Test Message - Mandrake

This is a discussion on Test Message - Mandrake ; Test message 11-07-06 0827 -0500...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 30 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 582

Thread: Test Message

  1. Test Message

    Test message
    11-07-06 0827 -0500




  2. Re: Test Message

    On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 08:26:47 -0500 (EST), Larry Lavins wrote:
    > Test message
    > 11-07-06 0827 -0500



    Welcome to the group.
    Since the post showed up here, the test failed.
    Do you know about the 400+ test groups on Usenet?

    Some interesting information may be found in
    http://livinginternet.com/u/uu_test.htm

    Please use something like alt.test or misc.test .
    For binary test use something like alt.binaries.test

    Please, before you post again, read
    http://tgos.org/newbie/index2.html
    http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

    For odd punctuation marks seen at end of text responses, you might look at
    http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/gallery.htm

    To enhance your Usenet experience you may want to check
    "How to make killfiles for use with various newsreaders."
    http://www.hyphenologist.co.uk/killfile/killfilefaq.htm

    "What is a troll, what do they do, why do they do it, and
    what can one do about them? (Anti Troll FAQ)"
    http://www.hyphenologist.co.uk/killf..._troll_faq.htm


  3. Re: Test Message

    On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 08:26:47 -0500, Larry Lavins wrote:

    > Test message
    > 11-07-06 0827 -0500


    Yes, the test proves beyond any shadow of a doubt, that you are surely a
    moron. You have failed again, which is something you're used to, no doubt.

    Bugger off, worm.

    --
    "Ubuntu" - an African word meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".


  4. Re: Test Message

    Larry Lavins wrote:

    > Test message
    > 11-07-06 0827 -0500



    Welcome to the group. If your message was intended to go to
    alt.os.linux.mandrake, it was a success. There are some people that will
    tell lies claiming that it failed. This is not the case. It seems these
    people need to put others down in order to feel better about themselves. I
    suggest you consider for yourself why someone would want to tell lies about
    the success of a test post, then treat posts from such people accordingly.

    That said, there are a number of test groups on usenet. If your server does
    allow you to subscribe to such groups, it is considered polite to posts to
    those groups.

    Again, any issue anyone has about test posts revolves around NETIQUETTE. Why
    they would have tell lies about a netiquette issue is beyond me.

  5. Re: Test Message

    On Tuesday 07 November 2006 14:26, Larry Lavins stood up and addressed the
    masses in /alt.os.linux.mandrake/ as follows...:

    > Test message
    > 11-07-06 0827 -0500


    Now that everyone has had their say about your test post, I must of course
    also have mine - albeit that it's not my habit. ;-)

    As Bit Twister pointed out to you, posting test messages to non-test
    newsgroups is considered bad /Netiquette./ It's not a crime, but it's just
    not appreciated much, when there are over 400 newsgroups with the word
    "test" in their name somewhere. ;-)

    Bit Twister also welcomed you to the group, and I do the same. As I looked
    up on Google where Dan C got his motives for flaming you like that, I
    noticed that you've posted several such test posts to different non-test
    groups, but also that you were (or still are) also an OS/2 user.

    Having used OS/2 for 5 years myself on my first ever PC, I am of course glad
    to see someone who hasn't been as Windows-conditioned as we have come to
    expect from newbies. ;-)

    Of course, OS/2 is still closer to Windows than it is to UNIX, but at least
    OS/2 users by definition show that they won't let either Microsoft or a
    hardware vendor pick their operating system for them. ;-)

    The above all said, please ignore the replies from Dan C and
    Matt /left_coast./ The first one has a reputation of being quite
    intolerant towards newbies and people who post from Windows. The second
    one is our local /Netkook,/ at yet another one of his attempts to confront
    and discredit Bit Twister, whom he has been stalking for quite some time
    now - among other targets, yours truly included.

    So... Welcome to the group - again. You'll find that this group has a lot
    of friendly and helpful people in it, and some less friendly people. As do
    most groups, I suppose. ;-)

    --
    With kind regards,

    *Aragorn*
    (registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

  6. Re: Test Message

    Aragorn wrote:

    First, it must be pointed out that Aragorn has made MANY false made up
    attacks on me in an attempt to discredit me.

    > Matt /left_coast./ *The first one has a reputation of being quite
    > intolerant towards newbies and people who post from Windows.


