Re: What exactly is EXIF data? - Linux

This is a discussion on Re: What exactly is EXIF data? - Linux ; Hadron wrote: > So you think linking people with their real lives, talking about their > wives leaving them and having affairs and threatening talk about > contacting someones client base is "adult"? Cretin. How about you **** > off ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5
Results 81 to 92 of 92

Thread: Re: What exactly is EXIF data?

  1. Re: What exactly is EXIF data?

    Hadron wrote:

    > So you think linking people with their real lives, talking about their
    > wives leaving them and having affairs and threatening talk about
    > contacting someones client base is "adult"? Cretin. How about you ****
    > off back under the rock from which you crawled? You're as bad as Willy
    > Poaster if you think that is decent, honourable behaviour.


    Hey, moron. Where were you when people were using anonymous remailers to
    post my real name and business info? Why, you were on the sidelines
    clapping and giggling, of course.

    You're a hypocritical nutsack of the highest order, Quack.
    --
    Regards,
    [tv]

    ....A paid up computer is, by definition, obsolete.

    Owner/Proprietor, Cheesus Crust Pizza Company
    Good to the last supper



  2. Re: What exactly is EXIF data?

    Hadron wrote:

    > It most certainly IS a threat and if that went to a court of law then
    > the jury/judge would see it as that.


    BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! You useless imbecile.
    --
    Regards,
    [tv]

    ..../////////// POLICE TAGLINE - DO NOT CROSS \\\\\\\\\\\\\

    Owner/Proprietor, Cheesus Crust Pizza Company
    Good to the last supper



  3. Re: What exactly is EXIF data?

    On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 10:35:23 -0400, Tattoo Vampire wrote:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> So you think linking people with their real lives, talking about their
    >> wives leaving them and having affairs and threatening talk about
    >> contacting someones client base is "adult"?
    >> Cretin. How about you ****
    >> off back under the rock from which you crawled? You're as bad as Willy
    >> Poaster if you think that is decent, honourable behaviour.

    >
    > Hey, moron. Where were you when people were using anonymous remailers to
    > post my real name and business info? Why, you were on the sidelines
    > clapping and giggling, of course.


    Same as when Michael Glasser attempted to blackmail someone, *&*
    threatened to contact someones client. I bet Quack *never* said a word. He
    probably thinks *that* is decent, honourable behavior.

    > You're a hypocritical nutsack of the highest order, Quack.


    He sure is.

    --
    ? ?o?? ?u?s s?? ???ss?? si??
    p???u???n? si ??i?? ???nd?o?
    ?sn?i? ?zopui? $? ??? ?o ???? %00?
    -- s???s?s xnuil/nu? --



  4. Re: What exactly is EXIF data?

    On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 08:01:52 -0500, chrisv wrote:

    >>> Hadron quacked:
    >>>>
    >>>> You can't say "someone should murder you", for example, without it
    >>>> being seen as a veiled threat.

    >
    > Dumb****. Murder is a crime. Disseminating information is, in general,
    > not.


    And especially when the person had supplied the information *themselves*
    in a website, bragged about what they do in newsgroups & linked to it with
    their nym!

    --
    ? ?o?? ?u?s s?? ???ss?? si??
    p???u???n? si ??i?? ???nd?o?
    ?sn?i? ?zopui? $? ??? ?o ???? %00?
    -- s???s?s xnuil/nu? --



  5. Re: What exactly is EXIF data?

    On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 13:19:41 +0200, Peter Khlmann wrote:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> Peter Köhlmann writes:
    >>
    >>> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Peter Khlmann, ye stagnant waggish boy, those healths will make thee
    >>>> and thy state look ill, ye harried:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Do your "customers" know what kind of dishonest, lying fraud they
    >>>>> deal with,
    >>>>> Snot/Snit/Rekruled/Michael Glasser? I very much get the feeling they
    >>>>> *should* know
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Are you implying a threat of some kind, Klmann?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> Far from it.
    >>> I am saying that I strongly feel that Michael Glassers
    >>> "victims/customers" have a right to know with whom they deal.
    >>>
    >>> That is not a threat. Why would someone view it as such?

    >>
    >> It most certainly IS a threat and if that went to a court of law then
    >> the jury/judge would see it as that.

    >
    > Really? So sue me
    >
    >> You can't say "someone should murder you", for example, without it being
    >> seen as a veiled threat.

    >
    > So when people see what Snot/Snit/Rekruled/Michael Glasser does on usenet
    > would a threat to his "business"? Really? Could it perhaps be that in tha
    > case he behaves not at all "honest" and "honorable" on usenet?


    I don't believe trying to blackmail someone is "honest" and "honorable",
    maybe Quack does because apparently the troll said *nothing* about Michael
    Snit Glasser threatening that.

    > Because if he was the "honorable business man" he says he is, it would
    > certainly be visible in his usenet posts also, right? Why then this fear
    > of his clients seeing his behaviour here if he is honest?


    Yes, *why*?

    > And, after he (claims) to have contacted several ISPs, *he* has taken
    > things out of COLA. If he does so just *once* again, no matter the result
    > or to whom or if true at all, his victims will learn what he does here.
    > They then can decide for themselves if they are looking forward to a "high
    > quality screwing" they are rightfully to receive when dealing with Michael
    > Glasser
    >
    > And that is not a threat, it is a promise


    --
    ? ?o?? ?u?s s?? ???ss?? si??
    p???u???n? si ??i?? ???nd?o?
    ?sn?i? ?zopui? $? ??? ?o ???? %00?
    -- s???s?s xnuil/nu? --



  6. Re: What exactly is EXIF data?

    > **** wrote:
    >>
    >> I was wrong to razz you about your calendar - it was a silly jab
    >> about something of no importance that I should not have even
    >> posted. To use the words you asked me to, I "screwed up on the
    >> whole photo/calendar thing" by commenting on it at all.


    You sure made a fscking asshole of yourself. Liar. Fsckwit.

    Not that we didn't already know about you...

  7. Re: What exactly is EXIF data?

    "chrisv" stated in post
    ksmdnSv0Oc355SHVnZ2dnUVZ_qrinZ2d@giganews.com on 9/1/08 4:19 PM:

    >> **** wrote:
    >>>
    >>> I was wrong to razz you about your calendar - it was a silly jab
    >>> about something of no importance that I should not have even
    >>> posted. To use the words you asked me to, I "screwed up on the
    >>> whole photo/calendar thing" by commenting on it at all.

    >
    > You sure made a fscking asshole of yourself. Liar. Fsckwit.
    >
    > Not that we didn't already know about you...


    Oh man... and here it come... you are going to quote these alleged lies of
    mine.

    Right?

    Right?

    Oh, no you are not... even with me mocking you for you inability.

    That says a lot about your BS claims - not even you believe them.


    --
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
    nothing. - Unknown


  8. Re: What exactly is EXIF data?

    In article ,
    Snit wrote:

    > "Hadron" stated in post
    > g9gsr7$adh$4@registered.motzarella.org on 9/1/08 7:04 AM:
    >
    > > William Poaster writes:
    > >
    > >> On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 08:01:52 -0500, chrisv wrote:
    > >>
    > >>>>> Hadron quacked:
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>> You can't say "someone should murder you", for example, without it
    > >>>>>> being seen as a veiled threat.
    > >>>
    > >>> Dumb****. Murder is a crime. Disseminating information is, in general,
    > >>> not.
    > >>
    > >> And especially when the person had supplied the information *themselves*
    > >> in a website, bragged about what they do in newsgroups & linked to it with
    > >> their nym!

    > >
    > > You really are a wanker of the worst order. You know full well what you
    > > are doing. The why is any ones guess. Your protests of "it was public
    > > domain" are as shallow as your decency.

    >
    > As I noted earlier:
    >
    > More than that, they *know* there is no excuse for their
    > actions - if they actually thought their BS was justifiable
    > they would not have the need to openly lie about it - which
    > they do every time they excuse their despicable actions by
    > saying the information about the business they target is
    > public. That is *irrelevant*... 100% irrelevant. The fact a
    > business's information can easily be found does not excuse
    > posting derogatory comments about the business simply because
    > you have lost a Usenet debate or been caught lying or cannot
    > refute an opinion you do not like.
    >
    > Now if one of my customers was unhappy with me and posted
    > their experience - or their view of their experience - that
    > would be fair and reasonable. But the COLA folk who lie
    > about me and my business are acting reprehensibly



    It's not a "lie" that numerous usenet posters have labeled you a liar, troll or
    worse... that they have pointed out your inability to comprehend what you read,
    your incessant trolling, your outright lies and BS. Take a look...

    1- Adam Kesher: "Steve, IIRC Sandman's website has a member area and a
    login. If you forget your password, you can ask it to e-mail it to you,
    and a bot will send an e-mail.

    *That* is the e-mail Snit got from Sandman's website, and yes he's that
    ****ed in the head and starved for attention that he'd claim it to be an
    e-mail from Sandman himself. So, don't get sucked into his little
    circus.

    The e-mail, in this particular instance, did probably originate from
    Sandman.net."

    2- Alan Baker: "People's perceptions of you are *formed* by behaviour
    and not withstanding your occasional on topic posts, I wish you'd leave
    too. Please note that despite the amazing silliness that is Edwin, I
    have never made the same wish of him."

    3- Andrew J. Brehm: "You are not flamed because you speak the truth, you
    are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting the
    newsgroup."

    4- AZ Nomad: "The fact that you routinely change your headers to weasel
    out of killfiles proves that you're an asshole."

    5- Andy/news/nospam: "Why do you keep these things up, Snit? Why not
    just let them go away and show how responsible a member of CSMA you are?
    You could show your enemies up by being better than then, rise above the
    low level you so obviously dislike. Anything, just stop...."

    6- B.B.: "Does the From: header contain the string "Snit"? If yes, then
    troll. Otherwise, maybe. Dunno why I had my KF on you set to expire, but
    it's fixed now."

    7- bobinnv: "I learned some time ago how much better this group can be
    if you kill file Snit. I have never understood why more people don't do
    the same.."

    8- Bob S: "This has always been pretty much a free-for-all group, but
    since Snit showed up, its become almost impossible to have a decent
    discussion about anything.

    The solution is to NOT REPLY TO SNIT. But for some reason, some people
    just can't stop feeding him."

    9- ?b? unny: "snit makes me sad."

    10- buzz off: "Snit is obviously mentally ill..."

    11- chrisv (cola): "No, she called him "****", and rightly so, for they
    way he was so ignominiously birthed into a toilet at the bus depot, and
    simply refused to die, despite repeated flushes.

    It's now far too late to *flush* him, but we can still *plonk* him..."

    12- C Lund: "Snit is not my responsibility. Maybe it's time for you to
    learn how to use your kill-filter. I am assuming, of course, that your
    Usenet browser has a kill-filter."

    13- Code Orange: "Then why post it? What need is there for you to "win"
    an argument? They don't like you, you don't like them. Why must you keep
    this up? What results are you expecting?"

    14- Dawg Tail: "You've already apologized for having already misread
    what I had previously written. What makes you think that you're
    correctly understanding what I'm writting now. You've got a history of
    reading into things what you wanted people to have said instead of what
    they really said.

    I suggest you get over this limitation of yours. It's making you look
    foolish."

    Dawg Tail: "PC advocates, Mac advocates, Linux advocates. Almost all of
    them are making similar claims about Snit. When you have so many diverse
    people who share a common perception where do you think the problem
    lies? With Snit? Or almost everyone else? The answer doesn't require an
    advanced degree to figure out."

    15- Dave Fritzinger: "Snit, please go away. Get a life, meet a woman, do
    something, but please, please, please, GO AWAY!!!! "

    16- Donald L McDaniel: "Jesus, snit. You're a teacher. I thought you
    knew what a metaphor was, and could recognize one when it was presented
    to you. I guess I had too much confidence in you."

