about recumbents - or any other kind of bicycles for that
> matter.
> [...]
>
> >> It was all about Ed Gin stepping on my posts and everyone else's with his
> >> insane drivel. Of course, one thing lead to another since he was clearly
> >> insane - and a criminal to boot. It is really pitiful that you do not
> >> know
> >> how to make distinctions that matter. All Ed Gin and I had in common were
> >> our first names.
> >
> > I'll take that as an ammendment of your original contention. It is
> > really pitiful that you have misconstrued that I am unable to make
> > distinctions and it is even more pitiful that you for some unknown
> > reason think that I made any statement that could be interpreted to
> > mean that I thought you and Ed Gin had anything in common ... outside
> > of being a trolls that spam newsgroupgs with gibberish of, that is.
> > There now I've made a statement regarding some commonality regarding
> > you two Eds.
>
> Yes, and you are wrong as usual. I am not a troll. I say outrageous things
> in order to get some kind of a response, but that is not the same thing as
> being a troll.
Oh but it is. A troll is someone who invades an established online
forum, and posts inflammatory, rude or offensive messages designed
intentionally to annoy and antagonize the existing members or disrupt
the flow of discussion ... and, that's precisely what you do.
Ed Gin was a troll, the only one ARBR ever had in its'
> history as far as I can tell. He destroyed ARBR without too much trouble
> because the vast majority of the members were cowards. It is why to this day
> I do not have any respect for newsgroups. You simply must have a moderator.
> Without one, you are forever on the verge of chaos.
> [...]
>
> >> Nope, I would occasionally take Tom Sherman seriously when he made some
> >> sense, but you are into nothing but vendettas. Are you Sicilian by
> >> chance?
> >
> > How very noble of you. I'm sure that very admission alone will bring
> > Tom back to ARBR. An Irishman asks if someone with a name of McNaa
> > is Sicilian???
>
> I would still like to know what has happened to Tom Sherman! Anyone know
> anything at all about where he has gone?
> [...]
>
> >> As far as
> >> I am concerned, you remain a perfect stranger to me and you most likely
> >> always will.
> >
> > A perfect stranger whom you have talked to on the phone, who helped you
> > rid yourself of a virus on your P and whom you engaged in private
> > emails.
>
> All of the above is no more than a cyber space connection, same as Usenet.
> In any kind of a face to face connection, it would be immediately apparent
> that we have nothing in common.
And, thank God for that.
Jim McNaa
> [...]
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 18 Jun 2006 13:16:58
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1150589018.854084.141320@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
[newsgroups trimmed]
> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
>> >> As long as off-topic posts do not interfere with those that are
>> >> on-topic
>> >> it
>> >> does not matter. Your good buddy Ed Gin knew how to interfere with
>> >> every
>> >> post no matter whether it was on-topic or off-topic. That is because
>> >> he
>> >> was
>> >> a troll with his insane drivel. That is something Tom Sherman and I
>> >> never
>> >> were. Too bad you can't tell the difference.
>> >
>> > Now who is taking liberty with netiquette??? Off-topic by definition
>> > is just that ... off-topic no matter what kind of spin you vainly
>> > attemnpt to put on it. Don't confuse the issue by introducing
>> > irrelevant information regaridng the diferrences between Gin, you and
>> > Sherman that isn't even accurate. Tom Sherman might be accused of
>> > drivel, but a troll he was not. You and Gin both qualify as trolls who
>> > employed insane drivel. Too bad you can't tell the difference between
>> > on-topic, off-topic and what is appropriate in terms of netiquette. I
>> > refer you to my previous explanation. Perhaps if you read it a second
>> > time, it will sink in.
Nope, other newsgroups are just chock full of off-topic drivel. Your only
complaint is that my drivel is better than your drivel.
>> I know exactly what is on-topic and what is off-topic. I choose to post
>> mainly to off-topic threads and I will create off-topic subjects on an
>> on-topic thread that has exhausted itself. I do this to provide some
>> interest and some amusement to the poor earnest members of ARBR. However,
>> much of what I do falls under the category of housekeeping which is
>> really
>> not off-topic. It is quite necessary to have someone around like me who
>> will
>> look after the best interests of the group. I am Mr. ARBR himself because
>> of
>> my general concern for the group.
>
> You know not the meaning of the word netiquette and houskeeping is
> merely a euphemistic rationalization for your off-topic banter. If you
> were genuinely concerned for ARBR, you'd take leave of the forum as
> many have requested you to. No one except Mike Vandeman appreciates
> your presence here.
ARBR is now as dead as a door nail. If I weren't here, the undertakers might
as well as be called in and put us all under the ground. Anyone but me
notice how dead ARBR has become since NYC is no longer posting here?
[...]
>> Yes, and you are wrong as usual. I am not a troll. I say outrageous
>> things
>> in order to get some kind of a response, but that is not the same thing
>> as
>> being a troll.
>
> Oh but it is. A troll is someone who invades an established online
> forum, and posts inflammatory, rude or offensive messages designed
> intentionally to annoy and antagonize the existing members or disrupt
> the flow of discussion ... and, that's precisely what you do.
Jim is finally saying something of substance which deserves a serious reply.
Newsgroups that stay too strictly on-topic are impossibly boring and
tedious. There is only so much that can be said on any topic. All
conversations tend to wander a bit and when they do I am here to jump in on
it and provide some interest and amusement.
Rudeness and offensiveness are in the eye of the beholder. All is tit for
tat with me, but I do like to provoke - there can be no doubt about that.
But I assume we are all adults here and can take it. Those who have such
extreme sensitivities that they can't take a bit of contention should not be
here in the first place.
Jim, take a closer look at RBM. That group is composed of mostly nothing but
idiots. They are all over the map on their topics. It is just chock full of
mindless chit-chat. Certain members of that group are clubby types who NEVER
say anything the least bit interesting or amusing. Very many other
newsgroups are exactly like RBM. The Aussie one and the UK one for example.
I just hate that kind of mindless chit-chat. It belongs on email, not
newsgroups. I will always try to broaden my comments so as to make them
interesting to the general reader. You should try to do the same yourself
instead of pursing your various vendettas and stalking behavior. It does
not become you at all. That is what kids do, not 60 year old men of the
world.
[...]
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 12 Jun 2006 22:58:51
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1149950376.886422.188260@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1149812887.845773.199910@f6g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:1149481088.836413.204640@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> >> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> >> >> news:1148572555.606192.101010@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >> >> >>
> >>> >> ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS - NOR DOES HE EVEN INCLUDE ANY OF THE
> >> >> >> MESSAGE
> >> >> >> TO
> >> >> >> WHICH HE IS RESPONDING!
> >> >
> >> > I was responding to your very first post something which I am
> >> > reasonably certain no one else was at all challenged to comprehend, so
> >> > stop frothing at the mouth.
> >>
> >> It doesn't matter if you are responding to a first post or a hundredth
> >> post.
> >> Top posting is NEVER OK!
> >
> > Opinion, stated as fact.
>
> Nope, it is netiquette. You confuse email with Usenet as always. They are
> completely different because of the presence of outside readers.
Really???
> >> And you must always include some of the previous
> >> message to which you are replying for reasons of context if nothing else.
> >> No
> >> one, I repeat no one, will ever look up a previous post.
> >
> > Opinion, stated as fact.
> >
> >> That is why
> >> everything has to be there right in front of the reader at first glance
> >> in
> >> every post.
> >
> > Opinion, stated as fact.
> >
> >> Often I do not recall what I might have said in a previous post
> >> without looking it up - which I will never do. Screw it! This is Usenet,
> >> not
> >> a college symposium.
> >>
> >> >> >> > Ed,
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > A very telling confession. Do print a copy for your therapist
> >> >> >> > ...
> >> >> >> > Jim
> >> >> >> > McNaa
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> So, you don't know where Tom Sherman is either?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Unlike you, I lament not for I couldn't care less.
> >> >>
> >> >> You were never much of a poster to ARBR as far as I can tell, other
> >> >> than
> >> >> your sporadic personal vendettas.
> >> >
> >> > And just how many on-topic posts can you claim to have ever made???
> >>
> >> What does it matter if the message is on-topic or off-topic. All that
> >> matters is that it be interesting.
> >
> > Fiddle-faddle ... rubbish. If it mattered not, then there would be
> > need for only a single newsgroup, whereas in fact there is an
> > established hierarchy with many groups focused on a limited, specific
> > topics. It is generally accepted that posters are expected to confine
> > themselves to the groups intended subject matter. Off-topic posts are
> > considered inappropriate. This is an elementary concept that you
> > apparently do not comprehend or at least have no intention of abiding
> > by.
>
> As long as off-topic posts do not interfere with those that are on-topic it
> does not matter. Your good buddy Ed Gin knew how to interfere with every
> post no matter whether it was on-topic or off-topic. That is because he was
> a troll with his insane drivel. That is something Tom Sherman and I never
> were. Too bad you can't tell the difference.
Now who is taking liberty with netiquette??? Off-topic by definition
is just that ... off-topic no matter what kind of spin you vainly
attemnpt to put on it. Don't confuse the issue by introducing
irrelevant information regaridng the diferrences between Gin, you and
Sherman that isn't even accurate. Tom Sherman might be accused of
drivel, but a troll he was not. You and Gin both qualify as trolls who
employed insane drivel. Too bad you can't tell the difference between
on-topic, off-topic and what is appropriate in terms of netiquette. I
refer you to my previous explanation. Perhaps if you read it a second
time, it will sink in.
> >> > As concerns personal vendettas, I have taken a total of 3 individuals
> >> > to
> >> > task, your beloved Tom Sherman being one. You were an active
> >> > participant in that particular personal vendetta.
> >>
> >> I just chipped in briefly to keep you from self-destructing. Tom Sherman
> >> was
> >> making you look like a fool.
> >
> > How very suppportive of you, but there is no need to concern yourself.
> > I don't self-desturct. As for the rest ... opinion stated as fact.
> >
> >> Ed Gin was another
> >> > and again you were an active participant in some (though not all) of
> >> > that personal venedetta. That's 2 for 2 which cancel one another out
> >> > since you were part and parcel of the action.
> >>
> >> I only got in on the tail end of that one when Ed Gin started stepping on
> >> all of my posts with his insane drivel.
> >
> > Baderdash ... twaddle. You had more issues with Ed GIn than the one
> > stated and still do since you constantly refer to him as the criminal
> > vandal troll that destroyed ARBR. Truth be told, the TROLL that has
> > inflicted the most damage on this newsgroup is you.
>
> It was all about Ed Gin stepping on my posts and everyone else's with his
> insane drivel. Of course, one thing lead to another since he was clearly
> insane - and a criminal to boot. It is really pitiful that you do not know
> how to make distinctions that matter. All Ed Gin and I had in common were
> our first names.