    But CORRECTLY stated the TRUTH about test posts. So you feel you need to
    attack me. In this case I said NOTHING about Bit Twister, but you feel the
    need to make the test message post ABOUT Bit Twister to justify your attack
    on me. Forgetting that Bit told LIES about test post for a LONG time.
    Petty, very petty. It was only AFTER I confronted the telling of lies about
    test posts REPEATEDLY and catching grief and personal attacks from the
    likes of Aragorn did Bit finally STOP telling the lies bout test posts. It
    is clear that Aragorn is a BIASED individual that has an ax to grind
    against someone that would confront the telling of lies. Why would he be so
    against someone that confronts the telling of lies? Why would a TRUTHFUL
    person have such a problem with someone that CONFRONTS those that tell
    lies?

    The fact is, in a tread where I correctly pointed out that people are
    telling lies about test message posts, you feel the need to ATTACK ME. Your
    hate of me is showing again.

    > The second
    > one is our local /Netkook,/ at yet another one of his attempts to confront
    > and discredit Bit Twister, whom he has been stalking for quite some time
    > now - among other targets, yours truly included.


    Ahh, Aragorn is STALKING me again.

    I confronted Bit when he was WRONG and when he was telling LIES. What
    discredited Bit was his reaction to someone correctly pointing out his
    error and his telling of lies. As an /*_example_*/, his claim that opening
    up a service port (imap or pop) was a better solution than what he
    incorrectly claimed as a kludge method of accessing local mail. When in
    fact, in many cases, the more secure AND BEST option was the option *I* put
    forward. If a SINGLE user wanted only to access the email the system sent
    to root (which mandriva says should be forwarded to a real user not root
    [1]) and only wanted to do it LOCALLY (no remote access) it would be better
    to OPEN A PORT for the whole world to hack than to add a single user
    to /etc/group (the way mandriva sets up its distribution). Could Bit EVER
    acknowledge this error? Not a chance. The fact is, I have corrected Bit on
    many occasions, INCLUDING his /PREVIOUS/ telling LIES about test messages
    (how long did it take Bit to stop telling those lies once confronted? A
    very long time and only after spewing lots of grief. .

    The fact that I point out errors in what bit says does NOT mean I should be
    ignored. The fact that someone points out errors is a reason to LISTEN to
    that person. No, it is clear that the person trying to discredit someone is
    YOU and you are trying to discredit ME.


    [1] From the /etc/postfix/alias file:

    # Person who should get root's mail. This alias
    # must exist.
    # CHANGE THIS LINE to an account of a HUMAN
    root:



  7. Re: Test Message

    left_coast wrote:

    > First, it must be pointed out that Aragorn has made MANY false made up
    > attacks on me in an attempt to discredit me.


    Matt - /please/ take your meds and stop wasting your time posting yet more
    drivel to Usenet. You're becoming irritating.

    C.


  8. Re: Test Message

    Chris Hunter wrote:

    > left_coast wrote:
    >
    >> First, it must be pointed out that Aragorn has made MANY false made up
    >> attacks on me in an attempt to discredit me.

    >
    > Matt - /please/ take your meds and stop wasting your time posting yet more
    > drivel to Usenet. You're becoming irritating.
    >
    > C.


    I have stated NOTHING but the truth. This thread is an example. I posted a
    message that correctly, even by Aragorn's standards, identifies the issues
    about test posts and get attacked by Aragorn, now YOU. It is not me that
    need to take meds, it is the likes of hateful people like YOU that need
    meds. You have not been able to address ANY specific issue yet you attack
    anyway. Just what I expect from the likes of you and Aragorn, attack
    without any justification.

  9. Re: Test Message

    Chris Hunter wrote:

    > You're becoming irritating.
    >
    > C.


    If you don't like what I have to say, put me in your killfile. I no longer
    take people that attack without specifics, the way you have, seriously. All
    I see is another hateful person that supports people that tell lies. Again,
    in this thread, I said NOTHING that justifies the attacks Aragorn made, yet
    he attacks and you sport him.

  10. Re: Test Message

    left_coast wrote:

    > If you don't like what I have to say, put me in your killfile.


    Happily! *plonk!*

    > I no longer
    > take people that attack without specifics, the way you have, seriously.


    Good. Maybe you'll stop posting your mindless drivel (though that's
    probably too much to hope for from someone as mentally defective as you).

    > All I see is another hateful person that supports people that tell lies.


    It seems that *every* posting on Usenet contains "lies" according to you.
    You really have a serious persecution complex - I /really/ would suggest
    extended discussions about your problem with a psychiatrist.

    > Again, in this thread, I said NOTHING that justifies the attacks Aragorn
    > made, yet he attacks and you sport him.


    If you check your posting history, you made some bizarre unwarranted attacks
    on me: accusing me of "lying", "bigotry", "anti-Americanism" and various
    other specious nonsense.

    You really should seek professional help and stop showing your psychoses
    publicly on Usenet to the detriment of every newsgroup you post to.

    *Go* *away* - you're not wanted, and have nothing to offer.

    C.


  11. Re: Test Message

    On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 10:14:17 -0800, left_coast wrote:

    > But CORRECTLY stated the TRUTH about test posts.


    No you are lying. There are about 9 sentences in your post.
    4 are true the rest are lies.

    > So you feel you need to attack me.


    No attack, Aragorn was just giving Larry some advice and provided the
    truth about your deliberate libelous accusations you have made upon me.

    > In this case I said NOTHING about Bit Twister,


    Nobody said you did, but you injected this misdirection for your next lie.

    > but you feel the need to make the test message post


    What, guess you are reading minds here and we all know about your
    feeling about mind reading.

    > ABOUT Bit Twister to justify your attack on me.


    How can that be a line and an attack when someone is providing facts.

    > Forgetting that Bit told LIES about test post for a LONG time.


    See there you are with a deliberate libelous accusation and a bold
    face lie.

    > Petty, very petty. It was only AFTER I confronted the telling of lies about
    > test posts REPEATEDLY and catching grief and personal attacks from the
    > likes of Aragorn did Bit finally STOP telling the lies bout test
    > posts.


    That is a lie. I never had to stop because I was not lying in the first place.

    >
    > The fact is, in a tread where I correctly pointed out that people are
    > telling lies about test message posts, you feel the need to ATTACK ME. Your
    > hate of me is showing again.


    No you are lying left and right. Everyone pointed out your were the
    one lying left and right. For any newbie watching this thread
    feel free to judge for yourself.
    Message-Id:

    >
    > I confronted Bit when he was WRONG and when he was telling LIES.


    See there you are lying again, unlike you I was not trying to deceive
    anyone.


    > The fact is, I have corrected Bit on
    > many occasions, INCLUDING his /PREVIOUS/ telling LIES about test messages
    > (how long did it take Bit to stop telling those lies once confronted? A
    > very long time and only after spewing lots of grief. .


    More lies. Since I never started lying, I did not have to stop and you
    could not have corrected my test post response because it is not broke.

  12. Re: Test Message

    Chris Hunter wrote:

    >> If you don't like what I have to say, put me in your killfile.

    >
    > Happily! **plonk!*


    That god.

    >
    >> I no longer
    >> take people that attack without specifics, the way you have, seriously.

    >
    > Good. *Maybe you'll stop posting your mindless drivel (though that's
    > probably too much to hope for from someone as mentally defective as you).



    Of course not. While I do not take you seriously, I still respond.

    >
    >> All I see is another hateful person that supports people that tell lies.

    >
    > It seems that every posting on Usenet contains "lies" according to you.
    > You really have a serious persecution complex - I really would suggest
    > extended discussions about your problem with a psychiatrist.



    Ahh, you have a problem with people confronting those that tell lies, why is
    that? Too many people confronting YOU?

    >
    >> Again, in this thread, I said NOTHING that justifies the attacks Aragorn
    >> made, yet he attacks and you sport him.

    >
    > If you check your posting history, you made some bizarre unwarranted
    > attacks on me: accusing me of "lying", "bigotry", "anti-Americanism" and
    > various other specious nonsense.


    Ahhh, now we see what is driving the hate... I successfully challenged
    your "anti-American" rhetoric by pointing out that Europeans were, in fact,
    no better. In fact, if you take the last 230 years (the time that the US
    has been existence) The total death toll of all the dead in all the wars
    the USA started (even the USA War of Independence from tyrannical British
    rule) is DWARFED by the death toll World War II a SINGLE war started by
    Europeans. Though out history European "culture" has been a culture of war
    that is far worse than that of the USA. But if I remember correctly, I also
    implied to your being under-educated because of your lack of understating
    of the war like nature of the "culture" you value so much. That you, in
    fact, have no room to judge. All you could do was make lame excuses. But in
    all of this, I see NOTHING specific. As usual, my detractors, when unable
    to debate specifics, make general claims.

    >
    > You really should seek professional help and stop showing your psychoses
    > publicly on Usenet to the detriment of every newsgroup you post to.


    Why? Because I don't bow down to your bigoted, uneducated, anti-American
    rhetoric? Anyone that disagrees with you needs medical help? Judging by
    you, Europeans are a bunch of losers.

    >
    > Go away - you're not wanted, and have nothing to offer.


    Ahhh, the battle cry of the anti-free speech hate mongers. Can't discredit
    the message, discredit the messenger. It's no wonder that, though out
    history, until the USA got involved and stayed involved you Europeans were
    killing each other in

    >
    > C.



  13. Re: Test Message

    Bit Twister wrote:

    > On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 10:14:17 -0800, left_coast wrote:
    >
    >> But CORRECTLY stated the TRUTH about test posts.

    >
    > No you are lying. There are about 9 sentences in your post.
    > 4 are true the rest are lies.


    vague claims. Nothing specific. FIGURES. Unless you have something SPECIFIC,
    your words are MEANINGLESS.

    >
    >> So you feel you need to attack me.

    >
    > No attack, Aragorn was just giving Larry some advice and provided the
    > truth about your deliberate libelous accusations you have made upon me.


    As I was trying to give by pointing out that some people tell lies about the
    test post. You seem to have a problem with people that challenge those that
    tell lies, why would that be?

    >
    >> In this case I said NOTHING about Bit Twister,

    >
    > Nobody said you did, but you injected this misdirection for your next lie.


    No, it is NOT a lie. It is the TRUTH, I said NOTHING ABOUT YOU. To claim
    that statement a lie is simply FALSE. To claim that my statement "In this
    case I said NOTHING about Bit Twister" is a deliberate lie, because I, IN
    FACT said NOTHING about you regardless of if you think it a misdirection or
    not. IT IS A TRUE STATEMENT. But I am seeing why you would act so
    threatened by people that challenge people that tell lies.

    >
    >> but you feel the need to make the test message post

    >
    > What, guess you are reading minds here and we all know about your
    > feeling about mind reading.


    No, I MADE GUESS. Guessing as to what ones motives are implies that I DO NOT
    KNOW for sure. If I could read minds, I would KNOW FOR SURE. Again you are
    WRONG. As I clearly stated, I WAS GUESSING, not mind reading. Guess you are
    not smart enough to tell the difference.

    >
    >> ABOUT Bit Twister to justify your attack on me.

    >
    > How can that be a line and an attack when someone is providing facts.


    You tell me, how could it be the line of attack when I was the one providing
    facts?

    >
    >> Forgetting that Bit told LIES about test post for a LONG time.

    >
    > See there you are with a deliberate libelous accusation and a bold
    > face lie.


    Nope, As I stated before, according to the Cambridge Dictionary, the
    dictionary of YOUR choice, "telling lies" does not require deception.

    http://dictionary.cambridge.org/defi...1791&dict=CALD

    since your claims that the test posts were a failure is not true, your
    claims fit the "Cambridge Dictionary" of telling a lie. Since I caimed you
    were telling lies, it FITS.

    >
    >> Petty, very petty. It was only AFTER I confronted the telling of lies
    >> about test posts REPEATEDLY and catching grief and personal attacks from
    >> the likes of Aragorn did Bit finally STOP telling the lies bout test
    >> posts.

    >
    > That is a lie. I never had to stop because I was not lying in the first
    > place.
    >


    Yes, you were telling lies. You refuse to admit it.

    >>
    >> The fact is, in a tread where I correctly pointed out that people are
    >> telling lies about test message posts, you feel the need to ATTACK ME.
    >> Your hate of me is showing again.

    >
    > No you are lying left and right. Everyone pointed out your were the
    > one lying left and right. For any newbie watching this thread
    > feel free to judge for yourself.
    > Message-Id:


    Last time I checked, one is a liar because they do not tell the truth. One
    is not voted a liar. A million people can call me a liar, but if what I say
    is in fact the truth then there would be a million people WRONG. The fact
    that you would resort to such an invalid tactic just shows how weak your
    claim are.



    >
    >>
    >> I confronted Bit when he was WRONG and when he was telling LIES.

    >
    > See there you are lying again, unlike you I was not trying to deceive
    > anyone.


    Again, "telling lies" does not require you to try to deceive. According to
    the dictionary of your choice:

    http://dictionary.cambridge.org/defi...1791&dict=CALD

    My claim was "telling lies" and that does not require an attempt to deceive
    ONLY ".

    >
    >
    >> The fact is, I have corrected Bit on
    >> many occasions, INCLUDING his /PREVIOUS/ telling LIES about test messages
    >> (how long did it take Bit to stop telling those lies once confronted? A
    >> very long time and only after spewing lots of grief. .

    >
    > More lies. Since I never started lying, I did not have to stop and you
    > could not have corrected my test post response because it is not broke.


    I claimed "TELLING LIES" which does not require you to attempt to deceive.
    http://dictionary.cambridge.org/defi...1791&dict=CALD

    It only requires that you "say something/things that are not true"
    Since "telling lies" only requires you say something that is not true and
    your claims about the failure of test posts are not true, my claim that you
    are "telling lies" is in fact TRUE.


  14. Re: Test Message

    Chris Hunter wrote:
    > left_coast wrote:
    >
    >> If you don't like what I have to say, put me in your killfile.

    >
    > Happily! *plonk!*
    >
    >> I no longer
    >> take people that attack without specifics, the way you have, seriously.

    >
    > Good. Maybe you'll stop posting your mindless drivel (though that's
    > probably too much to hope for from someone as mentally defective as you).
    >
    >> All I see is another hateful person that supports people that tell lies.

    >
    > It seems that *every* posting on Usenet contains "lies" according to you.
    > You really have a serious persecution complex - I /really/ would suggest
    > extended discussions about your problem with a psychiatrist.
    >
    >> Again, in this thread, I said NOTHING that justifies the attacks Aragorn
    >> made, yet he attacks and you sport him.

    >
    > If you check your posting history, you made some bizarre unwarranted attacks
    > on me: accusing me of "lying", "bigotry", "anti-Americanism" and various
    > other specious nonsense.
    >
    > You really should seek professional help and stop showing your psychoses
    > publicly on Usenet to the detriment of every newsgroup you post to.
    >
    > *Go* *away* - you're not wanted, and have nothing to offer.


    He'll be here as long as people respond to him.

    --
    Blinky RLU 297263
    Killing all posts from Google Groups
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

  15. Re: Test Message

    Blinky the Shark wrote:

    > Go away - you're not wanted, and have nothing to offer.
    >
    > He'll be here as long as people respond to him.
    >


    I will be here TRYING to help AND challenging those that tell lies as long
    as I feel like it. I can only think of one reason why the likes of you have
    such an issue with people that challenge those that tell lies.

  16. Re: Test Message

    Bit Twister wrote:

    And just WHY did you snip THIS?:

    > I confronted Bit when he was WRONG and when he was telling LIES. What
    > discredited Bit was his reaction to someone correctly pointing out his
    > error and his telling of lies. As an /*_example_*/, his claim that opening
    > up a service port (imap or pop) was a better solution than what he
    > incorrectly claimed as a kludge method of accessing local mail. When in
    > fact, in many cases, the more secure AND BEST option was the option I put
    > forward. If a SINGLE user wanted only to access the email the system sent
    > to root (which mandriva says should be forwarded to a real user not root
    > [1]) and only wanted to do it LOCALLY (no remote access) it would be

    better
    > to OPEN A PORT for the whole world to hack than to add a single user
    > to /etc/group (the way mandriva sets up its distribution). Could Bit EVER
    > acknowledge this error? Not a chance. The fact is, I have corrected Bit on
    > many occasions, INCLUDING his PREVIOUS telling LIES about test messages
    > (how long did it take Bit to stop telling those lies once confronted? A
    > very long time and only after spewing lots of grief. .


    I see you STILL can not admit when you are WRONG.



  17. Re: Test Message

    On 8 Nov 2006 22:59:54 GMT, Blinky the Shark wrote:

    > He'll be here as long as people respond to him.


    Respond to who?

    --
    Linux: because I work with Windows, and that's bad enough.
    AOLM FAQ - http://blinkynet.net/comp/faq_aolm.html
    RLU #300033 - MDV 2006 - WindowMaker 0.92.0

  18. Re: Test Message

    Dave wrote:
    > On 8 Nov 2006 22:59:54 GMT, Blinky the Shark wrote:
    >
    >> He'll be here as long as people respond to him.

    >
    > Respond to who?


    If this implies that you, too, have him binned, that is a good thing.
    Others might learn from this.

    --
    Blinky RLU 297263
    Killing all posts from Google Groups
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

  19. Re: Test Message

    Blinky the Shark wrote:

    > Dave wrote:
    >> On 8 Nov 2006 22:59:54 GMT, Blinky the Shark wrote:
    >>
    >>> He'll be here as long as people respond to him.

    >>
    >> Respond to who?

    >
    > If this implies that you, too, have him binned, that is a good thing.
    > Others might learn from this.
    >


    Anyone that has a problem with someone that confronts people that tell lies
    can put me in their killfiles right now. Any of the hateful people that
    think telling lies about test posts is a good thing, PLEASE PUT ME IN YOUR
    KILLFILE.

  20. Re: Test Message

    On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 14:48:46 -0800, left_coast wrote:
    > Bit Twister wrote:
    >
    >> On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 10:14:17 -0800, left_coast wrote:
    >>
    >>> But CORRECTLY stated the TRUTH about test posts.

    >>
    >> No you are lying. There are about 9 sentences in your post.
    >> 4 are true the rest are lies.

    >
    > vague claims. Nothing specific. FIGURES. Unless you have something SPECIFIC,
    > your words are MEANINGLESS.


    True lines:
    Welcome to the group.
    If your message was intended to go to
    alt.os.linux.mandrake, it was a success.
    That said, there are a number of test groups on usenet. If your server does
    allow you to subscribe to such groups, it is considered polite to posts to
    those groups.

    The rest were lies about about peopele posting lies about test posts.


    > As I was trying to give by pointing out that some people tell lies about the
    > test post.


    Unless you trying to point out that
    /you are the one posting lying responses/
    to anyone using humor in a response, that statement is a lie.

    > You seem to have a problem with people that challenge those that
    > tell lies, why would that be?


    No, just lying people like you.


    > No, it is NOT a lie. It is the TRUTH, I said NOTHING ABOUT YOU. To claim
    > that statement a lie is simply FALSE.


    Sorry, another of your lying misdirection attempts. You injected the statement
    implying Aragorn indicated you mentioned Bit Twister in order to
    deceive people.


    > But I am seeing why you would act so
    > threatened by people that challenge people that tell lies.


    See more direct lying. I feel no threat. You made up that lie.


    > No, I MADE GUESS. Guessing as to what ones motives are implies that I DO NOT
    > KNOW for sure. If I could read minds, I would KNOW FOR SURE. Again you are
    > WRONG. As I clearly stated, I WAS GUESSING, not mind reading.


    You said "So you feel you need to attack me."

    That is a statement. Had you said "I guess you feel the need to attack me."
    See, one indicates you are guessing, the other is a statement.

    > Guess you are not smart enough to tell the difference.


    See, you know when to use the word guess. That shows your above rant
    was more lying.




    > You tell me, how could it be the line of attack when I was the one providing
    > facts?


    Another lie, you are the one doing the lying with no facts.

    > Nope, As I stated before, according to the Cambridge Dictionary, the
    > dictionary of YOUR choice, "telling lies" does not require deception.
    >
    > http://dictionary.cambridge.org/defi...1791&dict=CALD
    > since your claims that the test posts were a failure is not true, your
    > claims fit the "Cambridge Dictionary" of telling a lie. Since I caimed you
    > were telling lies, it FITS.


    See, you make yet another set of deceptive lying statements.

    For me to tell a lie, I had to have been lying or lied.
    Lying or lied are verbs showing action performed. So looking at
    http://dictionary.cambridge.org/defi...5936&dict=CALD

    lie (SPEAK FALSELY) Show phonetics
    verb [I] lying, lied, lied
    to say or write something which is not true in order to deceive someone:

    That is the *fact* you keep trying to hide proving you are the liar.

    The fact that you would resort to such a lame tactic just proves
    you are the liar in every test response thread.

    >
    > I claimed "TELLING LIES" which does not require you to attempt to deceive.
    > http://dictionary.cambridge.org/defi...1791&dict=CALD
    >
    > It only requires that you "say something/things that are not true"
    > Since "telling lies" only requires you say something that is not true and
    > your claims about the failure of test posts are not true, my claim that you
    > are "telling lies" is in fact TRUE.


    No, you are lying again. To have told lies, I have to have been lying.
    http://dictionary.cambridge.org/defi...5936&dict=CALD


+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 30 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast