Re: Pig Ignorant Don Moody


"Bert Weaver" <weaverb@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:A9qdnYNZV4P5b2DanZ2dnUVZ_hCdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Don Moody" <dpmoody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:wJKdnTPlXc9mf2DaRVnyiQA@xxxxxxxxx
snip

Weaver started by claiming I had sent him an email

No, Moody. I `started' by telling you exactly what I think of you,
prompted
by yet another abusive and bullying tirade against a polite poster
whose
apparent sin was to have asked a question which, once again, you
considered
`idiotic', etc.

in spite or
repeatedly being asked he has yet to publish the date on which that
alleged email was sent.

If you have "repeatedly" asked, then my news server has not shown
this. Or
perhaps you asked in another thread. As far as I am aware, you
requested
once. If you had challenged me to post the offending email I would
have
jumped at the chance. The date? It doesn't take a genius to work
that out.
Use some high-school level research skills to use, and try to work
it out.
Hint: take the date I posted castigating you for your invective
against a
poster to this group. Throw into the equation that it was the
following day
I posted here that I'd received a foul email from someone ... is it
really
that difficult to determine the date I might have received it??

[snip]
So what are the implications of the continuing
thunderous silence?

No thunderous silence (careful, you'll have pedantic Charles back at
you for
that one!). I'm generally not one to lock horns with people, and it
seemed
to be disrupting the group to continue responding to puerile and ad
hominem
posts. For example, Hugh disputing that I was at my computer at
6.15am. That
I'm usually up at 5.30am I could have put down to the fact I don't
sit up
late drinking myself into incoherency as ... er ... some people do.
Asking
me to post the URLs of my clients' websites (I haven't provided that
information either - is that too a `thunderous silence'?). Calling
me a
f****ng a*****e. The ascerbic Lesley Robertson piping in as per
usual,
taking me to task for pointing out what a low-life you are, but
carefully
ignoring Hugh's name-calling. Charles, with his sad little go at
what he
considered a grammatical error on my part. It's childish.

It's all too ridiculous - the way the little clique of
self-proclaimed
moderators of this group close ranks and gang up to bully anyone who
dares
to speak up against your abominable and unacceptable behaviour. And
you,
Moody, are in fact the troll of this newsgroup. You know perfectly
well that
when you rabidly attack new or naive posters in the manner you do -
in the
manner of a bully, in the manner of a truly `little' person - that
it will
cause disruption to this newsgroup and divert from its rationale.
If, after
numerous episodes, you **don't** know that your savage and
unprovoked
attacks will cause disruption to this group, you're even more stupid
than I
think you are.

[snip pompous long-winded delusional drivel]

If you really can't work out the date I received the email, post
back here
on a new thread prefixed by OT in the subject line. Explain that you
still
cannot work out the date it might have been received by me, and I'll
help
you out by posting the date. The whole email if you so desire. In
the
meantime, I do not read every thread. I also do not necessarily read
this
newsgroup every day. To avoid you imagining there's a thunderous or
deafening silence my end, or that I might be unwell, or even that I
might be
a sock puppet, use OT and my name in the Subject line. By all means
add
whatever adjectives you feel are appropriate.

But let's get one thing straight, Moody. Whenever you next decide to
release
your venom onto another poster, be prepared for someone to remind
you of
what sort of person you really are. Publicly, here on this genealogy
newsgroup. For posterity, you understand.

Bert


All that waffle avails you nothing. You were asked for a date and no
amount of elliptical rubbish about not taking a genius to work it out
will cut any ice. A date is a date is a date.

Nut taking the sort of timeframe your subject-avoidance indicates I
have gone through my ;sent list; twice more, with a magnifier. THERE
IS NI EMAIL TO WEAVER IN THAT TIMEFRAME OR FOR AT LEAST 5 WEEKS BEFORE
IT.

IT FOLLOWS EITHER THAT YOU ARE A LIAR OR THAT SOMEBODY HAS FORGED MY
NAME ON THEIR EMAIL TO YOU.

It follows either way that your defamation of me was wholly
unjustifiable and that I did not produce the 'verbal filth' of which
you complain If you can't identify the real sender from the full
headings, I suggest you get your ISP to do so, and publish your
results with your apology in this newsgroup.

The other alternative is to give your true name and postal address,
and look for the letter telling you where you are going to be taken to
court for defamation.

You may choose instead to scuttle away and not pollute this or any
other genealogical newsgroup with your trash ever again. I suggest you
confine your genealogical publishing patron submissions to IGI where
they'll get the contempt they deserve for proper genealogists who
realise they are reading the tripe of a liar and a coward.

Don


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Pig Ignorant Don Moody
    ... poster to this group. ... Moody, are in fact the troll of this newsgroup. ...
    (soc.genealogy.britain)
  • Re: Children at Play in the Schoolyard
    ... Don Moody wrote: ... On a newsgroup? ... I don't even try to jest in the matter of correction ascription and contact details on any form of writing about science. ...
    (soc.genealogy.britain)
  • Re: REMINDER: No speaking to the troll)
    ... Scott you were the very first poster on this newsgroup to cause me problems ... BTW if I really were a "Stalker" I could not have won that jury trial 12 to ... Scott, you have to quit making "Hate Groups" on this newsgroup. ...
    (misc.transport.trucking)
  • Re: Han from Chinas comp.lang.c topicality FAQ (version 2.0)
    ... This is a comp.lang.c topicality FAQ. ... what you can and cannot post to the comp.lang.c Usenet newsgroup. ... C language itself doesn't support threading, ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: One way to combat spam in sci.math ...
    ... The same goes for substantially identical replies to posters not adhering to ... suggestion the original poster does the same next time. ... somebodies need to start a sci.math.mod moderated math newsgroup. ... BTW a periodic notice about the Mark of Quasi will quickly clue in ...
    (sci.math)