I'll take that as an ammenement of your original contention. It is
really pitiful that you have misconstrued that I am unable to make
distinctions and it is even more pitiful that you for some unknown
reason think that I made any statement that could be interpreted to
mean that I thought you and Ed Gin had anything in common ... outside
of being a trolls that spam newsgroupgs with gibberish of, that is.
There now I've made a statement regarding some commonality regarding
you two Eds.
> >> As for the third ...
> >> > well, you can't very well be expected to participate in that personal
> >> > vendetta since you are the target. There you have it.
> >>
> >> I do not take you any more seriously than did Tom Sherman and Ed Gin.
> >> That
> >> right there should tell you something.
> >
> > Opinion, stated as fact. Prattle ... gibberish. If I was not taken
> > seriosulsy then why were you all unable to ingonre me and why were you
> > allso driven to reply to everything that I have had to say. You're
> > just so full crap.
>
> Nope, I would occasionally take Tom Sherman seriously when he made some
> sense, but you are into nothing but vendettas. Are you Sicilian by chance?
How very noble of you. I'm sure that very admission alone will bring
Tom back to ARBR. An Irishman asks if someone with a name of McNaa
is Sicilian???
> >> I have
> >> > focused my attention on three individuals and two (you and Gin) have
> >> > been the focal point of many members on ARBR, so I find myself in good
> >> > company. You, on the other hand, have taken on just about everyone on
> >> > this newsgroup, Vanderman, for whom you have an obvious affection,
> >> > being an exception. So let's see then. The score is me THREE and you
> >> > a SIZEABLE INDEFINIT NUMBER that continues to grow. Do the math. The
> >> > numbers are decidedly not in your favor, so you can cease your
> >> > whining..
> >>
> >> Every post is sui generis with me. I do not react to persons, only to
> >> their
> >> messages. But I post generally to one and all based on the subject. You
> >> only
> >> post to carry on your personal vendettas. Are you crazy ... that is the
> >> question?
> >
> > More bullshit. In reacting to a message, you are reacting to its
> > author, no matter what kind of a spin you vainly attempt to put on it.
> > You cannot shroud yoursel in a Latin catch phrase to explain away your
> > actions. The math speaks for itself.
>
> Again no, I am unlike you that way. I am an adult who has fully matured and
> I do not ever waste time on personal crap.
This very statementis CRAP.
> I only respond to your posts by
> saying what I want to say, not necessarily what you want to hear.
Your manner of response has absolutely no relevance to the issue at
hand. The fact remains that in responding to a message, you are
responding to the author of the message. In reacting tlo a message,
you are reacting to th author regardless of the form you reaction take.
This is so very obvious that it should not even have to be stated.
> As far as
> I am concerned, you remain a perfect stranger to me and you most likely
> always will.
A perfect stranger whom you have talke to on the phone, sho helped you
rid yourself of a virus on you PD and whom you engaged in private
emails.
> I have absolutely no emotional investment in any of my posts,
> not matter how it may read to the contrary. That is what being an adult is
> all about.
CRAP. No one who reads that will believe you. The very words you
write betray you. Besides having no emotion investment in what youy
write is not a sign of adulthood. If anything, taking responsibility
for what you write is a sign of adulthood. Since you don not, what
does that say of you maturity? Get real, Dolan.
> >> >> Tom Sherman was the mainstay of this
> >> >> entire newsgroup. He was ever helpful to newbies and knew more about
> >> >> recumbents than any other person I ever encountered on any newsgroup.
> >> >
> >> > This is pitiful. You sound as though you've lost a loved one. Stay
> >> > tuned for the same old song to be sung if and when Vandeman pulls up
> >> > stakes. Are same sex riages legal in Minnesota?
> >>
> >> Everything I say about Tom Sherman is true. The only pitiful thing here
> >> is
> >> your jealousy of him - and me!
> >
> > Opinion, stated as fact. You do that a lot, don't you? And you base
> > your assumption on what, pray tell? Are you dellusional or did you
> > just skip your meds today? Jealousy ... don't flatter youself Ed.
> > Regardless, thanks for starting off my day with a bit amusement.
>
> You are the one who is making sexual allusions. Very dangerous territory for
> you to venture upon with me because of my Saintliness. You do not ever want
> to arouse Saint Edward the Great from His slumbers.
And this is in response to what above that allegedly has sexual
connotations? I addressed jealousy ...nothing morr ... nothing less,
but it is interesting that you chose the opperative word "arouse" in
your reply.
> >> >> I knew it was just a matter of time before he would leave as there
> >> >> were
> >> >> just
> >> >> so many idiots and scoundrels infecting ARBR. The fact is that he was
> >> >> too
> >> >> good for us. He was wrongheaded about almost everything outside of
> >> >> recumbents, but that is why I was here - to counteract act him.
> >> >
> >> > This is an unmoderated newsgroup. Who asked you to assume the role of
> >> > moderator? If weren't deaf, dumb and blind, you would heed the
> >> > requests of those who have asked you to cease and desist or pack it up
> >> > and leave. You often insist that EVERYONE who posts on newsgroups, and
> >> > particularly ARBR, are idiots, morons, and imbeciles. Which particular
> >> > cretin category do you fall under??? Pick one!!! Since you are the
> >> > most prolific poster on ARBR, it would logically follow that whatever
> >> > category you chose, you would be the quintessential representative.
> >>
> >> All newsgroups need someone who has the best interest of the group at
> >> heart.
> >
> > "Best interest fo the group at heart". Surely you jest. Time for a
> > vote. Who of you consider Ed Dolan to be that person? Those who have
> > kill-filed you have already voted.
>
> I am into housekeeping chores for the most part as there is never anything
> of any substance being said that interests me much.
No one has asked for you to play monderator on an unmoderated formum.
Houskeepin according to whom. You alleged housekeeping consists of
off-topic nonsense which itself is in need of housekeeping. If there
is nothing of any substance being said that interests you, then begone
troll ... take a hike on "your sacred trails"..
> >> You only show up here for your vendettas. If a newsgroup just had your
> >> type,
> >> it would be still born. I will admit I have gotten rid of some dead wood
> >
> > Opinion, stated as fact. Nothing could improve this newsgroup as much
> > as your absence. Ask yourself why is it that so many have professed
> > to have kill-filed you. Your kill-file statistics are your legacy.
>
> I know exactly the type who kill-file someone so Great as I. The world is
> full of of such dullards. They are nondescript pitfall souls who simply
> can't hold their own in a conversation. They want to have their say and
> cannot brook any opposition without getting all insulted. So far, you have
> at least a somewhat thicker skin that those types I must admit.
They are those who have exercised som ecommon sense ... those who heard
enough of your crap and just decided enough is enough. Others didn't
kill-file you. They just left altogether. Others just ignore you.
Some like myself taek you on from time to time to tell it like it is
not that you are ever open minded enough to listen.
> >> from time to time, but I keep the group lively. Never a dull moment when
> >> Ed
> >> Dolan the Great is around.
> >> [...]
> >
> > Always a dullard moment when HEAD Dolan the GRATE is around.
>
> I write for the few who can appreciate me, not for the many who never have a
> clue. Most importantly, anyone but me ever notice how all these
> conversations that I have with Jim are all about me and never about him?
> That right there should tell you who is interesting and who is not!
Few??? Vandeman doesn't qualify as a few. These conversations are not
exclusively about you and even if they were, your conclusion does not
follow from the premise. You like logical fallacies, dont' you?
Frankly I don't understand what Vandeman admires in you. I don't think
he could recognize intellect and writing ability if it slapped him
upside his hard head.
Jim McNaa
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 13 Jun 2006 11:25:57
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1150178331.580689.15320@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Jim McNaa has finally learned how to post correctly, but now he needs to
learn how to edit. I will show him how if he cares to learn by following my
example.
[...]
Edward Dolan wrote:
>> >> What does it matter if the message is on-topic or off-topic. All that
>> >> matters is that it be interesting.
>> >
>> > Fiddle-faddle ... rubbish. If it mattered not, then there would be
>> > need for only a single newsgroup, whereas in fact there is an
>> > established hierarchy with many groups focused on a limited, specific
>> > topics. It is generally accepted that posters are expected to confine
>> > themselves to the groups intended subject matter. Off-topic posts are
>> > considered inappropriate. This is an elementary concept that you
>> > apparently do not comprehend or at least have no intention of abiding
>> > by.
>>
>> As long as off-topic posts do not interfere with those that are on-topic
>> it
>> does not matter. Your good buddy Ed Gin knew how to interfere with every
>> post no matter whether it was on-topic or off-topic. That is because he
>> was
>> a troll with his insane drivel. That is something Tom Sherman and I never
>> were. Too bad you can't tell the difference.
>
> Now who is taking liberty with netiquette??? Off-topic by definition
> is just that ... off-topic no matter what kind of spin you vainly
> attemnpt to put on it. Don't confuse the issue by introducing
> irrelevant information regaridng the diferrences between Gin, you and
> Sherman that isn't even accurate. Tom Sherman might be accused of
> drivel, but a troll he was not. You and Gin both qualify as trolls who
> employed insane drivel. Too bad you can't tell the difference between
> on-topic, off-topic and what is appropriate in terms of netiquette. I
> refer you to my previous explanation. Perhaps if you read it a second
> time, it will sink in.
I know exactly what is on-topic and what is off-topic. I choose to post
mainly to off-topic threads and I will create off-topic subjects on an
on-topic thread that has exhausted itself. I do this to provide some
interest and some amusement to the poor earnest members of ARBR. However,
much of what I do falls under the category of housekeeping which is really
not off-topic. It is quite necessary to have someone around like me who will
look after the best interests of the group. I am Mr. ARBR himself because of
my general concern for the group.
Both Tom Sherman and myself would get somewhat stupid when we were dealing
with others who were stupid. It is a self defense mechanism. I would prefer
to only engage in conversation with my fellow geniuses, but such are few and
far between.
Ed Gin was singular in every sense of the word. He was a troll who was also
a vandal who was also a criminal. You, Tom and I were never any of those
things. All three of us were mostly off-topic most of the time. As long as
we did not interfere with on-topic posts, there was absolutely nothing wrong
with being off-topic. Some of us just enjoy it for its' own sake. We can't
all be dullards like most of the members. After all, there is only so much
that can be said about recumbents - or any other kind of bicycles for that
matter.
[...]
>> It was all about Ed Gin stepping on my posts and everyone else's with his
>> insane drivel. Of course, one thing lead to another since he was clearly
>> insane - and a criminal to boot. It is really pitiful that you do not
>> know
>> how to make distinctions that matter. All Ed Gin and I had in common were
>> our first names.
>
> I'll take that as an ammenement of your original contention. It is
> really pitiful that you have misconstrued that I am unable to make
> distinctions and it is even more pitiful that you for some unknown
> reason think that I made any statement that could be interpreted to
> mean that I thought you and Ed Gin had anything in common ... outside
> of being a trolls that spam newsgroupgs with gibberish of, that is.
