Posted by JM on 01/13/07 18:15

On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 23:14:17 +0000, ThePsyko wrote:

> On 12 Jan 2007 I stormed the castle called alt.2600 and heard Max Grrl cry
> out in news:120120071705421741%maxtheangel@gmail.com...
>
>> In article <4LTph.21$9M6.1@newsfe03.lga>, Steve <no.one@example.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "ThePsyko" <thepsyko@itookmyprozac.com> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns98B683A55608LifeIsGood@nntp.petitmorte.net...
>>> | On 12 Jan 2007 I stormed the castle called alt.2600 and heard Steve
>>> | cry out in news:BoSph.34$US6.2@newsfe02.lga...
>>> |
>>> |
>>> | > "Bill K" <msuwkrull@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> | > news:1168617886.958531.250160@v45g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
>>> | >|
>>> | >| Steve wrote:
>>> | >| > "Onideus Mad Hatter" <usenet@backwater-productions.net> wrote in
>>> | >| > message news:6u8eq21l8mutmtghv9au6ctihi7jmftvd4@4ax.com...
>>> | >| > | I've noticed over the past year that every time I run a search
>>> | >| > | for something...I start rackin up blog hit after blog hit
>>> | >| > | after blog hit.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > <snip>
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > learn to google. better yet, go to the flash site and get TFM
>>> | >| > !!! i
>>> | > program
>>> | >| > in several languages and have NEVER had the problem you're
>>> | >| > describing. further, i have several technical hobbies as well.
>>> | >| > each are well covered
>>> | > in
>>> | >| > blogs...in fact, and counter to your pompous-assed attitude and
>>> | > assertions,
>>> | >| > i look forward to getting a blog link as i can be reasonably
>>> | >| > certain
>>> | > that
>>> | >| > someone has posted links to more informative non-blogged source
>>> | >| > sites...
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > arrogant son-of-a-bitch! you have a problem with blogs...fine. I
>>> | >| > HATE DUMBASSES who see fit to post OFF-TOPIC diatribes in nntp
>>> | >| > groups whos context is specific, and specifically NOT for such
>>> | >| > tirades!
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > now, on to your quotes...
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | Hatter Quotes
>>> | >| > | -------------
>>> | >| > | "You're only one of the best if you're striving to become one
>>> | >| > | of the best."
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > illogically exclusive. certainly the most likely to achieve such
>>> | >| > a title
>>> | > of
>>> | >| > being the best at a thing are NOT those who work particularly
>>> | >| > had for
>>> | > it.
>>> | >| > rather, they are those with a natural disposition on inclination
>>> | >| > toward
>>> | > the
>>> | >| > same.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "I didn't make reality, Sunshine, I just verbally bitch
>>> | >| > | slapped you with it."
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > your reality seems very distinct to you and not shared by the
>>> | > majority...i
>>> | >| > wonder who is more likely wrong. it is easy to see how the
>>> | >| > conflict
>>> | > between
>>> | >| > our definition of reality and yours produces such friction as to
>>> | >| > prompt
>>> | > you
>>> | >| > to hold the 'i'm ok, everyone else is not' attitude.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "I'm not a professional, I'm an artist."
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > illogical equivocation. the quality of one's work gives no
>>> | >| > indication as
>>> | > to
>>> | >| > whether or not one is actually employed to engage in such work.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "Your Usenet blinders are my best friend."
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > i thought your arrogance was.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "Usenet Filters - Learn to shut yourself the fuck up!"
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > yes...your post forces me to use my filter to 'shut yourself the
>>> | >| > fuck
>>> | > up'
>>> | >| > since you cannot discipline your own tongue.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "Drugs killed Jesus you know...oh wait, no, that was the Jews,
>>> | >| > | my bad."
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > oh you historian! the romans killed jesus, you fucking
>>> | >| > anti-semite.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "There are clingy things in the grass...burrs 'n
>>> | >| > | such...mmmm..."
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > this is about the most coherent quote you've provided. too bad
>>> | >| > it illuminates nothing.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "The more I learn the more I'm killing my idols."
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > as is obvious the reason, their reality is vastly different from
>>> | >| > the
>>> | > world
>>> | >| > in which you delude yourself.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "Is it wrong to incur and then use the hate ridden, vengeful
>>> | >| > | stupidity of complete strangers in random Usenet froups to
>>> | >| > | further my art?"
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > there is no wrong nor right. now as for polite or generally
>>> | >| > acceptable
>>> | > to
