"Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote in
:
"Sean Monaghan" wrote in message
"Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote in
:
"Sean Monaghan" wrote in message
miguel wrote in
:
Kali wrote:
miguel said:
Kadaitcha Gimp Retard He-Bitch wrote:
Translation: even though all kookologists agree that taking
usenet to real life is prime kooksign, that's what I'm trying to
accomplish.
Good job there kOOk.
miguel
So, what are your plans for Steve Cheney?
If I ever meet him, I will put him in the hospital.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^
This is not a flame; this is a clear threat of physical violence.
This is something we'd expect from Richard "the St00pid" Bullis, or
from Edmond Heinz Wollmann - not the words of a 'marginal kook', or
from someone who is merely involved in a Usenet flamewar.
This snippet of evidence not only justifies the open KotM
nomination of Michael Cranston attorney, but it also qualifies him
for the Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - AUK's highest lifetime-achievement
award for stupidity.
From - http://www.caballista.org/auk/awards.html
"Bolo Bullis Foam Duck - The spoonerism for "dumb ****", for those
who've lost more marbles than a Chinese Checker factory will ever
make."
I hereby nominate "Michael Cranston attorney"/Miguel to become Bolo
Bullis Foam Duck #27.
Seconds, anyone?
The nomination is ridiculous.
It's interesting how say that this *nomination* is ridiculous - not
Cranston's threat.
In the more than...I saw something from a 2004 post that indicated it
was 12 years then, so that would make it 15 years that Chaney has been
acting like a psychopath online...Mike has made absolutely no effort
to seek out Chaney and "put him in the hospital."
That would lead me to the conclusion that someone is overreacting to
words on the screen, and I don't mean Mike.
See
http://www.caballista.org/auk/faq.html#question27
Note - To those
That would be my cue.
Paranoid much? I was referring to the nominee.
I'm the only person who has ever made the claim that any of these
nominations of Mike are revenge nominations, so it follows that I
would be the most likely person to do so for this nomination too.
That's logic, not paranoia.
1. You assumed.
2. You came to an inaccurate conclusion.
3. Your 'logic' failed you.
who will want to make the k'laim that this nomination
is based on 'revenge' due to some coincidental flamewar in which
I've never participated, let it be known that there have been many
flamewars in which individual AUKers have participated where not a
single nomination was ever made. Such k'laims are ludicrous,
unfounded, and based on ignorance (and quite possibly, based on
cluelessness)
Precisely the opposite. Unfortunately, I'm still working with the
very same hand tied behind my back.
as opposed to being based on rational thought.
Honor is rational. Without it, civilization would not survive. If I
had no honor, this would be a different argument entirely.
You take the awards' programme *far* too seriously.
Oh, I'm pretty sure it's not *me* who takes the awards' programme far
too seriously.
Says the person who is post-humping my nominations.
*whoosh*
Right. It's like being back in fifth grade. No one had a clue then
either.
Let's see if you have a sufficient number of neurons firing today
to comprehend a fairly simple argument.
First (not firstly, that's semi-literate), you kookologists
universally disdain taking usenet to real life. "Real life" is
fairly understood to mean consequences in meatspace.
I think that standard of behavior is stupid and cowardly. I think
if somebody types some nasty **** safely from under his bed in
momma's basement he ought to possess enough character or courage
to say it to somebody's face. If said nasty **** has real world
consequences, even moreso. Perhaps there is one or two of you
kookologists who possess the character and courage to abide that
standard. I think I've read about one of you who does MMA training
at one point or another. The rest of you hide behind your
self-serving rule of conduct that serves only to insulate you from
any consequences for your bad behavior.
Second, since you kookologists hold universal disdain for taking
usenet to real life, one might expect you to refrain from doing
so, and that when one of your number elects out of desperation to
do so, others of you might be intellectually honest enough to
point out the hypocrisy.
I expect I'll be waiting a long time to see any display of that.
It's the same sort of hypocrisy I pointed out to you about your
netkopping post. Are you too emotionally overwrought to be
objective about this?
miguel
--
Official FAQ for Alt.Usenet.Kooks:
http://www.caballista.org/auk
COOSN-266-06-58907
Hammer of Thor - August 2005
Pierre Salinger Memorial "Hook, Line & Sinker" awards -
March 2005, July 2005, August 2005, August 2006, February 2007
[Co]Friendly Neighbourhood Vote Wrangler