> There now I've made a statement regarding some commonality regarding
> you two Eds.
Yes, and you are wrong as usual. I am not a troll. I say outrageous things
in order to get some kind of a response, but that is not the same thing as
being a troll. Ed Gin was a troll, the only one ARBR ever had in its'
history as far as I can tell. He destroyed ARBR without too much trouble
because the vast majority of the members were cowards. It is why to this day
I do not have any respect for newsgroups. You simply must have a moderator.
Without one, you are forever on the verge of chaos.
[...]
>> Nope, I would occasionally take Tom Sherman seriously when he made some
>> sense, but you are into nothing but vendettas. Are you Sicilian by
>> chance?
>
> How very noble of you. I'm sure that very admission alone will bring
> Tom back to ARBR. An Irishman asks if someone with a name of McNaa
> is Sicilian???
I would still like to know what has happened to Tom Sherman! Anyone know
anything at all about where he has gone?
[...]
>> As far as
>> I am concerned, you remain a perfect stranger to me and you most likely
>> always will.
>
> A perfect stranger whom you have talke to on the phone, sho helped you
> rid yourself of a virus on you PD and whom you engaged in private
> emails.
All of the above is no more than a cyber space connection, same as Usenet.
In any kind of a face to face connection, it would be immediately apparent
that we have nothing in common.
[...]
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Aug 2006 14:01:01
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Jim McNamara the Stalker was Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
Chris Foster wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:1151990910.453592.62380@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com:
>
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1151899777.728762.269050@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> >> [...]
> >> > Ed ... Quit your whining, already. You have only yourself to blame
> >> > for the "stalking" that you have fallen victim of from your many
> >> > adversaries. You intentionally go trolling for fights. When you
> >> > encounter a tenacious, formidable adversary, and find yourself
> >> > hopelessly embroiled in an embarrassing no-win cyber-skirmish, in
> >> > desperation, you move to disencumber yourself by seeking to
> >> > discredit and dismiss your adversary by labeling him or her as a
> >> > stalker. This thinly disguised ploy of yours has failed countless
> >> > times. If you really want to escape your self-inflicted dilemma,
> >> > then turn tail, crawl on out of here. Return to the rock that you
> >> > slithered out from under. - Jim McNaa
> >>
> >> Nothing but a stalker and a leech. Very sad indeed!
> >
> > Thanks for reinforcing my contention. - Jim McNaa
> >
>
>
>
> Jimmy, you hit the nail squarely on the head!!
Thanks Chris, but I could have put that hammer to better use if Ed's
hard head was within reach. Those of us who have engaged Ed Dolan in
cyber skirmishes just have to give the man his due. He possesses a
unique, uncanny ability to galvanize the ARBR membership in steadfast
opposition to himself. Ed deliberately crafts a post to instigate,
infuriate and elicit a response. That's what TROLLs do and Ed does it
better than most. If one engages Ed entirely too well, you are then
labeled a stalker for the very reasons cited above. - Jim McNaa
> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 01 Aug 2006 17:45:21
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Jim McNamara the Stalker was Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1154466061.035740.53210@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
[...]
> Thanks Chris, but I could have put that hammer to better use if Ed's
> hard head was within reach. Those of us who have engaged Ed Dolan in
> cyber skirmishes just have to give the man his due. He possesses a
> unique, uncanny ability to galvanize the ARBR membership in steadfast
> opposition to himself. Ed deliberately crafts a post to instigate,
> infuriate and elicit a response. That's what TROLLs do and Ed does it
> better than most. If one engages Ed entirely too well, you are then
> labeled a stalker for the very reasons cited above. - Jim McNaa
Actually Jimbo is not too far off the k. The one thing he misses is that
there is always substance in my posts no matter how I craft them. I will
stand by anything I say and defend it no matter how outrageous it might
first appear.
I do not post to elicit agreement, but rather to elicit disagreement. In
that is all the fun of Usenet. Otherwise, it is nothing but a drag and the
most boring thing you can do on this earth.
The stalker issue is interesting. I never stalk anyone beyond a very limited
extent. I think even Mr. Sherman would attest to that. However, Jimbo comes
very close to be nothing but a stalker. He needs to get his own issues and
not be constantly sponging off of me.
I reign supreme in taking members of this newsgroup (ARBR) to task if and
when they cross certain lines. Yea, I am the nanny of this group. Get used
to it!
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 10 Jun 2006 07:39:36
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1149812887.845773.199910@f6g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1149481088.836413.204640@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >> >
> >> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:1148572555.606192.101010@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >> >>
>> >> ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS - NOR DOES HE EVEN INCLUDE ANY OF THE
> >> >> MESSAGE
> >> >> TO
> >> >> WHICH HE IS RESPONDING!
> >
> > I was responding to your very first post something which I am
> > reasonably certain no one else was at all challenged to comprehend, so
> > stop frothing at the mouth.
>
> It doesn't matter if you are responding to a first post or a hundredth post.
> Top posting is NEVER OK!
Opinion, stated as fact.
> And you must always include some of the previous
> message to which you are replying for reasons of context if nothing else. No
> one, I repeat no one, will ever look up a previous post.
Opinion, stated as fact.
> That is why
> everything has to be there right in front of the reader at first glance in
> every post.
Opinion, stated as fact.
> Often I do not recall what I might have said in a previous post
> without looking it up - which I will never do. Screw it! This is Usenet, not
> a college symposium.
>
> >> >> > Ed,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > A very telling confession. Do print a copy for your therapist ...
> >> >> > Jim
> >> >> > McNaa
> >> >>
> >> >> So, you don't know where Tom Sherman is either?
> >> >
> >> > Unlike you, I lament not for I couldn't care less.
> >>
> >> You were never much of a poster to ARBR as far as I can tell, other than
> >> your sporadic personal vendettas.
> >
> > And just how many on-topic posts can you claim to have ever made???
>
> What does it matter if the message is on-topic or off-topic. All that
> matters is that it be interesting.
Fiddle-faddle ... rubbish. If it mattered not, then there would be
need for only a single newsgroup, whereas in fact there is an
established hierarchy with many groups focused on a limited, specific
topics. It is generally accepted that posters are expected to confine
themselves to the groups intended subject matter. Off-topic posts are
considered inappropriate. This is an elementary concept that you
apparently do not comprehend or at least have no intention of abiding
by.
> > As concerns personal vendettas, I have taken a total of 3 individuals to
> > task, your beloved Tom Sherman being one. You were an active
> > participant in that particular personal vendetta.
>
> I just chipped in briefly to keep you from self-destructing. Tom Sherman was
> making you look like a fool.
How very suppportive of you, but there is no need to concern yourself.
I don't self-desturct. As for the rest ... opinion stated as fact.
> Ed Gin was another
> > and again you were an active participant in some (though not all) of
> > that personal venedetta. That's 2 for 2 which cancel one another out
> > since you were part and parcel of the action.
>
> I only got in on the tail end of that one when Ed Gin started stepping on
> all of my posts with his insane drivel.
Baderdash ... twaddle. You had more issues with Ed GIn than the one
stated and still do since you constantly refer to him as the criminal
vandal troll that destroyed ARBR. Truth be told, the TROLL that has
inflicted the most damage on this newsgroup is you.
> As for the third ...
> > well, you can't very well be expected to participate in that personal
> > vendetta since you are the target. There you have it.
>
> I do not take you any more seriously than did Tom Sherman and Ed Gin. That
> right there should tell you something.
Opinion, stated as fact. Prattle ... gibberish. If I was not taken
seriosulsy then why were you all unable to ingonre me and why were you
allso driven to reply to everything that I have had to say. You're
just so full crap.
> I have
> > focused my attention on three individuals and two (you and Gin) have
> > been the focal point of many members on ARBR, so I find myself in good
> > company. You, on the other hand, have taken on just about everyone on
> > this newsgroup, Vanderman, for whom you have an obvious affection,
> > being an exception. So let's see then. The score is me THREE and you
> > a SIZEABLE INDEFINIT NUMBER that continues to grow. Do the math. The
> > numbers are decidedly not in your favor, so you can cease your
> > whining..
>
> Every post is sui generis with me. I do not react to persons, only to their
> messages. But I post generally to one and all based on the subject. You only
> post to carry on your personal vendettas. Are you crazy ... that is the
> question?
More bullshit. In reacting to a message, you are reacting to its
author, no matter what kind of a spin you vainly attempt to put on it.
You cannot shroud yoursel in a Latin catch phrase to explain away your
actions. The math speaks for itself.
> >> Tom Sherman was the mainstay of this
> >> entire newsgroup. He was ever helpful to newbies and knew more about
> >> recumbents than any other person I ever encountered on any newsgroup.
> >
> > This is pitiful. You sound as though you've lost a loved one. Stay
> > tuned for the same old song to be sung if and when Vandeman pulls up
> > stakes. Are same sex riages legal in Minnesota?
>
> Everything I say about Tom Sherman is true. The only pitiful thing here is
> your jealousy of him - and me!
Opinion, stated as fact. You do that a lot, don't you? And you base
your assumption on what, pray tell? Are you dellusional or did you
just skip your meds today? Jealousy ... don't flatter youself Ed.
Regardless, thanks for starting off my day with a bit amusement.
> >> I knew it was just a matter of time before he would leave as there were
> >> just
> >> so many idiots and scoundrels infecting ARBR. The fact is that he was too
> >> good for us. He was wrongheaded about almost everything outside of
> >> recumbents, but that is why I was here - to counteract act him.
> >
> > This is an unmoderated newsgroup. Who asked you to assume the role of
> > moderator? If weren't deaf, dumb and blind, you would heed the
> > requests of those who have asked you to cease and desist or pack it up
> > and leave. You often insist that EVERYONE who posts on newsgroups, and
> > particularly ARBR, are idiots, morons, and imbeciles. Which particular
> > cretin category do you fall under??? Pick one!!! Since you are the
> > most prolific poster on ARBR, it would logically follow that whatever
> > category you chose, you would be the quintessential representative.
>
> All newsgroups need someone who has the best interest of the group at heart.
"Best interest fo the group at heart". Surely you jest. Time for a
vote. Who of you consider Ed Dolan to be that person? Those who have
kill-filed you have already voted.
> You only show up here for your vendettas. If a newsgroup just had your type,
> it would be still born. I will admit I have gotten rid of some dead wood
Opinion, stated as fact. Nothing could improve this newsgroup as much
as your absence. Ask yourself why is it that so many have professed
to have kill-filed you. Your kill-file statistics are your legacy.
> from time to time, but I keep the group lively. Never a dull moment when Ed
> Dolan the Great is around.
> [...]
Always a dullard moment when HEAD Dolan the GRATE is around.
Jim McNaa
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 12 Jun 2006 05:30:14
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1149950376.886422.188260@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1149812887.845773.199910@f6g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> > Edward Dolan wrote:
>> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:1149481088.836413.204640@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> >> >
>> >> > Edward Dolan wrote:
>> >> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:1148572555.606192.101010@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> >> >>
>>> >> ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS - NOR DOES HE EVEN INCLUDE ANY OF THE
>> >> >> MESSAGE
>> >> >> TO
>> >> >> WHICH HE IS RESPONDING!
>> >
>> > I was responding to your very first post something which I am
>> > reasonably certain no one else was at all challenged to comprehend, so
>> > stop frothing at the mouth.
>>
>> It doesn't matter if you are responding to a first post or a hundredth
>> post.
>> Top posting is NEVER OK!
>
> Opinion, stated as fact.
Nope, it is netiquette. You confuse email with Usenet as always. They are
completely different because of the presence of outside readers.
>> And you must always include some of the previous
>> message to which you are replying for reasons of context if nothing else.
>> No
>> one, I repeat no one, will ever look up a previous post.
>
> Opinion, stated as fact.
>
>> That is why
>> everything has to be there right in front of the reader at first glance
>> in
>> every post.
>
> Opinion, stated as fact.
>
>> Often I do not recall what I might have said in a previous post
>> without looking it up - which I will never do. Screw it! This is Usenet,
>> not
>> a college symposium.
>>
>> >> >> > Ed,
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > A very telling confession. Do print a copy for your therapist
>> >> >> > ...
>> >> >> > Jim
>> >> >> > McNaa
>> >> >>
>> >> >> So, you don't know where Tom Sherman is either?
>> >> >
>> >> > Unlike you, I lament not for I couldn't care less.
>> >>
>> >> You were never much of a poster to ARBR as far as I can tell, other
>> >> than
>> >> your sporadic personal vendettas.
>> >
>> > And just how many on-topic posts can you claim to have ever made???
>>
>> What does it matter if the message is on-topic or off-topic. All that
>> matters is that it be interesting.
>
> Fiddle-faddle ... rubbish. If it mattered not, then there would be
> need for only a single newsgroup, whereas in fact there is an
> established hierarchy with many groups focused on a limited, specific
> topics. It is generally accepted that posters are expected to confine
> themselves to the groups intended subject matter. Off-topic posts are
> considered inappropriate. This is an elementary concept that you
> apparently do not comprehend or at least have no intention of abiding
> by.
As long as off-topic posts do not interfere with those that are on-topic it
does not matter. Your good buddy Ed Gin knew how to interfere with every
post no matter whether it was on-topic or off-topic. That is because he was
a troll with his insane drivel. That is something Tom Sherman and I never
were. Too bad you can't tell the difference.
>> > As concerns personal vendettas, I have taken a total of 3 individuals
>> > to
>> > task, your beloved Tom Sherman being one. You were an active
>> > participant in that particular personal vendetta.
>>
>> I just chipped in briefly to keep you from self-destructing. Tom Sherman
>> was
>> making you look like a fool.
>
> How very suppportive of you, but there is no need to concern yourself.
> I don't self-desturct. As for the rest ... opinion stated as fact.
>
>> Ed Gin was another
>> > and again you were an active participant in some (though not all) of
>> > that personal venedetta. That's 2 for 2 which cancel one another out
>> > since you were part and parcel of the action.
>>
>> I only got in on the tail end of that one when Ed Gin started stepping on
>> all of my posts with his insane drivel.
>
> Baderdash ... twaddle. You had more issues with Ed GIn than the one
> stated and still do since you constantly refer to him as the criminal
> vandal troll that destroyed ARBR. Truth be told, the TROLL that has
> inflicted the most damage on this newsgroup is you.
It was all about Ed Gin stepping on my posts and everyone else's with his
insane drivel. Of course, one thing lead to another since he was clearly
insane - and a criminal to boot. It is really pitiful that you do not know
how to make distinctions that matter. All Ed Gin and I had in common were
our first names.
>> As for the third ...
>> > well, you can't very well be expected to participate in that personal
>> > vendetta since you are the target. There you have it.
>>
>> I do not take you any more seriously than did Tom Sherman and Ed Gin.
>> That
>> right there should tell you something.
>
> Opinion, stated as fact. Prattle ... gibberish. If I was not taken
> seriosulsy then why were you all unable to ingonre me and why were you
> allso driven to reply to everything that I have had to say. You're
> just so full crap.
Nope, I would occasionally take Tom Sherman seriously when he made some
sense, but you are into nothing but vendettas. Are you Sicilian by chance?
>> I have
>> > focused my attention on three individuals and two (you and Gin) have
>> > been the focal point of many members on ARBR, so I find myself in good
>> > company. You, on the other hand, have taken on just about everyone on
>> > this newsgroup, Vanderman, for whom you have an obvious affection,
>> > being an exception. So let's see then. The score is me THREE and you
>> > a SIZEABLE INDEFINIT NUMBER that continues to grow. Do the math. The
>> > numbers are decidedly not in your favor, so you can cease your
>> > whining..
>>
>> Every post is sui generis with me. I do not react to persons, only to
>> their
>> messages. But I post generally to one and all based on the subject. You
>> only
>> post to carry on your personal vendettas. Are you crazy ... that is the
>> question?
>
> More bullshit. In reacting to a message, you are reacting to its
> author, no matter what kind of a spin you vainly attempt to put on it.
> You cannot shroud yoursel in a Latin catch phrase to explain away your
> actions. The math speaks for itself.
Again no, I am unlike you that way. I am an adult who has fully matured and
I do not ever waste time on personal crap. I only respond to your posts by
saying what I want to say, not necessarily what you want to hear. As far as
I am concerned, you remain a perfect stranger to me and you most likely
always will. I have absolutely no emotional investment in any of my posts,
not matter how it may read to the contrary. That is what being an adult is
all about.
>> >> Tom Sherman was the mainstay of this
>> >> entire newsgroup. He was ever helpful to newbies and knew more about
>> >> recumbents than any other person I ever encountered on any newsgroup.
>> >
>> > This is pitiful. You sound as though you've lost a loved one. Stay
>> > tuned for the same old song to be sung if and when Vandeman pulls up
>> > stakes. Are same sex riages legal in Minnesota?
>>
>> Everything I say about Tom Sherman is true. The only pitiful thing here
>> is
>> your jealousy of him - and me!
>
> Opinion, stated as fact. You do that a lot, don't you? And you base
> your assumption on what, pray tell? Are you dellusional or did you
> just skip your meds today? Jealousy ... don't flatter youself Ed.
> Regardless, thanks for starting off my day with a bit amusement.
You are the one who is making sexual allusions. Very dangerous territory for
you to venture upon with me because of my Saintliness. You do not ever want
to arouse Saint Edward the Great from His slumbers.
>> >> I knew it was just a matter of time before he would leave as there
>> >> were
>> >> just
>> >> so many idiots and scoundrels infecting ARBR. The fact is that he was
>> >> too
>> >> good for us. He was wrongheaded about almost everything outside of
>> >> recumbents, but that is why I was here - to counteract act him.
>> >
>> > This is an unmoderated newsgroup. Who asked you to assume the role of
>> > moderator? If weren't deaf, dumb and blind, you would heed the
>> > requests of those who have asked you to cease and desist or pack it up
>> > and leave. You often insist that EVERYONE who posts on newsgroups, and
>> > particularly ARBR, are idiots, morons, and imbeciles. Which particular
>> > cretin category do you fall under??? Pick one!!! Since you are the
>> > most prolific poster on ARBR, it would logically follow that whatever
>> > category you chose, you would be the quintessential representative.
>>
>> All newsgroups need someone who has the best interest of the group at
>> heart.
>
> "Best interest fo the group at heart". Surely you jest. Time for a
> vote. Who of you consider Ed Dolan to be that person? Those who have
> kill-filed you have already voted.
I am into housekeeping chores for the most part as there is never anything
of any substance being said that interests me much.
>> You only show up here for your vendettas. If a newsgroup just had your
>> type,
>> it would be still born. I will admit I have gotten rid of some dead wood
>
> Opinion, stated as fact. Nothing could improve this newsgroup as much
> as your absence. Ask yourself why is it that so many have professed
> to have kill-filed you. Your kill-file statistics are your legacy.
I know exactly the type who kill-file someone so Great as I. The world is
full of of such dullards. They are nondescript pitfall souls who simply
can't hold their own in a conversation. They want to have their say and
cannot brook any opposition without getting all insulted. So far, you have
at least a somewhat thicker skin that those types I must admit.
>> from time to time, but I keep the group lively. Never a dull moment when
>> Ed
>> Dolan the Great is around.
>> [...]
>
> Always a dullard moment when HEAD Dolan the GRATE is around.
I write for the few who can appreciate me, not for the many who never have a
clue. Most importantly, anyone but me ever notice how all these
conversations that I have with Jim are all about me and never about him?
That right there should tell you who is interesting and who is not!
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | |
Date: 03 Jul 2006 22:28:30
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Jim McNamara the Stalker was Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1151899777.728762.269050@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> [...]
> > Ed ... Quit your whining, already. You have only yourself to blame for
> > the "stalking" that you have fallen victim of from your many
> > adversaries. You intentionally go trolling for fights. When you
> > encounter a tenacious, formidable adversary, and find yourself
> > hopelessly embroiled in an embarrassing no-win cyber-skirmish, in
> > desperation, you move to disencumber yourself by seeking to discredit
> > and dismiss your adversary by labeling him or her as a stalker. This
> > thinly disguised ploy of yours has failed countless times. If you
> > really want to escape your self-inflicted dilemma, then turn tail,
> > crawl on out of here. Return to the rock that you slithered out from
> > under. - Jim McNaa
>
> Nothing but a stalker and a leech. Very sad indeed!
Thanks for reinforcing my contention. - Jim McNaa
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | | |
Date: 01 Aug 2006 15:00:40
From: Chris Foster
Subject: Re: Jim McNamara the Stalker was Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in
news:1151990910.453592.62380@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com:
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1151899777.728762.269050@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>> [...]
>> > Ed ... Quit your whining, already. You have only yourself to blame
>> > for the "stalking" that you have fallen victim of from your many
>> > adversaries. You intentionally go trolling for fights. When you
>> > encounter a tenacious, formidable adversary, and find yourself
>> > hopelessly embroiled in an embarrassing no-win cyber-skirmish, in
>> > desperation, you move to disencumber yourself by seeking to
>> > discredit and dismiss your adversary by labeling him or her as a
>> > stalker. This thinly disguised ploy of yours has failed countless
>> > times. If you really want to escape your self-inflicted dilemma,
>> > then turn tail, crawl on out of here. Return to the rock that you
>> > slithered out from under. - Jim McNaa
>>
>> Nothing but a stalker and a leech. Very sad indeed!