>>> | >| > the masses, i think it is behavior that will earn your art to be
>>> | >| > known
>>> | > as
>>> | >| > the art definitive of 'perfect ass'.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "Freedom is only a concept, like race it's merely a social
>>> | >| > | construct that doesn't really exist outside of your ability to
>>> | >| > | convince others of its relevancy."
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > and all things outside of the first-cause is likewise. which
>>> | >| > means that
>>> | > i
>>> | >| > perceive i exist but cannot see any relevance in perceiving that
>>> | >| > you do...and you give little cause that would 'convince others'.
>>> | >| > after all, based on your blathering, narcisistic, and
>>> | >| > hatefulness behaviour there
>>> | > is
>>> | >| > very little worth in us believing you do exist. that would be a
>>> | >| > waste of time. consider the cost/benefit ratio.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "Next time slow up a lil, then maybe you won't jump the gun
>>> | >| > | and start creamin yer panties before it's time to pop the
>>> | >| > | champagne proper."
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > said your boyfriend on new years eve.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "Reality is directly proportionate to how creative you are."
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > only if you're delusional. reality is based on third-party
>>> | >| > observations. even personal reality is kept in check...tried
>>> | >| > levitating lately?
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "People are pretty fucking high on themselves if they think
>>> | >| > | that they're just born with a soul. *snicker*...yeah, like
>>> | >| > | they're just givin em out for free."
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > kind of like intellect. while wholly devoid of such, you are
>>> | >| > even more pitiful since you espouse that you do yet parade
>>> | >| > around, completely
>>> | > obvious
>>> | >| > to all others, without a single marble in your bag.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "Quible, quible said the Hare. Quite a lot of
>>> | >| > | quibling...everywhere. So the Hare took a long stare and
>>> | >| > | decided at best, to leave the rest, to their merry little
>>> | >| > | mess."
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > which is why i'm now plonking you.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "There's a difference between 'bad' and 'so earth shatteringly
>>> | >| > | horrible it makes the angels scream in terror as they
>>> | >| > | violently rip their heads off, their blood spraying into the
>>> | >| > | faces of a thousand sweet innocent horrified children, who
>>> | >| > | will forever have the terrible images burned into their tiny
>>> | >| > | little minds'."
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > other than considering your 'tiny little' mind, it would be good
>>> | >| > to
>>> | > start
>>> | >| > with logic in supporting such a claim. first if you intend to
>>> | >| > use angels
>>> | > for
>>> | >| > support, you should prove god exists and whether or not he
>>> | >| > has/needs
>>> | > angels.
>>> | >| > further, you'd need to establish they have heads, need blood,
>>> | >| > and have a fetish vented towards implanting unforgettable
>>> | >| > imagery in ones head.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > there is a difference between 'earth shatteringly good' and
>>> | >| > 'earth shatterlingly horrible'. all socially engaged animals
>>> | >| > curtail partaking
>>> | > of
>>> | >| > the extremes of either as it may get them expelled from the
>>> | >| > group -
>>> | > spelling
>>> | >| > a most certain doom.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "How sad that you're such a poor judge of style that you can't
>>> | >| > | even properly gauge the artistic worth of your own efforts."
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > that's a blanket quote you just throw out there to someone whom
>>> | >| > you've
>>> | > never
>>> | >| > met? you don't know me or anyone else here. i'm sorry you find
>>> | >| > it
>>> | > necessary
>>> | >| > to project. i do feel sad for you. however, i believe your
>>> | >| > judging of
>>> | > style
>>> | >| > is merely an overestimation of yourself...you obviously
>>> | >| > overvalue
>>> | > everything
>>> | >| > you do.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "Those who record history are those who control history."
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > illogical equivocation. you certainly do see everyone in a
>>> | >| > negative
>>> | > light.
>>> | >| > this assertion assumes that motive records history and that the
>>> | >| > events
>>> | > of
>>> | >| > history have little effect on the story.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "I am the living embodiment of hell itself in all its
>>> | >| > | tormentive rage, endless suffering, unfathomable pain and
>>> | >| > | unending horror...but you don't get sent to me...I come for
>>> | >| > | you."
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > narcisist. futher, prove hell. no matter the result of that
>>> | >| > endeavor,
>>> | > bring
>>> | >| > it on. i'll spank your ass like a toddler.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "Ideally in a fight I'd want a BGM-109A with a W80 250 kiloton