    17- ed: "snit, you continually amaze me with how much of a liar and
    loser you are. you may notice a semi-regular pattern with me where i
    stop responding to your posts for stretches at a time, then start up
    responding as if you were a normal person. i suppose it's tough for the
    magnitude of your 'loserdom' to stick, so it loses some of it's
    sharpness when i stop responding to you. you almost always start
    responding back in a semi normal way, but inevitably degenerate. it's
    once again that time. i can only ask that you pass my condolences to
    your wife and unborn child for having to put up with such a dishonest
    fool as yourself. (well, if your wife is a loser as well, just pass
    those condolences to the rug-rat to be; if not, double
    condolences to her). "

    18- Edwin: "You've got to be out of your mind, Snit. You're the worst
    troll this group has ever seen. You're a liar and a forger, and you've
    almost destroyed this group single-handedly. For you to post a list of
    out of context arguments, and lies, and forgeries about your enemies
    labled as a "peace effort" has to be one of the craziest stunts you've
    pulled. It's all about your sick need for attention, your need to be
    center stage at all times. You'd publicly eat dog turd if you thought it
    would make people look at you."

    19- Elijah Baley: "Seriously, Snit, you need psychiatric help. Go see a
    doctor."

    20- Elizabot v2.0.2: "I see you were unable to respond to the points in
    my post and you are back to your repetitious regurgitation mode. How
    childishly typical of you, Snit. "

    21- fibercut: "That is the problem. In the years I have been coming to
    CSMA I have seen in the past year a real hatred among people, besides
    the typical Mac vs. Windows typical argument. I feel that it is like
    being in a room of really young children trying there best to best the
    other person. The one common thing among all of this seems to be you. I
    hate to be like this, but facts are facts. You seem to be in the middle
    of a great percentage of arguments. CSMA has become less about Macs and
    more about "look everybody, I think he lied". Is there no end then all
    this picking at each other on such a personal level. CSMA has always
    been al little adversarial but you have personally crank it up to the
    point that this place is no longer fun. Congratulations on stopping CSMA
    and making this place your own personal
    circus."

    22- George Graves: "Jason. You have started an argument with the Snit
    (AKA Michael Glasser), this should not be done. He will drive you crazy
    with his twisted logic, his deep-rooted need to be ALWAYS right at any
    cost. He will move goalposts, set up strawmen, and bore you into
    submission with his endless pedanticism. The only way to engage him is
    to hit and run. NEVER engage him, it's a futile, empty procedure that
    will only anger you and feed him. Take my advice and STAY AWAY!"

    23- gimme_this_gimme_t...@yahoo.com: "Hitting the vodka tonight Snit?"

    24- Greycloud: "You really shouldn't lie like that. Everyone else
    notices that you are not honest and you have no honor."

    25- Henry Flam: "Who gives a damn about this ****? Snit, once in a
    while, I make the mistake in thinking that that you are starting to make
    sense in your posts; I tend to agree with your politics. Then you post
    stuff like this and it destroys any respect that I have for you."

    26- Heywood Mogroot: "*plonk*"

    27- Jamie Hart (cola): "It seems that since you are unable to offer
    support for your statements, you're reduced to personal attacks on me.
    Incidentally, anyone reading this post can see that I have offered no
    straw men, and have only asked you to explain how the things you state
    as facts can be true. I'm really sorry that you're taking this attitude,
    the topic is an interesting one and I thought you might have some
    insights. I've snipped the rest, since you dislike long posts and avoid
    answering any of the questions I asked by saying everything was just
    repeated. "

    28- Jason McNorton: "You're one of the many, many paranoid people on
    usenet that should be confined most likely. You sit there and refresh
    your screen endlessly. You post the same nonsense over and over. Either
    you're a super troll, or you're a super mess."

    29- JEDIDIAH (cola): "You're simply full of ****."

    30- Jeff B.: "Yo, Snit. We're not pals. I think you're a git."

    31- Jeff Hoppe: "This is a Macintosh Advocacy newsgroup. Not a 12-step
    recovery plan. Your medical problems or conditions won't help me achieve
    a greater understanding of my Mac. In fact, it detracts from it and
    those kinds of discussions have no place in a newsgroup such as this."

    32- Jesus: "Really, Snit. It's annoying. What are you accomplishing
    besides being annoying? Is that your goal?"

    33- Jim Lee Jr.: "Snit, read the thread's title, is Bush mentioned in
    it? You (and Carroll) ought to learn to stay on topic and not hijack
    threads."

    34- Jim Polaski: "Why is it that nearly every thread you're involved in
    seems like it turns into some tit-for-tat, dozens of responses to OT
    things and garbage?"

    35- Jim Richardson (cola): "And yet again, Snit runs away, rather than
    actually provide evidence for his claims. Par for the course I suppose."

    36- Joey Jojo Junior Shabadoo: "and Snithead has even farther to fall -
    in a few weeks he'll be out on the street after midnight, yelling at
    passersby 'sucky sucky, $2...'"

    37- John C. Randolph: "You're nothing but a troll yourself. What are you
    bitching about?"

    38- JohnOfArc (cola): "I'm not sure "troll" does it justice- more like a
    black hole! But hey, if we all promise to never again even entertain an
    unkind thought re Apple, will you take it back and lock it up? Please??"

    39- John Q. Public: "I have not been bothered to read Snit's postings
    since I figured out who he is. I don't bother to filter his posts, I
    just consider the source and skip to the next one when I see his name."

    40- John Slade: "I don't get posts from Snit. I wouldn't be shocked that
    he has some kind of disorder. He made up stuff about being a computer
    repairman and teacher. He's just plain loony and best ignored. Let him
    deal with his disorder by medication. He's here to do one thing, get
    attention from people. He says the crazy stuff just to get a reaction.
    You say you like to beat him over the head. Well that's what he's
    counting on, he says stuff he knows isn't true in hopes to get a rise
    out of people like you. Ignore him, you won't regret it."

    John Slade: "Snit, you have a enough problems as it is without adding
    drinking booze to the list. How the hell did you manage to get out of my
    killfile? Oh well back into the cage you go, PLONK."

    41- Josh McKee: "Snit, I assume there was some point to this posting?
    Because I certainly cannot find it."

    42- K E: "I haven't read this board for awhile but I see that even
    though the trolls still roam free at least the worst troll of the lot is
    mostly being ignored by readers on this bb. If the few stragglers that
    keep replying to him would just stop responding to Snit at all this
    place could be worth coming back to. There's a good chance he'll pack up
    and take his trolling to more fertile ground."

    43- Kelsey Bjarnason (cola): "Funny how you simply don't bother reading
    the posts that rip your entire thesis to bleeding gobbets of putrid
    excrescence. Maybe some day you'll learn how to support your position,
    instead of sticking your fingers in your ears and humming, hoping it'll
    all go away."

    44- Ku Karlovsky (cola): "You repeatedly chastise others for ad hominem
    attacks while in the same sentence make your own ad hominem attacks.You
    make silly claims and then avoid the subject of your silliness. You're a
    liar and a hypocrite and you always have been."

    45- Lars Trager: "Yes, you are stupid."

    46- Lefty Bigfoot: "Okay, I tried to put up with it for a long time, but
    the few times you post something worth reading just aren't worth it
    anymore. *plonk*"

    47- Liam Slider (cola): "Maybe he's responding to the fact you've been
    an annoying little ****wit lately. You started out with the pretense of
    trying to be fair, but lately all there is from you in COLA is trashtalk
    about Linux and you acting every bit the troll."

    48- Linonut (cola): "Snit is a Tholenoid."

    "Indeed. Snit may be the first retraction of my general killfile
    amnesty. The volume of cavilling, whining, foot-stomping,
    back-tracking, goal-post shifting, and petulance generated by that
    effete candy-ass beggars belief".

    49- Lloyd Parsons: "Well, I don't know if Oxford is the most cretinous,
    I would think that would be reserved for Snit! ;-)"

    50- Mark Kent (cola): "The problem with someone like Mr Glasser is the
    same as it is with Mr Wong, even if he were to be honest now, it would
    be impossible to determine where the honesty starts and the usual
    dishonesty ends. In my primary school, one of the teachers was very keen
    on proverbs, and I recall her going over the "cry wolf" story.
    Mr Glasser could "cry wolf" over and over now, and I would not come to
    help him with his sheep, because I do not know any way of determining if
    he's ever telling the truth, or indeed, if he ever has."

    51- Mayor of R'lyeh: "The fact is that he's probably pulling it to this
    post since its all about him and he managed to make me think about him
    today. A friend of mine has a toddler. I went over to her house and
    videotaped her kid doing a bunch of cute toddler stuff then burned a DVD
    of it for her. While we were watching the DVD her kid got mad. He got
    mad because we quit making him the center of attention and made that kid
    on the tv the center of attention. He even ran up to the tv and tried to
    block our view of it. That's how Snit lives his whole life."

    52- Michelle Ronn: "The real topic here is that one someone refutes your
    "facts", you run away and ignore them. Refuting your "facts" is easily
    done in this case. I did it, and you ignored it. "

    53- Mike: "Nonsense. I never see you "advocate" anything. All I see you
    doing is engage in endless semantic arguments with everyone.
    You're the TholenBot of CSMA. BTW, that's *not* a compliment!"

    54- Mike Dee: "I will no longer accuse you of lying here. Instead I can
    only say that you are a complete and delusional kook that happens to
    inhabit CSMA for the time being. That you are unaware of how deranged
    you actually behave further reinforces this notion. Please seek
    professional help."

    55- mmoore321: "Snit is a human car-accident and we are all
    rubbernecking. We know it is bad form, but yet strangely curious. Treat
    him the same way, look but just keep moving on."

    56- Mojo: "Actually, these facts piss everybody off because they are
    off-topic, unnecessarily confrontational, extremely boring and clearly
    show that you are crying out for attention."

    57- Mr. Blonde: "Lastly, I can't help but comment on the fact that your
    obsession with Sandman has actually grown since you claimed to KF him.
    Killfilling someone generally implies you're ignoring that person, yet
    you piggyback onto virtually every reply to him here and and check his
    website's validation status more often than most people check their
    e-mail. These are not the actions of a mentally balanced individual."

    58- MR_ED_of_Course: "Seriously, spend half a day at any pre-school or
    kindergarten and see if the kids there can't teach you a thing or two
    about social behavior."

    59- Muahman: "Ummm, dude you post 1000 posts a day. 999 of them are
    trolls, if anyone here has issues it's not me."

    60- Nashton/Nasht0n: "Oh for crying out loud, if I wasn't convinced that
    snit is a total loser, and I rarely call people losers, I certainly am
    now. Why bother responding to his stupidities anyway?"

    61- New Bee: "Honest and honorable? You? You've either got a wry sense
    of humor, or you're completely nuts. Either way you're just a waste of
    time, and you've done more than anybody to make this group a cesspool.
    Then you revel in wallowing in your own filth."

    62- Not Important: "I get this mental image of you and a sibling as
    children in the back seat of the family car saying:
    Mom, 'snits' touching me ...
    and you responding much as you do now ...
    I'm not touching you, you're touching me!
    The problem is that by now you should've grown out of that type of poke
    and complain interaction with others. But, of course, you've haven't
    learned how to interact with others in a more 'constructive' and
    mutually beneficial manner even now."

    63- OldCSMAer: "What's he been doing? Am I going to be sorry I killfiled
    him?"

    64- OldSage: "What drives me nuts is your unrelenting ability and desire
    to argue on the head of a pin about the most trivial of things."

    65- Oxford: "If you are using MT-Newswatcher:
    Select offending Author, example Snit...
    Go to the Filters Menu, Choose "Kill this Author"
    Click "OK"
    Then Repeat with each annoying Author of your choice.
    Then to see your work...
    Choose the Filter Menu again,
    Then "Refilter Articles"...
    Bam! No more boring, pointless bickering about nothing.
    Enjoy!!!!!"

