A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » misc.kids » General
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Kent and his ""real world friend Mike""



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 4th 07, 01:43 AM posted to alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.adoption,alt.dads-rights.unmoderated,misc.kids,misc.legal
Kent Wills
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 197
Default Kent and his ""real world friend Mike""

I have it on good authority that on Mon, 3 Dec 2007 09:47:35 -0800
(PST), Greegor wrote:

Your ""mutual real world friend named Mike"" is pulling your leg.


It's possible.
He could be flat out lying too. Your employment status isn't
something I worry about.
You could be the CEO of a Fortune 500 Company, or bankrupt,
living in your parent's den, or something in between. It's really
none of my business.


Long ago somebody in the hyena pack came up
with some kind of record about a guy with the
same first and last name as mine who worked at
Best Buy in this area and had a liquor problem.


I wasn't told of any drinking problems. Only that you work
for Best Buy.

But it wasn't me.
I have never worked at Best Buy in my life.
I never liked liquor and never had a drinking problem.


Since no mention was made of alcohol, I didn't presume you
did.

Last year Firemonkey falsely accused me of
infecting her computer with two different virus's
something like 6 months apart. Supposedly
one of them said "Best Buy" somewhere
inside of it. I think this is the one that was
set up to report to a Canadian cable internet
address.


I didn't know a virus included an IP.

One of the two virii she claimed I had
"arranged" was supposedly transmitted by
way of a JPEG file I had linked to at an
address something like photobucket.


That would be a good trick. Getting an JPG file to transmit a
virus.

Both of the virii mentioned were old and
well documented. One of them is only
able to infect Windows XP SP0 or SP1
and no other operating system.

Apparently Firemonkey was surfing the internet
withOUT a valid updated and active antivirus
program, and withOUT any Firewall program.


ACK!

Note to EVERYONE: Get a firewall (hardware preferred, but
even Zone Alarm is better than nothing) and a virus scanner. There
are many free ones that work as well as the commercial programs. And
update your OS patches!

Despite abyssmally poor technical knowledge,
Firemonkey strongly asserted my guilt.

I questioned the accusations on the grounds
that a person genuinely attempting to infect
somebody else's computer would not use
such old and well known virii. I explained that
basically EVERY program would
recognize old ones like those.


Every scanner would. If she wasn't using one, then she would
be vulnerable.

I ridiculed Firemonkey for being so stupid
as to surf the internet without the most
basic security precautions, yet blaming me
specifically, and with no logical proof.

One of the two virii is documented as commonly
contracted from PORN SITES.

I also ridiculed her for accusing me of spying on
her using a virus that reports to a CANADIAN
cable internet address!


The virus may have originated from a programmer in Canada, but
I know of no virus that contains the originating IP.


Then as she was new to Firewall's and watching
closely, she had the usual amazement about all
of the background pings that any internet user receives.


Every computer on-line gets a lot of background stuff sent to
them. The first time I got Zone Alarm with my Win Me machine, I was a
bit curious and nervous.
I thought everyone on-line must be trying to get into my
computer. That was the nervous part.
Why would anyone care enough about me to want access to my
machine? That was the curious part.

She complained that I was pinging her a lot.

It took her MONTHS to accept that pings can
actually fake the origin IP address.


If the IPs always traced to you, it would be far more probable
that it was you. You aren't important enough to clone.

At one point she accused me of pinging her
from my address but was not aware that my
dynamic IP address had CHANGED due to a
big lightning strike and 6 hour power outage.

Whoever was putting out the fake pings
(if anybody!) failed to take that into account.

Firemonkey posted my address and phone number
publicly in the newsgroups and incited people
to "visit me" or call me up to complain.

Shortly an "anonymous poster" with a familiar style made
other threats involving my address and phone number.


A very stupid thing to do.
Unless it's being done to prove something specific that
requires posting it, there is NO reason to do it. Ever.


Isn't it just a little bit obvious that your
""real world friend Mike"" was just another
tactic in your little fishing expedition?


What fishing expedition? I pointed out it's none of my
business. I also stated I wanted you to feel perfectly comfortable
NOT telling me either way, as was your right.
I was curious, as I also pointed out, but that's all.


This new discovery of yours about Best Buy is more like old fish!


It's not my discovery. It's something I was told by someone
we both know. And his real life name is Mike. Actually Michael, but
you get the idea.


--
"It's attached to a thing called a "WIFE" Betty."
Kenneth Robert Pangborn showing how he views his wife
as an object and NOT a human being.
Message-ID: KLf2j.31312$9h.4837@trnddc07
  #2  
Old December 4th 07, 05:21 AM posted to alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.adoption,alt.dads-rights.unmoderated,misc.kids,misc.legal
freedom[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default Kent and his ""real world friend Mike""

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Mon, 03 Dec 2007, Kent Wills wrote:
I have it on good authority that on Mon, 3 Dec 2007 09:47:35 -0800
(PST), Greegor wrote:

Your ""mutual real world friend named Mike"" is pulling your leg.


It's possible.
He could be flat out lying too. Your employment status isn't
something I worry about.
You could be the CEO of a Fortune 500 Company, or bankrupt,
living in your parent's den, or something in between. It's really
none of my business.


Long ago somebody in the hyena pack came up
with some kind of record about a guy with the
same first and last name as mine who worked at
Best Buy in this area and had a liquor problem.


I wasn't told of any drinking problems. Only that you work
for Best Buy.


I checked with a few Best Buy stores in his known area, and he doesn't seem
to work there.


http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com

"...beating [some kids] into a bloody pulp is the ONLY thing
that would get through to them." -Ken Pangborn

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A

iQA/AwUBR1TNOabdsu4taRc6EQKLOACgjyYPYte3vkLdB9Teyv8A1g 9Tw9wAnRFk
RdGiEQecCfXARG++mHMzPql4
=WxAA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  #3  
Old December 4th 07, 11:47 PM posted to alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.adoption,alt.dads-rights.unmoderated,misc.kids,misc.legal
Kent Wills
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 197
Default Kent and his ""real world friend Mike""

I have it on good authority that on Mon, 3 Dec 2007 21:38:07 -0800
(PST), Greegor wrote:

[snip of items for which I have no comment]

This new discovery of yours about Best Buy is more like old fish!


It's not my discovery. It's something I was told by someone
we both know. And his real life name is Mike. Actually Michael, but
you get the idea.


What happened to the "real world" part from before?


Real world, real life. You need to argue semantics?
The fact is, you and I both know the same guy.
BTW, he claimed you asked about me and that he told you he
didn't know anyone by the name Kent Wills.
That probably isn't what he told you verbatim, but I'm sure
it's close.


Did you just word it poorly, Kent?


No. Real world or real life. They mean the same thing in the
context given.


--
Kent
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons...
for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
  #4  
Old December 5th 07, 05:11 AM posted to alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.adoption,alt.dads-rights.unmoderated,misc.kids,misc.legal
Kent Wills
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 197
Default Kent and his ""real world friend Mike""

I have it on good authority that on Tue, 4 Dec 2007 18:28:17 -0800
(PST), Greegor wrote:

On Dec 4, 4:47 pm, Kent Wills wrote:
I have it on good authority that on Mon, 3 Dec 2007 21:38:07 -0800

(PST), Greegor wrote:

[snip of items for which I have no comment]

This new discovery of yours about Best Buy is more like old fish!


It's not my discovery. It's something I was told by someone
we both know. And his real life name is Mike. Actually Michael, but
you get the idea.


What happened to the "real world" part from before?


Real world, real life. You need to argue semantics?
The fact is, you and I both know the same guy.
BTW, he claimed you asked about me and that he told you he
didn't know anyone by the name Kent Wills.
That probably isn't what he told you verbatim, but I'm sure
it's close.


Why would I think that this nonexistant "Mike" knows you?


Please offer proof that he is fictional.

Where does this alleged person allegedly know me from?


So now he is real?

I can't ask a nonexistant person about you.


Please prove he is fictional.

Did they communicate this by way of e-mail Kent?


So now he is real?

Did you just word it poorly, Kent?


No. Real world or real life. They mean the same thing in the
context given.

--
Kent
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons...
for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
  #5  
Old December 6th 07, 12:11 AM posted to alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.adoption,alt.dads-rights.unmoderated,misc.kids,misc.legal
Kent Wills
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 197
Default Kent and his ""real world friend Mike""

I have it on good authority that on Wed, 5 Dec 2007 10:13:46 -0800
(PST), Greegor wrote:

On Dec 4, 10:11 pm, Kent Wills wrote:
I have it on good authority that on Tue, 4 Dec 2007 18:28:17 -0800





(PST), Greegor wrote:
On Dec 4, 4:47 pm, Kent Wills wrote:
I have it on good authority that on Mon, 3 Dec 2007 21:38:07 -0800


(PST), Greegor wrote:


[snip of items for which I have no comment]


This new discovery of yours about Best Buy is more like old fish!


It's not my discovery. It's something I was told by someone
we both know. And his real life name is Mike. Actually Michael, but
you get the idea.


What happened to the "real world" part from before?


Real world, real life. You need to argue semantics?
The fact is, you and I both know the same guy.


You assert this as fact, with no proof.


Ah, the theme of ascps. Supported with great vigor by you.

In fact, your assertions indicate it's fiction.


Not so. But if it makes you feel better to believe that, it
does me no harm.


BTW, he claimed you asked about me and that he told you he
didn't know anyone by the name Kent Wills.
That probably isn't what he told you verbatim, but I'm sure
it's close.


Verbatim as in outside of internet?


Verbatim as in that's probably not word for word what he told
you. I wasn't there, so I can't know what he said, verbatim.


Why would I think that this nonexistant "Mike" knows you?


Please offer proof that he is fictional.


Your non-answer is just that.


You state Mike is nonexistent. If this is so, prove it.
I'm waiting.


Where does this alleged person allegedly know me from?


So now he is real?


I don't think so. I think it's a fiction.


What you think doesn't effect the reality that Mike is real.
And if he's fictional, why did you ask him about me? Or will
you claim that was made up as well?


I can't ask a nonexistant person about you.


Please prove he is fictional.


Yet you can't even say how this person supposedly knows me.


I can. That I elect not to should not be interpreted as an
inability.


Did they communicate this by way of e-mail Kent?


So now he is real?


It's YOUR ASSERTION you have failed to prove.


I've made assertion as to his being real or fictional? YOU
made the implication that Mike is fictional.

Did you just word it poorly, Kent?


No. Real world or real life. They mean the same thing in the
context given.


Meaningless if it's a deception on your part, a fiction.


Since it's not a deception on my part, you are accepting Mike
is real.
Whew. You made that far more difficult than needed.


It's unlikely that we have any friends in common,
especially outside of cyber space.


As I pointed out, calling Mike a friend is over stating it a
bit. As such, your claim is valid, though not in the way you present.
We both know him. He and I don't hang out together (the
distance makes that quite impossible), but we do communicate.


From what you've alleged, the person makes
false claims about my employment situation.


Then you should take it up with Mike.
On the other hand you could admit that you're unemployed and
have been for years. That you're still cadging off Lisa with the
promise of a big win against the state of Iowa. How's that going,
BTW? Simple curiosity on my part.


How is it that this supposed person supposedly
came in contact with ME, supposedly?


I didn't think to ask. But how many Mikes do you know in real
life? How did you meet them? One of them will be the Mike in
question, so you should already know the answer.


How is it that this supposed person supposedly
came in contact with YOU, supposedly?


We met.

Do you hunt pheasant together or what?


If you want to believe that, it's fine with me. If you want
to believe we go white water rafting, that's fine as well. You can
think we're working together on a screen play, if you so desire. The
possibilities are really endless.
Whatever you want imagine we will have NO effect on my life,
so I'm not going to worry about it.


--
Kent
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons...
for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
  #6  
Old December 7th 07, 01:05 AM posted to alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.adoption,alt.dads-rights.unmoderated,misc.kids,misc.legal
Kent Wills
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 197
Default Kent and his ""real world friend Mike""

I have it on good authority that on Thu, 6 Dec 2007 10:11:26 -0800
(PST), Greegor wrote:

[...]

Verbatim as in outside of internet?


Verbatim as in that's probably not word for word what he told
you. I wasn't there, so I can't know what he said, verbatim.



Why would I think that this nonexistant "Mike" knows you?


Please offer proof that he is fictional.


Your non-answer is just that.


You state Mike is nonexistent. If this is so, prove it.
I'm waiting.


Wouldn't it be kind of mean to prove that your invisible friend
doesn't exist?


If he's fictional, you should be able to prove this.
I'm still waiting.



Where does this alleged person allegedly know me from?


So now he is real?


I don't think so. I think it's a fiction.


What you think doesn't effect the reality that Mike is real.
And if he's fictional, why did you ask him about me?


How did I encounter your imaginary friend to ask this question?


You tell me. I wasn't there, so I can't know. And I didn't
think to ask him what was going on at the time.
Why don't you tell me, and when I ask, I'll see if the storys
match?


Were we both riding pink elephants at the time Kent?


That you are a Log Cabin Republican is none of my business.

Or will you claim that was made up as well?


Hey, it's YOUR imaginary friend! Should I humor you or not?


If he's fictional, you should be able to prove this.
I'm still waiting...


I can't ask a nonexistant person about you.


Please prove he is fictional.


Why would the burden of proof be on me?


You made the claim that he's fictional. As such, it befalls
you to prove your claim.
Avoiding the question may work for you, but it's failing to
impress anyone with cognitive reasoning skills.

Yet you can't even say how this person supposedly knows me.


I can. That I elect not to should not be interpreted as an
inability.


I don't take "should not" advice from somebody whom I do not trust.

I don't trust you, so of course I DO interpret it as an inability.

You have several inabilities.


Your interpretations rarely match reality.

Did they communicate this by way of e-mail Kent?


So now he is real?


It's YOUR ASSERTION you have failed to prove.


I've made assertion as to his being real or fictional? YOU
made the implication that Mike is fictional.


Why would it have to be an "implication"?


It was an implication.


Your evasiveness would make it a
logical presumption even if you were not a liar.


I'm waiting for you to prove he's fictional. You've taken to
claiming he is. Prove it.
You seem bound and determined to convince yourself I made him
up. The reason for this could be nearly anything, but I think it's
because you know he's real and fear what else he may tell. He might
have some valid dirt on you that you'd rather keep quiet.
I don't KNOW this is the reason, of course, but it would make
a lot of sense.

Did you just word it poorly, Kent?


No. Real world or real life. They mean the same thing in the
context given.


Meaningless if it's a deception on your part, a fiction.


Since it's not a deception on my part, you are accepting Mike
is real.


Since it IS a deception on your part, your story is BS.


If so, you'll be able to prove it.
Let the readers see the proof.


Whew. You made that far more difficult than needed.


Are you claiming victorious retreat?


You accepted that he was real. Now you're waffling.


It's unlikely that we have any friends in common,
especially outside of cyber space.


As I pointed out, calling Mike a friend is over stating it a
bit.


It would be YOUR "overstatement". Akin to "worded poorly" isn't it?


I stated that calling his a friend would be over stating it.
Only you could see that as meaning anything more.


As such, your claim is valid, though not in the way you present.


You decide what is valid and what isn't? How convenient for you!


How accurate, you mean.


We both know him. He and I don't hang out together (the
distance makes that quite impossible), but we do communicate.


Most would call what you do bull ****.


Call it what you want. The truth remains the truth.


From what you've alleged, the person makes
false claims about my employment situation.


Then you should take it up with Mike.


He was out riding pink elephants when I called.


How delusional, exactly, are you?


On the other hand you could admit that you're unemployed and
have been for years.


Why would I say that?


You were for a very long time. Promising to repay Lisa once
your k00k s00t against the State of Iowa came through. Odd that
you've yet to file. And after so many years.
The SOL will expire soon, if it hasn't already, so you best
get on the ball.


That you're still cadging off Lisa with the
promise of a big win against the state of Iowa.


You mean like Deuce Bigelow? (grin)


Don't know of any suit with anyone named Deuce Bigelow. It
didn't make the local news.
I can't find anything on-line about such a suit.


How's that going,
BTW? Simple curiosity on my part.


Of course.


So, how's that law suit going?
You'd think by now you would have done something. Like file.

How is it that this supposed person supposedly
came in contact with ME, supposedly?


I didn't think to ask. But how many Mikes do you know in real
life? How did you meet them? One of them will be the Mike in
question, so you should already know the answer.


Ergo this is all just mental masturbation you foisted.


If it makes your life a little easier to pretend someone you
know in real life is actually fictional, so be it.


How is it that this supposed person supposedly
came in contact with YOU, supposedly?


We met.


Earlier you said you two couldn't hang out because of distance.


You presume we've always lived so far apart.
Is English a fourth or fifth language for you?

Trouble keeping your masturbatory story straight?


That you fantasize about me masturbating is something best
kept to yourself.

Do you hunt pheasant together or what?


If you want to believe that, it's fine with me. If you want
to believe we go white water rafting, that's fine as well. You can
think we're working together on a screen play, if you so desire. The
possibilities are really endless.
Whatever you want imagine we will have NO effect on my life,
so I'm not going to worry about it.


Generally this sort of protestation indicates the opposite
of what it says on the face of it.


Only in your mind.


Another indication that this "real world friend Mike" story
is pure Kent Wills masturbatory fiction.


If believing such makes your life a little more comfortable,
that's fine. It does me no harm.


--
Kent
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons...
for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
  #7  
Old December 7th 07, 07:28 AM posted to alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.adoption,alt.dads-rights.unmoderated,misc.kids,misc.legal
Kent Wills
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 197
Default Kent and his ""real world friend Mike""

I have it on good authority that on Thu, 6 Dec 2007 20:47:58 -0800
(PST), Greegor wrote:

KW If he's fictional, you should be able to prove this.
KW I'm still waiting.

You make up a BS story loaded with vaguaries
and then pretend that the burden of proof is on me?


You made the claim. It befalls you to prove it.

--
Kent
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons...
for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
  #8  
Old December 8th 07, 05:27 AM posted to alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.adoption,alt.dads-rights.unmoderated,misc.kids,misc.legal
Kent Wills
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 197
Default Kent and his ""real world friend Mike""

I have it on good authority that on Fri, 7 Dec 2007 15:36:19 -0800
(PST), Greegor wrote:

KW If he's fictional, you should be able to prove this.
KW I'm still waiting.

G You make up a BS story loaded with vaguaries
G and then pretend that the burden of proof is on me?

KW You made the claim. It befalls you to prove it.

You made the claim that we had a friend named Mike
in common in the real world. The only information you
obtained from this supposed contact was WRONG
and had been raised before in the ascps newsgroup.


The only information I *mentioned* in the group was in regards
to your employment.
And when you mentioned he was pulling my leg, I pointed out
that he may well be lying to me.


You have never substantiated the dubious story.
You have been evasive.
It really looks like you flat out lied.


If I tell you that which you already know, I would "out" him.
Since he's a male, you'll not try to abuse him in any fashion (you
ONLY prey upon weaker females), but you might try to make his life
difficult in some manner.

Your attempt to shift the burden
of proof indicates deception as well.


No shift. It does NOT befall me to prove he is fictional. YOU
alone made that claim. As such, the burden befalls you to prove it.
Either do so or admit you can't.

Dragon's teeth!


--
Kent
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons...
for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
  #9  
Old December 8th 07, 05:34 AM posted to alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.adoption,alt.dads-rights.unmoderated,misc.kids,misc.legal
Kent Wills
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 197
Default Kent and his ""real world friend Mike""

I have it on good authority that on Fri, 07 Dec 2007 17:53:15 -0600,
"Michael©" wrote:

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 23:36:19 GMT, Greegor etched

into the walls of alt.support.child-protective-services:

KW If he's fictional, you should be able to prove this.
KW I'm still waiting.

G You make up a BS story loaded with vaguaries
G and then pretend that the burden of proof is on me?

KW You made the claim. It befalls you to prove it.

You made the claim that we had a friend named Mike
in common in the real world. The only information you
obtained from this supposed contact was WRONG
and had been raised before in the ascps newsgroup.

You have never substantiated the dubious story.
You have been evasive.
It really looks like you flat out lied.

Your attempt to shift the burden
of proof indicates deception as well.


Christ, goddamn Greg, can you be any more polite! LOL

He's a liar and a ****ing sloppy ****.


Rather a lot of misogynist rhetoric in your posts.
Give that we are to presume, according to you, that you do not
mean what you post, then you are posting for effect.
But what is the effect you're after? Therein lies the real
question.
Am I to compare myself to a vagina?
I am honored, to say the least. Women's bodies and their
reproductive parts are somewhat fascinating to most, if not all,
heterosexual males. And it's quite impossible, unless one happens to
be a homosexual, to be turn off by them, or be insulted by the use
them by evolutionary throwbacks who use them as a means of insult.


"Have a nice night with your blow-up spic wife."
"Michael©" showing that he HATES me because my
wife is Hispanic in alt.support.child-protective-services.
  #10  
Old December 9th 07, 01:06 AM posted to alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.adoption,alt.dads-rights.unmoderated,misc.kids,misc.legal
krp
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,268
Default Kent and his ""real world friend Mike""


"Greegor" wrote in message
...
KW If he's fictional, you should be able to prove this.
KW I'm still waiting.

G You make up a BS story loaded with vaguaries
G and then pretend that the burden of proof is on me?

KW You made the claim. It befalls you to prove it.

You made the claim that we had a friend named Mike
in common in the real world. The only information you
obtained from this supposed contact was WRONG
and had been raised before in the ascps newsgroup.



Haven't you noticed Kent's imaginary friends yet? Like the imaginary
CANADIAN DUDE that used MILLIONS and MILLIONS of internet sites in Holguin.
ALL OVER THE PLACE!! Bwahahahahahahaha!



PAY NO ATTENTION TO THAT MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN!!



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
1997 video MSBP ""expert"" Prof Savid Southall shuts down interview! Greegor Foster Parents 19 September 15th 07 11:45 PM
COVER BLOWN: "Capital Resources Institute" is the name of a right wing "family values" org who want violence to be allowed against certain kids zeez[_2_] Solutions 1 August 23rd 07 03:39 AM
Surgeons "maimed" brain damaged child to "convenience" caregivers, health advocate charges Jan Drew General 0 January 15th 07 08:43 PM
Surgeons "maimed" brain damaged child to "convenience" caregivers, health advocate charges Jan Drew Kids Health 0 January 15th 07 08:43 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.