>>> | >| > | tactical thermonuclear fusion based war head."
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > ideally, i'd employ diplomacy so as to avoid conflict. here's my
>>> | >| > quote: 'diplomacy - the art of letting others have your way'.
>>> | >| > since you have no such art, or even tact, i can see why this
>>> | >| > scenario has plagued your
>>> | > mind
>>> | >| > and why you'd consider it an ideal situation.
>>> | >| >
>>> |>| > | "Tell me, would you describe yourself more as a process or a
>>> | >| > | function?"
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > i can tell you that none of YOUR processes are functioning!
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "Apparently this group has got the market cornered on stupid.
>>> | >| > | Intelligence is down 137 points across the board and the
>>> | >| > | forecast indicates an increase in Webtv users."
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > you cross-posted. and as with the rest of your reality, every
>>> | >| > one of
>>> | > these
>>> | >| > groups gets the corner if-and-only-if you come to 'participate'
>>> | >| > in one
>>> | > of
>>> | >| > them. and your forecast is wrong. you are at 0 points...you
>>> | >| > cannot get
>>> | > any
>>> | >| > more un-intelligent. what a moron...'down x points and due to
>>> | > increase'...i
>>> | >| > don't think you mean to be so optimistic.
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > | "Is my .sig delimiter broken? Really? You're sure? Awww,
>>> | >| > | gee...that's too bad...for YOU!" `, )
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > and here's my injunctive relief...
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > *PLONK*
>>> | >| >
>>> | >| > now, FOAD.
>>> | >|
>>> | >| Hatter, you know you've arrived when you inspire so many people to
>>> | >| spend so much time responding to you. Very few people have such
>>> | >| power. Keep up the good work. Just think, if you got them to use
>>> | >| their creative energy solving problems such as Iraq instead
>>> | >| diatribes against you, imagine what could be accomplished. --
>>> | >| A Hatter Fan
>>> | >
>>> | > bill is hatter. pretty sad when one rants, is confronted, and runs
>>> | > and hides under a new identity. and, my response took all of about
>>> | > 5 minutes. i had it to spare while my pc was compiling some code.
>>> | > go spew your stupidity somewhere else.
>>> | >
>>> | > FOAD
>>> | >
>>> | >
>>> | >
>>> | >
>>> | lol... You're new to usenet aren't you...
>>
>> Obviously, Babe. : )
>>> |
>>> | --
>>> | ThePsyko
>>> | Public Enemy #7
>>>
>>> the sock strikes again.
>>
>> LOL, Psycho's not Hat's sock - nor anyone else's.
>>
>>> you have heard of statistical significance, haven't you? first, what
>>> are the odds that someone favors your vanity, stupidity, and
>>> narcissism? second, that three of them would follow you into one of
>>> these three news groups?
>>
>> I've got an idea - why don't you take a looky-look at all the froups
>> this thread is xposted to, hmmm? Considering that there's at least 4,
>> that's quite a few pools to draw peeps from.
>>
>> Further, when you consider the fact that most of these peeps have been
>> on usenet for quite some time, I'd think it's pretty fucking logical to
>> come to the conclusion that pretty much everybody KNOWS pretty much
>> everybody.
>>
>> But for the record, the players are from the froups as follows (though,
>> next time, why don't you just Google the chit to see if they ARE socks
>> before you start ASSuming shit, hmmm?
>>
>> Psycho: alt.hackers.malicious, alt.2600 (I think), alt.php (I think)
>> Hat: All of the above
>> Me: ADG, AHM, though I often lurk at AMF
>>
>> For the record, I've known Hat for about 2 years, and Psycho about what?
>> 6 months? And no one who's actually lurked for longer than a week would
>> EVER assume that the two are anything close to even being friendly, much
>> less "socks" of the other, LOL.
>>
>>> third, that they would find your post among a myriad of other posts not
>>> made by you? and four, that they all have the same cantor, tone,
>>> daftness, and arrogance in the voice of their posts as you? i know you
>>> lack such critical thinking skills or familiarity with mathematics in
>>> general, however don't assume the rest of us are so gullible.
>>
>> AFAIK, the syntax you're referring to would be considered a "language"
>> common to those who hack and/or are "netters."LOL, I'm by no means a
>> hacker, but I speak the "language" for the most part . . . it's kinda
>> how you fit in in the groups.
>>
>> And if you haven't figured it out yet - most hackers are fucking
>> arrogant as hell - prolly because they know they can fuck up your
>> computer without breaking a sweat. But, "netters" are pretty fucking
>> arrogant, too.
>>>
>>> i expect, if you have any honesty in you, you should just respond to
>>> this reply with the name 'sockMaster'.
>>
>> HTH!!
>>
>> *sigh*
>>
>> I know, I know . . . I MUST be a sock, too, right? ; )
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> yeah but you're a cute sock lol.. now.. where do I put my toes IYKWIM?!??
> :)

"How can I take you seriously with a little pink sock in your mouth?"
;p

--
Three things are certain:
Death, taxes, and lost data.
Guess which has occurred.
~David Dixon

[Back to original message]