Re: [mod] Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation - OS2

This is a discussion on Re: [mod] Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation - OS2 ; Richard Steiner wrote: > Here in comp.os.os2.misc, > =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=A9_The_OS/2_Guy_=A9?= > spake unto us, saying: > > >>Richard Steiner wrote: >> >> >>>That was part of the reason for its creation (the exclusion of various >>>kooks, not just Mr. "Martin"). >> ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 144

Thread: Re: [mod] Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

  1. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Richard Steiner wrote:
    > Here in comp.os.os2.misc,
    > =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=A9_The_OS/2_Guy_=A9?= <"; OS2Guy"@Gmail.com;>
    > spake unto us, saying:
    >
    >
    >>Richard Steiner wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>That was part of the reason for its creation (the exclusion of various
    >>>kooks, not just Mr. "Martin").

    >>
    >>Let's not mince words, Rich. It was 'revived' specifically to ban
    >>me primarily, Ed and everyone else who is brave about to speak out
    >>against or tell the truth about eComStation.

    >
    >
    > I was talking about the comp.os.os2.moderated group's initial creation,
    > not the current attempt to revive it.
    >
    > You're right, though -- the current incarnation was revived because a
    > few people in the c.o.o.* groups (yourself included) are making life
    > difficult for people who aren't skilled in newsreader usage and who
    > want to concentrate on technical issues in these groups.
    >
    > Comments about eComStation are on-topic in comp.os.os2.ecomstation and
    > (if about OS/2 topics in general) in various other OS/2 newsgroups, and
    > comp.os.os2.moderated is now available as well if people want to avoid
    > the various flamewars that occur in here from time to time.
    >
    >
    >>>You'll notice (if you search in Google) that Tim didn't use his irtual
    >>>"Dr." title until very recently.

    >>
    >>There is nothing 'virtual' about it, Rich. Took many years of very
    >>hard work to achieve it.

    >
    >
    > Okay. What subject? Where and when did you obtain your PhD?
    >
    > With that information, it should be easy to verify the existence of
    > your degree, and there really isn't much reason to hide it (I would
    > think that info would lend some legitimacy to your presence here).


    Be happy to provide it but you first. Post here, publicly for all
    to see, your Social Security Number, your bank account number,
    your bank account pass codes, your personal residence address
    and telephone, especially your cell phone if you have one so we
    can quickly verify your existence.

    When you do that, and it is totally verified by the world at large,
    I'll be happy to provide you with the personal information you
    request above.

    --
    Dr. Timothy Martin, The Official and Only OS/2 Guy
    Warp City Web Site - http://www.warpcity.com
    email: OS2Guy@Gmail.com OR eCSGuy@Gmail.com

  2. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    The eCS Guy wrote:
    > Jason Bowen wrote:
    >
    >> The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>
    >>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>> I win, he claimed he was blocking in the last 24 hours, my post
    >>>>>> went through.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Maybe you missed his shift.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Oh I'm sure I did. Mine just happened to be one that slipped through.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Maybe. It wasn't off-topic and OS/2 related. Those tend to "slip
    >>> through".
    >>>

    >>
    >> Can you read? He said my posts won't get through. In the time frame
    >> he claimed to be moderating, I posted and it went through.

    >
    >
    > He said your posts won't get through when he is on duty. He gave
    > no timeframe.
    >


    Yes he did. My post was the ONLY one that went through in a time frame
    he claimed. What do you think the odds on that happening are?

    >>>> Me thinks he got sloppy and didn't check when making his claim. LOL.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Or maybe you got lucky and missed his shift.

    >>
    >>
    >> LOL, my what a sycophant you are.

    >
    >
    > Then post his shift and verify it is his shift.
    >


    He's the one making the claims, he has to provide the proof. Let me
    guess, you believe in guilty until proven innocent?