>
> Thanks for reinforcing my contention. - Jim McNaa
>
Jimmy, you hit the nail squarely on the head!!
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | |
Date: 29 Jun 2006 19:43:14
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Jim McNamara the Stalker was Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1151559032.884476.251340@y41g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> [...]
> >> Jim has become nothing but a pitiful, pathetic stalker. He is incapable
> >> of
> >> posting anything on his own that anyone in this world would want to read,
> >> let alone respond to. Nay, he is only capable of childish feuds with the
> >> likes of Ed Gin, Tom Sherman and now the Great Ed Dolan. He is a man of
> >> the
> >> shadows, never daring the sunlight of standing on his own.
> [...]
> >> Unfortunately for him Ed Dolan the Great is, well, just too Great to
> >> expend
> >> any time on him.
> >
> > Tool late. You just did.
>
> All of your posts from here on out will be severely edited
You hearbreaker.
> (same goes for
> Curtiss, another pitiful stalker and leech) unless you are able to dredge up
> material that I think the group might be interested in reading.
That you think the group might be interested in reading. Are you ever
arrogant. Where do you get off making such determinations for
others?? You play your silly little games and do what you feel you
must. I couldn't care less.
> >> I will shortly dispense of him the way Tom Sherman did, by
> >> showing nothing but exasperation.
> >
> > As you will recall, Tom gave it up.
>
> Tom never gave up, he simply left you in disgust.
Same differnece.
> That is the only way to
> deal with stalkers and leeches as they are just so pitiful. Christ, you
> almost end up feeling sorry for the poor bastards.
That's strange. Then, why don't I feel like that about you. - Jim
McNaa
> [...]
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 08 Jun 2006 17:28:07
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1149481088.836413.204640@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1148572555.606192.101010@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >>
> >> ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS - NOR DOES HE EVEN INCLUDE ANY OF THE MESSAGE
> >> TO
> >> WHICH HE IS RESPONDING!
I was responding to your very first post something which I am
reasonably certain no one else was at all challenged to comprehend, so
stop frothing at the mouth.
> >>
> >> > Ed,
> >> >
> >> > A very telling confession. Do print a copy for your therapist ... Jim
> >> > McNaa
> >>
> >> So, you don't know where Tom Sherman is either?
> >
> > Unlike you, I lament not for I couldn't care less.
>
> You were never much of a poster to ARBR as far as I can tell, other than
> your sporadic personal vendettas.
And just how many on-topic posts can you claim to have ever made??? As
concerns personal vendettas, I have taken a total of 3 individuals to
task, your beloved Tom Sherman being one. You were an active
participant in that particular personal vendetta. Ed Gin was another
and again you were an active participant in some (though not all) of
that personal venedetta. That's 2 for 2 which cancel one another out
since you were part and parcel of the action. As for the third ...
well, you can't very well be expected to participate in that personal
vendetta because wince you are the target. There you have it. I have
focused my attention on three individuals and two (you and Gin) have
been the focal point of many members on ARBR, so I find myself in good
company. You, on the other hand, have taken on just about everyone on
this newsgroup, Vanderman, for whom you have an obvious affection,
being an exception. So let's see then. The score is me THREE and you
a SIZEABLE INDEFINIT NUMBER that continues to grow. Do the math. The
numbers are decidedly not in your favor, so you can cease your
whining..
> Tom Sherman was the mainstay of this
> entire newsgroup. He was ever helpful to newbies and knew more about
> recumbents than any other person I ever encountered on any newsgroup.
This is pitiful. You sound as though you've lost a loved one. Stay
tuned for the same old song to be sung if and when Vandeman pulls up
stakes. Are same sex riages legal in Minnesota?
> I knew it was just a matter of time before he would leave as there were just
> so many idiots and scoundrels infecting ARBR. The fact is that he was too
> good for us. He was wrongheaded about almost everything outside of
> recumbents, but that is why I was here - to counteract act him.
This is an unmoderated newsgroup. Who asked you to assume the role of
moderator? If weren't deaf, dumb and blind, you would heed the
requests of those who have asked you to cease and desist or pack it up
and leave. You often insist that EVERYONE who posts on newsgroups, and
particularly ARBR, are idiots, morons, and imbeciles. Which particular
cretin category do you fall under??? Pick one!!! Since you are the
most prolific poster on ARBR, it would logically follow that whatever
category you chose, you would be the quintessential representative.
> But
> frankly, I miss him. He had not only intelligence, but wit too. He was a
> kindred sprit
I think you just insulted the man.
> and was very, very good for ARBR. But most important of all,
> he was a worthy adversary for me. We were both intellectuals who knew what
> words were worth. I miss him more than you would think possible.
My heart bleeds for you and your loss. Get a life.
> Tom Sherman and I had the best arguments ever about the Iraq War.
What do you not understand about this being a recumbent newsgroup?
> I think
> that particular thread may be the longest in Usenet history. It started off
> rather quietly but it just built and built until it took of over the entire
> universe. I don't know about you, but I live for moments like that.
What a telling rek. You live for moments like that because without
ARBR and adversary there is no significant meaning in your life.
Yours is a pathetic, shallow existence. You're one very sick puppy ...
Ed.
Jim McNaa
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 09 Jun 2006 07:32:26
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1149812887.845773.199910@f6g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1149481088.836413.204640@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > Edward Dolan wrote:
>> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:1148572555.606192.101010@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> >>
>> >> ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS - NOR DOES HE EVEN INCLUDE ANY OF THE
>> >> MESSAGE
>> >> TO
>> >> WHICH HE IS RESPONDING!
>
> I was responding to your very first post something which I am
> reasonably certain no one else was at all challenged to comprehend, so
> stop frothing at the mouth.
It doesn't matter if you are responding to a first post or a hundredth post.
Top posting is NEVER OK! And you must always include some of the previous
message to which you are replying for reasons of context if nothing else. No
one, I repeat no one, will ever look up a previous post. That is why
everything has to be there right in front of the reader at first glance in
every post. Often I do not recall what I might have said in a previous post
without looking it up - which I will never do. Screw it! This is Usenet, not
a college symposium.
>> >> > Ed,
>> >> >
>> >> > A very telling confession. Do print a copy for your therapist ...
>> >> > Jim
>> >> > McNaa
>> >>
>> >> So, you don't know where Tom Sherman is either?
>> >
>> > Unlike you, I lament not for I couldn't care less.
>>
>> You were never much of a poster to ARBR as far as I can tell, other than
>> your sporadic personal vendettas.
>
> And just how many on-topic posts can you claim to have ever made???
What does it matter if the message is on-topic or off-topic. All that
matters is that it be interesting.
As
> concerns personal vendettas, I have taken a total of 3 individuals to
> task, your beloved Tom Sherman being one. You were an active
> participant in that particular personal vendetta.
I just chipped in briefly to keep you from self-destructing. Tom Sherman was
making you look like a fool.
Ed Gin was another
> and again you were an active participant in some (though not all) of
> that personal venedetta. That's 2 for 2 which cancel one another out
> since you were part and parcel of the action.
I only got in on the tail end of that one when Ed Gin started stepping on
all of my posts with his insane drivel.
As for the third ...
> well, you can't very well be expected to participate in that personal
> vendetta because wince you are the target. There you have it.
I do not take you any more seriously than did Tom Sherman and Ed Gin. That
right there should tell you something.
I have
> focused my attention on three individuals and two (you and Gin) have
> been the focal point of many members on ARBR, so I find myself in good
> company. You, on the other hand, have taken on just about everyone on
> this newsgroup, Vanderman, for whom you have an obvious affection,
> being an exception. So let's see then. The score is me THREE and you
> a SIZEABLE INDEFINIT NUMBER that continues to grow. Do the math. The
> numbers are decidedly not in your favor, so you can cease your
> whining..
Every post is sui generis with me. I do not react to persons, only to their
messages. But I post generally to one and all based on the subject. You only
post to carry on your personal vendettas. Are you crazy ... that is the
question?
>> Tom Sherman was the mainstay of this
>> entire newsgroup. He was ever helpful to newbies and knew more about
>> recumbents than any other person I ever encountered on any newsgroup.
>
> This is pitiful. You sound as though you've lost a loved one. Stay
> tuned for the same old song to be sung if and when Vandeman pulls up
> stakes. Are same sex riages legal in Minnesota?
Everything I say about Tom Sherman is true. The only pitiful thing here is
your jealousy of him - and me!
>> I knew it was just a matter of time before he would leave as there were
>> just
>> so many idiots and scoundrels infecting ARBR. The fact is that he was too
>> good for us. He was wrongheaded about almost everything outside of
>> recumbents, but that is why I was here - to counteract act him.
>
> This is an unmoderated newsgroup. Who asked you to assume the role of
> moderator? If weren't deaf, dumb and blind, you would heed the
> requests of those who have asked you to cease and desist or pack it up
> and leave. You often insist that EVERYONE who posts on newsgroups, and
> particularly ARBR, are idiots, morons, and imbeciles. Which particular
> cretin category do you fall under??? Pick one!!! Since you are the
> most prolific poster on ARBR, it would logically follow that whatever
> category you chose, you would be the quintessential representative.
All newsgroups need someone who has the best interest of the group at heart.
You only show up here for your vendettas. If a newsgroup just had your type,
it would be still born. I will admit I have gotten rid of some dead wood
from time to time, but I keep the group lively. Never a dull moment when Ed
Dolan the Great is around.
[...]
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | |
Date: 02 Jul 2006 21:09:37
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Jim McNamara the Stalker was Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1151457197.408302.259430@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1151285882.208017.299450@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >> >
> >> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> [...]
> >> > Off-topic is self-defining and is a practice frowned upon as improper
> >> > netiquette, so don't try to rationalize away you indisgressions. Look,
> >> > why don't you just start your own newsgroup, like
> >> > Dolan.off-topic.whatever. Confine yourself to your new newsgroup and
> >> > crosspost invitations to whatever newsgroups you want and you will see
> >> > just how unpopular you are and how lonely your new newsgroup will be.
> >> > I dare you. I double dare you to face up to the truth ... coward..
> >>
> >> Nope, go to any newsgroup and you will see dozens of threads that are
> >> off-topic. I have explained to you many times why this is so, but you are
> >> too dense to follow my reasoning.
> >> [...]
> >
> > So then you are following the bad example of others then??? Refusal to
> > accept the challenge duly noted ... coward!!!
> >
> >> > I think you are begging for a re-posting of my voluminous post that
> >> > portrays you for what an who you are and the word entertainer cannot be
> >> > found therein. The Readers DIgest condensed version ... you are an
> >> > obnoxius fool in serious need of a therapist and an attitude
> >> > adjustment.
> >>
> >> The longer you hang on my coattails the more pathetic you become. You are
> >> reduced to nothing but a stalker. You have become pitiful and deserving
> >> of
> >> the disgust of the entire newsgroup. Try to get a life of your own. My
> >> life
> >> is already full and I do not have any room for outsiders.
> >> [...]
> >
> > It would appear that there are a number of people chewing at your
> > coattails. When you don't like the attention that you've earned, you
> > label your adversaires as stalkers. Look jerk, you asked for it ...
> > you desrve it ... and, you will not be deprived of it for as long as
> > you remain. Your only out is to GET OUT. - Jim McNaa
>
> Jim has become nothing but a pitiful, pathetic stalker. He is incapable of
> posting anything on his own that anyone in this world would want to read,
> let alone respond to. Nay, he is only capable of childish feuds with the
> likes of Ed Gin, Tom Sherman and now the Great Ed Dolan. He is a man of the
> shadows, never daring the sunlight of standing on his own.
Ed ... Quit your whining, already. You have only yourself to blame for
the "stalking" that you have fallen victim of from your many
adversaries. You intentionally go trolling for fights. When you
encounter a tenacious, formidable adversary, and find yourself
hopelessly embroiled in an embarrassing no-win cyber-skirmish, in
desperation, you move to disencumber yourself by seeking to discredit
and dismiss your adversary by labeling him or her as a stalker. This
thinly disguised ploy of yours has failed countless times. If you
really want to escape your self-inflicted dilemma, then turn tail,
crawl on out of here. Return to the rock that you slithered out from
under. - Jim McNaa
> Unfortunately for him Ed Dolan the Great is, well, just too Great to expend
> any time on him. I will shortly dispense of him the way Tom Sherman did, by
> showing nothing but exasperation. It is easy to do this and does not take
> any effort at all. I will write one word to his hundreds of words and have
> the infinite satisfaction of knowing that no one, but no one, will ever
> bother to read any of this shit.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | | |
Date: 03 Jul 2006 03:01:01
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Jim McNamara the Stalker was Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1151899777.728762.269050@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
[...]
> Ed ... Quit your whining, already. You have only yourself to blame for
> the "stalking" that you have fallen victim of from your many
> adversaries. You intentionally go trolling for fights. When you
> encounter a tenacious, formidable adversary, and find yourself
> hopelessly embroiled in an embarrassing no-win cyber-skirmish, in
> desperation, you move to disencumber yourself by seeking to discredit
> and dismiss your adversary by labeling him or her as a stalker. This
> thinly disguised ploy of yours has failed countless times. If you
> really want to escape your self-inflicted dilemma, then turn tail,
> crawl on out of here. Return to the rock that you slithered out from
> under. - Jim McNaa
Nothing but a stalker and a leech. Very sad indeed!
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | |
Date: 02 Jul 2006 21:06:22
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Jim McNamara the Stalker was Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1151457197.408302.259430@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1151285882.208017.299450@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >> >
> >> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> [...]
> >> > Off-topic is self-defining and is a practice frowned upon as improper
> >> > netiquette, so don't try to rationalize away you indisgressions. Look,
> >> > why don't you just start your own newsgroup, like
> >> > Dolan.off-topic.whatever. Confine yourself to your new newsgroup and
> >> > crosspost invitations to whatever newsgroups you want and you will see
> >> > just how unpopular you are and how lonely your new newsgroup will be.
> >> > I dare you. I double dare you to face up to the truth ... coward..
> >>
> >> Nope, go to any newsgroup and you will see dozens of threads that are
> >> off-topic. I have explained to you many times why this is so, but you are
> >> too dense to follow my reasoning.
> >> [...]
> >
> > So then you are following the bad example of others then??? Refusal to
> > accept the challenge duly noted ... coward!!!
> >
> >> > I think you are begging for a re-posting of my voluminous post that
> >> > portrays you for what an who you are and the word entertainer cannot be
> >> > found therein. The Readers DIgest condensed version ... you are an
> >> > obnoxius fool in serious need of a therapist and an attitude
> >> > adjustment.
> >>
> >> The longer you hang on my coattails the more pathetic you become. You are
> >> reduced to nothing but a stalker. You have become pitiful and deserving
> >> of
> >> the disgust of the entire newsgroup. Try to get a life of your own. My
> >> life
> >> is already full and I do not have any room for outsiders.
> >> [...]
> >
> > It would appear that there are a number of people chewing at your
> > coattails. When you don't like the attention that you've earned, you
> > label your adversaires as stalkers. Look jerk, you asked for it ...
> > you desrve it ... and, you will not be deprived of it for as long as
> > you remain. Your only out is to GET OUT. - Jim McNaa
>
> Jim has become nothing but a pitiful, pathetic stalker. He is incapable of
> posting anything on his own that anyone in this world would want to read,
> let alone respond to. Nay, he is only capable of childish feuds with the
> likes of Ed Gin, Tom Sherman and now the Great Ed Dolan. He is a man of the
> shadows, never daring the sunlight of standing on his own.
>
> Unfortunately for him Ed Dolan the Great is, well, just too Great to expend
> any time on him. I will shortly dispense of him the way Tom Sherman did, by
> showing nothing but exasperation. It is easy to do this and does not take
> any effort at all. I will write one word to his hundreds of words and have
> the infinite satisfaction of knowing that no one, but no one, will ever
> bother to read any of this shit.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Jun 2006 22:40:37
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Jim McNamara the Stalker was Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1151457197.408302.259430@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1151285882.208017.299450@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >> >
> >> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> [...]
> >> > Off-topic is self-defining and is a practice frowned upon as improper
> >> > netiquette, so don't try to rationalize away you indisgressions. Look,
> >> > why don't you just start your own newsgroup, like
> >> > Dolan.off-topic.whatever. Confine yourself to your new newsgroup and
> >> > crosspost invitations to whatever newsgroups you want and you will see
> >> > just how unpopular you are and how lonely your new newsgroup will be.
> >> > I dare you. I double dare you to face up to the truth ... coward..
> >>
> >> Nope, go to any newsgroup and you will see dozens of threads that are
> >> off-topic. I have explained to you many times why this is so, but you are
> >> too dense to follow my reasoning.
> >> [...]
> >
> > So then you are following the bad example of others then??? Refusal to
> > accept the challenge duly noted ... coward!!!
> >
> >> > I think you are begging for a re-posting of my voluminous post that
> >> > portrays you for what an who you are and the word entertainer cannot be
> >> > found therein. The Readers DIgest condensed version ... you are an
> >> > obnoxius fool in serious need of a therapist and an attitude
> >> > adjustment.
> >>
> >> The longer you hang on my coattails the more pathetic you become. You are
> >> reduced to nothing but a stalker. You have become pitiful and deserving
> >> of
> >> the disgust of the entire newsgroup. Try to get a life of your own. My
> >> life
> >> is already full and I do not have any room for outsiders.
> >> [...]
> >
> > It would appear that there are a number of people chewing at your
> > coattails. When you don't like the attention that you've earned, you
> > label your adversaires as stalkers. Look jerk, you asked for it ...
> > you desrve it ... and, you will not be deprived of it for as long as
> > you remain. Your only out is to GET OUT. - Jim McNaa
>
> Jim has become nothing but a pitiful, pathetic stalker. He is incapable of
> posting anything on his own that anyone in this world would want to read,
> let alone respond to. Nay, he is only capable of childish feuds with the
> likes of Ed Gin, Tom Sherman and now the Great Ed Dolan. He is a man of the
> shadows, never daring the sunlight of standing on his own.
Anytime you feel the heat, you start whining about one of you
adversaries being a stalker. Since several readers have recently made
favorable comments regarding posts I've made about you, it would appear
that your statement regarding others not reading what I've written is
quite incorrect. I've responded to this feud charge of yours several
times before. You have had feuds with all of the names mentioned but
one since you cannot be expected to have a feud with yourself. In
addition, you have had feuds with countless others with whom I have
not. You are just far less selective. He who lives in a glass house
shouldn't throw stones, Ed. A man of shadows, naver daring the
sunlight says the self-proclaimed hermit. I'd love to meet you in the
sunlight sometime. I'm sure others would too. You wouldn't have the
testicular fortitude to say half the things you say to others up close
an personal like. If you did, you'd surely get what's coming to you.
> Unfortunately for him Ed Dolan the Great is, well, just too Great to expend
> any time on him.
Tool late. You just did.
> I will shortly dispense of him the way Tom Sherman did, by
> showing nothing but exasperation.
As you will recall, Tom gave it up.
> It is easy to do this and does not take
> any effort at all. I will write one word to his hundreds of words and have
> the infinite satisfaction of knowing that no one, but no one, will ever
> bother to read any of this shit.
A clever tacticain never provides the details of his strategy to his
adversary. You're not too bright are you???
Jim McNaa
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Jun 2006 22:30:33
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Jim McNamara the Stalker was Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1151457197.408302.259430@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1151285882.208017.299450@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >> >
> >> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> [...]
> >> > Off-topic is self-defining and is a practice frowned upon as improper
> >> > netiquette, so don't try to rationalize away you indisgressions. Look,
> >> > why don't you just start your own newsgroup, like
> >> > Dolan.off-topic.whatever. Confine yourself to your new newsgroup and
> >> > crosspost invitations to whatever newsgroups you want and you will see
> >> > just how unpopular you are and how lonely your new newsgroup will be.
> >> > I dare you. I double dare you to face up to the truth ... coward..
> >>
> >> Nope, go to any newsgroup and you will see dozens of threads that are
> >> off-topic. I have explained to you many times why this is so, but you are
> >> too dense to follow my reasoning.
> >> [...]
> >
> > So then you are following the bad example of others then??? Refusal to
> > accept the challenge duly noted ... coward!!!
> >
> >> > I think you are begging for a re-posting of my voluminous post that
> >> > portrays you for what an who you are and the word entertainer cannot be
> >> > found therein. The Readers DIgest condensed version ... you are an
> >> > obnoxius fool in serious need of a therapist and an attitude
> >> > adjustment.
> >>
> >> The longer you hang on my coattails the more pathetic you become. You are
> >> reduced to nothing but a stalker. You have become pitiful and deserving
> >> of
> >> the disgust of the entire newsgroup. Try to get a life of your own. My
> >> life
> >> is already full and I do not have any room for outsiders.
> >> [...]
> >
> > It would appear that there are a number of people chewing at your
> > coattails. When you don't like the attention that you've earned, you
> > label your adversaires as stalkers. Look jerk, you asked for it ...
> > you desrve it ... and, you will not be deprived of it for as long as
> > you remain. Your only out is to GET OUT. - Jim McNaa
>
> Jim has become nothing but a pitiful, pathetic stalker. He is incapable of
> posting anything on his own that anyone in this world would want to read,
> let alone respond to. Nay, he is only capable of childish feuds with the
> likes of Ed Gin, Tom Sherman and now the Great Ed Dolan. He is a man of the
> shadows, never daring the sunlight of standing on his own.
Anytime you feel the heat, you start whining about one of you
adversaries being a stalker. Since several readers have recently made
favorable comments regarding posts I've made about you, it would appear
that your statement regarding others not reading what I've written is
quite incorrect. I've responded to this feud charge of yours several
times before. You have had feuds with all of the names mentioned but
one since you cannot be expected to have a feud with yourself. In
addition, you have had feuds with countless others with whom I have
not. You are just far less selective. He who lives in a glass house
shouldn't throw stones, Ed. A man of shadows, naver daring the
sunlight says the self-proclaimed hermit. I'd love to meet you in the
sunlight sometime. I'm sure others would too. You wouldn't have the
testicular fortitude to say half the things you say to others up close
an personal like. If you did, you'd surely get what's coming to you.
> Unfortunately for him Ed Dolan the Great is, well, just too Great to expend
> any time on him.
Tool late. You just did.
> I will shortly dispense of him the way Tom Sherman did, by
> showing nothing but exasperation.
As you will recall, Tom gave it up.
> It is easy to do this and does not take
> any effort at all. I will write one word to his hundreds of words and have
> the infinite satisfaction of knowing that no one, but no one, will ever
> bother to read any of this shit.
A clever tacticain never provides the details of his strategy to his
adversary. You're not too bright are you???
Jim McNaa
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | | |
Date: 29 Jun 2006 18:26:01
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Jim McNamara the Stalker was Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1151559032.884476.251340@y41g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
>> Jim has become nothing but a pitiful, pathetic stalker. He is incapable
>> of
>> posting anything on his own that anyone in this world would want to read,
>> let alone respond to. Nay, he is only capable of childish feuds with the
>> likes of Ed Gin, Tom Sherman and now the Great Ed Dolan. He is a man of
>> the
>> shadows, never daring the sunlight of standing on his own.
[...]
>> Unfortunately for him Ed Dolan the Great is, well, just too Great to
>> expend
>> any time on him.
>
> Tool late. You just did.
All of your posts from here on out will be severely edited (same goes for
Curtiss, another pitiful stalker and leech) unless you are able to dredge up
material that I think the group might be interested in reading.
>> I will shortly dispense of him the way Tom Sherman did, by
>> showing nothing but exasperation.
>
> As you will recall, Tom gave it up.
Tom never gave up, he simply left you in disgust. That is the only way to
deal with stalkers and leeches as they are just so pitiful. Christ, you
almost end up feeling sorry for the poor bastards.
[...]
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 09 Jun 2006 01:40:31
From: Robert Haston
Subject: Ed Dolan's role
|
Dolan (Van what's his face, et al.) performs an important role - motivating
us to spend less time at the keyboard and more time behind the handlebars.
Thanks Ed,
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1149812887.845773.199910@f6g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1149481088.836413.204640@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > Edward Dolan wrote:
>> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:1148572555.606192.101010@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> >>
>> >> ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS - NOR DOES HE EVEN INCLUDE ANY OF THE
>> >> MESSAGE
>> >> TO
>> >> WHICH HE IS RESPONDING!
>
> I was responding to your very first post something which I am
> reasonably certain no one else was at all challenged to comprehend, so
> stop frothing at the mouth.
>
>> >>
>> >> > Ed,
>> >> >
>> >> > A very telling confession. Do print a copy for your therapist ...
>> >> > Jim
>> >> > McNaa
>> >>
>> >> So, you don't know where Tom Sherman is either?
>> >
>> > Unlike you, I lament not for I couldn't care less.
>>
>> You were never much of a poster to ARBR as far as I can tell, other than
>> your sporadic personal vendettas.
>
> And just how many on-topic posts can you claim to have ever made??? As
> concerns personal vendettas, I have taken a total of 3 individuals to
> task, your beloved Tom Sherman being one. You were an active
> participant in that particular personal vendetta. Ed Gin was another
> and again you were an active participant in some (though not all) of
> that personal venedetta. That's 2 for 2 which cancel one another out
> since you were part and parcel of the action. As for the third ...
> well, you can't very well be expected to participate in that personal
> vendetta because wince you are the target. There you have it. I have
> focused my attention on three individuals and two (you and Gin) have
> been the focal point of many members on ARBR, so I find myself in good
> company. You, on the other hand, have taken on just about everyone on
> this newsgroup, Vanderman, for whom you have an obvious affection,
> being an exception. So let's see then. The score is me THREE and you
> a SIZEABLE INDEFINIT NUMBER that continues to grow. Do the math. The
> numbers are decidedly not in your favor, so you can cease your
> whining..
>
>> Tom Sherman was the mainstay of this
>> entire newsgroup. He was ever helpful to newbies and knew more about
>> recumbents than any other person I ever encountered on any newsgroup.
>
> This is pitiful. You sound as though you've lost a loved one. Stay
> tuned for the same old song to be sung if and when Vandeman pulls up
> stakes. Are same sex riages legal in Minnesota?
>
>> I knew it was just a matter of time before he would leave as there were
>> just
>> so many idiots and scoundrels infecting ARBR. The fact is that he was too
>> good for us. He was wrongheaded about almost everything outside of
>> recumbents, but that is why I was here - to counteract act him.
>
> This is an unmoderated newsgroup. Who asked you to assume the role of
> moderator? If weren't deaf, dumb and blind, you would heed the
> requests of those who have asked you to cease and desist or pack it up
> and leave. You often insist that EVERYONE who posts on newsgroups, and
> particularly ARBR, are idiots, morons, and imbeciles. Which particular
> cretin category do you fall under??? Pick one!!! Since you are the
> most prolific poster on ARBR, it would logically follow that whatever
> category you chose, you would be the quintessential representative.
>
>> But
>> frankly, I miss him. He had not only intelligence, but wit too. He was a
>> kindred sprit
>
> I think you just insulted the man.
>
>> and was very, very good for ARBR. But most important of all,
>> he was a worthy adversary for me. We were both intellectuals who knew
>> what
>> words were worth. I miss him more than you would think possible.
>
> My heart bleeds for you and your loss. Get a life.
>
>> Tom Sherman and I had the best arguments ever about the Iraq War.
>
> What do you not understand about this being a recumbent newsgroup?
>
>> I think
>> that particular thread may be the longest in Usenet history. It started
>> off
>> rather quietly but it just built and built until it took of over the
>> entire
>> universe. I don't know about you, but I live for moments like that.
>
> What a telling rek. You live for moments like that because without
> ARBR and adversary there is no significant meaning in your life.
> Yours is a pathetic, shallow existence. You're one very sick puppy ...
> Ed.
>
> Jim McNaa
>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>> aka
>> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
>
|
| |
Date: 05 Jun 2006 10:07:33
From:
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
Surbiton? Atlanta? Connecticutt?
|
| |
Date: 04 Jun 2006 21:18:08
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1148572555.606192.101010@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS - NOR DOES HE EVEN INCLUDE ANY OF THE MESSAGE TO
> WHICH HE IS RESPONDING!
>
> > Ed,
> >
> > A very telling confession. Do print a copy for your therapist ... Jim
> > McNaa
>
> So, you don't know where Tom Sherman is either?
Unlike you, I lament not for I couldn't care less.
Jim McNaa
|
| | |
Date: 05 Jun 2006 02:16:28
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1149481088.836413.204640@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1148572555.606192.101010@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS - NOR DOES HE EVEN INCLUDE ANY OF THE MESSAGE
>> TO
>> WHICH HE IS RESPONDING!
>>
>> > Ed,
>> >
>> > A very telling confession. Do print a copy for your therapist ... Jim
>> > McNaa
>>
>> So, you don't know where Tom Sherman is either?
>
> Unlike you, I lament not for I couldn't care less.
You were never much of a poster to ARBR as far as I can tell, other than
your sporadic personal vendettas. Tom Sherman was the mainstay of this
entire newsgroup. He was ever helpful to newbies and knew more about
recumbents than any other person I ever encountered on any newsgroup.
I knew it was just a matter of time before he would leave as there were just
so many idiots and scoundrels infecting ARBR. The fact is that he was too
good for us. He was wrongheaded about almost everything outside of
recumbents, but that is why I was here - to counteract act him. But
frankly, I miss him. He had not only intelligence, but wit too. He was a
kindred sprit and was very, very good for ARBR. But most important of all,
he was a worthy adversary for me. We were both intellectuals who knew what
words were worth. I miss him more than you would think possible.
Tom Sherman and I had the best arguments ever about the Iraq War. I think
that particular thread may be the longest in Usenet history. It started off
rather quietly but it just built and built until it took of over the entire
universe. I don't know about you, but I live for moments like that.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | |
Date: 27 Jun 2006 18:13:17
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1151285882.208017.299450@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> [...]
> > Off-topic is self-defining and is a practice frowned upon as improper
> > netiquette, so don't try to rationalize away you indisgressions. Look,
> > why don't you just start your own newsgroup, like
> > Dolan.off-topic.whatever. Confine yourself to your new newsgroup and
> > crosspost invitations to whatever newsgroups you want and you will see
> > just how unpopular you are and how lonely your new newsgroup will be.
> > I dare you. I double dare you to face up to the truth ... coward..
>
> Nope, go to any newsgroup and you will see dozens of threads that are
> off-topic. I have explained to you many times why this is so, but you are
> too dense to follow my reasoning.
> [...]
So then you are following the bad example of others then??? Refusal to
accept the challenge duly noted ... coward!!!
> > I think you are begging for a re-posting of my voluminous post that
> > portrays you for what an who you are and the word entertainer cannot be
> > found therein. The Readers DIgest condensed version ... you are an
> > obnoxius fool in serious need of a therapist and an attitude
> > adjustment.
>
> The longer you hang on my coattails the more pathetic you become. You are
> reduced to nothing but a stalker. You have become pitiful and deserving of
> the disgust of the entire newsgroup. Try to get a life of your own. My life
> is already full and I do not have any room for outsiders.
> [...]
It would appear that there are a number of people chewing at your
coattails. When you don't like the attention that you've earned, you
label your adversaires as stalkers. Look jerk, you asked for it ...
you desrve it ... and, you will not be deprived of it for as long as
you remain. Your only out is to GET OUT. - Jim McNaa
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | | |
Date: 28 Jun 2006 03:09:31
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Jim McNamara the Stalker was Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1151457197.408302.259430@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1151285882.208017.299450@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > Edward Dolan wrote:
>> [...]
>> > Off-topic is self-defining and is a practice frowned upon as improper
>> > netiquette, so don't try to rationalize away you indisgressions. Look,
>> > why don't you just start your own newsgroup, like
>> > Dolan.off-topic.whatever. Confine yourself to your new newsgroup and
>> > crosspost invitations to whatever newsgroups you want and you will see
>> > just how unpopular you are and how lonely your new newsgroup will be.
>> > I dare you. I double dare you to face up to the truth ... coward..
>>
>> Nope, go to any newsgroup and you will see dozens of threads that are
>> off-topic. I have explained to you many times why this is so, but you are
>> too dense to follow my reasoning.
>> [...]
>
> So then you are following the bad example of others then??? Refusal to
> accept the challenge duly noted ... coward!!!
>
>> > I think you are begging for a re-posting of my voluminous post that
>> > portrays you for what an who you are and the word entertainer cannot be
>> > found therein. The Readers DIgest condensed version ... you are an
>> > obnoxius fool in serious need of a therapist and an attitude
>> > adjustment.
>>
>> The longer you hang on my coattails the more pathetic you become. You are
>> reduced to nothing but a stalker. You have become pitiful and deserving
>> of
>> the disgust of the entire newsgroup. Try to get a life of your own. My
>> life
>> is already full and I do not have any room for outsiders.
>> [...]
>
> It would appear that there are a number of people chewing at your
> coattails. When you don't like the attention that you've earned, you
> label your adversaires as stalkers. Look jerk, you asked for it ...
> you desrve it ... and, you will not be deprived of it for as long as
> you remain. Your only out is to GET OUT. - Jim McNaa
Jim has become nothing but a pitiful, pathetic stalker. He is incapable of
posting anything on his own that anyone in this world would want to read,
let alone respond to. Nay, he is only capable of childish feuds with the
likes of Ed Gin, Tom Sherman and now the Great Ed Dolan. He is a man of the
shadows, never daring the sunlight of standing on his own.
Unfortunately for him Ed Dolan the Great is, well, just too Great to expend
any time on him. I will shortly dispense of him the way Tom Sherman did, by
showing nothing but exasperation. It is easy to do this and does not take
any effort at all. I will write one word to his hundreds of words and have
the infinite satisfaction of knowing that no one, but no one, will ever
bother to read any of this shit.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | |
Date: 05 Jun 2006 10:52:48
From: G.T.
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
>
>
> I knew it was just a matter of time before he would leave as there were just
> so many idiots and scoundrels infecting ARBR.
Clearly, and you must be the leader of the scoundrels.
> The fact is that he was too
> good for us. He was wrongheaded about almost everything outside of
> recumbents, but that is why I was here - to counteract act him. But
> frankly, I miss him. He had not only intelligence, but wit too. He was a
> kindred sprit and was very, very good for ARBR. But most important of all,
> he was a worthy adversary for me. We were both intellectuals who knew what
> words were worth. I miss him more than you would think possible.
>
> Tom Sherman and I had the best arguments ever about the Iraq War. I think
> that particular thread may be the longest in Usenet history. It started off
> rather quietly but it just built and built until it took of over the entire
> universe. I don't know about you, but I live for moments like that.
>
Wow, if you live for moments like that you must live one miserably
boring life.
Greg
--
"All my time I spent in heaven
Revelries of dance and wine
Waking to the sound of laughter
Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons
|
| | | | |
Date: 07 Jun 2006 00:25:13
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
"G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com > wrote in message
news:1288rrgrudmi95b@corp.supernews.com...
[newsgroups restored]
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>>
>> I knew it was just a matter of time before he would leave as there were
>> just so many idiots and scoundrels infecting ARBR.
>
> Clearly, and you must be the leader of the scoundrels.
My only sin was that I tried to save the newsgroup from the depredations of
the criminal vandal troll. You have to fight fire with fire and so things
did get kind of rough I must admit. But the one thing that amazed me more
than anything else was the cowardice of almost all the members of ARBR. That
is why to this day I have a fair amount of contempt for the group, and
indeed for all newsgroups.
>> The fact is that he was too good for us. He was wrongheaded about almost
>> everything outside of recumbents, but that is why I was here - to
>> counteract act him. But frankly, I miss him. He had not only
>> intelligence, but wit too. He was a kindred sprit and was very, very good
>> for ARBR. But most important of all, he was a worthy adversary for me. We
>> were both intellectuals who knew what words were worth. I miss him more
>> than you would think possible.
>>
>> Tom Sherman and I had the best arguments ever about the Iraq War. I think
>> that particular thread may be the longest in Usenet history. It started
>> off rather quietly but it just built and built until it took of over the
>> entire universe. I don't know about you, but I live for moments like
>> that.
>>
>
> Wow, if you live for moments like that you must live one miserably boring
> life.
If you would like to get an education on the Iraq War, go read that thread.
You will be amazed and dumfounded!
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 25 May 2006 09:18:05
From: D'ohBoy
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
<snip ED-crap and ED-crap encouragement >
I was hoping this would just die but nooooooo, you had to go and feed
the troll.
D'ohBoy the Mediocre
|
| |
Date: 25 May 2006 08:55:55
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
Ed,
A very telling confession. Do print a copy for your therapist ... Jim
McNaa
|
| | |
Date: 26 May 2006 22:01:00
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1148572555.606192.101010@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS - NOR DOES HE EVEN INCLUDE ANY OF THE MESSAGE TO
WHICH HE IS RESPONDING!
> Ed,
>
> A very telling confession. Do print a copy for your therapist ... Jim
> McNaa
So, you don't know where Tom Sherman is either?
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | |
Date: 25 Jun 2006 18:38:02
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1150903159.315581.27160@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> [...]
> >> >> Nope, other newsgroups are just chock full of off-topic drivel. Your
> >> >> only
> >> >> complaint is that my drivel is better than your drivel.
> >> >
> >> > And I made this complaint where pray tell? Where is you evidence in
>> > support of this fabfication?
> >>
> >> The complaint is there underlying your every sentence. It was like that
> >> with
> >> Ed Gin and Tom Sherman too. You need to find your own topics and not be
> >> sponging off others all the time.
> >
> > What a pitiful retort. I have never stated explicity or implitiy
> > (complained) that your drivel is better than my drivel. Unlke you, I
> > don't even regard what I write as drivel. Prove me wrong and cite a
> > specific example to corroborate yout unsubstantiated assertion. You
> > cna't can you.
>
> You are tedious in the extreme Jim. I strongly advise you to get your own
> topics and not to be constantly sponging off of others who do not really
> have any interest in you. Usenet is a cold cruel world and it is mainly made
> up of nothing but bastards. The sooner you know this, the better.
You are monotonouns and pig headed in the extreme. My advsie to you is
to can your worthless advice.
> [...]
>
> >> Did you not notice how ARBR revived when NYC was posting to it? All it
> >> takes
> >> is a few live wires and ARBR can be back to where it was. I think however
> >> that we will have to get rid of all the threads having to do with
> >> mountain
> >> biking and hiking trails as that is not really germane to this group.
> >
> > Diversion duly noted. Be cautious. You are about to alienate the ONLY
> > ally that you have ... Mikey V., but I have to agree that mountain
> > biking is not germane to this group. It is most peculiar though for
> > you recognize that mountain biking is off-topic and yet fail to also
> > recognize that your nonsense, not even remotely related to cycling, as
> > accptable rather than not germane. This exceeds literary licenseby any
> > standards. The conundrum continues.
>
> I have already explained in another post what I was trying to do. The
> trouble is that ARBR is mostly made up of Fred types who have no imagination
> and do not know how to run with a subject. Yes, I am out of my element, but
> hope springs eternal in the human breast. I feel sorry for all the Freds in
> the world who simply have no idea of how much fun it can be to engage with
> others in intellectual discourse. The main fun of any newsgroup is getting
> off topic. To stay on topic all the time is deadly. No half way bright
> person would ever want to stay on topic for more than 2 minutes.
>
> Vandeman is no doubt happy on his own newsgroups and has no interest in our
> groups. He is mostly a one-note Johnny and is unlike me that way. He is
> never off of his topic. You would be hard put to say what my topic is other
> than tweaking everybody.
Off-topic is self-defining and is a practice frowned upon as improper
netiquette, so don't try to rationalize away you indisgressions. Look,
why don't you just start your own newsgroup, like
Dolan.off-topic.whatever. Confine yourself to your new newgroop and
crosspost invitations to whatever newsgroups you want and you will see
just how unpopular you are and how lonely your new newsgroup will be.
I dare you. I double dare you to face up to the truth ... coward..
> [...]
>
> >> I am a side dish here on ARBR. I do not interfere with on topic posts.
> >
> > Yes at the very best you a subordinate to the main course and as such
> > have little relevancy. As an admitted side dish, you are a TROLL who
> > is the purveyor of off-topic bibberish (read mindless chit-chat).
>
> Think of me as an entertainer and you will have it exactly right. But an
> entertainer that can jab you to the quick of your soul!
> [...]
I think you are begging for a re-posting of my voluminous post that
portrays you for what an who you are and the word entertainer cannot be
found therein. The Readers DIgest condensed version ... you are an
obnoxius fool in serious need of a therapist and an attitude
adjustment.
> >> I NEVER am writing just for you on ARBR. I am writing for a universe of
> >> unknown readers. It is really quite pitiful that you are unable to think
> >> in
> >> these broader terms. It is why no one finds your posts interesting.
> >
> > In responding to my post, you are responding to me no matter what kind
> > of spin you vainly attempt to put on it. As concerns interest in your
> > posts vs min, I could care less, however I again invite you take a
> > poll. Strange how you never avail yourself of such suggestions. Could
> > it be that you don't wnat to see your unpopularity in expressed in the
> > raw numbers and precision of mathematics?
>
> I gage my popularity by the quantity and the quality of the posts that I get
> in response. You should do the same. It seems the only time you are able to
> engage anyone is when you are one on one with a single adversary, i.e., a
> vendetta. I do not like to be limited to that.
Here's a thought. I'm not a troll. I don't bait people into responses
and then deceive myself into believing that when someone responds to
troll bait that this gives meaning to my life and validates my
self-worth. Get a life ... you twisted freak..
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | | |
Date: 26 Jun 2006 14:12:18
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Where is Tom Sherman? Second Query
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1151285882.208017.299450@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
> Off-topic is self-defining and is a practice frowned upon as improper
> netiquette, so don't try to rationalize away you indisgressions. Look,
> why don't you just start your own newsgroup, like
> Dolan.off-topic.whatever. Confine yourself to your new newgroop and
> crosspost invitations to whatever newsgroups you want and you will see
> just how unpopular you are and how lonely your new newsgroup will be.
> I dare you. I double dare you to face up to the truth ... coward..
Nope, go to any newsgroup and you will see dozens of threads that are
off-topic. I have explained to you many times why this is so, but you are
too dense to follow my reasoning.
[...]
> I think you are begging for a re-posting of my voluminous post that
> portrays you for what an who you are and the word entertainer cannot be
> found therein. The Readers DIgest condensed version ... you are an
> obnoxius fool in serious need of a therapist and an attitude
> adjustment.
The longer you hang on my coattails the more pathetic you become. You are
reduced to nothing but a stalker. You have become pitiful and deserving of
the disgust of the entire newsgroup. Try to get a life of your own. My life
is already full and I do not have any room for outsiders.
[...]
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
|
