Re: To SCT censor Stefanie.



On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 07:56:31 +1100, Krypsis <krypsis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Good Soldier Schweik wrote:
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 20:26:39 +0900, HawaiianEye
<HawaiianEye@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Good Soldier Schweik wrote:
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 01:06:23 +1100, Krypsis <krypsis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Good Soldier Schweik wrote:
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 16:38:09 +1100, Krypsis <krypsis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
<snip>

Paranoid? I don't think so. Cautious? Yes definitely, especially since
watching you and your ilk hound people out of SCT and even Rec.Knives!
Frankly, do you blame me for being wary?
I assume that you are referring to Steve Cramer who, if you actually
read this group for any length of time, you would have realized was a
nearly psychotic liar and to my mind richly deserved everything he
received.
I have read quite a few of your posts where you have said this. Can you
prove any of it? I have seen many troll posts about this, but no one
ever posted any facts. Just going by typical troll logic that if you say
something often enough it must be true. Guess what people are saying
about you. :o) I am certainly a believer.

You never say anyone posting any facts? Bob posted for several years
giving an almost blow by blow account and even posted photos taken
inside the police station. apparently you don't read as well as you
seem to claim.

Bob posted assertions, not facts. Assertions cannot be held as proofs.
Did Bob post transcripts of statements from that event at the police
station? I didn't seen any back when the issue was hot. I haven't to
date seen any proof so assertions they remain. Seems I read quite a deal
better than you!

You are correct from a legal point of view Bob posted his
allegations... time after time, month after month, year after year,
and Steve never argued that the allegations were incorrect or that Bob
was lying. As I mentioned his only defense was "that it was only a
little bit of fax paper".

Given Steve's personality, he was, to put it mildly, a highly abrasive
person, it seems impossible that anyone could post lies for all that
time without Steve protesting them.

You can argue all you want to but anyone who ever encountered Steve is
not going to believe that, based on Steve's own actions, Bob was
recounting anything but the truth. A somewhat exaggerated version,
perhaps, buy essentially true.,

cheers,

Schweik
(goodsoldierschweikatgmaildotcom)
.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: To SCT censor Stefanie.
    ... I have seen many troll posts about this, but no one ever posted any facts. ... Assertions cannot be held as proofs. ... So his allegations became truths simply because he repeated them ad nauseum! ...
    (soc.culture.thai)
  • Re: Snex demonstates his characteristic ignorance of both religion and science
    ... empirical facts. ... Christian doctrine makes assertions about only one material ... Hume showed that it matters little how many empirical "facts' we ... snex doesn't have a clue. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Apple sued over LCD screens
    ... There are two questions present in this thread between us, Steve. ... that the presumption of innocence is not 100% and sometimes the accused is ... see the difference and think the only way to get pertinent facts is ... It means that the jury may only pronounce the defendant ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: In the interests of naval topics :-)
    ... Which actual facts would those be, Steve? ... Trot out your 'facts of the matter', if you can, you bloody nutter. ... the tool of the corrupt tyrant. ...
    (sci.military.naval)
  • pagano thinks lies he tells to the ignorant flock of christ-heads will work on me too. what a bu
    ... Christian doctrine makes assertions about only one material ... the great step of illogic that pagano missed is the part where he ... Hume showed that it matters little how many empirical "facts' we ...
    (talk.origins)