Re: OT: Steve Carroll's still a Douche Bag (in case you missed it)

"Sandman" <mr@xxxxxxxxxxx> stated in post
mr-BDE757.21494221032007@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 3/21/07 1:49 PM:

In article <C226A521.7B39E%SNIT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Snit <SNIT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The fact he started a thread in response to Carroll's trolling is not
in question. Why do you pretend it is?

So new threads can now be considered "responses"? Ok, so why did you
compare this to Steve Carroll, whose new threads also could be
considered responses to a supposed trolling from you? What do you
think the difference is, Michael?

Sandman, I find it sad that you repeatedly run from questions and just snip
them.

I will focus only on the parts that are relevant to the topic at hand.
If you wish to change subject, I propose that you start a new thread
and hope that someone will find your new subject interesting.

In the meantime, you failed to answer my on-topic question, ironically.

I did respond, fully, to your question. You snipped the answer. You have
ended any chance of reasoned dialog between us in this thread - you just
snip and run.

In the end, Sandman, yes, I do believe that threads can be started in
response to a precipitating event but that does not mean that every started
thread is done for that reason. You focus on people starting threads in
response to Steve's trolling and seem to not be able to understand why his
threads and replied, posted for *no* reason other than to troll and flame,
are different than the posts done in reply to his.

I wish Steve would stop starting new threads in his trolling, but I also
wish he would stop his trolling in existing threads. I am happy, however,
that people are calling him on his trolling - even if I do not agree 100%
with every form of response.

You spend time questioning those responding to Steve's trolling; have you
even asked Steve about his trolling or called him on it? I do not believe
so - the most I have seen from you is a denial that you are defending him.

--
I am currently being "targeted" by a forger.
Check the headers to make sure this is not from Individual.net

--
? There is no known malware that attacks OS X in the wild
? There are two general types of PCs: Macs and PCs (odd naming conventions!)
? Mac OS X 10.x.x is a version of Mac OS


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: computers review
    ... If you were honest and had an honest response you would have no need to run ... Steve did not recognize the caps lock symbol - it may have been ... maybe Steve just saw a report and made up a story about his ... Might be more but Steve sure gives no reason to believe so. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: OT: Steve Carrolls still a Douche Bag (in case you missed it)
    ... The fact he started a thread in response to Carroll's trolling is ... yourself honest and honorable while it can be shown that you engage in ... Get some help Steve! ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: computers review
    ... his trolling and lying. ... I then responded to his trolling and lying. ... but in the end it is foolish to focus on my imperfect response ... when it is directly against me, such as when he lies in a public forum about ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: OT: Snits argument preserved - act 2
    ... constantly replying to Steve? ... John was *responding* to Steve's trolling. ... makes little sense to focus on the response to Steve's BS while not taking ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: OT: Snits argument preserved - act 2
    ... Steve is spewing hate filled BS into CSMA. ... John was *responding* to Steve's trolling. ... makes little sense to focus on the response to Steve's BS while not taking ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)