Child Support Guidelines are UNFAIR! Lets join together to fight them!

Gini wrote:

"Werebat" wrote in message
news:S3RSe.9173$Cc5.6982@lakeread06...


Gini wrote:

"Werebat" wrote in message
news:LNOSe.9106$Cc5.6310@lakeread06...


.................................................. .....

====
Damn! I was so proud of your progress. Now this. Say it aint't so, Ron!
Maybe there's a local self-help group
you can get into.
====

"Progress"?

Gini, you seriously haven't caught any of my alternate personas HERE over
the last year or so? Really?

===
I seriously haven't been paying attention, Ron. I've had more
significant family matters to attend to and my time here
has been quite limited. The times I have read the posts, I've been quite
brief and haven't followed any nonsensical
threads as they have become quite predictable and boring. Since this is
the genre your ruse postings fall under, I simply
missed them (if, that is, they really existed at all). In other words,
Ron...I don't care. I can say that it isn't your modus operandi
to post serious posts along with ruse postings and you have participated
seriously in this group for many months. So, what ruse postings have you
made in this group lately? Show me the posts, Ron.
===

Hmm... You "don't care", yet you want me to show you the posts... Yeah,
THAT'S the ticket... :^)

====
I don't care. You accused me of missing it. I said prove it. You didn't
prove it.
Still waiting.
====

Now you still claim that you don't care, but you've asked about it TWICE.

Are you in the habit of making more than one request for information
that you don't care about, Gini?

- Ron ^*^

Gini wrote:

"Jill" wrote in message
news ..........................

Because it wasn't crossposted here. Considering your fondness for
crossposting, I wonder why that series of trolling attempts wasn't
posted here as well. Just how do you come to leave alt.child-support
out of most of your mischief in other NG's?

=====
He likes us. He needs us.

"Need" is a relative term. But in truth, I do like many people here.


He posted a lot of ruse posts here when he first
showed up.

You never did get the point of those.


We caught him repeatedly.

This is technically true.


He even began posting malicious posts and signing
my name to them.

Oh, that was you?

I'd forgotten. Don't remember the posts, or how "malicious" they were.
Like as not they were directed at me.


I had to notify the group to check headers to make sure what they were
reading was really written
by me. Still, eventually I had to notify the group I would no longer be
posting here because I couldn't take the
chance that some would actually believe Ron's posts were from me and I could
not be responsibile
for giving out bad information on topics of significant importance to those
who come to this group
looking for real help and guidance.

Yeh, and I felt a little bad about that. By that time I'd seen that you
had a non-martinet side, too.


He later stopped trolling the group

Umm... Yeah, THAT'S the ticket...


and
settled into genuine participation and
most here accepted that (but with reservation, I'm sure).
=====

:^)

- Ron ^*^

Werebat wrote:



Jill wrote:

On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 23:17:04 -0400, Werebat
wrote:



Jill wrote:


On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 18:25:22 -0400, Werebat
wrote:


Is the above supposed to be tongue in cheek or is that an admission
that you really were trying to troll in soc.men recently? That is,
before I inadvertantly outed you.


Eh? When did I deny that, after I was outed?



Where did I say you denied it?


Why would I have to make an admission that I was "really" trying to
troll in soc.men if I'd never denied having done so?



Because it wasn't crossposted here. Considering your fondness for
crossposting, I wonder why that series of trolling attempts wasn't
posted here as well. Just how do you come to leave alt.child-support
out of most of your mischief in other NG's?


Why, Jill, that would be out of respect for the seriousness of the
topics discussed here. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.

What a crock. You have no respect for anyone or anything here, and your
presence pulls down the entire newsgroup. You are a childish little boy
with a lot of mental issues. Jill is right to call you out on your
immature behavior here and elsewhere.

BTW, I noted the stupid Bush Bashing post (Meteorological Terroism?)
you sent under a different name [Ed Bergin] late on 9/2.


Oh, you're a Bush fan. THAT explains it...



Whether or not I'm a "Bush fan" has nothing to do with the off topic
idiocy of your forged header post. Trolling and spamming are not
widely thought of as funny or cute.


Funny. Three people sent me e-mails about that post saying how much
they liked it, and one person put it up on their website. Looks like
you're wrong. You also might want to look up the definition of
"spamming".



