Re: Treasongate

On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 22:15:55 GMT, gekko
<gekko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>Josh Hill <usereplyto@xxxxxxxxx> fingre fremførte følgende
>fornøyelige frase:
>
>
>> On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 23:47:05 -0400, ing <ing.blueyes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>chris_tine49@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>>
>>>> Selur wrote:
>>>
>>><.....>
>>>>>I think if MW's own Jock lived in Germany in the 30s, he would
>>>>>have been a book-burning thug. Jock embraces the teller rather
>>>>>than the message. He wants to believe, he wants to demonstrate
>>>>>his belief.
>>>
>>>> I'm not sure why it's important to demonize Josh.
>>>
>>>Let me try to answer that -- at least from what
>>>I've observed over the years ... and I could be
>>>wrong, but I don't think so.
>>>
>>>It's only important to demonize Josh to those who
>>>feel he's some kind of real threat to .... well,
>>>whatever values they hold dear, for want of a
>>>clear cut answer ... to those who have nothing
>>>better to do with their time and need an outlet in
>>>which to show off their self-supposed put-down
>>>witticisms. IMHO of course.
>>
>> Well, yes. Or, often, a combination, e.g., Gekko is often just
>> clowning around but clearly does feel threatened by some of the
>> points I make. And there was a time when Joxer I mean Ray thought
>> he was a mighty warrior, though he's long since made the
>> transition to desperation.
>>
>> Stan was always desperate.
>>
>>>I'd bet there's a bunch of us who just skip by
>>>Josh's posts and move on, mostly without reading
>>>him. If we're feeling generous, we might scan them
>>>but that's about it. And ya know, our lives carry
>>>on relatively the same regardkess if whether we
>>>read him or not. So much for the threat.
>>
>> But I am a threat. Sometimes, I'm a threat because I express
>> uncomfortable truths in a manner that leads people to believe I'm
>> serious. I know, for example, exactly what Stan's insecurities
>> are. And you know, people don't always pick up on that, don't
>> always realize why someone is so upset at me, because, after all,
>> I haven't been lobbing much artillery their way. Not infrequently,
>> I haven't lobbed /any/ -- they merely projected their insecurities
>> onto what I thought and said.
>>
>>>It always surprises me to find folks here who I
>>>once thought had more than a dozen working brain
>>>cells, constantly responding to him, with words
>>>from "on high" it seems, pointing out his
>>>idiocies. Jesus. I just gotta laugh. I seldom
>>>read Josh and only on a very few occasions have
>>>ever responded to him. I can't remember the last
>>>time - eons ago is my best guestimate.
>>>
>>>I mostly find much of what he writes ain't worth
>>>responding to. Those who consistently hammer him
>>>however, I guess they DO find him worthwhile.
>>>(I'll never understand why, but I will accept they
>>>must find him interesting because they actually
>>>spend TIME). It must just puff out Josh's chest
>>>-- them taking all this time to respond to him --
>>>I think it must. They think he's worth the time.
>>>How could he think anything less?
>>
>> Well, if you don't read me, you aren't going to find what I say
>> worthwhile, are you?
>>
>> But, really, one has to be careful not to project one's own tastes
>> onto others. Some people like to argue about politics, some people
>> like to talk about cooking. The fact that I'm one of the former
>> doesn't mean that I consider cooking posts intrinsically
>> uninteresting, or that I think they aren't worthwhile. I just
>> respond to the posts that amuse me.
>>
>>>BTW, all of what's written above - the same goes
>>>for "the Haddad", I gotta say. Marooon or what?
>>>Give me a break. Life's too fucking short to
>>>bother with that ilk. And if you do respond to
>>>them with what you think are cutting witticisms
>>>(mostly they aren't, they're immediately
>>>forgettable lines, probably not even original if
>>>you want the truth), just be honest enough to let
>>>folks know you're jacking off in your hat doing it
>>>all, that you're doing it as a mental writing
>>>exercise. Please have that courtesy because newbie
>>>lurkers don't have a clue as to past histories.
>>
>> Again, it amuses some to taunt Ray. It's not my own cup of Heroin
>> -- like most here I've had my say, and since then I've pretty much
>> ignored his posts. But he certainly deserves it, given his chronic
>> disingenuity.
>>
>> 'Course, one always senses when she lobs a desultory snipe at Ray
>> that Gekko misses arguing with me. She's like a kickboxer in a
>> kindergarten class.
>>
>>>> Let's talk about issues, writing, forms of argument and address.
>>>> Or join the MW rugby team which uses Josh as its leather ball.
>>>> Righ now you give Josh far more power than he has.
>>>
>>>Amen ducks. What you said and then some. When
>>>there's nothing else worthwhile talking about, or
>>>nothing that comes to mind -- folks around here
>>>will always get their rocks off, cursing at, and
>>>with self-defined "wit" at the forefront, knock
>>>Josh. Good christ. Mostly responders use this
>>>venue to strut their "writing skills" in this
>>>public place, (maybe even to win a few more "fans"
>>>in the doing so - but holy cow, like who gives a
>>>***!) Bottom line, there ain't no other reason
>>>they respond to obvious idiots.
>>
>> The comeback here is self-evident, but, as you know, I'm not fond
>> of this crap.
>>
>>>Do any of Josh's responders actually think he's a
>>>real threat ... to *anything*!? No. Josh has no
>>>power -- as do any of us here - we're just pixels
>>>in space. He's just an easy mark for those who
>>>want to participate here but can't seem to come up
>>>with their own ideas for interesting topics - so
>>>they go after him. Fish in a barrel, ain't it?
>>>They are RE-actors (to Josh), as opposed to
>>>leaders (of their own ideas). Creativity in this
>>>venue is on life support. IMNSHO.
>>
>> Right. I compared them to ants. You know, the ones that scurry
>> around when a little boy kicks over their mound.
>>
>> They really don't have much to say, and those who do have either
>> left this group or don't devote much time to it. OTOH, I am (to
>> put on my Geno hat for a moment) unfailingly interesting and
>> creative.
>>
>
>I think, if you read through this, along with the bulk of J*sh's
>posts where he talks about himself and speculates concerning others,
>you'll understand why I'm finally fed up with his delusional crap,
>his blatant lies, his smarmy hypocrisy, and will no longer play with
>him.
>
>The man needs meds. Seriously.

Thus quacketh Gekkothustra.


--
Josh
.

Loading