Re: mythomania is the opposite of what?

On Aug 24, 5:39?am, boots <n...@xxxxx> wrote:
Josh Hill <userepl...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 10:08:06 -0700, $Zero <zeroi...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Aug 23, 12:28?pm, somebody with a great sense of humor wrote:

[...]

snipped in its hilarious entirety.

Josh, i'm afraid that your slanderous claims that a certain amusing
dude is "stalking" you are quite off the deep end.

and he's right, too. you don't have what it takes to ignore him.

There's no sense in debating someone who denies a fact. I ignored Stan
for something like six months. Completely. It was not the first time,
but it was the longest, and I went out of my way to point out what I
was doing it, because people kept saying "If you ignore him, he'll go
away," and I wanted to prove to them what I already knew from
experience, that it would make no difference.

Well, done, I proved it, and anybody who chooses to ignore the
evidence -- Stan's posts, my lack of responses, archived for eternity
-- can go *** themselves.

OTOH, your alleged "stalker" sure has what it takes to ignore the
people he wishes to ignore.

for instance, he's ignored me for almost ten years -- even with me
constantly making fun of the stupid things he's said over the years --
yet not a single slip up from him.

Be thankful that I'm not Alan Hope.

and he didn't even do the idiotic alleged public killfiling routine
that you did,

I went public with the killfiling because I knew it would drive him
nuts. Had I known /how/ nuts, I would have done it silently; we are
talking about one troubled dude.

so he's completely ignored me for ten whole years
without even the benefit of increasing his discipline to avoid looking
like a stupid fool for possibly slipping up here and there -- like you
do.

You can be assured that Stan is not the only person I have ignored.
And I do not "slip up": I did what I felt like doing. It was never my
intent to ignore Stan forever. I merely wanted to prove that it made
no difference whether I did or not. That having been proved, I decided
to relax the strictures.

Killfiling someone isn't the same as saying you will never respond to
a person, for me or anyone else. I've had people who had publicly
killfiled me respond to my quoted words. No one made an issue of it. A
killfile is just a filter that locks out some of the boredom or
craziness or offensiveness. It's a tool, and one is free to use it as
one wishes.

So -- if I feel like responding to somebody, I will do it; if I don't
feel like responding, I won't.

and this is not even your first public kill-filing of him?

Yes. I gave him a second chance way back when. He failed.

Josh, dude, you've done made yourself an easy target for ridicule.

try taking personal responsibility for your complete idiocy instead of
slandering your alleged "harasser" -- before you implode -- right in
front of everyone.

HTH

seriously.

I'm sorry, Zero. The simple fact is that the nutter follows me around
even when I ignore him for months at a stretch. That's harassment. The
simple fact is that the nutter addresses posts to me personally when I
can't see them. The simple fact is the nutter won't, after all these
years, acknowledge the obvious, that he's been plonked. I killfiled
him as a result. Whether I eventually respond to one or another of his
neurotic babbles is my business.

When you have a compulsive need for things to be tidy the constant
cleanup can be frustrating. Tthe first step, when you discover there
is *** on the floor, is not to track it around. Once you reach the
point where you can avoid getting it on your feet you can decide
whether it can be cleaned up or whether it is self-replicating, but at
least you can avoid seeing *** imprints on the carpet that are the
size and shape of your feet.

beautiful nice summary, boots!

boots.

-$Zero...

http://www.whooooooosh.com

.

Loading