You crossposted it to a series of NG's and you got 3 positive
responses! Oh my, how impressive. LOL.


Hmm.

Cat got your tongue?

How many who thought the joke unfunny responded? How many trashed it
without opening it? How many killfiled "Ed" in response to reading
it?


Hmm.

This is the best response you can muster?

You don't know if your joke was more positively or negatively received
but a paltry 3 positive replies doesn't mean squat.


But your own negativity now DOES mean something, right?

Damn straight. She's speaking up for what many other people believe.
You should listen. Ordinarily I don't post my annoyance, but you seem
to be thriving on people's silence here so I think it's time to say
something. I think everyone else should, too, just to drown you out.
You aren't anything more than tolerated here.

That some other
idiot allegedly put it on his website is also devoid of any real
meaning.


But what does provide us with "real meaning" on Usenet?

Honest people. Honest conversation. People who don't abuse others'
trust. Things you wouldn't know about.

While you're at it, explain to me, in non-subjective terms, why that
post was "stupid" or "idiotic".



Because that is my opinion of it. I am entitled to view it any way I
choose to. Obviously your mileage varies and so be it.


You've never read "The Onion", have you? The post in question was
written with almost the same style, and in the same spirit.

The Onion is also childish and stupid. That you read it speaks volumes
about who you are and your mental state. There is no humor in that
piece of junk, it's the same joke over and over and it wore thin years
ago. Get over yourself. You've got a kid now, time to grow up and
leave high school comics behind.

I guess what I find so interesting here is why you choose to spew so
much vitriol over an obvious joke post. In a separate thread. I mean,
I obviously hit a raw nerve with what I wrote. If you just didn't find
it funny, you would've said to yourself, "Meh, whatever" and left it at
that. I'm sure lots of other people did. But what you write here
indicates that you are actually quite angry about it. It goes beyond
not finding the post particularly funny. It makes me wonder about your
own issues. Normal people do not blow up about things like that.

This is what moved me to post. It's true that most people wouldn't say
anything. I didn't. But I was every bit as offended and annoyed by
your post as Jill was. Usually I bite my tongue but this has gone too
far. Personally I wish this were a moderated group so you could get
kicked out. And don't try to psychoanalyze me because you yourself are
psycho!

Me, one of my quirks is that I'm easily offended by people who are
easily offended. Which is why you are drawing my attention right now.

She's drawing your attention because you can't deal with criticism. You
never have, you never do. Until you grow up a little, you never will.
Eventually you will learn that no one is laughing with you, people are
laughing at you. It must be lonely to be you, with no friends. How can
you have adult friends if you can't handle honest criticism? Jill's
opinions here are valid and backed up by many people in the past.

BTW, you neatly stepped around making an explanation as to why you
didn't crosspost your stupid joke with a "forged" header from
alt.child-support.


You never asked me to explain that.

I don't know, I just felt like posting here with my normal handle.
Does that really need an explanation? Why?



And you attacked MoonShyne for her behavior on usenet. I never
thought the day would come where I'd post something that indirectly
defends her but I guess Hell just froze over.


Umm... You're upset because I didn't forge my headers?

You're silly! :^)

And you're an ass. She never said that.

You troll and spam and have the gall to point a finger at her for
behaving badly. That makes you a hypocrite. And a troll. There's
your explanation.


To be a hypocrite Moonie, I'd have to find your personal info and
post it on a sex site. I have no intentions of doing that.

Well at least you're not a total loser. Good for you.

As for being a troll, yeah, I am one. So? What are you gonna do about
it, netcop? Huh? What are you gonna DO about it?

She will eventually ignore you, just like most people here and I suspect
in real life.

Wouldn't it have been easier to send it all out at once or do you
think this NG has a greater tolerance for trolling than the other
groups?


Eh?

You don't make any sense. If I thought this NG had a greater
tolerance for trolling, wouldn't I be MORE likely to forge my headers
here?



It makes perfect sense. The *content* of your idiot post was what
made it trolling...duh. It was off topic to this NG every bit as much
as to the others "Ed" spammed. That you used your normal "handle"
here indicates you thought the good people here were more tolerant of
your spam than other groups might be.


