Text 18881, 89 rader
Skriven 2005-12-17 17:36:57 av Björn Felten (2:203/2)
  Kommentar till text 18878 av SHANNON TALLEY (1:275/311)
Ärende: FidoNews Story
======================
 ST> Dumbass,

   Thank you. It's always nice to get on the right foot from the start when
trying to get this echo "on the right foot" isn't it?

 >>   1: Why didn't he first try netmail?

 ST> He's not a fidonet regular. Regardless, why should he?

   Because if he hadn't been propped by someone in advance, that would be the
obvious way, the way that some 90% of all the hundreds of submissions I have
published in the Snooze has been sent.

 >>   2: Why did he feel the urge to carbon copy the article to "a
 >> considerable number of people"?

 ST> Although I can speak for him

   So why do you still try to?

 ST> -- remember -- he left this echo because you &
 ST> your ilk referred to him numerous times by racial slurs

   Ah yes, that "racial" thing all over again. Are you sure it wasn't
"liberal", "left wing", or anything similar at the time?

 ST> was because we had already indicated in echomail that you wouldn't publish
 ST> an article written by Dan.

   That's what I thought. "We" had "indicated". So who are "we", pray tell? And
why did you think it necessary to "indicate" something like that before this
imaginary Jerry guy even had made his first attempt to publish anything in the
Snooze?

 >>   3: Who are those "people", and how did he know who to send to?

 ST> Read the Email dumbass, it's in the CC portion :)  You got it... :)

   Didn't I just tell you that I didn't receive it? Can you please show proof
that I did.

 >>   4: How many are "a considerable amount"? 5? 10? 20?

 ST> Read the Email dumbass, it's in the CC portion :)  You got it... :)

   But as I've just told you I *didn't* get it. So, please tell me.

 >>   5: How come none of those people are standing up to support your lies?

 ST> Actually BJ, they did stand up and accuse you of not publishing the
article
 ST> dumbass...

   They did? Well then, surely you would have no problems telling us who they
are, and even link us to their postings?

 >>   To cut a long story short:

 ST> Too late.

   Is that for you to decide?

 >>   1: Of course I have never received any submission from your Jerry guy.

 ST> Liar.

   Let's at least agree that one of us is a notorious liar. I leave it to all
the readers to decide which one of us is.

 >>   2: Why would I jeopardize my personal integrity by rejecting something
 >> he wrote, and what was the hot stuff, that he wrote, all about that I
didn't
 >> dare publish according to you?

 ST> You don't have any integrity.  We ALL know that to be a FACT.

   That doesn't answer my question. What hot stuff did he write about?

 >>   Yeah, right. Do you want me to publish the netmail where you say that
 >> you didn't get the article that Dan claimed he sent? I've done it once
 >> before, but

 ST> That was the first attempt, he subsequently successfully sent that article
 ST> to you via Netmail & Email dumbass.

   And you know that because...?

---
 * Origin: news://felten.yi.org (2:203/2)