Re: Rupert?
- From: PJ Wilson <pwilnospam@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 22:28:25 -0400
Franklin Cross said...
>"PJ Wilson" <pwilnospam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> Obveeus said...
>>>At least, I think that is what PJ was implying. I'm trying to give him
>>>the benefit of the doubt even though he seems as trollish as that
>>>Roderick guy.
>>
>> The branding of someone who holds opposing opinions as a 'troll'
>> is the last refuge of a truly lame debater.
>
>He does it as soon as he starts to lose one of the thousands of
>arguments he starts. And the sad part is he usually starts them.
Yeah.... but despite all that, and despite the silly hissy fit he's throwing
here, he's not that bad a poster. He just wants to be a big fish in a little
pond. Kind of reminds me of me. In fact from now on, whenever I post,
you and Obveeous should whistle. That's the only way we'll convince
the rest of this newsgroup that the three of us are not the same person.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Rupert?
- From: Elle
- Re: Rupert?
- References:
- Rupert?
- From: Obveeus
- Re: Rupert?
- From: PJ Wilson
- Re: Rupert?
- From: Bigolhomo
- Re: Rupert?
- From: PJ Wilson
- Re: Rupert?
- From: PJ Wilson
- Re: Rupert?
- From: Elle
- Re: Rupert?
- From: PJ Wilson
- Re: Rupert?
- From: Franklin Cross
- Rupert?
- Prev by Date: Re: Rupert?
- Next by Date: Re: Rupert?
- Previous by thread: Re: Rupert?
- Next by thread: Re: Rupert?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|