    >>
    >>>> There are no shifts, the moderation system is set up to email the
    >>>> moderator(s). It does't look at what time it is and say I'll send
    >>>> to this person or that one.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> We know there are four coordinators according to the Master
    >>> Moderator's List. Sounds like shift work to me.

    >>
    >>
    >> What it sounds like to you is irrelevant. What is really happening is
    >> relevant.

    >
    >
    > It sounds like he has embarassed you and you can't deal with it.
    >


    Sounds like somebody needs to learn to read and analyze.

    > The eCS Guy


  3. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    The eCS Guy wrote:
    > Jason Bowen wrote:
    >
    >> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> There are two reasons why his post(s) will appear. 1. If they are
    >>> OS/2 relevant enough to be of interest, and (2) he should post
    >>> during my absence. If it is the latter then the other moderators
    >>> would delete any flames or attacks but they too would let through
    >>> an OS/2 relevant posting.
    >>>

    >>
    >> I posted when you claimed to be moderating. Punk.

    >
    >
    > You still haven't identified his moderating shift. Post it.
    >


    Guilty till proven innocent. The burden in on the person posting as Tim.

    >>
    >>> Jason doesn't use OS/2 at all. He posts purely out of personal
    >>> animosity toward OS/2 users and from a lack of self-confidence
    >>> at his lack of ability to actually use OS/2.

    >>
    >>
    >> LOL, this reeks of over justification for your behavior. You lack so
    >> much self-confidence that you make up a fake doctorate, and fake
    >> positions and fake supporters.

    >
    >
    > The only faker here seems to be you. Why don't you use OS/2?
    >


    Hmmm geez the same reasoning skills. I don't use OS/2 anymore because
    it doesn't suit me. I read OS/2 news and newgroups because it interests
    me. I can respond to public posts because it is my right. Post with
    your real name, be able to provide for the verfication of it.

    > The eCS Guy
    >
    >


  4. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    The eCS Guy wrote:

    >> Doesn't drive me nuts, you've never once proven your claims. You're
    >> just a liar, plain and simple. You're an anonymous huckster that has
    >> no life and props himself up falsely.

    >
    >
    > Your continued ponitifcation proves you wrong.
    >


    Yeah, says the sock puppet. Do you whipe your chin off when you are
    done pleasuring him?

    > The eCS Guy


  5. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    > The eCS Guy wrote:
    >
    >> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>
    >>> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> There are two reasons why his post(s) will appear. 1. If they are
    >>>> OS/2 relevant enough to be of interest, and (2) he should post
    >>>> during my absence. If it is the latter then the other moderators
    >>>> would delete any flames or attacks but they too would let through
    >>>> an OS/2 relevant posting.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> I posted when you claimed to be moderating. Punk.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> You still haven't identified his moderating shift. Post it.

    >
    >
    > He doesn't know what my shift is. He just knows that if I
    > am on duty his posts won't go through. It's already happened
    > about fifteen times. I keep deleting his silly no-nothing
    > messages.
    >


    Yeah rightttttt. You can't even verify your real identity or the source
    of your supposed doctorate. Funny how you avoid but your sock puppet
    replies. You are tooo simple.

    >>>> Jason doesn't use OS/2 at all. He posts purely out of personal
    >>>> animosity toward OS/2 users and from a lack of self-confidence
    >>>> at his lack of ability to actually use OS/2.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> LOL, this reeks of over justification for your behavior. You lack so
    >>> much self-confidence that you make up a fake doctorate, and fake
    >>> positions and fake supporters.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> The only faker here seems to be you. Why don't you use OS/2?
    >>
    >> The eCS Guy

    >
    >
    > Jason spent four very long years at Colorado.edu and was eventually
    > forced to give it up. No degree, no nothing and his parents had to
    > pay the bill.
    >
    > You can understand why he goes berserk when I mention my
    > own 8 years of college and the end result of a Doctorate.
    >


    LOL, post the letter from CU. Why do you like to lie so much? Just
    reply to me directly instead of having your sock puppet do it and then
    posting indirectly to me through your puppet.