    66- Patrick Nihill: "I mean, honestly, who would you rather discuss
    something with; Dan, or someone like Zara? Or, for that matter, Snit,
    for whom the work 'troll' seems so painfully inadequate?"

    67- Pawel Wojciak: "Jesus Christ, snit... "

    68- PC Guy: "Forget it Snit, you're a waste of time. For someone who
    talks about everyone else not being "honest and honorable" you appear to
    be the least honest and honorable of anyone here."

    69- Peter: "I've never felt the need to use the filters in Newswatcher
    but I thought Id try the Kill this Author.. option with Snit. Ten
    seconds later and he's gone! Amazing."

    70- Peter Bjorn Perlso: "Plonked for 60 days. Now stfu and take your
    argument with sandman into the private room."

    71- Peter Hayes: "True, but that removes Snit completely, and someti...
    err..... occasiona.... errrrr..... once in a blue moon he has something
    useful to say."

    72- Peter Jensen (cola): "Where has he ever said that they were not
    different windowing environments? Message-ID, please. Experience has
    told me not to trust you on anything without backing evidence."

    73- Peter Kohlmann (cola): "Snot is a hideous troll. Nobody is as
    dishonest as that piece of unadultered garbage. There are csma posters
    even more stupid than Snot. Oxford comes to mind. There are certainly
    other csma posters who lie nearly as much. But no others are so intent
    on trolling in whatever way possible as Snot"

    74- Phil Earnhardt: "You're only interested in trying to get superficial
    snipes and extrapolate inappropriate conclusions."

    75- Rapskat (cola): "For instance, your sig you reference a long
    standing war you have going with some person from csma. It's like you
    single out persons to target your attentions upon and then continuously
    berate them with constant barbs and goads to perpetuate their
    acrimonious responses, which in turn you respond in kind, etc. ad
    infinitum. Above all things, your affinity for Macs and your overbearing
    pompous nature aside, this is what convinces me that your primary
    purpose for frequenting this and other groups is to troll."

    76- RichardK: "Just killfile him already."

    77- Rick (cola): "Snit, you are a liar. And an ignorant one. You trash
    people that are trying their level best to cope with a horrendous
    situation. And you do it without the slightest idea of what is going
    on."

    78- Rick G.: "Just to be plain here, I have no doubt that he is a troll.
    I am tolerant of his nature, not blind to it. However, as a troll, he is
    .... somewhat clumsy."

    79- Robert F.: "Um, perhaps you misunderstand. I don't care if you quote
    Mayor McCheese claiming the Earth is a flat plate perched on the shell
    of a tortoise, I was merely pointing out that you run the risk of
    looking ridiculous when you quote something patently stupid. If that's
    your goal, you're on the right track, and more power to you."

    80- Roy Culley (cola): "You appear to be in the latter category.
    Starting crossposted threads for the simple purpose of hoping to
    generate a flame war. If you truly want to learn more about Linux and
    how it can help you and your supposed users why aren't you requesting
    help from a more technical Linux newsgroup than an advocacy group?
    As the old saying goes, those who can do, those who can't teach. Your
    posts seem to confirm that saying IMHO."

    81- Sandman: "He is by far the most killfiled person in the -HISTORY- of
    csma. I've never seen someone so disliked, almost hated, in a news group
    before. He has the ability to turn just about any person against him in
    just a few posts. On usenet, trolls do this daily, but the funny part
    with Michael is that I actually think he DOESN'T consider himself be a
    troll - damn what -EVERYONE ELSE- is calling him. Obviously they are
    wrong. Only Tholen himself can match this behaviour."

    82- sav: "You really need to take a rest somewhere nice. Honestly, even
    the nutters who hang out down on Brighton seafront made more sense than
    this. You been doing drugs or something?"

    83- Sean Burke: If you're dumb enough to respond to snit, you're
    probably dumb enough to click on a spam attachment that promises to
    remove smut from your harddrive."

    84- ShutterBugz: "so snit-zel has some kind of problem expressing anger,
    i guess. he has to vent his frustrations in other ways. and he thinks
    he's making sense: well the syntax is there and he figures he's pretty
    smart. indeed, he tells us, he's done the personality tests and the iq
    tests and he's okay! aaaaahhhhh, you see he's soooooooo well adjusted."

    85- Steve Carroll: "The only things we are sure about Snit is that he
    has:
    * a monumental reading comprehension problem.
    * nym-shifted numerous times to avoid kill-files.
    * built too many straw-men to count... some, the size of small cities.
    * been labeled a disingenuous liar/troll(or worse) by the vast majority.
    * used numerous sock-puppets and admitted to it.
    * stolen IDs and admitted to it.
    * gotten booted off by ISPs for his behavior.
    * twisted more context than all csma posters combined.
    * made more unsupported accusations than all csma posters combined.
    * virtually no life outside of csma."

    86- Steve Mackay: "Just killfile Snit, the dishonest piece of elephant
    dung, and all would go away. Sure, I got caught up in the "Snit Circus",
    but then the cotton candy began to sour, and CSMA begun to smell like
    elephant dung."

    87- Steven de Mena: "Sorry, you have now lost all credibility with me
    for your rediculous argument regarding this."

    88- Steve Travis: "Oh oh... Now look what we've done. Snit has lost all
    self respect and has sunk to the point of using words like 'asses' when
    referring to others. Oh, how could the morally superior snit have fallen
    so low.. Please take a moment out of your busy schedule to feel
    embarassed for him. Or perhaps we should set up a fund to get him more
    happy glue (and the appropriate plastic bags)."

    89- Stuart Krivis: "You might as well just give up and plonk him then. A
    snit is a snit is a snit and always will be."

    90- TheLetterK: "That is merely your perception, ****. You're the one
    lacking counter evidence, and your arguments basically amount to "I'm
    right, nya nya nya." No matter how many examples someone points at to
    demonstrate their claim, you blindly continue to insist that they
    provide no evidence, or that the evidence given is irrelevant. Worse
    still, you fall back on straw men and disingenuous quote mangling to
    portray the argument in your favor. You are one of the worst trolls that
    inhabit CSMA, ****. *Edwin* is more prone to fits of reason than you
    are. "

    91-Tim Adams: "I'd kill file you but then I'd miss the fun. you see, you
    never cease to amaze me at just how stupid you really are. Why just the
    other day I had a great laugh when I saw you, the king of liars (in this
    NG anyway) calling somebody else a liar."

    92- Tim Crowley: "I don't know - I think you might have more compassion.
    Snit is sick. He needs help. This is the only way the poor sick fool can
    get attention. My ****ing God, he's taken to hanging out with and
    supporting racist pig ****ers like MuahMuah. It is true that no-one
    likes him and those that pretend they do are just using him or don't
    know him - but come on- it's not his fault. He's sick. Have some
    compassion, eh? All these idiot trolls, Zara, Stew, Tommy,
    MuaaaahMuaaah, and Snit - they are all so alike. I pity each and every
    one of them"

    93- Tim Smith: "No, he didn't, and there is no reasonable way you could
    actually believe he lied. You are purely trying to troll here."

    94- Timberwoof: "*Plonk!*"

    95- Tom Bates: "Do you have to turn any thread you post in into one of
    your Circus acts?"

    96- Tommy: "In case you did not get it, I think the moral was: Stop
    polluting the world with your infantile and obsessive "writings". You
    give Mac advocacy a bad name. If that was your goal you have succeeded!
    That also goes for all that bull**** on your website"

    97- TravelinMan: "I still can't figure out what's wrong with Snit. Most
    people have him kill-filed and the few who don't mostly restrict their
    responses to 'why don't you go away, no one wants you here'.
    Just what would keep someone in this group with all of that animosity?
    Must be some kind of severe mental illness."

    98- Wally: "Because by your own admission "honor and honesty" are
    nothing more than a "game" to you, as such not only do you wish to
    define the rules, but no doubt you will also attempt to alter or bend
    the rules when inevitably things do not go to your liking, for this
    reason I doubt anyone would be foolish enough to play your game."

    99- William R. Walsh: "Now, if you'll excuse me, and accept my sincere
    apologies for this, PLONK! Feel proud about that. You're the first
    person to be plonked from my new computer! :-) "

    100- Woofbert: "*Plonk*"

    101- zara: "Look - I'm not into combing through thousands of posts, to
    prove what was said or not said - I leave stuff like that to people
    without lives, like Snit. But it is assuredly, in the record. Ping Snit
    to do a search - you will flatter him, and give meaning to his tawdry
    little life."

    102- Znu: "I think your 'I'll go start a new thread to try to draw more
    people into the debate I'm currently having with Steve/Elizabot/etc'
    tactic is fairly trollish."

    103 - High Plains Thumper: "Well, for one who is trolling this
    group, those were extremely poorly done examples, making problems
    that do not exist except an invention of Snit's own mind."

    104 - Geoff M. Fitton:
    "The Prescott Computer Guy *still* showing how stupid he is...
    What a mar00n".

    105 - William Poaster:
    "Good grief. If anyone's having a mental breakdown it's the Prescott
    Computer Guy, Michael Snit Glasser. What a f#cked up mess he is'.

    106 - Tattoo Vampire:
    "In other words, in another attempt to troll, you made yourself look like a
    fool. Again".



    (snip Snit's purposeful mischaracterizations).

    --
    "Apple is pushing how green this is - but it [Macbook Air] is
    clearly disposable... when the battery dies you can pretty much
    just throw it away". - Snit

  9. Re: What exactly is EXIF data?

    In article ,
    Snit wrote:

    > "chrisv" stated in post
    > VfKdnTiIus5deibVnZ2dnUVZ_gCdnZ2d@giganews.com on 9/1/08 6:01 AM:
    >
    > >>> Hadron quacked:
    > >>>>
    > >>>> You can't say "someone should murder you", for example, without it
    > >>>> being seen as a veiled threat.

    > >
    > > Dumb****. Murder is a crime. Disseminating information is, in general,
    > > not.

    >
    > Calling out "Fire" in a theater is a crime (when there is no emergency, of
    > course)... as is much other potentially damaging and baseless speech. It is
    > that form of "speech" which is under discussion.


    I can't begin to imagine what kind of meds you're mixing where it has you
    believing that people pointing out the fact you're a lying POS is remotely
    similar to "Calling out "Fire" in a theater". You poor, sick fool...

    --
    "Apple is pushing how green this is - but it [Macbook Air] is
    clearly disposable... when the battery dies you can pretty much
    just throw it away". - Snit

  10. Re: What exactly is EXIF data?

    On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 08:07:28 -0600, Steve Carroll wrote:

    > In article ,
    > Snit wrote:
    >
    >> "Hadron" stated in post
    >> g9gsr7$adh$4@registered.motzarella.org on 9/1/08 7:04 AM:
    >>
    >> > William Poaster writes:
    >> >
    >> >> On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 08:01:52 -0500, chrisv wrote:
    >> >>
    >> >>>>> Hadron quacked:
    >> >>>>>>
    >> >>>>>> You can't say "someone should murder you", for example, without
    >> >>>>>> it being seen as a veiled threat.
    >> >>>
    >> >>> Dumb****. Murder is a crime. Disseminating information is, in
    >> >>> general, not.
    >> >>
    >> >> And especially when the person had supplied the information
    >> >> *themselves* in a website, bragged about what they do in newsgroups &
    >> >> linked to it with their nym!
    >> >
    >> > You really are a wanker of the worst order.


    Hardon Quack calling some a wanker, when it is the self-confessed
    *troll*.
    Message-ID:
    Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007

    >> > You know full well what you are doing. The why is any ones guess.
    >> > Your protests of "it was public domain" are as shallow as your
    >> > decency.


    Here the self-confessed *troll*, Hardon Quack, utters total bollocks, &
    talks of "decency".
    Oh, the irony.


    What you have to remember is that **** floats.
    Hadron always resurfaces.

    From: caver1
    Message-ID: <47dfac8b$0$22866$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
    Newsgroups: alt.os.linux.ubuntu
    Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2000


    Creative cutting and pasting, though...

    Hardon: > I think that will do for now.

    Sure will. *You have already proved what a liar and an idiot you are...

    From: Joe
    Newsgroups: alt.os.linux.ubuntu
    Message-ID:
    Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2007


    >> As I noted earlier:
    >>
    >> More than that, they *know* there is no excuse for their actions -
    >> if they actually thought their BS was justifiable they would not
    >> have the need to openly lie about it - which they do every time
    >> they excuse their despicable actions by saying the information
    >> about the business they target is public. That is *irrelevant*...
    >> 100% irrelevant. The fact a business's information can easily be
    >> found does not excuse posting derogatory comments about the
    >> business simply because you have lost a Usenet debate or been
    >> caught lying or cannot refute an opinion you do not like.
    >>
    >> Now if one of my customers was unhappy with me and posted their
    >> experience - or their view of their experience - that would be fair
    >> and reasonable. But the COLA folk who lie about me and my business
    >> are acting reprehensibly

    >
    >
    > It's not a "lie" that numerous usenet posters have labeled you a liar,
    > troll or worse... that they have pointed out your inability to
    > comprehend what you read, your incessant trolling, your outright lies
    > and BS.


    Of course it's not a lie. Michael Snit Glasser lies, & forges posts. Many
    have seen it & know about it. Hardon Quack does the same thing, & people
    have also pointed out Quack's inability to comprehend what he reads, & his
    incessant trolling. They could almost be twins.

    > Take a look...
    >
    > 1- Adam Kesher: "Steve, IIRC Sandman's website has a member area and a
    > login. If you forget your password, you can ask it to e-mail it to you,
    > and a bot will send an e-mail.
    >
    > *That* is the e-mail Snit got from Sandman's website, and yes he's that
    > ****ed in the head and starved for attention that he'd claim it to be an
    > e-mail from Sandman himself. So, don't get sucked into his little
    > circus.
    >
    > The e-mail, in this particular instance, did probably originate from
    > Sandman.net."
    >
    > 2- Alan Baker: "People's perceptions of you are *formed* by behaviour
    > and not withstanding your occasional on topic posts, I wish you'd leave
    > too. Please note that despite the amazing silliness that is Edwin, I
    > have never made the same wish of him."
    >
    > 3- Andrew J. Brehm: "You are not flamed because you speak the truth, you
    > are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting the
    > newsgroup."
    >
    > 4- AZ Nomad: "The fact that you routinely change your headers to weasel
    > out of killfiles proves that you're an asshole."
    >
    > 5- Andy/news/nospam: "Why do you keep these things up, Snit? Why not
    > just let them go away and show how responsible a member of CSMA you are?
    > You could show your enemies up by being better than then, rise above the
    > low level you so obviously dislike. Anything, just stop...."
    >
    > 6- B.B.: "Does the From: header contain the string "Snit"? If yes, then
    > troll. Otherwise, maybe. Dunno why I had my KF on you set to expire, but
    > it's fixed now."
    >
    > 7- bobinnv: "I learned some time ago how much better this group can be
    > if you kill file Snit. I have never understood why more people don't do
    > the same.."
    >
    > 8- Bob S: "This has always been pretty much a free-for-all group, but
    > since Snit showed up, its become almost impossible to have a decent
    > discussion about anything.
    >
    > The solution is to NOT REPLY TO SNIT. But for some reason, some people
    > just can't stop feeding him."
    >
    > 9- ?b? unny: "snit makes me sad."
    >
    > 10- buzz off: "Snit is obviously mentally ill..."
    >
    > 11- chrisv (cola): "No, she called him "****", and rightly so, for they
    > way he was so ignominiously birthed into a toilet at the bus depot, and
    > simply refused to die, despite repeated flushes.
    >
    > It's now far too late to *flush* him, but we can still *plonk* him..."
    >
    > 12- C Lund: "Snit is not my responsibility. Maybe it's time for you to
    > learn how to use your kill-filter. I am assuming, of course, that your
    > Usenet browser has a kill-filter."
    >
    > 13- Code Orange: "Then why post it? What need is there for you to "win"
    > an argument? They don't like you, you don't like them. Why must you keep
    > this up? What results are you expecting?"
    >
    > 14- Dawg Tail: "You've already apologized for having already misread
    > what I had previously written. What makes you think that you're
    > correctly understanding what I'm writting now. You've got a history of
    > reading into things what you wanted people to have said instead of what
    > they really said.
    >
    > I suggest you get over this limitation of yours. It's making you look
    > foolish."
    >
    > Dawg Tail: "PC advocates, Mac advocates, Linux advocates. Almost all of
    > them are making similar claims about Snit. When you have so many diverse
    > people who share a common perception where do you think the problem
    > lies? With Snit? Or almost everyone else? The answer doesn't require an
    > advanced degree to figure out."
    >
    > 15- Dave Fritzinger: "Snit, please go away. Get a life, meet a woman, do
    > something, but please, please, please, GO AWAY!!!! "
    >
    > 16- Donald L McDaniel: "Jesus, snit. You're a teacher. I thought you
    > knew what a metaphor was, and could recognize one when it was presented
    > to you. I guess I had too much confidence in you."
    >
    > 17- ed: "snit, you continually amaze me with how much of a liar and
    > loser you are. you may notice a semi-regular pattern with me where i
    > stop responding to your posts for stretches at a time, then start up
    > responding as if you were a normal person. i suppose it's tough for the
    > magnitude of your 'loserdom' to stick, so it loses some of it's
    > sharpness when i stop responding to you. you almost always start
    > responding back in a semi normal way, but inevitably degenerate. it's
    > once again that time. i can only ask that you pass my condolences to
    > your wife and unborn child for having to put up with such a dishonest
    > fool as yourself. (well, if your wife is a loser as well, just pass
    > those condolences to the rug-rat to be; if not, double condolences to
    > her). "
    >
    > 18- Edwin: "You've got to be out of your mind, Snit. You're the worst
    > troll this group has ever seen. You're a liar and a forger, and you've
    > almost destroyed this group single-handedly. For you to post a list of
    > out of context arguments, and lies, and forgeries about your enemies
    > labled as a "peace effort" has to be one of the craziest stunts you've
    > pulled. It's all about your sick need for attention, your need to be
    > center stage at all times. You'd publicly eat dog turd if you thought it
    > would make people look at you."
    >
    > 19- Elijah Baley: "Seriously, Snit, you need psychiatric help. Go see a
    > doctor."
    >
    > 20- Elizabot v2.0.2: "I see you were unable to respond to the points in
    > my post and you are back to your repetitious regurgitation mode. How
    > childishly typical of you, Snit. "
    >
    > 21- fibercut: "That is the problem. In the years I have been coming to
    > CSMA I have seen in the past year a real hatred among people, besides
    > the typical Mac vs. Windows typical argument. I feel that it is like
    > being in a room of really young children trying there best to best the
    > other person. The one common thing among all of this seems to be you. I
    > hate to be like this, but facts are facts. You seem to be in the middle
    > of a great percentage of arguments. CSMA has become less about Macs and
    > more about "look everybody, I think he lied". Is there no end then all
    > this picking at each other on such a personal level. CSMA has always
    > been al little adversarial but you have personally crank it up to the
    > point that this place is no longer fun. Congratulations on stopping CSMA
    > and making this place your own personal circus."
    >
    > 22- George Graves: "Jason. You have started an argument with the Snit
    > (AKA Michael Glasser), this should not be done. He will drive you crazy
    > with his twisted logic, his deep-rooted need to be ALWAYS right at any
    > cost. He will move goalposts, set up strawmen, and bore you into
    > submission with his endless pedanticism. The only way to engage him is
    > to hit and run. NEVER engage him, it's a futile, empty procedure that
    > will only anger you and feed him. Take my advice and STAY AWAY!"
    >
    > 23- gimme_this_gimme_t...@yahoo.com: "Hitting the vodka tonight Snit?"
    >
    > 24- Greycloud: "You really shouldn't lie like that. Everyone else
    > notices that you are not honest and you have no honor."
    >
    > 25- Henry Flam: "Who gives a damn about this ****? Snit, once in a
    > while, I make the mistake in thinking that that you are starting to make
    > sense in your posts; I tend to agree with your politics. Then you post
    > stuff like this and it destroys any respect that I have for you."
    >
    > 26- Heywood Mogroot: "*plonk*"
    >
    > 27- Jamie Hart (cola): "It seems that since you are unable to offer
    > support for your statements, you're reduced to personal attacks on me.
    > Incidentally, anyone reading this post can see that I have offered no
    > straw men, and have only asked you to explain how the things you state
    > as facts can be true. I'm really sorry that you're taking this attitude,
    > the topic is an interesting one and I thought you might have some
    > insights. I've snipped the rest, since you dislike long posts and avoid
    > answering any of the questions I asked by saying everything was just
    > repeated. "
    >
    > 28- Jason McNorton: "You're one of the many, many paranoid people on
    > usenet that should be confined most likely. You sit there and refresh
    > your screen endlessly. You post the same nonsense over and over. Either
    > you're a super troll, or you're a super mess."
    >
    > 29- JEDIDIAH (cola): "You're simply full of ****."
    >
    > 30- Jeff B.: "Yo, Snit. We're not pals. I think you're a git."
    >
    > 31- Jeff Hoppe: "This is a Macintosh Advocacy newsgroup. Not a 12-step
    > recovery plan. Your medical problems or conditions won't help me achieve
    > a greater understanding of my Mac. In fact, it detracts from it and
    > those kinds of discussions have no place in a newsgroup such as this."
    >
    > 32- Jesus: "Really, Snit. It's annoying. What are you accomplishing
    > besides being annoying? Is that your goal?"
    >
    > 33- Jim Lee Jr.: "Snit, read the thread's title, is Bush mentioned in
    > it? You (and Carroll) ought to learn to stay on topic and not hijack
    > threads."
    >
    > 34- Jim Polaski: "Why is it that nearly every thread you're involved in
    > seems like it turns into some tit-for-tat, dozens of responses to OT
    > things and garbage?"
    >
    > 35- Jim Richardson (cola): "And yet again, Snit runs away, rather than
    > actually provide evidence for his claims. Par for the course I suppose."
    >
    > 36- Joey Jojo Junior Shabadoo: "and Snithead has even farther to fall -
    > in a few weeks he'll be out on the street after midnight, yelling at
    > passersby 'sucky sucky, $2...'"
    >
    > 37- John C. Randolph: "You're nothing but a troll yourself. What are you
    > bitching about?"
    >
    > 38- JohnOfArc (cola): "I'm not sure "troll" does it justice- more like a
    > black hole! But hey, if we all promise to never again even entertain an
    > unkind thought re Apple, will you take it back and lock it up? Please??"
    >
    > 39- John Q. Public: "I have not been bothered to read Snit's postings
    > since I figured out who he is. I don't bother to filter his posts, I
    > just consider the source and skip to the next one when I see his name."
    >
    > 40- John Slade: "I don't get posts from Snit. I wouldn't be shocked that
    > he has some kind of disorder. He made up stuff about being a computer
    > repairman and teacher. He's just plain loony and best ignored. Let him
    > deal with his disorder by medication. He's here to do one thing, get
    > attention from people. He says the crazy stuff just to get a reaction.
    > You say you like to beat him over the head. Well that's what he's
    > counting on, he says stuff he knows isn't true in hopes to get a rise
    > out of people like you. Ignore him, you won't regret it."
    >
    > John Slade: "Snit, you have a enough problems as it is without adding
    > drinking booze to the list. How the hell did you manage to get out of my
    > killfile? Oh well back into the cage you go, PLONK."
    >
    > 41- Josh McKee: "Snit, I assume there was some point to this posting?
    > Because I certainly cannot find it."
    >
    > 42- K E: "I haven't read this board for awhile but I see that even
    > though the trolls still roam free at least the worst troll of the lot is
    > mostly being ignored by readers on this bb. If the few stragglers that
    > keep replying to him would just stop responding to Snit at all this
    > place could be worth coming back to. There's a good chance he'll pack up
    > and take his trolling to more fertile ground."
    >
    > 43- Kelsey Bjarnason (cola): "Funny how you simply don't bother reading
    > the posts that rip your entire thesis to bleeding gobbets of putrid
    > excrescence. Maybe some day you'll learn how to support your position,
    > instead of sticking your fingers in your ears and humming, hoping it'll
    > all go away."
    >
    > 44- Ku Karlovsky (cola): "You repeatedly chastise others for ad hominem
    > attacks while in the same sentence make your own ad hominem attacks.You
    > make silly claims and then avoid the subject of your silliness. You're a
    > liar and a hypocrite and you always have been."
    >
    > 45- Lars Trager: "Yes, you are stupid."
    >
    > 46- Lefty Bigfoot: "Okay, I tried to put up with it for a long time, but
    > the few times you post something worth reading just aren't worth it
    > anymore. *plonk*"
    >
    > 47- Liam Slider (cola): "Maybe he's responding to the fact you've been
    > an annoying little ****wit lately. You started out with the pretense of
    > trying to be fair, but lately all there is from you in COLA is trashtalk
    > about Linux and you acting every bit the troll."
    >
    > 48- Linonut (cola): "Snit is a Tholenoid."
    >
    > "Indeed. Snit may be the first retraction of my general killfile
    > amnesty.
    > The volume of cavilling, whining, foot-stomping, back-tracking,
    > goal-post
    > shifting, and petulance generated by that effete candy-ass beggars
    > belief".
    >
    > 49- Lloyd Parsons: "Well, I don't know if Oxford is the most cretinous,
    > I would think that would be reserved for Snit! ;-)"
    >
    > 50- Mark Kent (cola): "The problem with someone like Mr Glasser is the
    > same as it is with Mr Wong, even if he were to be honest now, it would
    > be impossible to determine where the honesty starts and the usual
    > dishonesty ends. In my primary school, one of the teachers was very keen
    > on proverbs, and I recall her going over the "cry wolf" story. Mr
    > Glasser could "cry wolf" over and over now, and I would not come to help
    > him with his sheep, because I do not know any way of determining if he's
    > ever telling the truth, or indeed, if he ever has."
    >
    > 51- Mayor of R'lyeh: "The fact is that he's probably pulling it to this
    > post since its all about him and he managed to make me think about him
    > today. A friend of mine has a toddler. I went over to her house and
    > videotaped her kid doing a bunch of cute toddler stuff then burned a DVD
    > of it for her. While we were watching the DVD her kid got mad. He got
    > mad because we quit making him the center of attention and made that kid
    > on the tv the center of attention. He even ran up to the tv and tried to
    > block our view of it. That's how Snit lives his whole life."
    >
    > 52- Michelle Ronn: "The real topic here is that one someone refutes your
    > "facts", you run away and ignore them. Refuting your "facts" is easily
    > done in this case. I did it, and you ignored it. "
    >
    > 53- Mike: "Nonsense. I never see you "advocate" anything. All I see you
    > doing is engage in endless semantic arguments with everyone. You're the
    > TholenBot of CSMA. BTW, that's *not* a compliment!"
    >
    > 54- Mike Dee: "I will no longer accuse you of lying here. Instead I can
    > only say that you are a complete and delusional kook that happens to
    > inhabit CSMA for the time being. That you are unaware of how deranged
    > you actually behave further reinforces this notion. Please seek
    > professional help."
    >
    > 55- mmoore321: "Snit is a human car-accident and we are all
    > rubbernecking. We know it is bad form, but yet strangely curious. Treat
    > him the same way, look but just keep moving on."
    >
    > 56- Mojo: "Actually, these facts piss everybody off because they are
    > off-topic, unnecessarily confrontational, extremely boring and clearly
    > show that you are crying out for attention."
    >
    > 57- Mr. Blonde: "Lastly, I can't help but comment on the fact that your
    > obsession with Sandman has actually grown since you claimed to KF him.
    > Killfilling someone generally implies you're ignoring that person, yet
    > you piggyback onto virtually every reply to him here and and check his
    > website's validation status more often than most people check their
    > e-mail. These are not the actions of a mentally balanced individual."
    >
    > 58- MR_ED_of_Course: "Seriously, spend half a day at any pre-school or
    > kindergarten and see if the kids there can't teach you a thing or two
    > about social behavior."
    >
    > 59- Muahman: "Ummm, dude you post 1000 posts a day. 999 of them are
    > trolls, if anyone here has issues it's not me."
    >
    > 60- Nashton/Nasht0n: "Oh for crying out loud, if I wasn't convinced that
    > snit is a total loser, and I rarely call people losers, I certainly am
    > now. Why bother responding to his stupidities anyway?"
    >
    > 61- New Bee: "Honest and honorable? You? You've either got a wry sense
    > of humor, or you're completely nuts. Either way you're just a waste of
    > time, and you've done more than anybody to make this group a cesspool.
    > Then you revel in wallowing in your own filth."
    >
    > 62- Not Important: "I get this mental image of you and a sibling as
    > children in the back seat of the family car saying: Mom, 'snits'
    > touching me ...
    > and you responding much as you do now ... I'm not touching you, you're
    > touching me! The problem is that by now you should've grown out of that
    > type of poke and complain interaction with others. But, of course,
    > you've haven't learned how to interact with others in a more
    > 'constructive' and mutually beneficial manner even now."
    >
    > 63- OldCSMAer: "What's he been doing? Am I going to be sorry I killfiled
    > him?"
    >
    > 64- OldSage: "What drives me nuts is your unrelenting ability and desire
    > to argue on the head of a pin about the most trivial of things."
    >
    > 65- Oxford: "If you are using MT-Newswatcher: Select offending Author,
    > example Snit... Go to the Filters Menu, Choose "Kill this Author" Click
    > "OK"
    > Then Repeat with each annoying Author of your choice. Then to see your
    > work...
    > Choose the Filter Menu again,
    > Then "Refilter Articles"...
    > Bam! No more boring, pointless bickering about nothing. Enjoy!!!!!"
    >
    > 66- Patrick Nihill: "I mean, honestly, who would you rather discuss
    > something with; Dan, or someone like Zara? Or, for that matter, Snit,
    > for whom the work 'troll' seems so painfully inadequate?"
    >
    > 67- Pawel Wojciak: "Jesus Christ, snit... "
    >
    > 68- PC Guy: "Forget it Snit, you're a waste of time. For someone who
    > talks about everyone else not being "honest and honorable" you appear to
    > be the least honest and honorable of anyone here."
    >
    > 69- Peter: "I've never felt the need to use the filters in Newswatcher
    > but I thought Id try the Kill this Author.. option with Snit. Ten
    > seconds later and he's gone! Amazing."
    >
    > 70- Peter Bjorn Perlso: "Plonked for 60 days. Now stfu and take your
    > argument with sandman into the private room."
    >
    > 71- Peter Hayes: "True, but that removes Snit completely, and someti...
    > err..... occasiona.... errrrr..... once in a blue moon he has something
    > useful to say."
    >
    > 72- Peter Jensen (cola): "Where has he ever said that they were not
    > different windowing environments? Message-ID, please. Experience has
    > told me not to trust you on anything without backing evidence."
    >
    > 73- Peter Kohlmann (cola): "Snot is a hideous troll. Nobody is as
    > dishonest as that piece of unadultered garbage. There are csma posters
    > even more stupid than Snot. Oxford comes to mind. There are certainly
    > other csma posters who lie nearly as much. But no others are so intent
    > on trolling in whatever way possible as Snot"
    >
    > 74- Phil Earnhardt: "You're only interested in trying to get superficial
    > snipes and extrapolate inappropriate conclusions."
    >
    > 75- Rapskat (cola): "For instance, your sig you reference a long
    > standing war you have going with some person from csma. It's like you
    > single out persons to target your attentions upon and then continuously
    > berate them with constant barbs and goads to perpetuate their
    > acrimonious responses, which in turn you respond in kind, etc. ad
    > infinitum. Above all things, your affinity for Macs and your overbearing
    > pompous nature aside, this is what convinces me that your primary
    > purpose for frequenting this and other groups is to troll."
    >
    > 76- RichardK: "Just killfile him already."
    >
    > 77- Rick (cola): "Snit, you are a liar. And an ignorant one. You trash
    > people that are trying their level best to cope with a horrendous
    > situation. And you do it without the slightest idea of what is going
    > on."
    >
    > 78- Rick G.: "Just to be plain here, I have no doubt that he is a troll.
    > I am tolerant of his nature, not blind to it. However, as a troll, he is
    > ... somewhat clumsy."
    >
    > 79- Robert F.: "Um, perhaps you misunderstand. I don't care if you quote
    > Mayor McCheese claiming the Earth is a flat plate perched on the shell
    > of a tortoise, I was merely pointing out that you run the risk of
    > looking ridiculous when you quote something patently stupid. If that's
    > your goal, you're on the right track, and more power to you."
    >
    > 80- Roy Culley (cola): "You appear to be in the latter category.
    > Starting crossposted threads for the simple purpose of hoping to
    > generate a flame war. If you truly want to learn more about Linux and
    > how it can help you and your supposed users why aren't you requesting
    > help from a more technical Linux newsgroup than an advocacy group? As
    > the old saying goes, those who can do, those who can't teach. Your posts
    > seem to confirm that saying IMHO."
    >
    > 81- Sandman: "He is by far the most killfiled person in the -HISTORY- of
    > csma. I've never seen someone so disliked, almost hated, in a news group
    > before. He has the ability to turn just about any person against him in
    > just a few posts. On usenet, trolls do this daily, but the funny part
    > with Michael is that I actually think he DOESN'T consider himself be a
    > troll - damn what -EVERYONE ELSE- is calling him. Obviously they are
    > wrong. Only Tholen himself can match this behaviour."
    >
    > 82- sav: "You really need to take a rest somewhere nice. Honestly, even
    > the nutters who hang out down on Brighton seafront made more sense than
    > this. You been doing drugs or something?"
    >
    > 83- Sean Burke: If you're dumb enough to respond to snit, you're
    > probably dumb enough to click on a spam attachment that promises to
    > remove smut from your harddrive."
    >
    > 84- ShutterBugz: "so snit-zel has some kind of problem expressing anger,
    > i guess. he has to vent his frustrations in other ways. and he thinks
    > he's making sense: well the syntax is there and he figures he's pretty
    > smart. indeed, he tells us, he's done the personality tests and the iq
    > tests and he's okay! aaaaahhhhh, you see he's soooooooo well adjusted."
    >
    > 85- Steve Carroll: "The only things we are sure about Snit is that he
    > has: * a monumental reading comprehension problem. * nym-shifted
    > numerous times to avoid kill-files. * built too many straw-men to
    > count... some, the size of small cities. * been labeled a disingenuous
    > liar/troll(or worse) by the vast majority. * used numerous sock-puppets
    > and admitted to it. * stolen IDs and admitted to it.
    > * gotten booted off by ISPs for his behavior. * twisted more context
    > than all csma posters combined. * made more unsupported accusations than
    > all csma posters combined. * virtually no life outside of csma."
    >
    > 86- Steve Mackay: "Just killfile Snit, the dishonest piece of elephant
    > dung, and all would go away. Sure, I got caught up in the "Snit Circus",
    > but then the cotton candy began to sour, and CSMA begun to smell like
    > elephant dung."
    >
    > 87- Steven de Mena: "Sorry, you have now lost all credibility with me
    > for your rediculous argument regarding this."
    >
    > 88- Steve Travis: "Oh oh... Now look what we've done. Snit has lost all
    > self respect and has sunk to the point of using words like 'asses' when
    > referring to others. Oh, how could the morally superior snit have fallen
    > so low.. Please take a moment out of your busy schedule to feel
    > embarassed for him. Or perhaps we should set up a fund to get him more
    > happy glue (and the appropriate plastic bags)."
    >
    > 89- Stuart Krivis: "You might as well just give up and plonk him then. A
    > snit is a snit is a snit and always will be."
    >
    > 90- TheLetterK: "That is merely your perception, ****. You're the one
    > lacking counter evidence, and your arguments basically amount to "I'm
    > right, nya nya nya." No matter how many examples someone points at to
    > demonstrate their claim, you blindly continue to insist that they
    > provide no evidence, or that the evidence given is irrelevant. Worse
    > still, you fall back on straw men and disingenuous quote mangling to
    > portray the argument in your favor. You are one of the worst trolls that
    > inhabit CSMA, ****. *Edwin* is more prone to fits of reason than you
    > are. "
    >
    > 91-Tim Adams: "I'd kill file you but then I'd miss the fun. you see, you
    > never cease to amaze me at just how stupid you really are. Why just the
    > other day I had a great laugh when I saw you, the king of liars (in this
    > NG anyway) calling somebody else a liar."
    >
    > 92- Tim Crowley: "I don't know - I think you might have more compassion.
    > Snit is sick. He needs help. This is the only way the poor sick fool can
    > get attention. My ****ing God, he's taken to hanging out with and
    > supporting racist pig ****ers like MuahMuah. It is true that no-one
    > likes him and those that pretend they do are just using him or don't
    > know him - but come on- it's not his fault. He's sick. Have some
    > compassion, eh? All these idiot trolls, Zara, Stew, Tommy,
    > MuaaaahMuaaah, and Snit - they are all so alike. I pity each and every
    > one of them"
    >
    > 93- Tim Smith: "No, he didn't, and there is no reasonable way you could
    > actually believe he lied. You are purely trying to troll here."
    >
    > 94- Timberwoof: "*Plonk!*"
    >
    > 95- Tom Bates: "Do you have to turn any thread you post in into one of
    > your Circus acts?"
    >
    > 96- Tommy: "In case you did not get it, I think the moral was: Stop
    > polluting the world with your infantile and obsessive "writings". You
    > give Mac advocacy a bad name. If that was your goal you have succeeded!
    > That also goes for all that bull**** on your website"
    >
    > 97- TravelinMan: "I still can't figure out what's wrong with Snit. Most
    > people have him kill-filed and the few who don't mostly restrict their
    > responses to 'why don't you go away, no one wants you here'. Just what
    > would keep someone in this group with all of that animosity? Must be
    > some kind of severe mental illness."
    >
    > 98- Wally: "Because by your own admission "honor and honesty" are
    > nothing more than a "game" to you, as such not only do you wish to
    > define the rules, but no doubt you will also attempt to alter or bend
    > the rules when inevitably things do not go to your liking, for this
    > reason I doubt anyone would be foolish enough to play your game."
    >
    > 99- William R. Walsh: "Now, if you'll excuse me, and accept my sincere
    > apologies for this, PLONK! Feel proud about that. You're the first
    > person to be plonked from my new computer! :-) "
    >
    > 100- Woofbert: "*Plonk*"
    >
    > 101- zara: "Look - I'm not into combing through thousands of posts, to
    > prove what was said or not said - I leave stuff like that to people
    > without lives, like Snit. But it is assuredly, in the record. Ping Snit
    > to do a search - you will flatter him, and give meaning to his tawdry
    > little life."
    >
    > 102- Znu: "I think your 'I'll go start a new thread to try to draw more
    > people into the debate I'm currently having with Steve/Elizabot/etc'
    > tactic is fairly trollish."
    >
    > 103 - High Plains Thumper: "Well, for one who is trolling this group,
    > those were extremely poorly done examples, making problems that do not
    > exist except an invention of Snit's own mind."
    >
    > 104 - Geoff M. Fitton:
    > "The Prescott Computer Guy *still* showing how stupid he is... What a
    > mar00n".
    >
    > 105 - William Poaster:
    > "Good grief. If anyone's having a mental breakdown it's the Prescott
    > Computer Guy, Michael Snit Glasser. What a f#cked up mess he is'.
    >
    > 106 - Tattoo Vampire:
    > "In other words, in another attempt to troll, you made yourself look
    > like a fool. Again".
    >
    >
    >
    > (snip Snit's purposeful mischaracterizations).


    --
    ɐ ɯoɹɟ ʇuǝs sɐʍ ǝƃɐssǝɯ sıɥʇ
    pǝǝʇuɐɹɐnƃ sı ɥɔıɥʍ ɹǝʇndɯoɔ
    ˙snɹıʌ ǝzopuıʍ $ɯ ǝɥʇ ɟo ǝǝɹɟ %00⇂
    -- sɯǝʇsʎs xnuıl/nuƃ --


  11. Re: What exactly is EXIF data?

    On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 08:07:28 -0600, Steve Carroll wrote:

    > In article ,
    > Snit wrote:
    >
    >> "Hadron" stated in post
    >> g9gsr7$adh$4@registered.motzarella.org on 9/1/08 7:04 AM:
    >>
    >> > William Poaster writes:
    >> >
    >> >> On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 08:01:52 -0500, chrisv wrote:
    >> >>
    >> >>>>> Hadron quacked:
    >> >>>>>>
    >> >>>>>> You can't say "someone should murder you", for example, without
    >> >>>>>> it being seen as a veiled threat.
    >> >>>
    >> >>> Dumb****. Murder is a crime. Disseminating information is, in
    >> >>> general, not.
    >> >>
    >> >> And especially when the person had supplied the information
    >> >> *themselves* in a website, bragged about what they do in newsgroups &
    >> >> linked to it with their nym!
    >> >
    >> > You really are a wanker of the worst order.


    Hardon Quack calling some a wanker, when it is the self-confessed
    *troll*.
    Message-ID:
    Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007

    >> > You know full well what you are doing. The why is any ones guess.
    >> > Your protests of "it was public domain" are as shallow as your
    >> > decency.


    Here the self-confessed *troll*, Hardon Quack, utters total bollocks, &
    talks of "decency".
    Oh, the irony.


    What you have to remember is that **** floats.
    Hadron always resurfaces.

    From: caver1
    Message-ID: <47dfac8b$0$22866$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
    Newsgroups: alt.os.linux.ubuntu
    Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2000


    Creative cutting and pasting, though...

    Hardon: > I think that will do for now.

    Sure will. You have already proved what a liar and an idiot you are...

    From: Joe
    Newsgroups: alt.os.linux.ubuntu
    Message-ID:
    Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2007


    >> As I noted earlier:
    >>
    >> More than that, they *know* there is no excuse for their actions -
    >> if they actually thought their BS was justifiable they would not
    >> have the need to openly lie about it - which they do every time
    >> they excuse their despicable actions by saying the information
    >> about the business they target is public. That is *irrelevant*...
    >> 100% irrelevant. The fact a business's information can easily be
    >> found does not excuse posting derogatory comments about the
    >> business simply because you have lost a Usenet debate or been
    >> caught lying or cannot refute an opinion you do not like.
    >>
    >> Now if one of my customers was unhappy with me and posted their
    >> experience - or their view of their experience - that would be fair
    >> and reasonable. But the COLA folk who lie about me and my business
    >> are acting reprehensibly

    >
    >
    > It's not a "lie" that numerous usenet posters have labeled you a liar,
    > troll or worse... that they have pointed out your inability to
    > comprehend what you read, your incessant trolling, your outright lies
    > and BS.


    Of course it's not a lie. Michael Snit Glasser lies, & forges posts. Many
    have seen it & know about it. Hardon Quack does the same thing, & people
    have also pointed out Quack's inability to comprehend what he reads, & his
    incessant trolling. They could almost be twins.

    > Take a look...
    >
    > 1- Adam Kesher: "Steve, IIRC Sandman's website has a member area and a
    > login. If you forget your password, you can ask it to e-mail it to you,
    > and a bot will send an e-mail.
    >
    > *That* is the e-mail Snit got from Sandman's website, and yes he's that
    > ****ed in the head and starved for attention that he'd claim it to be an
    > e-mail from Sandman himself. So, don't get sucked into his little
    > circus.
    >
    > The e-mail, in this particular instance, did probably originate from
    > Sandman.net."
    >
    > 2- Alan Baker: "People's perceptions of you are *formed* by behaviour
    > and not withstanding your occasional on topic posts, I wish you'd leave
    > too. Please note that despite the amazing silliness that is Edwin, I
    > have never made the same wish of him."
    >
    > 3- Andrew J. Brehm: "You are not flamed because you speak the truth, you
    > are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting the
    > newsgroup."
    >
    > 4- AZ Nomad: "The fact that you routinely change your headers to weasel
    > out of killfiles proves that you're an asshole."
    >
    > 5- Andy/news/nospam: "Why do you keep these things up, Snit? Why not
    > just let them go away and show how responsible a member of CSMA you are?
    > You could show your enemies up by being better than then, rise above the
    > low level you so obviously dislike. Anything, just stop...."
    >
    > 6- B.B.: "Does the From: header contain the string "Snit"? If yes, then
    > troll. Otherwise, maybe. Dunno why I had my KF on you set to expire, but
    > it's fixed now."
    >
    > 7- bobinnv: "I learned some time ago how much better this group can be
    > if you kill file Snit. I have never understood why more people don't do
    > the same.."
    >
    > 8- Bob S: "This has always been pretty much a free-for-all group, but
    > since Snit showed up, its become almost impossible to have a decent
    > discussion about anything.
    >
    > The solution is to NOT REPLY TO SNIT. But for some reason, some people
    > just can't stop feeding him."
    >
    > 9- ?b? unny: "snit makes me sad."
    >
    > 10- buzz off: "Snit is obviously mentally ill..."
    >
    > 11- chrisv (cola): "No, she called him "****", and rightly so, for they
    > way he was so ignominiously birthed into a toilet at the bus depot, and
    > simply refused to die, despite repeated flushes.
    >
    > It's now far too late to *flush* him, but we can still *plonk* him..."
    >
    > 12- C Lund: "Snit is not my responsibility. Maybe it's time for you to
    > learn how to use your kill-filter. I am assuming, of course, that your
    > Usenet browser has a kill-filter."
    >
    > 13- Code Orange: "Then why post it? What need is there for you to "win"
    > an argument? They don't like you, you don't like them. Why must you keep
    > this up? What results are you expecting?"
    >
    > 14- Dawg Tail: "You've already apologized for having already misread
    > what I had previously written. What makes you think that you're
    > correctly understanding what I'm writting now. You've got a history of
    > reading into things what you wanted people to have said instead of what
    > they really said.
    >
    > I suggest you get over this limitation of yours. It's making you look
    > foolish."
    >
    > Dawg Tail: "PC advocates, Mac advocates, Linux advocates. Almost all of
    > them are making similar claims about Snit. When you have so many diverse
    > people who share a common perception where do you think the problem
    > lies? With Snit? Or almost everyone else? The answer doesn't require an
    > advanced degree to figure out."
    >
    > 15- Dave Fritzinger: "Snit, please go away. Get a life, meet a woman, do
    > something, but please, please, please, GO AWAY!!!! "
    >
    > 16- Donald L McDaniel: "Jesus, snit. You're a teacher. I thought you
    > knew what a metaphor was, and could recognize one when it was presented
    > to you. I guess I had too much confidence in you."
    >
    > 17- ed: "snit, you continually amaze me with how much of a liar and
    > loser you are. you may notice a semi-regular pattern with me where i
    > stop responding to your posts for stretches at a time, then start up
    > responding as if you were a normal person. i suppose it's tough for the
    > magnitude of your 'loserdom' to stick, so it loses some of it's
    > sharpness when i stop responding to you. you almost always start
    > responding back in a semi normal way, but inevitably degenerate. it's
    > once again that time. i can only ask that you pass my condolences to
    > your wife and unborn child for having to put up with such a dishonest
    > fool as yourself. (well, if your wife is a loser as well, just pass
    > those condolences to the rug-rat to be; if not, double condolences to
    > her). "
    >
    > 18- Edwin: "You've got to be out of your mind, Snit. You're the worst
    > troll this group has ever seen. You're a liar and a forger, and you've
    > almost destroyed this group single-handedly. For you to post a list of
    > out of context arguments, and lies, and forgeries about your enemies
    > labled as a "peace effort" has to be one of the craziest stunts you've
    > pulled. It's all about your sick need for attention, your need to be
    > center stage at all times. You'd publicly eat dog turd if you thought it
    > would make people look at you."
    >
    > 19- Elijah Baley: "Seriously, Snit, you need psychiatric help. Go see a
    > doctor."
    >
    > 20- Elizabot v2.0.2: "I see you were unable to respond to the points in
    > my post and you are back to your repetitious regurgitation mode. How
    > childishly typical of you, Snit. "
    >
    > 21- fibercut: "That is the problem. In the years I have been coming to
    > CSMA I have seen in the past year a real hatred among people, besides
    > the typical Mac vs. Windows typical argument. I feel that it is like
    > being in a room of really young children trying there best to best the
    > other person. The one common thing among all of this seems to be you. I
    > hate to be like this, but facts are facts. You seem to be in the middle
    > of a great percentage of arguments. CSMA has become less about Macs and
    > more about "look everybody, I think he lied". Is there no end then all
    > this picking at each other on such a personal level. CSMA has always
    > been al little adversarial but you have personally crank it up to the
    > point that this place is no longer fun. Congratulations on stopping CSMA
    > and making this place your own personal circus."
    >
    > 22- George Graves: "Jason. You have started an argument with the Snit
    > (AKA Michael Glasser), this should not be done. He will drive you crazy
    > with his twisted logic, his deep-rooted need to be ALWAYS right at any
    > cost. He will move goalposts, set up strawmen, and bore you into
    > submission with his endless pedanticism. The only way to engage him is
    > to hit and run. NEVER engage him, it's a futile, empty procedure that
    > will only anger you and feed him. Take my advice and STAY AWAY!"
    >
    > 23- gimme_this_gimme_t...@yahoo.com: "Hitting the vodka tonight Snit?"
    >
    > 24- Greycloud: "You really shouldn't lie like that. Everyone else
    > notices that you are not honest and you have no honor."
    >
    > 25- Henry Flam: "Who gives a damn about this ****? Snit, once in a
    > while, I make the mistake in thinking that that you are starting to make
    > sense in your posts; I tend to agree with your politics. Then you post
    > stuff like this and it destroys any respect that I have for you."
    >
    > 26- Heywood Mogroot: "*plonk*"
    >
    > 27- Jamie Hart (cola): "It seems that since you are unable to offer
    > support for your statements, you're reduced to personal attacks on me.
    > Incidentally, anyone reading this post can see that I have offered no
    > straw men, and have only asked you to explain how the things you state
    > as facts can be true. I'm really sorry that you're taking this attitude,
    > the topic is an interesting one and I thought you might have some
    > insights. I've snipped the rest, since you dislike long posts and avoid
    > answering any of the questions I asked by saying everything was just
    > repeated. "
    >
    > 28- Jason McNorton: "You're one of the many, many paranoid people on
    > usenet that should be confined most likely. You sit there and refresh
    > your screen endlessly. You post the same nonsense over and over. Either
    > you're a super troll, or you're a super mess."
    >
    > 29- JEDIDIAH (cola): "You're simply full of ****."
    >
    > 30- Jeff B.: "Yo, Snit. We're not pals. I think you're a git."
    >
    > 31- Jeff Hoppe: "This is a Macintosh Advocacy newsgroup. Not a 12-step
    > recovery plan. Your medical problems or conditions won't help me achieve
    > a greater understanding of my Mac. In fact, it detracts from it and
    > those kinds of discussions have no place in a newsgroup such as this."
    >
    > 32- Jesus: "Really, Snit. It's annoying. What are you accomplishing
    > besides being annoying? Is that your goal?"
    >
    > 33- Jim Lee Jr.: "Snit, read the thread's title, is Bush mentioned in
    > it? You (and Carroll) ought to learn to stay on topic and not hijack
    > threads."
    >
    > 34- Jim Polaski: "Why is it that nearly every thread you're involved in
    > seems like it turns into some tit-for-tat, dozens of responses to OT
    > things and garbage?"
    >
    > 35- Jim Richardson (cola): "And yet again, Snit runs away, rather than
    > actually provide evidence for his claims. Par for the course I suppose."
    >
    > 36- Joey Jojo Junior Shabadoo: "and Snithead has even farther to fall -
    > in a few weeks he'll be out on the street after midnight, yelling at
    > passersby 'sucky sucky, $2...'"
    >
    > 37- John C. Randolph: "You're nothing but a troll yourself. What are you
    > bitching about?"
    >
    > 38- JohnOfArc (cola): "I'm not sure "troll" does it justice- more like a
    > black hole! But hey, if we all promise to never again even entertain an
    > unkind thought re Apple, will you take it back and lock it up? Please??"
    >
    > 39- John Q. Public: "I have not been bothered to read Snit's postings
    > since I figured out who he is. I don't bother to filter his posts, I
    > just consider the source and skip to the next one when I see his name."
    >
    > 40- John Slade: "I don't get posts from Snit. I wouldn't be shocked that
    > he has some kind of disorder. He made up stuff about being a computer
    > repairman and teacher. He's just plain loony and best ignored. Let him
    > deal with his disorder by medication. He's here to do one thing, get
    > attention from people. He says the crazy stuff just to get a reaction.
    > You say you like to beat him over the head. Well that's what he's
    > counting on, he says stuff he knows isn't true in hopes to get a rise
    > out of people like you. Ignore him, you won't regret it."
    >
    > John Slade: "Snit, you have a enough problems as it is without adding
    > drinking booze to the list. How the hell did you manage to get out of my
    > killfile? Oh well back into the cage you go, PLONK."
    >
    > 41- Josh McKee: "Snit, I assume there was some point to this posting?
    > Because I certainly cannot find it."
    >
    > 42- K E: "I haven't read this board for awhile but I see that even
    > though the trolls still roam free at least the worst troll of the lot is
    > mostly being ignored by readers on this bb. If the few stragglers that
    > keep replying to him would just stop responding to Snit at all this
    > place could be worth coming back to. There's a good chance he'll pack up
    > and take his trolling to more fertile ground."
    >
    > 43- Kelsey Bjarnason (cola): "Funny how you simply don't bother reading
    > the posts that rip your entire thesis to bleeding gobbets of putrid
    > excrescence. Maybe some day you'll learn how to support your position,
    > instead of sticking your fingers in your ears and humming, hoping it'll
    > all go away."
    >
    > 44- Ku Karlovsky (cola): "You repeatedly chastise others for ad hominem
    > attacks while in the same sentence make your own ad hominem attacks.You
    > make silly claims and then avoid the subject of your silliness. You're a
    > liar and a hypocrite and you always have been."
    >
    > 45- Lars Trager: "Yes, you are stupid."
    >
    > 46- Lefty Bigfoot: "Okay, I tried to put up with it for a long time, but
    > the few times you post something worth reading just aren't worth it
    > anymore. *plonk*"
    >
    > 47- Liam Slider (cola): "Maybe he's responding to the fact you've been
    > an annoying little ****wit lately. You started out with the pretense of
    > trying to be fair, but lately all there is from you in COLA is trashtalk
    > about Linux and you acting every bit the troll."
    >
    > 48- Linonut (cola): "Snit is a Tholenoid."
    >
    > "Indeed. Snit may be the first retraction of my general killfile
    > amnesty.
    > The volume of cavilling, whining, foot-stomping, back-tracking,
    > goal-post
    > shifting, and petulance generated by that effete candy-ass beggars
    > belief".
    >
    > 49- Lloyd Parsons: "Well, I don't know if Oxford is the most cretinous,
    > I would think that would be reserved for Snit! ;-)"
    >
    > 50- Mark Kent (cola): "The problem with someone like Mr Glasser is the
    > same as it is with Mr Wong, even if he were to be honest now, it would
    > be impossible to determine where the honesty starts and the usual
    > dishonesty ends. In my primary school, one of the teachers was very keen
    > on proverbs, and I recall her going over the "cry wolf" story. Mr
    > Glasser could "cry wolf" over and over now, and I would not come to help
    > him with his sheep, because I do not know any way of determining if he's
    > ever telling the truth, or indeed, if he ever has."
    >
    > 51- Mayor of R'lyeh: "The fact is that he's probably pulling it to this
    > post since its all about him and he managed to make me think about him
    > today. A friend of mine has a toddler. I went over to her house and
    > videotaped her kid doing a bunch of cute toddler stuff then burned a DVD
    > of it for her. While we were watching the DVD her kid got mad. He got
    > mad because we quit making him the center of attention and made that kid
    > on the tv the center of attention. He even ran up to the tv and tried to
    > block our view of it. That's how Snit lives his whole life."
    >
    > 52- Michelle Ronn: "The real topic here is that one someone refutes your
    > "facts", you run away and ignore them. Refuting your "facts" is easily
    > done in this case. I did it, and you ignored it. "
    >
    > 53- Mike: "Nonsense. I never see you "advocate" anything. All I see you
    > doing is engage in endless semantic arguments with everyone. You're the
    > TholenBot of CSMA. BTW, that's *not* a compliment!"
    >
    > 54- Mike Dee: "I will no longer accuse you of lying here. Instead I can
    > only say that you are a complete and delusional kook that happens to
    > inhabit CSMA for the time being. That you are unaware of how deranged
    > you actually behave further reinforces this notion. Please seek
    > professional help."
    >
    > 55- mmoore321: "Snit is a human car-accident and we are all
    > rubbernecking. We know it is bad form, but yet strangely curious. Treat
    > him the same way, look but just keep moving on."
    >
    > 56- Mojo: "Actually, these facts piss everybody off because they are
    > off-topic, unnecessarily confrontational, extremely boring and clearly
    > show that you are crying out for attention."
    >
    > 57- Mr. Blonde: "Lastly, I can't help but comment on the fact that your
    > obsession with Sandman has actually grown since you claimed to KF him.
    > Killfilling someone generally implies you're ignoring that person, yet
    > you piggyback onto virtually every reply to him here and and check his
    > website's validation status more often than most people check their
    > e-mail. These are not the actions of a mentally balanced individual."
    >
    > 58- MR_ED_of_Course: "Seriously, spend half a day at any pre-school or
    > kindergarten and see if the kids there can't teach you a thing or two
    > about social behavior."
    >
    > 59- Muahman: "Ummm, dude you post 1000 posts a day. 999 of them are
    > trolls, if anyone here has issues it's not me."
    >
    > 60- Nashton/Nasht0n: "Oh for crying out loud, if I wasn't convinced that
    > snit is a total loser, and I rarely call people losers, I certainly am
    > now. Why bother responding to his stupidities anyway?"
    >
    > 61- New Bee: "Honest and honorable? You? You've either got a wry sense
    > of humor, or you're completely nuts. Either way you're just a waste of
    > time, and you've done more than anybody to make this group a cesspool.
    > Then you revel in wallowing in your own filth."
    >
    > 62- Not Important: "I get this mental image of you and a sibling as
    > children in the back seat of the family car saying: Mom, 'snits'
    > touching me ...
    > and you responding much as you do now ... I'm not touching you, you're
    > touching me! The problem is that by now you should've grown out of that
    > type of poke and complain interaction with others. But, of course,
    > you've haven't learned how to interact with others in a more
    > 'constructive' and mutually beneficial manner even now."
    >
    > 63- OldCSMAer: "What's he been doing? Am I going to be sorry I killfiled
    > him?"
    >
    > 64- OldSage: "What drives me nuts is your unrelenting ability and desire
    > to argue on the head of a pin about the most trivial of things."
    >
    > 65- Oxford: "If you are using MT-Newswatcher: Select offending Author,
    > example Snit... Go to the Filters Menu, Choose "Kill this Author" Click
    > "OK"
    > Then Repeat with each annoying Author of your choice. Then to see your
    > work...
    > Choose the Filter Menu again,
    > Then "Refilter Articles"...
    > Bam! No more boring, pointless bickering about nothing. Enjoy!!!!!"
    >
    > 66- Patrick Nihill: "I mean, honestly, who would you rather discuss
    > something with; Dan, or someone like Zara? Or, for that matter, Snit,
    > for whom the work 'troll' seems so painfully inadequate?"
    >
    > 67- Pawel Wojciak: "Jesus Christ, snit... "
    >
    > 68- PC Guy: "Forget it Snit, you're a waste of time. For someone who
    > talks about everyone else not being "honest and honorable" you appear to
    > be the least honest and honorable of anyone here."
    >
    > 69- Peter: "I've never felt the need to use the filters in Newswatcher
    > but I thought Id try the Kill this Author.. option with Snit. Ten
    > seconds later and he's gone! Amazing."
    >
    > 70- Peter Bjorn Perlso: "Plonked for 60 days. Now stfu and take your
    > argument with sandman into the private room."
    >
    > 71- Peter Hayes: "True, but that removes Snit completely, and someti...
    > err..... occasiona.... errrrr..... once in a blue moon he has something
    > useful to say."
    >
    > 72- Peter Jensen (cola): "Where has he ever said that they were not
    > different windowing environments? Message-ID, please. Experience has
    > told me not to trust you on anything without backing evidence."
    >
    > 73- Peter Kohlmann (cola): "Snot is a hideous troll. Nobody is as
    > dishonest as that piece of unadultered garbage. There are csma posters
    > even more stupid than Snot. Oxford comes to mind. There are certainly
    > other csma posters who lie nearly as much. But no others are so intent
    > on trolling in whatever way possible as Snot"
    >
    > 74- Phil Earnhardt: "You're only interested in trying to get superficial
    > snipes and extrapolate inappropriate conclusions."
    >
    > 75- Rapskat (cola): "For instance, your sig you reference a long
    > standing war you have going with some person from csma. It's like you
    > single out persons to target your attentions upon and then continuously
    > berate them with constant barbs and goads to perpetuate their
    > acrimonious responses, which in turn you respond in kind, etc. ad
    > infinitum. Above all things, your affinity for Macs and your overbearing
    > pompous nature aside, this is what convinces me that your primary
    > purpose for frequenting this and other groups is to troll."
    >
    > 76- RichardK: "Just killfile him already."
    >
    > 77- Rick (cola): "Snit, you are a liar. And an ignorant one. You trash
    > people that are trying their level best to cope with a horrendous
    > situation. And you do it without the slightest idea of what is going
    > on."
    >
    > 78- Rick G.: "Just to be plain here, I have no doubt that he is a troll.
    > I am tolerant of his nature, not blind to it. However, as a troll, he is
    > ... somewhat clumsy."
    >
    > 79- Robert F.: "Um, perhaps you misunderstand. I don't care if you quote
    > Mayor McCheese claiming the Earth is a flat plate perched on the shell
    > of a tortoise, I was merely pointing out that you run the risk of
    > looking ridiculous when you quote something patently stupid. If that's
    > your goal, you're on the right track, and more power to you."
    >
    > 80- Roy Culley (cola): "You appear to be in the latter category.
    > Starting crossposted threads for the simple purpose of hoping to
    > generate a flame war. If you truly want to learn more about Linux and
    > how it can help you and your supposed users why aren't you requesting
    > help from a more technical Linux newsgroup than an advocacy group? As
    > the old saying goes, those who can do, those who can't teach. Your posts
    > seem to confirm that saying IMHO."
    >
    > 81- Sandman: "He is by far the most killfiled person in the -HISTORY- of
    > csma. I've never seen someone so disliked, almost hated, in a news group
    > before. He has the ability to turn just about any person against him in
    > just a few posts. On usenet, trolls do this daily, but the funny part
    > with Michael is that I actually think he DOESN'T consider himself be a
    > troll - damn what -EVERYONE ELSE- is calling him. Obviously they are
    > wrong. Only Tholen himself can match this behaviour."
    >
    > 82- sav: "You really need to take a rest somewhere nice. Honestly, even
    > the nutters who hang out down on Brighton seafront made more sense than
    > this. You been doing drugs or something?"
    >
    > 83- Sean Burke: If you're dumb enough to respond to snit, you're
    > probably dumb enough to click on a spam attachment that promises to
    > remove smut from your harddrive."
    >
    > 84- ShutterBugz: "so snit-zel has some kind of problem expressing anger,
    > i guess. he has to vent his frustrations in other ways. and he thinks
    > he's making sense: well the syntax is there and he figures he's pretty
    > smart. indeed, he tells us, he's done the personality tests and the iq
    > tests and he's okay! aaaaahhhhh, you see he's soooooooo well adjusted."
    >
    > 85- Steve Carroll: "The only things we are sure about Snit is that he
    > has: * a monumental reading comprehension problem. * nym-shifted
    > numerous times to avoid kill-files. * built too many straw-men to
    > count... some, the size of small cities. * been labeled a disingenuous
    > liar/troll(or worse) by the vast majority. * used numerous sock-puppets
    > and admitted to it. * stolen IDs and admitted to it.
    > * gotten booted off by ISPs for his behavior. * twisted more context
    > than all csma posters combined. * made more unsupported accusations than
    > all csma posters combined. * virtually no life outside of csma."
    >
    > 86- Steve Mackay: "Just killfile Snit, the dishonest piece of elephant
    > dung, and all would go away. Sure, I got caught up in the "Snit Circus",
    > but then the cotton candy began to sour, and CSMA begun to smell like
    > elephant dung."
    >
    > 87- Steven de Mena: "Sorry, you have now lost all credibility with me
    > for your rediculous argument regarding this."
    >
    > 88- Steve Travis: "Oh oh... Now look what we've done. Snit has lost all
    > self respect and has sunk to the point of using words like 'asses' when
    > referring to others. Oh, how could the morally superior snit have fallen
    > so low.. Please take a moment out of your busy schedule to feel
    > embarassed for him. Or perhaps we should set up a fund to get him more
    > happy glue (and the appropriate plastic bags)."
    >
    > 89- Stuart Krivis: "You might as well just give up and plonk him then. A
    > snit is a snit is a snit and always will be."
    >
    > 90- TheLetterK: "That is merely your perception, ****. You're the one
    > lacking counter evidence, and your arguments basically amount to "I'm
    > right, nya nya nya." No matter how many examples someone points at to
    > demonstrate their claim, you blindly continue to insist that they
    > provide no evidence, or that the evidence given is irrelevant. Worse
    > still, you fall back on straw men and disingenuous quote mangling to
    > portray the argument in your favor. You are one of the worst trolls that
    > inhabit CSMA, ****. *Edwin* is more prone to fits of reason than you
    > are. "
    >
    > 91-Tim Adams: "I'd kill file you but then I'd miss the fun. you see, you
    > never cease to amaze me at just how stupid you really are. Why just the
    > other day I had a great laugh when I saw you, the king of liars (in this
    > NG anyway) calling somebody else a liar."
    >
    > 92- Tim Crowley: "I don't know - I think you might have more compassion.
    > Snit is sick. He needs help. This is the only way the poor sick fool can
    > get attention. My ****ing God, he's taken to hanging out with and
    > supporting racist pig ****ers like MuahMuah. It is true that no-one
    > likes him and those that pretend they do are just using him or don't
    > know him - but come on- it's not his fault. He's sick. Have some
    > compassion, eh? All these idiot trolls, Zara, Stew, Tommy,
    > MuaaaahMuaaah, and Snit - they are all so alike. I pity each and every
    > one of them"
    >
    > 93- Tim Smith: "No, he didn't, and there is no reasonable way you could
    > actually believe he lied. You are purely trying to troll here."
    >
    > 94- Timberwoof: "*Plonk!*"
    >
    > 95- Tom Bates: "Do you have to turn any thread you post in into one of
    > your Circus acts?"
    >
    > 96- Tommy: "In case you did not get it, I think the moral was: Stop
    > polluting the world with your infantile and obsessive "writings". You
    > give Mac advocacy a bad name. If that was your goal you have succeeded!
    > That also goes for all that bull**** on your website"
    >
    > 97- TravelinMan: "I still can't figure out what's wrong with Snit. Most
    > people have him kill-filed and the few who don't mostly restrict their
    > responses to 'why don't you go away, no one wants you here'. Just what
    > would keep someone in this group with all of that animosity? Must be
    > some kind of severe mental illness."
    >
    > 98- Wally: "Because by your own admission "honor and honesty" are
    > nothing more than a "game" to you, as such not only do you wish to
    > define the rules, but no doubt you will also attempt to alter or bend
    > the rules when inevitably things do not go to your liking, for this
    > reason I doubt anyone would be foolish enough to play your game."
    >
    > 99- William R. Walsh: "Now, if you'll excuse me, and accept my sincere
    > apologies for this, PLONK! Feel proud about that. You're the first
    > person to be plonked from my new computer! :-) "
    >
    > 100- Woofbert: "*Plonk*"
    >
    > 101- zara: "Look - I'm not into combing through thousands of posts, to
    > prove what was said or not said - I leave stuff like that to people
    > without lives, like Snit. But it is assuredly, in the record. Ping Snit
    > to do a search - you will flatter him, and give meaning to his tawdry
    > little life."
    >
    > 102- Znu: "I think your 'I'll go start a new thread to try to draw more
    > people into the debate I'm currently having with Steve/Elizabot/etc'
    > tactic is fairly trollish."
    >
    > 103 - High Plains Thumper: "Well, for one who is trolling this group,
    > those were extremely poorly done examples, making problems that do not
    > exist except an invention of Snit's own mind."
    >
    > 104 - Geoff M. Fitton:
    > "The Prescott Computer Guy *still* showing how stupid he is... What a
    > mar00n".
    >
    > 105 - William Poaster:
    > "Good grief. If anyone's having a mental breakdown it's the Prescott
    > Computer Guy, Michael Snit Glasser. What a f#cked up mess he is'.
    >
    > 106 - Tattoo Vampire:
    > "In other words, in another attempt to troll, you made yourself look
    > like a fool. Again".
    >
    >
    >
    > (snip Snit's purposeful mischaracterizations).


    --
    ? ?o?? ?u?s s?? ???ss?? si??
    p???u???n? si ??i?? ???nd?o?
    ?sn?i? ?zopui? $? ??? ?o ???? %00?
    -- s???s?s xnuil/nu? --



  12. Re: What exactly is EXIF data?

    Snit wrote:

    > When you do so you will have to explain why Tattoo Vampire oddly forgot to
    > mention that fact for at least four posts - even though the date the
    > picture
    > was being taken was under discussion.


    Why would I bother to discuss something that didn't exist?

    Give it up, Snit. The more you wiggle and dance and try to worm your way out
    of your blunder, the more you look like a total idiot in front of everyone.

    I'll ask you again, if that data is there, what is the make and model of the
    camera use? If you can't answer this (and I know you can't) will you promise
    to go away forever?
    --
    Regards,
    [tv]

    ....Computers make very fast, very efficient mistakes.

    Owner/Proprietor, Cheesus Crust Pizza Company
    Good to the last supper




+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5