Re: WTD - PC/Midi connector

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 in article <MPG.1d50c81a7ffd62ee989825@xxxxxxxxx>, Neil Barker <neil@xxxxxxxxxx> writes 
In article <LhzOBTUcHr5CFwo+@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, me@xxxxxxxxxxx says...

(Diatribe snipped) 

Snipped text reinstated for the sake of completeness -

I don't need to do any research.  It doesn't matter who Phil Kyle is,
except perhaps to you and Phil.  He is posting in u.a.c now due to your
behaviour elsewhere.    The only idiot I am worried about is the idiot
who likes to call himself "Neil Barker".


You were posting off topic, you were off charter, before I got involved
in this thread.  That's why I am involved, because of that and your past
record attacking others.


You can't blame your off topic posting on Phil or me or anyone else.
You have so often claimed that off topic posts will be the death of
u.a.c. Considering the aggression you have displayed towards others in
the past, you really ought to be posting to a higher standard yourself.
You have claimed to be a netcop.  In fact you are simply a trouble
maker.

Frankly sunshine, I couldn't give a toss what you think.

Actually I rather think that you do, or otherwise you would not be trying to shrug it off and hide my comments by snipping. Your attempt at setting Followup-To: poster suggests that you want a closer email correspondence, but I'm not falling for that one.

It is also apparent that you do not care for the users of u.a.c in general.

What you
cannot understand is that by posting the way you do, you are giving the
fuckwit troll exactly what it wants


I can only see one fuckwit troll here, and that's Neil Barker.

- hence why I ignore and therefore
do not reply to it.

But you don't ignore him, do you? You made that obvious earlier in this thread and in previous threads, and encouraged him to respond to you. He's really getting to you, isn't he?

But you never were that bright when it comes to these things, were you
?


Somewhat brighter than you, Nellie.

Just let me remind people that I am posting to this thread to remind Neil Barker that off topic posting, such as his post that I replied to initially, is contrary to the charter of u.a.c. Neil has made it his thing to aggressively attack others who have posted off topic, and doesn't have the decency to recognise and curb his own off topic posting. As such, he is a hypocrite, and a blight on this newsgroup.

His references to Phil Kyle in response to my posts are a pathetic attempt at a red herring. Perhaps if Neil Barker was consistent, he would be posting in reply to Phil, and advising Phil of the off topic nature of his posts. Instead he is attempting to justify his inconsistency with bluster and aggression.

Now be a good chap, Neil, and sod off.

--
John Blundell
Reply-to: address is valid.
Antispam From: address
These settings made for newsgroup, but may also appear in email replies.
.

Loading