  6. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    The OS/2 Guy wrote:

    >
    > With every post he proves I drive him nuts. I LOVE that!!! :-)
    >


    How many times have you tried not replying over the past few years. The
    google archives prove you wrong. Your OCD gives you away. No get back
    to running that Linux server. Need any help with basic UNIX shell
    commands? :-)

  7. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Jason Bowen wrote:
    > The eCS Guy wrote:
    >
    >> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>
    >>> The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>> I win, he claimed he was blocking in the last 24 hours, my post
    >>>>>>> went through.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Maybe you missed his shift.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Oh I'm sure I did. Mine just happened to be one that slipped through.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Maybe. It wasn't off-topic and OS/2 related. Those tend to "slip
    >>>> through".
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Can you read? He said my posts won't get through. In the time frame
    >>> he claimed to be moderating, I posted and it went through.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> He said your posts won't get through when he is on duty. He gave
    >> no timeframe.
    >>

    >
    > Yes he did. My post was the ONLY one that went through in a time frame
    > he claimed. What do you think the odds on that happening are?


    You still haven't posted his shift schedule. What is it?

    >
    >>>>> Me thinks he got sloppy and didn't check when making his claim. LOL.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Or maybe you got lucky and missed his shift.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> LOL, my what a sycophant you are.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Then post his shift and verify it is his shift.
    >>

    >
    > He's the one making the claims, he has to provide the proof. Let me
    > guess, you believe in guilty until proven innocent?


    You claimed he posted his shift schedule. None of us saw it.
    What is it? You made the claim, provide the proof.

    >
    >>>
    >>>>> There are no shifts, the moderation system is set up to email the
    >>>>> moderator(s). It does't look at what time it is and say I'll send
    >>>>> to this person or that one.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> We know there are four coordinators according to the Master
    >>>> Moderator's List. Sounds like shift work to me.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> What it sounds like to you is irrelevant. What is really happening
    >>> is relevant.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> It sounds like he has embarassed you and you can't deal with it.
    >>

    >
    > Sounds like somebody needs to learn to read and analyze.


    Denial won't make your case.

    The eCS Guy

  8. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    The eCS Guy wrote:
    > Jason Bowen wrote:
    >
    >> The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>
    >>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I win, he claimed he was blocking in the last 24 hours, my post
    >>>>>>>> went through.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Maybe you missed his shift.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Oh I'm sure I did. Mine just happened to be one that slipped
    >>>>>> through.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Maybe. It wasn't off-topic and OS/2 related. Those tend to "slip
    >>>>> through".
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Can you read? He said my posts won't get through. In the time
    >>>> frame he claimed to be moderating, I posted and it went through.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> He said your posts won't get through when he is on duty. He gave
    >>> no timeframe.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Yes he did. My post was the ONLY one that went through in a time
    >> frame he claimed. What do you think the odds on that happening are?

    >
    >
    > You still haven't posted his shift schedule. What is it?
    >


    Can you answer the questions, didn't think so. Go ahead and work out
    the odds that 22 posts were caught by him and my one wasn't.

    >>
    >>>>>> Me thinks he got sloppy and didn't check when making his claim. LOL.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Or maybe you got lucky and missed his shift.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> LOL, my what a sycophant you are.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Then post his shift and verify it is his shift.
    >>>

    >>
    >> He's the one making the claims, he has to provide the proof. Let me
    >> guess, you believe in guilty until proven innocent?

    >
    >
    > You claimed he posted his shift schedule. None of us saw it.
    > What is it? You made the claim, provide the proof.
    >


    No I didn't. Read much? I said I posted when he claimed that he had
    blocked 22 posts. What do you think the odds are that my posts go
    through twice when nobody elses did? The onus is still on him to
    provide verification for his claims, which he hasn't.

