Re: Single request... - Linux

This is a discussion on Re: Single request... - Linux ; "Peter Köhlmann" stated in post 4868fa63$0$6559$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net on 6/30/08 8:23 AM: > Michael Glxsser (Snot) snotted: > >> "Peter Köhlmann" stated in post >> 486886a4$0$6602$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net on 6/30/08 12:09 AM: >> >>> Michael Glxsser (Houston Starterpad) snotted: >>> >>>> Frankly this whole ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Re: Single request...

  1. Re: Single request...

    "Peter Köhlmann" stated in post
    4868fa63$0$6559$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net on 6/30/08 8:23 AM:

    > Michael Glxsser (Snot) snotted:
    >
    >> "Peter Köhlmann" stated in post
    >> 486886a4$0$6602$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net on 6/30/08 12:09 AM:
    >>
    >>> Michael Glxsser (Houston Starterpad) snotted:
    >>>
    >>>> Frankly this whole thread shows how much more Michael knows than Peter
    >>>> and
    >>>> Rick and most of the rest of COLA. If he was wrong there would be no
    >>>> need for such BS, his comments would simply be refuted and then ignored.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Oh looky looky,
    >>>
    >>> a new poster (never before on all of usenet, now 13 Msg in a few hours)
    >>> appears to vehemently defend Snot/Snit/Michael Glxsser and his bull****
    >>>
    >>> Poor Snot. Again you feel the need to create a sockpuppet
    >>>
    >>> Why not instead explain why you are lying constantly? Why don't you
    >>> instead explain why you think that you have a right to *demand* not to be
    >>> called by your name?
    >>>
    >>> You conveniently bypass these type of questions *each* time
    >>>
    >>> And instead repeat ad nauseum your drivel

    >>
    >> You are making an even bigger fool of yourself.
    >>

    >
    > And, naturally, Snot Michael Glxsser did not answer the question


    There is *no* excuse for your targeting of my personal and business life.

    There is *no* excuse for your accusing others of being my sock puppets.

    Of course, Peter, the reason you do so is clear: You know you were "beaten":

    Beaten on the point that got you so mad in the first place:
    Linux has an absolute lacking of anything like the tools OS X
    has that help novice / non-techy users learn the concepts of
    files and folders *and* benefits more advanced users by
    making resources more quickly available. You have no
    reasonable response.

    Beaten on the point that your targeting of someone's personal
    and business life is simply outrageous behavior on your part.
    There is no excuse for your behavior, yet you repeatedly try
    to find some reason why it would be OK for you to act in such
    a despicable way. There is no excuse. None.

    You are not so foolish as to not understand how you are beaten on both of
    these points (and more). And that, frankly, brings a smile to my face.




    --
    Try not to become a man of success, but rather try to become a man of value.
    --Albert Einstein


  2. Re: Single request...

    On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:41:48 -0700, Snit wrote:


    > There is *no* excuse for your targeting of my personal and business
    > life.



    You act as if you're being stalked when the whole thing is your fault.
    If you're actually being stalked or harassed take legal action. Whining
    about it here won't stop anyone from referring to you by your name, or
    whatever the **** your complaint is.




    -Thufir

  3. Re: Single request...

    "thufir" stated in post
    fUfak.66484$gc5.31449@pd7urf2no on 6/30/08 6:38 PM:

    > On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:41:48 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >
    >
    >> There is *no* excuse for your targeting of my personal and business
    >> life.

    >
    >
    > You act as if you're being stalked when the whole thing is your fault.


    Peter's targeting of my personal and business life is not my fault.

    How absurd for you to even say so. He, and he alone, is responsible for his
    actions.

    > If you're actually being stalked or harassed take legal action. Whining
    > about it here won't stop anyone from referring to you by your name, or
    > whatever the **** your complaint is.


    You do not even know. That is funny. You claim something is my fault but
    you do not even know what that something is.

    You really, really suck at the whole concept of making a well thought out
    point. Just thought you should know.



    --
    "For example, user interfaces are _usually_ better in commercial software.
    I'm not saying that this is always true, but in many cases the user
    interface to a program is the most important part for a commercial
    company..." Linus Torvalds


  4. Re: Single request...

    On Jun 30, 9:51*pm, Snit wrote:
    > "thufir" stated in post
    > fUfak.66484$gc5.31449@pd7urf2no on 6/30/08 6:38 PM:
    >
    > > On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:41:48 -0700, Snit wrote:

    >
    > >> There is *no* excuse for your targeting of my personal and business
    > >> life.