So, you'd be upset if I forged my headers... But you're also upset that
I didn't forge my headers? You're weird.

Keep ranting, Murdock.

If you're just upset that I posted something that was off-topic, I'm
wondering why you don't equally flame every other off-topic poster here
and elsewhere. I've obviously hit a nerve with you.

You obviously think you are somehow superior to the rest of us because
you can "fool" us with your troll posts. Which is funny because you
can't even do that. Gini has pointed out, every single one of them gets
caught.

Why not give up the childish behavior and come to the fire here like a
real grown-up? Honesty, responsibility, accountability, not hiding
behind some false name that everyone sees through anyway.

Not too bright, eh?


Nice ad hominem. You seem to share a taste for them with Moonshyne.

You're responding with an ad hominem of your own. Hypocrite.

You think I'm the only one on usenet who reads
headers?


I think that killfiles rarely do. Which was the point, in case you
missed it.


You probably didn't get the "job" done nearly as well as you
think considering all you got was 3 responses out of how many groups
spammed.


This word, "spam"... I do not think it means what you think that it
means...

You repeatedly spam by forging your headers and wasting people's time.
What's there not to get?

Really? You think that NONE of my previous posts have been in earnest,
now?

Nice job putting words into her mouth. She never said that, ass.


You don't know anything about how I think. You don't know anything
about my panties either. You don't even know anything about how you
think, apparently because you don't do it often.


Again with the ad hominems. You seem to get off on telling me that I am
"stupid" and that my posts are "idiotic". I wonder where this is coming
from... Why the need for these put-downs? It's a bit childish, don't
you think? Sorta caves in that soapbox you're preaching on.

No its perfectly reasonable. You don't think much before you post, and
then you expect everyone else to treat you with respect. Doesn't work
in the real world, won't work here.

---

Joshua Weisman

"Werebat" wrote in message
news:n8XSe.10024$Cc5.9417@lakeread06...


Gini wrote:

"Werebat" wrote in message
news:S3RSe.9173$Cc5.6982@lakeread06...


Gini wrote:
................................................
So, what ruse postings have you
made in this group lately? Show me the posts, Ron.
===

Hmm... You "don't care", yet you want me to show you the posts... Yeah,
THAT'S the ticket... :^)

====
I don't care. You accused me of missing it. I said prove it. You didn't
prove it.
Still waiting.
====

Now you still claim that you don't care, but you've asked about it TWICE.

Are you in the habit of making more than one request for information that
you don't care about, Gini?
====
So...what you're saying is the posts don't exist. Thought so.
====

- Ron ^*^

Jill wrote:
On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 09:33:51 -0400, Joshua Weisman
wrote:

You're talking to yourself again, Ron.

Joshua Weisman's headers:


Path: sn-us!sn-xit-11!sn-xit-05!sn-xit-13!supernews.com!news.glorb.com!cox.net!news-xfer.cox.net!p01!lakeread06.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: Joshua Weisman
Reply-To:
Organization: Purny Dairy Technologies
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: alt.child-support
Subject: Child Support Guidelines are UNFAIR! Lets join together to fight
them!
References: t vxvSe.654$8i7.139@trndny07 . net H2wSe.3932$ia7.1197@trndny08 yjGSe.6819$me7.480@trndny09 dZISe.9054$Cc5.6602@lakeread06 ovKSe.9061$Cc5.5554@lakeread06 SMOSe.9105$Cc5.582@lakeread06 zvRSe.9176$Cc5.8549@lakeread06
In-Reply-To: zvRSe.9176$Cc5.8549@lakeread06
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 281
Message-ID: 6PXSe.10028$Cc5.6982@lakeread06
Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2005 09:33:51 -0400
NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.188.130.170
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: lakeread06 1125927234 70.188.130.170 (Mon, 05 Sep 2005 09:33:54 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2005 09:33:54 EDT
Xref: sn-us alt.child-support:422322


Werebat's headers:


Path: sn-us!sn-xit-11!sn-xit-08!sn-xit-13!supernews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nnt p.giganews.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy. net!news-feed01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net!nntp.frontiernet.net !cox.net!news-xfer.cox.net!p01!lakeread06.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: Werebat
Reply-To:
Organization: Chaos
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: alt.child-support
Subject: Child Support Guidelines are UNFAIR! Lets join together to fight
them!
References: v7qSe.7266$Cc5.7161@lakeread06 . net jHuSe.4196$rh.2954@trndny03 t vxvSe.654$8i7.139@trndny07 . net H2wSe.3932$ia7.1197@trndny08 yjGSe.6819$me7.480@trndny09 dZISe.9054$Cc5.6602@lakeread06 ovKSe.9061$Cc5.5554@lakeread06 U3MSe.4398$ia7.4107@trndny08 LNOSe.9106$Cc5.6310@lakeread06 IuPSe.4835$ia7.1040@trndny08
In-Reply-To: IuPSe.4835$ia7.1040@trndny08
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 56
Message-ID: S3RSe.9173$Cc5.6982@lakeread06
Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2005 01:53:52 -0400
NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.188.130.170
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: lakeread06 1125899634 70.188.130.170 (Mon, 05 Sep 2005 01:53:54 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2005 01:53:54 EDT
Xref: sn-us alt.child-support:422312


Of course you knew I'd figure it out because I already told you *how*
I knew it was you in the "Ed Bergin" post. Still you "forged"
another stupid post the same way.

Walked right into it, you did. You really aren't that suave, are you?


Another Free Clue: The X-complaints-To: in both
headers was a dead give away. Failing that, the NNTP-Posting-Host
70.188.130.170 in both posts settled the matter. Until you can figure
out how to alter your headers to change those, you aren't really
forging like the big boys and girls do it.

The "big boys and girls"?

The big boy and girl netcops are usually smarter than to reveal how they
are tracking. You aren't.

So in effect you sent an entire post addressing your own faults and
berating yourself for them. How droll...er I mean troll.

Wow. You've taken time to prove something that no one really cares about.

Congratulations.

Now try responding to my post.

You won't of course, because in your mind you've "won" here -- although
in reality it's just the opposite. You've just told me everything I
needed to know.

- Ron ^*^

Still waiting for an answer to this one -- won't get it, I know, because
you don't have one. It's much more comfortable seething in your own
little pool of anger, isn't it? Heh.


Werebat wrote:



Jill wrote:

On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 23:17:04 -0400, Werebat
wrote:



Jill wrote:


On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 18:25:22 -0400, Werebat
wrote:


Is the above supposed to be tongue in cheek or is that an admission
that you really were trying to troll in soc.men recently? That is,
before I inadvertantly outed you.


Eh? When did I deny that, after I was outed?



Where did I say you denied it?


Why would I have to make an admission that I was "really" trying to
troll in soc.men if I'd never denied having done so?



Because it wasn't crossposted here. Considering your fondness for
crossposting, I wonder why that series of trolling attempts wasn't
posted here as well. Just how do you come to leave alt.child-support
out of most of your mischief in other NG's?


Why, Jill, that would be out of respect for the seriousness of the
topics discussed here. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.


BTW, I noted the stupid Bush Bashing post (Meteorological Terroism?)
you sent under a different name [Ed Bergin] late on 9/2.


Oh, you're a Bush fan. THAT explains it...



Whether or not I'm a "Bush fan" has nothing to do with the off topic
idiocy of your forged header post. Trolling and spamming are not
widely thought of as funny or cute.


Funny. Three people sent me e-mails about that post saying how much
they liked it, and one person put it up on their website. Looks like
you're wrong. You also might want to look up the definition of
"spamming".



You crossposted it to a series of NG's and you got 3 positive
responses! Oh my, how impressive. LOL.


Hmm.


How many who thought the joke unfunny responded? How many trashed it
without opening it? How many killfiled "Ed" in response to reading
it?


Hmm.


You don't know if your joke was more positively or negatively received
but a paltry 3 positive replies doesn't mean squat.


But your own negativity now DOES mean something, right?


That some other
idiot allegedly put it on his website is also devoid of any real
meaning.


But what does provide us with "real meaning" on Usenet?


While you're at it, explain to me, in non-subjective terms, why that
post was "stupid" or "idiotic".



Because that is my opinion of it. I am entitled to view it any way I
choose to. Obviously your mileage varies and so be it.


You've never read "The Onion", have you? The post in question was
written with almost the same style, and in the same spirit.

I guess what I find so interesting here is why you choose to spew so
much vitriol over an obvious joke post. In a separate thread. I mean,
I obviously hit a raw nerve with what I wrote. If you just didn't find
it funny, you would've said to yourself, "Meh, whatever" and left it at
that. I'm sure lots of other people did. But what you write here
indicates that you are actually quite angry about it. It goes beyond
not finding the post particularly funny. It makes me wonder about your
own issues. Normal people do not blow up about things like that.

Me, one of my quirks is that I'm easily offended by people who are
easily offended. Which is why you are drawing my attention right now.


BTW, you neatly stepped around making an explanation as to why you
didn't crosspost your stupid joke with a "forged" header from
alt.child-support.


You never asked me to explain that.

I don't know, I just felt like posting here with my normal handle.
Does that really need an explanation? Why?



And you attacked MoonShyne for her behavior on usenet. I never
thought the day would come where I'd post something that indirectly
defends her but I guess Hell just froze over.


Umm... You're upset because I didn't forge my headers?

You're silly! :^)


You troll and spam and have the gall to point a finger at her for
behaving badly. That makes you a hypocrite. And a troll. There's
your explanation.


To be a hypocrite Moonie, I'd have to find your personal info and
post it on a sex site. I have no intentions of doing that.

As for being a troll, yeah, I am one. So? What are you gonna do about
it, netcop? Huh? What are you gonna DO about it?


Wouldn't it have been easier to send it all out at once or do you
think this NG has a greater tolerance for trolling than the other
groups?


Eh?

You don't make any sense. If I thought this NG had a greater
tolerance for trolling, wouldn't I be MORE likely to forge my headers
here?



It makes perfect sense. The *content* of your idiot post was what
made it trolling...duh. It was off topic to this NG every bit as much
as to the others "Ed" spammed. That you used your normal "handle"
here indicates you thought the good people here were more tolerant of
your spam than other groups might be.


So, you'd be upset if I forged my headers... But you're also upset that
I didn't forge my headers? You're weird.

If you're just upset that I posted something that was off-topic, I'm
wondering why you don't equally flame every other off-topic poster here
and elsewhere. I've obviously hit a nerve with you.


You know the one I mean -- the one you widely crossposted with
soc.men
in the headers -- the very same one you posted in alt.child-support
(but didn't crosspost) under your Werebat name within 4 minutes of
the
Ed Bergin one. Funny how "Ed" had all the same major header settings
you have including the ISP #.


Yeah, that was a joke post. Nice super-sleuthing. I forged my
headers there because I know a number of people have killfiled
"Werebat" on talk.origins. That was it.



Super-sleuthing? Thank you but you give me far too much credit. Your
idea of forging headers is rather pedestrian. All you did was change
the name of the sender and remove the word "CHAOS" from the
organizaion setting. Everything else matched including your ISP #.


LOL it did the job I wanted it to do. Never play an ace when a deuce
will do, you know?



Not too bright, eh?


Nice ad hominem. You seem to share a taste for them with Moonshyne.


You think I'm the only one on usenet who reads
headers?


I think that killfiles rarely do. Which was the point, in case you
missed it.


You probably didn't get the "job" done nearly as well as you
think considering all you got was 3 responses out of how many groups
spammed.


This word, "spam"... I do not think it means what you think that it
means...


All things considered, I don't think you've been unfairly criticized
by Gini or Dusty based on this kind of stuff.


But what, specifically, is the criticism? Do you think that I
really wear ruby slippers? Do you think that someone calling me
"sick" somehow elevates their level of stability in your eyes? Hmm?



Hmm? This discussion has been about your behavior, not theirs.


Oh, has it? I'm sorry, I should have taken a moment to look at the
header.



Why don't you try reading the contents instead?


Oh, I did, it's just that I didn't know that this entire discussion was
specifically about my behavior. It was pretty evident to YOU, though.
Interesting...


I
don't know if you're sick or not and if you wear ruby slippers I'd
rather not hear about it. I just don't think your behavior is
consistent and it makes it harder to take you seriously when you are
trying to make a serious point. HTH.


Interestingly enough, I never seem to have trouble getting people to
realize when I am posting something that is meant to be taken
seriously. In fact, I can't remember a time when someone has failed
to take seriously a post that I meant to be taken seriously.

So, looks like you're wrong again!



The only time I was wrong about you is when I took your previous posts
seriously.


Really? You think that NONE of my previous posts have been in earnest,
now?

Interesting...


If you're just one of those people who thinks that "flowers are red,
and green leaves are green", and you get your panties in a bunch when
they aren't seen the way they always have been seen -- then I'm happy
to be bunching your panties! That's just one of those things I like
to do.



You don't know anything about how I think. You don't know anything
about my panties either. You don't even know anything about how you
think, apparently because you don't do it often.


Again with the ad hominems. You seem to get off on telling me that I am
"stupid" and that my posts are "idiotic". I wonder where this is coming
from... Why the need for these put-downs? It's a bit childish, don't
you think? Sorta caves in that soapbox you're preaching on.

- Ron ^*^

Gini wrote:

"Werebat" wrote in message
news:n8XSe.10024$Cc5.9417@lakeread06...


Gini wrote:


"Werebat" wrote in message
news:S3RSe.9173$Cc5.6982@lakeread06...


Gini wrote:

...............................................
So, what ruse postings have you

made in this group lately? Show me the posts, Ron.
===

Hmm... You "don't care", yet you want me to show you the posts... Yeah,
THAT'S the ticket... :^)

====
I don't care. You accused me of missing it. I said prove it. You didn't
prove it.
Still waiting.
====

Now you still claim that you don't care, but you've asked about it TWICE.

Are you in the habit of making more than one request for information that
you don't care about, Gini?

====
So...what you're saying is the posts don't exist. Thought so.
====

They do -- part of the problem is that they are so numerous I have
forgotten most of them. If you *really* care about this, I could go to
Google and find some of them for you -- that is, if you *really* care
about it. :^)

- Ron ^*^

"Werebat" wrote in message
news:lfZSe.10034$Cc5.2190@lakeread06...


Gini wrote:

"Werebat" wrote in message
news:n8XSe.10024$Cc5.9417@lakeread06...


Gini wrote:


"Werebat" wrote in message
news:S3RSe.9173$Cc5.6982@lakeread06...


Gini wrote:

...............................................
So, what ruse postings have you

made in this group lately? Show me the posts, Ron.
===

Hmm... You "don't care", yet you want me to show you the posts...
Yeah, THAT'S the ticket... :^)

====
I don't care. You accused me of missing it. I said prove it. You didn't
prove it.
Still waiting.
====

Now you still claim that you don't care, but you've asked about it TWICE.

Are you in the habit of making more than one request for information that
you don't care about, Gini?

====
So...what you're saying is the posts don't exist. Thought so.
====

They do -- part of the problem is that they are so numerous I have
forgotten most of them. If you *really* care about this, I could go to
Google and find some of them for you -- that is, if you *really* care
about it. :^)
====
I don't.
====

- Ron ^*^

Gini wrote:

"Werebat" wrote in message
news:lfZSe.10034$Cc5.2190@lakeread06...


Gini wrote:


"Werebat" wrote in message
news:n8XSe.10024$Cc5.9417@lakeread06...


Gini wrote:



"Werebat" wrote in message
news:S3RSe.9173$Cc5.6982@lakeread06...



Gini wrote:

............................................. ..
So, what ruse postings have you


made in this group lately? Show me the posts, Ron.
===

Hmm... You "don't care", yet you want me to show you the posts...
Yeah, THAT'S the ticket... :^)

====
I don't care. You accused me of missing it. I said prove it. You didn't
prove it.
Still waiting.
====

Now you still claim that you don't care, but you've asked about it TWICE.

Are you in the habit of making more than one request for information that
you don't care about, Gini?

====
So...what you're saying is the posts don't exist. Thought so.
====

They do -- part of the problem is that they are so numerous I have
forgotten most of them. If you *really* care about this, I could go to
Google and find some of them for you -- that is, if you *really* care
about it. :^)

====
I don't.
====

Took you long enough, but you eventually stuck to your guns. I give you
6 points out of 10.

- Ron ^*^

I guess what I find so interesting here is why you choose to spew so
much vitriol over an obvious joke post. In a separate thread. I mean,
I obviously hit a raw nerve with what I wrote. If you just didn't find
it funny, you would've said to yourself, "Meh, whatever" and left it at
that. I'm sure lots of other people did. But what you write here
indicates that you are actually quite angry about it. It goes beyond
not finding the post particularly funny. It makes me wonder about your
own issues. Normal people do not blow up about things like that.

Jill wrote:

No matter what name you use to post, you're always nuts. Give
yourself a pat on the back since no one else is.

On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 11:09:52 -0400, Werebat
wrote:



Jill wrote:

On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 09:33:51 -0400, Joshua Weisman
wrote:

You're talking to yourself again, Ron.

Joshua Weisman's headers:



Path: sn-us!sn-xit-11!sn-xit-05!sn-xit-13!supernews.com!news.glorb.com!cox.net!news-xfer.cox.net!p01!lakeread06.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: Joshua Weisman
Reply-To:
Organization: Purny Dairy Technologies
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: alt.child-support
Subject: Child Support Guidelines are UNFAIR! Lets join together to fight
them!
References: t vxvSe.654$8i7.139@trndny07 . net H2wSe.3932$ia7.1197@trndny08 yjGSe.6819$me7.480@trndny09 dZISe.9054$Cc5.6602@lakeread06 ovKSe.9061$Cc5.5554@lakeread06 SMOSe.9105$Cc5.582@lakeread06 zvRSe.9176$Cc5.8549@lakeread06
In-Reply-To: zvRSe.9176$Cc5.8549@lakeread06
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 281
Message-ID: 6PXSe.10028$Cc5.6982@lakeread06
Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2005 09:33:51 -0400
NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.188.130.170
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: lakeread06 1125927234 70.188.130.170 (Mon, 05 Sep 2005 09:33:54 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2005 09:33:54 EDT
Xref: sn-us alt.child-support:422322


Werebat's headers:



Path: sn-us!sn-xit-11!sn-xit-08!sn-xit-13!supernews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nnt p.giganews.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy. net!news-feed01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net!nntp.frontiernet.net !cox.net!news-xfer.cox.net!p01!lakeread06.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: Werebat
Reply-To:
Organization: Chaos
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: alt.child-support
Subject: Child Support Guidelines are UNFAIR! Lets join together to fight
them!
References: v7qSe.7266$Cc5.7161@lakeread06 . net jHuSe.4196$rh.2954@trndny03 t vxvSe.654$8i7.139@trndny07 . net H2wSe.3932$ia7.1197@trndny08 yjGSe.6819$me7.480@trndny09 dZISe.9054$Cc5.6602@lakeread06 ovKSe.9061$Cc5.5554@lakeread06 U3MSe.4398$ia7.4107@trndny08 LNOSe.9106$Cc5.6310@lakeread06 IuPSe.4835$ia7.1040@trndny08
In-Reply-To: IuPSe.4835$ia7.1040@trndny08
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 56
Message-ID: S3RSe.9173$Cc5.6982@lakeread06
Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2005 01:53:52 -0400
NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.188.130.170
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: lakeread06 1125899634 70.188.130.170 (Mon, 05 Sep 2005 01:53:54 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2005 01:53:54 EDT
Xref: sn-us alt.child-support:422312


Of course you knew I'd figure it out because I already told you *how*
I knew it was you in the "Ed Bergin" post. Still you "forged"
another stupid post the same way.

Walked right into it, you did. You really aren't that suave, are you?



Another Free Clue: The X-complaints-To: in both
headers was a dead give away. Failing that, the NNTP-Posting-Host
70.188.130.170 in both posts settled the matter. Until you can figure
out how to alter your headers to change those, you aren't really
forging like the big boys and girls do it.

The "big boys and girls"?

The big boy and girl netcops are usually smarter than to reveal how they
are tracking. You aren't.


So in effect you sent an entire post addressing your own faults and
berating yourself for them. How droll...er I mean troll.

Wow. You've taken time to prove something that no one really cares about.

Congratulations.

Now try responding to my post.

You won't of course, because in your mind you've "won" here -- although
in reality it's just the opposite. You've just told me everything I
needed to know.

- Ron ^*^