    >>
    >>>>
    >>>>>> There are no shifts, the moderation system is set up to email the
    >>>>>> moderator(s). It does't look at what time it is and say I'll send
    >>>>>> to this person or that one.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> We know there are four coordinators according to the Master
    >>>>> Moderator's List. Sounds like shift work to me.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> What it sounds like to you is irrelevant. What is really happening
    >>>> is relevant.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> It sounds like he has embarassed you and you can't deal with it.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Sounds like somebody needs to learn to read and analyze.

    >
    >
    > Denial won't make your case.
    >


    Denial is exactly what you are in puppet.

    > The eCS Guy


  9. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Pat Gunn wrote:

    > I'm not going to claim that it's not Linux ... and
    > haven't even seen OS/2 on a PC for over 3 years).


    I'm I reading this right? You are the moderator of an OS/2 newsgroup
    but you don't use OS/2 - at all?

    Don't look for me there. I won't support any OS/2 newsgroup where the
    moderator doesn't actually use OS/2.

  10. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 17:01:55 -0400, Count Floyd wrote:

    > Pat Gunn wrote:
    >
    >> I'm not going to claim that it's not Linux ... and haven't even seen
    >> OS/2 on a PC for over 3 years).

    >
    > I'm I reading this right? You are the moderator of an OS/2 newsgroup but
    > you don't use OS/2 - at all?
    >
    > Don't look for me there. I won't support any OS/2 newsgroup where the
    > moderator doesn't actually use OS/2.


    Another zealot who cuts off his nose to spite his face!

    Wayne
    --
    Registered Linux user #375994
    http://www.geocities.jp/rondonko/


  11. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Wayne wrote:
    > On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 17:01:55 -0400, Count Floyd wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Pat Gunn wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>I'm not going to claim that it's not Linux ... and haven't even seen
    >>>OS/2 on a PC for over 3 years).

    >>
    >>I'm I reading this right? You are the moderator of an OS/2 newsgroup but
    >>you don't use OS/2 - at all?
    >>
    >>Don't look for me there. I won't support any OS/2 newsgroup where the
    >>moderator doesn't actually use OS/2.

    >
    >
    > Another zealot who cuts off his nose to spite his face!
    >
    > Wayne


    Says the other "Linux Luser" living in the OS/2 newsgroups.

    Why are you even here, Wayne? Oh wait, that's right. You've
    gone "Linux" but find you're not welcome in the Linux community.

    --
    Dr. Timothy Martin, The Official and Only OS/2 Guy
    Warp City Web Site - http://www.warpcity.com
    email: OS2Guy@Gmail.com OR eCSGuy@Gmail.com

  12. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Jason Bowen wrote:
    > The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> With every post he proves I drive him nuts. I LOVE that!!! :-)
    >>

    >
    > How many times have you tried not replying over the past few years.


    Never. I reply to everything, you know that.

    It drives you NUTS!

    --
    Dr. Timothy Martin, The Official and Only OS/2 Guy
    Warp City Web Site - http://www.warpcity.com
    email: OS2Guy@Gmail.com OR eCSGuy@Gmail.com

  13. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Jason Bowen wrote:
    > The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>
    >> You still haven't identified his moderating shift. Post it.
    >>

    >
    > Guilty till proven innocent. The burden in on the person posting as Tim.


    Wrong. It was your claim you knew my schedule. Post it or shut up.
    BTW, *why* is Jason Bowen, Microsoft Luver, living in the OS/2
    newsgroups?

    Answer: He has no where else to go.

    Question: Why is Jason no longer posting out of Colorado.edu?

    Answer: Colorado.edu kicked him out.

    Go ahead Jason, whine some more and make an even bigger
    red-butted fool out of yourself.

    --
    Dr. Timothy Martin, The Official and Only OS/2 Guy
    Warp City Web Site - http://www.warpcity.com
    email: OS2Guy@Gmail.com OR eCSGuy@Gmail.com

  14. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    I can prove you lied. Now prove you are a moderator. LOL.

    Jason Bowen has not been disciplined as a result of any complaints
    that were sent to abuse@colorado.edu

    ITS Abuse
    University of Colorado at Boulder


    >> From jason@jasonbowen.org Mon Aug 15 13:37:46 2005
    >> Return-Path:
    >> Received: from mx2.colorado.edu (mx2.colorado.edu [128.138.129.246])
    >> by spot.colorado.edu (8.13.3/8.13.3/UnixOps+Hesiod+SSL) with ESMTP

    id j7FJbjtM005899
    >> for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:37:45 -0600 (MDT)
    >> Received: from krusty.pcisys.net (krusty.pcisys.net [216.229.32.178])
    >> by mx2.colorado.edu (8.13.3/8.13.3/UnixOps+Hesiod) with ESMTP id

    j7FJbdGZ023337
    >> for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:37:39 -0600
    >> Received: from [192.168.2.101] (dsl-206-53-25-161.den.pcisys.net

    [206.53.25.161])
    >> (authenticated bits=0)
    >> by krusty.pcisys.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j7FJbhx1001825;
    >> Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:37:44 -0600 (MDT)
    >> Message-ID: <4300EF08.4060003@jasonbowen.org>
    >> Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:37:44 -0600
    >> From: Jason Bowen
    >> User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716)
    >> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
    >> MIME-Version: 1.0
    >> To: abuse@colorado.edu
    >> CC: os2guy@gmail.com, os2guy@warpcity.com
    >> Subject: false claims of disciplinary action against me
    >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
    >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    >> X-Virus-Status: No
    >> X-Virus-Checker-Version: clamassassin 1.2.2 with clamdscan / ClamAV

    0.86.2/1022/Mon Aug 15 04:03:07 2005
    >> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on

    fuzz.colorado.edu
    >> X-Spam-Level:
    >> X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled
    >> version=3.0.4
    >>
    >> Hello,
    >>
    >> The person going under the moniker "OS/2 Guy" and using the address
    >> os2guy@gmail.com and os2guy@warpcity.com(this was the address used to
    >> post a complaint in 1999) has been making public claims that I faced
    >> disciplinary action by the University of Colorado at Boulder for my
    >> posts to usenet from my former CU account. I was wondering if you

    could
    >> please clear this matter up and directly address the claim that I was
    >> disciplined as a result of any complaints to abuse@colorado.edu?
    >>
    >> Thank you for you time
    >> Jason Bowen
    >>


  15. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    > Jason Bowen wrote:
    >
    >> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> With every post he proves I drive him nuts. I LOVE that!!! :-)
    >>>

    >>
    >> How many times have you tried not replying over the past few years.

    >
    >
    > Never. I reply to everything, you know that.
    >
    > It drives you NUTS!
    >


    LOL, tell me about replying to this->

    Jason Bowen has not been disciplined as a result of any complaints
    that were sent to abuse@colorado.edu

    ITS Abuse
    University of Colorado at Boulder


    >> From jason@jasonbowen.org Mon Aug 15 13:37:46 2005
    >> Return-Path:
    >> Received: from mx2.colorado.edu (mx2.colorado.edu [128.138.129.246])
    >> by spot.colorado.edu (8.13.3/8.13.3/UnixOps+Hesiod+SSL) with ESMTP

    id j7FJbjtM005899
    >> for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:37:45 -0600 (MDT)
    >> Received: from krusty.pcisys.net (krusty.pcisys.net [216.229.32.178])
    >> by mx2.colorado.edu (8.13.3/8.13.3/UnixOps+Hesiod) with ESMTP id

    j7FJbdGZ023337
    >> for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:37:39 -0600
    >> Received: from [192.168.2.101] (dsl-206-53-25-161.den.pcisys.net