    >
    > > You act as if you're being stalked when the whole thing is your fault.

    >
    > Peter's targeting of my personal and business life is not my fault.
    >
    > How absurd for you to even say so. *He, and he alone, is responsible forhis
    > actions.
    >
    > > If you're actually being stalked or harassed take legal action. *Whining
    > > about it here won't stop anyone from referring to you by your name, or
    > > whatever the **** your complaint is.

    >
    > You do not even know. *That is funny. *You claim something is my faultbut
    > you do not even know what that something is.
    >
    > You really, really suck at the whole concept of making a well thought out
    > point. *Just thought you should know.
    >


    He has a point in that no one here gives a ****. Take it to email, or
    if you're actually being wronged, take it to court. What do you want
    to happen here? Do you expect the Almighty Mark Kent to come down from
    his mountain and weigh in on a decision? Or Roy Schestowitz to post
    countless off topic news posts supporting your cause? You've cut and
    paste the same damn message 100 times now, we get it.

  5. Re: Single request...

    "cc" stated in post
    8f3268bb-b091-4e2d-8d4d-d84bc7009e04...oglegroups.com on 6/30/08
    9:25 PM:

    > On Jun 30, 9:51*pm, Snit wrote:
    >> "thufir" stated in post
    >> fUfak.66484$gc5.31449@pd7urf2no on 6/30/08 6:38 PM:
    >>
    >>> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:41:48 -0700, Snit wrote:

    >>
    >>>> There is *no* excuse for your targeting of my personal and business
    >>>> life.

    >>
    >>> You act as if you're being stalked when the whole thing is your fault.

    >>
    >> Peter's targeting of my personal and business life is not my fault.
    >>
    >> How absurd for you to even say so. *He, and he alone, is responsible for his
    >> actions.
    >>
    >>> If you're actually being stalked or harassed take legal action. *Whining
    >>> about it here won't stop anyone from referring to you by your name, or
    >>> whatever the **** your complaint is.

    >>
    >> You do not even know. *That is funny. *You claim something is my fault but
    >> you do not even know what that something is.
    >>
    >> You really, really suck at the whole concept of making a well thought out
    >> point. *Just thought you should know.
    >>

    >
    > He has a point in that no one here gives a ****. Take it to email, or
    > if you're actually being wronged, take it to court. What do you want
    > to happen here? Do you expect the Almighty Mark Kent to come down from
    > his mountain and weigh in on a decision? Or Roy Schestowitz to post
    > countless off topic news posts supporting your cause? You've cut and
    > paste the same damn message 100 times now, we get it.


    I would hope that people would act in a reasonable way and at least let him
    know what was inappropriate about his actions...

    In the end, though, he simply takes it as encouragement - all he wants is
    attention.


    --
    I am one of only .3% of people who have avoided becoming a statistic.





  6. Re: Single request...

    On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:51:55 -0700, Snit wrote:

    >>> There is *no* excuse for your targeting of my personal and business
    >>> life.

    >>
    >>
    >> You act as if you're being stalked when the whole thing is your fault.

    >
    > Peter's targeting of my personal and business life is not my fault.
    >
    > How absurd for you to even say so. He, and he alone, is responsible for
    > his actions.



    What, precisely, is your complaint? "Targeting" your "personal and
    professional life" is vague. There are laws in most countries regarding
    stalking, sounds like a police matter, or a non-issue.



    -Thufir

  7. Re: Single request...

    "thufir" stated in post
    TYxak.71337$gc5.58736@pd7urf2no on 7/1/08 3:12 PM:

    > On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:51:55 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >
    >>>> There is *no* excuse for your targeting of my personal and business
    >>>> life.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> You act as if you're being stalked when the whole thing is your fault.

    >>
    >> Peter's targeting of my personal and business life is not my fault.
    >>
    >> How absurd for you to even say so. He, and he alone, is responsible for
    >> his actions.

    >
    >
    > What, precisely, is your complaint? "Targeting" your "personal and
    > professional life" is vague. There are laws in most countries regarding
    > stalking, sounds like a police matter, or a non-issue.


    The complaint is that Peter K. and others have been trying to usurp hits
    from searches for my personal and business name - and thus directly and
    adversely harm my business with their derogatory lies and BS.

    Peter does this for one reason: he knows that he made a fool of himself in a
    discussion we had about UI issues - specifically dealing with files and
    folders.

    That, truly, is pathetic.

    --
    I know how a jam jar feels...
    .... full of jam!


  8. Re: Single request...

    On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:32:02 -0700, Snit wrote:

    > The complaint is that Peter K. and others have been trying to usurp hits
    > from searches for my personal and business name - and thus directly and
    > adversely harm my business with their derogatory lies and BS.



    Again, vague. You can't possibly hope to win anything in court with
    claims like "trying to". What are they doing? Whether you take that to
    the cops or a lawyer, you won't get what you want.

    You probably mean to write "defamatory", most everything that gets
    written about anyone in usenet is derogatory.


    -Thufir

  9. Re: Single request...

    "thufir" stated in post
    xWyak.50428$Jx.39638@pd7urf1no on 7/1/08 4:17 PM:

    > On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:32:02 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >
    >> The complaint is that Peter K. and others have been trying to usurp hits
    >> from searches for my personal and business name - and thus directly and
    >> adversely harm my business with their derogatory lies and BS.

    >
    > Again, vague.


    When you learn a bit more about how the web works it will make more sense to
    you.

    > You can't possibly hope to win anything in court with claims like "trying to".
    > What are they doing? Whether you take that to the cops or a lawyer, you won't
    > get what you want.


    Court? What the heck are you babbling about?
    >
    > You probably mean to write "defamatory", most everything that gets
    > written about anyone in usenet is derogatory.


    I accept that you think Peter has fully defended his targeting of my
    personal and business life in reaction to his losing a Usenet debate.

    I disagree.

    Oh well.


    --
    Try not to become a man of success, but rather try to become a man of value.
    --Albert Einstein


  10. Re: Single request...

    On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:23:44 -0700, Snit wrote:

    >> Again, vague.

    >
    > When you learn a bit more about how the web works it will make more
    > sense to you.



    Meaning you have no specifics.



    -Thufir

  11. Re: Single request...

    On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:23:44 -0700, Snit wrote:

    >> You can't possibly hope to win anything in court with claims like
    >> "trying to". What are they doing? Whether you take that to the cops or
    >> a lawyer, you won't get what you want.

    >
    > Court? What the heck are you babbling about?



    Oh, you're not going to sue him? then it must not be important.



    -Thufir

  12. Re: Single request...

    On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:23:44 -0700, Snit wrote:

    >> You probably mean to write "defamatory", most everything that gets
    >> written about anyone in usenet is derogatory.

    >
    > I accept that you think Peter has fully defended his targeting of my
    > personal and business life in reaction to his losing a Usenet debate.
    >
    > I disagree.
    >
    > Oh well.




    You've not being "targetted".



    -Thufir

  13. Re: Single request...

    "thufir" stated in post
    jFJak.46503$kx.15212@pd7urf3no on 7/2/08 4:30 AM:

    > On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:23:44 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >
    >>> You probably mean to write "defamatory", most everything that gets
    >>> written about anyone in usenet is derogatory.

    >>
    >> I accept that you think Peter has fully defended his targeting of my
    >> personal and business life in reaction to his losing a Usenet debate.
    >>
    >> I disagree.
    >>
    >> Oh well.

    >
    >
    >
    > You've not being "targetted".
    >
    >
    >
    > -Thufir


    I accept that you think Peter has fully defended his targeting of my
    personal and business life in reaction to his losing a Usenet debate.

    I disagree.

    Oh well.

    --
    If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law.
    Roy Santoro, Psycho Proverb Zone (http://snipurl.com/BurdenOfProof)






  14. Re: Single request...

    On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 08:03:08 -0700, Snit wrote:

    >> You've not being "targetted".

    [...]
    > I accept that you think Peter has fully defended his targeting of my
    > personal and business life in reaction to his losing a Usenet debate.


    You've not been "targetted," so there's nothing to defend.


    -Thufir

  15. Re: Single request...

    "thufir" stated in post
    lLTak.47539$kx.2296@pd7urf3no on 7/2/08 3:59 PM:

    > On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 08:03:08 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >
    >>> You've not being "targetted".

    > [...]
    >> I accept that you think Peter has fully defended his targeting of my
    >> personal and business life in reaction to his losing a Usenet debate.

    >
    > You've not been "targetted," so there's nothing to defend.


    In the end it comes down to you thinking Peter was perfectly justified
    to target my personal and business life in reaction to his losing a Usenet
    debate.

    I disagree.

    Oh well.


    --
    "If a million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."
    - Anatole France




+ Reply to Thread