Re: CSMA Trolling Summaries: May 2006 Edition

Snit wrote:
Here are summaries of some of the trolls that nip at my heels. I challenge
any of them to show I am wrong (in any way other than absurd nits, outright
lies, or the like).

----------
Steve Carroll:
1) Steve has repeatedly attributed quotes to me I did not say or
takes them completely out of context. Steve's response when this
is discussed is it is my obligation to prove he is lying; he does
not feel he has any obligation to tell the truth unless someone not
only catches him but offers proof.
2) I challenged CSMA to find a single post from Steve Carroll
from the last month where he did not openly lie about me
or dishonestly accuse me of something. He has not been able
to point to any post of his but has repeatedly claimed to have
done so. He is lying. The challenge could easily include the last
two months, three, or six. Steve rarely if ever neglects to troll.
3) Steve has accused me of many other things, all without a shred of
evidence, the list is too long to go into any detail, but includes:
* Posting as CSMA Moderator (he has admitted he lied here)
* Saying I wanted USB 2.0 to replace Firewire (he has admitted
he just thought I had implied that but cannot point to any
evidence)
* Lying when I tell him my argument against Bush is well supported,
even though I have pointed him to the support and he cannot find
any honest refutation
* Using illegal recreational drugs. Steve's excuse for this one is
that he only makes up stories about me inhaling legal substances;
in other words he is ignorant about the illegality of huffing and
is lying about the drugs he has accused me of using.
* Parroting the above referenced Bush argument.
* He has accused me of not being a teacher even though Elizabeth has
posted support. Please note he does not merely say he doubts, he
makes the "absolute statement" that I am not.
* Making inappropriate sexual advances.
* E-mailing his "wife", a person who may or may not exist
* He has claimed to have hacked Josh's computer
* Of believing the only possible sex is sex that is sanctioned by the
government (he based this off my stating the fact that incest and sex
are so different only a pervert would consider then synonymous. Steve
and the other trolls have done lots and lots of trolling over this one!
4) Steve repeatedly uses quotes from many years ago about health problems
that are irrelevant to the current conversation to try to embarrass
the people he trolls. This, perhaps, is his most pathetic form of
trolling. And on and on and on. This is only the tip of the iceberg of Steve's lies
and unsupported accusations. Steve has not been able to support his
accusations, and he *never* will, being that there is no reasonable doubt
they are *all* lies on his part.

---------
Tim Adams
1) When I was talking about the security risk of auto-installed widgets
and how, at the time, Apple denied there was a way to remove them,
Tim jumped into the conversation talking about the pre-installed widgets.
When his mistake was pointed out to him, even gently and by multiple
people, Tim lied claiming that I had changed the topic (he had) and then
went on to talk about how the tilde in a path means "the hard drive
only". By Tim admitting to his erroneous belief he made it clear how
and why he messed up the context. Tim trolled me on his mistake for
some time.
2) When there was a discussion about ~/Desktop Tim jumped in discussing
/Desktop, repeating a similar error. When this was pointed out he
trolled me about that, too.
3) Tim has claimed that sex and incest are "identical" and then pushed the
nonsense claim that they are only so if in a particular order.
4) Tim has accused me of all sorts of sexual perversions and other repulsive
acts.

---------
Wally
1) I made a comment about how incest and sex are not synonymous (I stated
they did not "equate"). Wally responded by claiming he disagreed and felt
the two concepts *are* - at least to him - "synonymous". Wally's BS
denial of this is to sometimes claim that he was using a different
context than my comment he was responding to, but he has also stated
he sticks to his perverted claim no matter what context it is in
(even the original, which he - in part - quoted when first made
his claim!). 2) Wally has also accused me of all sorts of sexual perversions and other
repulsive acts.

---------
Tim Crowley
1) Tim went on a rampage whining and crying that the term "Screen name" is
not used in IRC. Even when a large amount of support was shown to him
he could not accept it... and started trolling those that told him the
reality that he was wrong. His only "evidence" is the command in IRC
to change a nickname / screen name is "/nick".
2) Tim claimed that Josh was not being honest and honorable with a challenge
to hack a computer, but was never able to give a reasonable explanation
why he felt this way. For every nit Tim picked, Josh agreed to correct
it with a new challenge to any reasonable extent he could.
3) Tim does not even generally make solid accusations, he just name calls
and spew BS.

---------
Lars Träger
1) Lars just name calls. He is not able to articulate what has him so
worked up and certainly cannot produce any support.
2) Lars trolled me over accidentally typing an incorrect year in a list
with quite a few years. He had no reasoned excuse for doing so.

---------
Edwin
1) Edwin repeatedly attributes his own quotes to others and, when this is
pointed out, snips and runs from the discussion - usually talking about
his flushing of a toilet. Some examples:
"I eat dog *** to get attention." - Edwin
Edwin also finished a sentence that started with "In my life I never..."
with "... thought very hard."
There are other quotes as well.

---------
TheLetterK
1) TheLetterK repeatedly attributes his own quotes to others. One example:
"There is nothing I understand." - TheLetterK

----------
Sandman
1) Sandman can be reasonable at times, but he goes off into lying, trolling
whacked out modes where he insists that his lies are not lies, even
though they clearly are. He attributes his own words to others, creates
contrived videos and clearly erroneous "FAQs" and tries to pass them off
as truth. He will insist they are accurate no matter how many times
others... and even he... prove otherwise. Favorite quote from Sandman:
"I continued to be the biggest troll in the group during tyhe time
period in question. Lying, failing to support my accusations,
obfuscating. You name it, I did it." - Sandman

----------
GreyCloud
1) GreyCloud insists on all sorts of whacko beliefs and trolls when then
are questioned. Some of his beliefs:
* Hillary Clinton has already been hand picked for our next president.
(GreyCloud has admitted this is a guess, but *also* claimed he has
secret "sources" of information that let him knows this)
* Polls are not to ever be trusted.
* The cure to cancer is merely to give up the fear
* All major models that show global warming being caused by man
(at least in part) are forgetting to represent the laws of
thermodynamics in their models
* Apple had a "short lived" wireless Might Mouse in late 2005
or early 2006.
* The US is the *only* country which allows people to speak out
against it.
He cannot, of course, support any of these beliefs of his, but he
none-the-less firmly believes them and belittles those who ask for
support or evidence.
2) GreyCloud has accused me of all sorts of sexual perversions and other
repulsive acts.

A short trip into the world of GreyCloud:
Somewhere, out there, in a small smoky room GreyCloud and the rest
of the Illuminati are preparing their final manipulations of the
sheeple. GreyCloud has let slip a few of their secrets: the next
US president, the cure for cancer, the hypnotic manipulations of all
polls, the problem with all global warming models, the world secret
police that censor political speech, and - the biggest secret of them
all - the existence of the short lived wireless mighty mouse. If
GreyCloud lets slip one more thing his role in M12 will be eliminated.
BEWARE MAJESTIC 11.

------------------
If anyone wants me to point to a link where the things I accuse the above of
happened, just ask. If I get a glut of requests I will take them one at a
time and will answer them, but it may take a while.

I challenge any of the above trolls to support their accusations with
reason, honesty, and direct quotes from me. My guess: they will *all* fail.

And just think: if they actually had a real claim and had supported it in
the past all they need to do is provide a link. If they are not lying they
can easily prove me wrong. Yet they will fail to do so. Quite telling.

Note: silly little nits, and absurd semantic games do not count as proof of
anything. I bet they forget that real quick (or just snip and run, ask
irrelevant questions, obfuscate, etc.)




What? Not even a mention of me?
.

Loading