    [206.53.25.161])
    >> (authenticated bits=0)
    >> by krusty.pcisys.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j7FJbhx1001825;
    >> Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:37:44 -0600 (MDT)
    >> Message-ID: <4300EF08.4060003@jasonbowen.org>
    >> Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:37:44 -0600
    >> From: Jason Bowen
    >> User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716)
    >> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
    >> MIME-Version: 1.0
    >> To: abuse@colorado.edu
    >> CC: os2guy@gmail.com, os2guy@warpcity.com
    >> Subject: false claims of disciplinary action against me
    >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
    >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    >> X-Virus-Status: No
    >> X-Virus-Checker-Version: clamassassin 1.2.2 with clamdscan / ClamAV

    0.86.2/1022/Mon Aug 15 04:03:07 2005
    >> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on

    fuzz.colorado.edu
    >> X-Spam-Level:
    >> X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled
    >> version=3.0.4
    >>
    >> Hello,
    >>
    >> The person going under the moniker "OS/2 Guy" and using the address
    >> os2guy@gmail.com and os2guy@warpcity.com(this was the address used to
    >> post a complaint in 1999) has been making public claims that I faced
    >> disciplinary action by the University of Colorado at Boulder for my
    >> posts to usenet from my former CU account. I was wondering if you

    could
    >> please clear this matter up and directly address the claim that I was
    >> disciplined as a result of any complaints to abuse@colorado.edu?
    >>
    >> Thank you for you time
    >> Jason Bowen
    >>




  16. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    > Jason Bowen wrote:
    >
    >> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> With every post he proves I drive him nuts. I LOVE that!!! :-)
    >>>

    >>
    >> How many times have you tried not replying over the past few years.

    >
    >
    > Never. I reply to everything, you know that.
    >
    > It drives you NUTS!
    >



    Also you haven't replied to this

    Sure... tell me about Warp City hosting on their Linux server.... LOL.
    Tell me about ipv4 octets with values over 256. Tell me about trying to
    claim you were running Warp City on multiple servers when all you were
    doing was using .ht files and when I called you on it you screamed about
    how I gave away how people secure their servers. Tell me about not
    being able to use chmod and exposing your log files which showed that
    you were lying about your users. I can grasp plenty, you only grasp
    yourself.

    Or how about this

    Sure... since they are emailed to you provide proof. Also, in the last
    24 hours, my post got through. You do realize you are claiming that the
    moderated group has more traffic than the rest of the OS/2 newsgroups,
    a highly unlikely proposition. Why would people continue to post if you
    were blocking? I think the answer lies in the fact that you are a liar.
    Why didn't you write back to CU on that email you were copied on with
    me? Punk.


    ****ing loser.

  17. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Jason Bowen wrote:
    > The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >
    >> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>
    >>> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> With every post he proves I drive him nuts. I LOVE that!!! :-)
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> How many times have you tried not replying over the past few years.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Never. I reply to everything, you know that.
    >>
    >> It drives you NUTS!
    >>

    >
    >
    > Also you haven't replied to this
    >
    > Sure... tell me about Warp City hosting on their Linux server.... LOL.
    > Tell me about ipv4 octets with values over 256. Tell me about trying to
    > claim you were running Warp City on multiple servers when all you were
    > doing was using .ht files and when I called you on it you screamed about
    > how I gave away how people secure their servers. Tell me about not
    > being able to use chmod and exposing your log files which showed that
    > you were lying about your users. I can grasp plenty, you only grasp
    > yourself.
    >
    > Or how about this
    >
    > Sure... since they are emailed to you provide proof. Also, in the last
    > 24 hours, my post got through. You do realize you are claiming that the
    > moderated group has more traffic than the rest of the OS/2 newsgroups,
    > a highly unlikely proposition. Why would people continue to post if you
    > were blocking? I think the answer lies in the fact that you are a liar.
    > Why didn't you write back to CU on that email you were copied on with
    > me? Punk.


    Got your goat, huh. Poor red-butted Jason. Why would I reply to
    any of that? You made it all up!

    Now what is my schedule, chump?

    > ****ing loser.


    My my ... I really did piss you off! LOL!

    --
    Dr. Timothy Martin, The Official and Only OS/2 Guy
    Warp City Web Site - http://www.warpcity.com
    email: OS2Guy@Gmail.com OR eCSGuy@Gmail.com

  18. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Jason Bowen wrote:
    > The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >
    >> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>
    >>> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> With every post he proves I drive him nuts. I LOVE that!!! :-)
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> How many times have you tried not replying over the past few years.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Never. I reply to everything, you know that.
    >>
    >> It drives you NUTS!
    >>

    >
    > LOL, tell me about replying to this->
    >
    > Jason Bowen *has been* disciplined as a result of any complaints
    > that were sent to abuse@colorado.edu


    Thank you. The rest of your bullpucky is forged but the
    above is quite clear and explains why you are no longer
    allowed at Colorado.edu.

    You red-butted chump.
    --
    Dr. Timothy Martin, The Official and Only OS/2 Guy
    Warp City Web Site - http://www.warpcity.com
    email: OS2Guy@Gmail.com OR eCSGuy@Gmail.com

  19. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Jason Bowen wrote:
    > I can prove you lied. Now prove you are a moderator. LOL.


    You can't prove squat. Now post my schedule or get off the pot, chump.

    > Jason Bowen *has been* disciplined as a result of any complaints
    > that were sent to abuse@colorado.edu


    Thank God Colorado.edu dumped you.

    --
    Dr. Timothy Martin, The Official and Only OS/2 Guy
    Warp City Web Site - http://www.warpcity.com
    email: OS2Guy@Gmail.com OR eCSGuy@Gmail.com

  20. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    > Jason Bowen wrote:
    >
    >> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>
    >>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> With every post he proves I drive him nuts. I LOVE that!!! :-)
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> How many times have you tried not replying over the past few years.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Never. I reply to everything, you know that.
    >>>
    >>> It drives you NUTS!
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >> Also you haven't replied to this
    >>
    >> Sure... tell me about Warp City hosting on their Linux server.... LOL.
    >> Tell me about ipv4 octets with values over 256. Tell me about trying
    >> to claim you were running Warp City on multiple servers when all you
    >> were doing was using .ht files and when I called you on it you
    >> screamed about how I gave away how people secure their servers. Tell
    >> me about not being able to use chmod and exposing your log files which
    >> showed that you were lying about your users. I can grasp plenty, you
    >> only grasp yourself.
    >>
    >> Or how about this
    >>
    >> Sure... since they are emailed to you provide proof. Also, in the
    >> last 24 hours, my post got through. You do realize you are claiming
    >> that the moderated group has more traffic than the rest of the OS/2
    >> newsgroups, a highly unlikely proposition. Why would people continue
    >> to post if you were blocking? I think the answer lies in the fact
    >> that you are a liar. Why didn't you write back to CU on that email
    >> you were copied on with me? Punk.

    >
    >
    > Got your goat, huh. Poor red-butted Jason. Why would I reply to
    > any of that? You made it all up!
    >


    You said you reply to it all. I didn't make up anything. You claimed
    that 22 posts to the moderated group were blocked by you but in that
    time frame there weren't even 22 posts to C.O.O.A. You were the one
    putting in addresses like 400.500.600.300 in your logs.

    > Now what is my schedule, chump?
    >


    You've used that with a couple of your suck puppets. Like Jim
    Littlefield from newscene. Did it sting to lose that account? Prove
    you have any bit of crediblity and post proof of your real name. You
    could do it with a blacked out license or anything else that wouldn't
    have to give away your location. Too much of a loser I see :-)


    >> ****ing loser.

    >
    >
    > My my ... I really did piss you off! LOL!
    >


    LOL, no you are a ****ing loser. I wouldn't laugh about it. One thing
    that morons like you and Eddie need to realize, I'm never in a huff when
    posting here.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast