Discussion:
Snit lie: Manipulation claim
(too old to reply)
Diesel
2020-06-28 10:13:42 UTC
Permalink
[snip]
Hmm, we must not be seeing the same things. And, I already know
how you tend to interpret things, so, since I asked for
clarification and you can't do that, I'm going to dismiss your
claim as more than likely, unproven personal opinion that you
tried to snow me with by passing off as a fact when it's not.
I already posted it elsewhere, but assumed that looking at names
and posting times was such a trivial task you would not need
support in doing so.
Oh? Did you find my request to be lazy and you repost it instead
annoying? If so, that was the intention. Now maybe you understand
what it's like when you won't get off your ass and search for
something yourself, eh?
Most Usenet clients have the ability to sort
by date and they show names. My apologies if this was something
that is more than trivial to you
Ahh, now you want to try for being a smartass with me. That's cool,
Snit. In response to your wannabe so witty attempt, I've decided to
ignore the rest of your post here related to the bot, your
'evidence', etc. , and all the effort you put into doing my homework
for me. I'm not even going to thank you for the time you spent.

Instead, I will focus on yet another lie you've tried to peddle
concerning me. That is, the lie of manipulation on my part.
I'd also like to know exactly what you meant when you wrote that
I was manipulating others by asking you questions, Snit. That's a
very defensive way to look at things, it's also a considerably
paranoid one, and, it's not true either. Do you need the MID of
your post to refresh your memory, or, since it wasn't even 48
hours ago, do you remember having made the accusation? You've
made it several times before, I just ignored it - previously. Now
though, since it's yet another lie you wrote about me, I won't
ignore it. Instead, I'll call you out for it, right here, just as
I've done with this post.
Maybe one day, you'll learn to stop lying about other people. And
you wonder why people don't blindly accept what you say as the
truth. Only newbies who've never heard of you would do that,
Snit. everyone else is smart enough to fact check you.
Again, if you need the MID to refresh your memory, just ask.
Same challenge to you again -- count the number of times you
present yourself as a victim. It may be a lot more than you
realize. No voice inflection needed to see it.
Aside from your piss poor effort to deflect here, are you able to
back up your recent claims that I'm manipulating anyone or not? Yes
or No? If yes, provide your evidence.
As far as where you talked about posting in a way to try to change
people's views and otherwise manipulate them, I responded as you
did so and you responded to that.
Cite MIDs where I did such a thing, and told you I had. Yes, MIDs for
all please.
Are you saying you cannot remember that discussion where I made
such a reference?
A reference? Snit, you didn't make any reference to manipulation, you
accused me of doing it, twice. Are you having trouble remembering
just a few days back? You even went so far as to claim that my
questioning you was part of my efforts to manipulate others. Again,
I'll ask, how is my asking you questions in any way manipulative,
Snit?
If so then I can dig back and see if I can find it -- it was not
long ago. Just surprised you would forget so quickly.
Hey, I did offer to help you dig a hole to china. I'll honor my word.
Yes, dig back and find everything you have on your latest
manipulation claims and all discussion we've had concerning it.

Feel free to post and we'll discuss!
--
Any closet is a walk-in closet if you try hard enough.
Snit
2020-06-28 19:16:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Diesel
[snip]
Hmm, we must not be seeing the same things. And, I already know
how you tend to interpret things, so, since I asked for
clarification and you can't do that, I'm going to dismiss your
claim as more than likely, unproven personal opinion that you
tried to snow me with by passing off as a fact when it's not.
I already posted it elsewhere, but assumed that looking at names
and posting times was such a trivial task you would not need
support in doing so.
Oh? Did you find my request to be lazy and you repost it instead
annoying?
No. I just was, as I said, surprised you did not just look at posting
times. As I said it would generally be very trivial for people to do...
but you did not so I did so for you (which is fine, it was to back my
own comments).
Post by Diesel
If so, that was the intention.
I am not surprised you sought to annoy.
Post by Diesel
Now maybe you understand
what it's like when you won't get off your ass and search for
something yourself, eh?
This implies you are annoyed when I do not do research for you. I can
see where that sheds light on some of our past discussions.
Post by Diesel
Most Usenet clients have the ability to sort
by date and they show names. My apologies if this was something
that is more than trivial to you
Ahh, now you want to try for being a smartass with me.
How do you see that as being a "smartass". I sincerely did think it
would be trivial for you. I trusted you to not respond to it with an
effort to, as you say, "annoy". I was overly trusting. But that is not
my being a "smartass". If anything I am admitting I did NOT know you
would react that way based on my trusting nature (the opposite of being
a smartass who would pretend to know everything).
Post by Diesel
That's cool,
Snit. In response to your wannabe so witty attempt, I've decided to
ignore the rest of your post here related to the bot, your
'evidence', etc. , and all the effort you put into doing my homework
for me. I'm not even going to thank you for the time you spent.
I posted evidence that what I said was trivial to see, and not the
"unproven personal opinion" you dismissed it as. I was, clearly, in mo
way trying to "snow [you] with by passing off as a fact when it's not".

It is a fact. When faced with it you do not want to look at or comment
on the evidence.

...

You then went back to a favorite topic of yours where you asked me to
find the quote where you spoke of your primary goal NOT being to really
have me apologize to you for a wrong you thought I did to you, but was
instead a secondary goal... with your primary one to manipulate how
others see me:

<***@R9wCnNq03.wp>
-----
I simply wanted to know if you'd man up and apologize for
the lies you wrote about me. It's quite clear that you
will not be doing that anytime soon, and as I told you
yesterday, the apology itself was always a secondary goal.
The primary goal was to show what you are to the rest of
the regulars of this newsgroup. And by show them what you
are, let them see you for you, without any prodding or
help from your detractors. Nobody told you to lie about
me, you went and did that entirely on your own.
-----
--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
Diesel
2020-06-30 04:53:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Snit
Post by Diesel
Now maybe you understand
what it's like when you won't get off your ass and search for
something yourself, eh?
This implies you are annoyed when I do not do research for you.
It implies nothing of the sort. It doesn't even make hints about such
a thing. it's quite direct.
Post by Snit
I posted evidence that what I said was trivial to see, and not the
"unproven personal opinion" you dismissed it as. I was, clearly,
in mo way trying to "snow [you] with by passing off as a fact when
it's not".
Again, and this is the last time i'm going to comment on it. What
you're claiming is evidence is not because it doesn't meet
established requirements to be considered as such. It's nothing more
than conjecture and your own personal theories as well as opinions on
the subject. It is *not* evidence.
Post by Snit
It is a fact. When faced with it you do not want to look at or
comment on the evidence.
You've provided nothing more than conjecture, on a good day.
Certainly not evidence. I cannot reliably comment on conjecture,
Snit.
Post by Snit
You then went back to a favorite topic of yours where you asked me
to find the quote where you spoke of your primary goal NOT being
to really have me apologize to you for a wrong you thought I did
to you, but was instead a secondary goal... with your primary one
Sort of. You made the claim that I was going to manipulate others
concerning you. And I wanted to see if you could find a post where I
actually made such a statement,because, *drumroll* I already knew I
infact, did NOT make any such statement.
Post by Snit
-----
I simply wanted to know if you'd man up and apologize for
the lies you wrote about me. It's quite clear that you
will not be doing that anytime soon, and as I told you
yesterday, the apology itself was always a secondary goal.
The primary goal was to show what you are to the rest of
the regulars of this newsgroup. And by show them what you
are, let them see you for you, without any prodding or
help from your detractors. Nobody told you to lie about
me, you went and did that entirely on your own.
-----
Yes, my statement. It's not quoted out of context this time around,
but it clearly does NOT support your claim that I was going to
manipulate, or even so much as attempt to do so. And yes, Snit, you
did lie on me when you tried to claim I had the bot source code or a
compiled binary. You went further with your lie when you tried to
claim I was helping it's author(s) or somehow offering them
protection. And you've done yourself no favors by trying to rephrase
what you wrote on some kind of misunderstanding, or efforts to
manipulate others against you. You seem to be very determined to dig
yourself a very deep hole here. And for some reason, I seem
interested in learning just how deep you can dig, with a shovel.
Morbid curiosity? perhaps.
--
Cats are independent, by which I mean smart. - D. Barry
Snit
2020-06-30 05:28:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Diesel
Post by Snit
Post by Diesel
Now maybe you understand
what it's like when you won't get off your ass and search for
something yourself, eh?
This implies you are annoyed when I do not do research for you.
It implies nothing of the sort. It doesn't even make hints about such
a thing. it's quite direct.
Notice where you snipped the context which showed your implication of
being annoyed:

<***@Q7kL66TAOas5Nt688V1mi5EG4j126Uu1LKdLfNG.Dy34w5392uqT5W>
-----
Oh? Did you find my request to be lazy and you repost it
instead annoying? If so, that was the intention.
-----

You sought to annoy, to get revenge or whatever for the annoyance you
felt at my not showing you time stamps from recent posts in this Usenet
group.
Post by Diesel
Post by Snit
I posted evidence that what I said was trivial to see, and not the
"unproven personal opinion" you dismissed it as. I was, clearly,
in mo way trying to "snow [you] with by passing off as a fact when
it's not".
Again, and this is the last time i'm going to comment on it.
Given your habit of repetition this is excellent to hear!

You did push off simple to see facts as "unproven personal opinion", and
you said I was trying to "snow [you] with by passing off as a fact when
it's not".

But as was trivial to show, it was fact. In case you need to reminded of
these facts you tried to pass of in such a way, here is the proof again:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Message-ID: <43860f92-8737-4724-b353-***@googlegroups.com>
From: Steve Carrolll - frelwizen <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 16:59:18 +0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Message-ID: <b68def8b-3eee-4ee3-9480-***@googlegroups.com>
From: STALKING_TARGET_36 <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 17:00:27 +0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Message-ID: <ae4f3ff8-e112-43c9-972c-***@googlegroups.com>
From: Smit Michael Glaser <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 17:01:39 +0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Message-ID: <fc78edd2-10a9-4437-96e1-***@googlegroups.com>
From: Steven Carrolll - frelwizer <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 17:02:45 +0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Message-ID: <02ceeb9d-e07b-4a3f-88e4-***@googlegroups.com>
From: Petruzzellis Kids <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 17:03:55 +0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Message-ID: <ab97aa29-5fa4-4032-806e-***@googlegroups.com>
From: Smit <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 17:05:04 +0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Message-ID: <b2b408ed-2d95-44c5-a02e-***@googlegroups.com>
From: nospam <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 17:06:15 +0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Message-ID: <24395ffb-53cb-4ec3-a375-***@googlegroups.com>
From: Smit <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 17:07:24 +0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------
UUser-Agent: G2/1.0
Message-ID: <60af8d2d-586d-4ab6-9480-***@googlegroups.com>
From: STALKING_TARGET_70 <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 17:09:38 +0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Message-ID: <4a00532c-e2c8-4687-8bb0-***@googlegroups.com>
From: Steve Carroll <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 17:10:34 +0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Message-ID: <740c4875-d962-4aa2-b932-***@googlegroups.com>
From: Steven Carrolll - frelwizer <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 17:11:43 +0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Message-ID: <8f3818a0-1313-4055-bb1d-***@googlegroups.com>
From: Steve Petruzzellis - frelwizzer <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 17:12:53 +0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Message-ID: <c9770dc4-b4c3-4546-896f-***@googlegroups.com>
From: STALKING_TARGET_31 <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 17:14:04 +0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Message-ID: <07e5073f-3f0f-4c7f-8f6a-***@googlegroups.com>
From: STALKING_TARGET_48 <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 17:15:16 +0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Message-ID: <7af6015c-95f8-44be-9c4b-***@googlegroups.com>
From: Stephen Carroll - fretwizzer <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 17:16:23 +0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Message-ID: <33c7da10-8bba-47da-a8cb-***@googlegroups.com>
From: STALKING_TARGET_62 <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 17:17:33 +0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Post by Diesel
What
you're claiming is evidence is not because it doesn't meet
established requirements to be considered as such. It's nothing more
than conjecture and your own personal theories as well as opinions on
the subject. It is *not* evidence.
I provide message IDs and injection dates. Perhaps you do not understand
what those show.
Post by Diesel
Post by Snit
It is a fact. When faced with it you do not want to look at or
comment on the evidence.
You've provided nothing more than conjecture, on a good day.
Certainly not evidence. I cannot reliably comment on conjecture,
Snit.
Post by Snit
You then went back to a favorite topic of yours where you asked me
to find the quote where you spoke of your primary goal NOT being
to really have me apologize to you for a wrong you thought I did
to you, but was instead a secondary goal... with your primary one
Sort of. You made the claim that I was going to manipulate others
concerning you. And I wanted to see if you could find a post where I
actually made such a statement,because, *drumroll* I already knew I
infact, did NOT make any such statement.
Post by Snit
-----
I simply wanted to know if you'd man up and apologize for
the lies you wrote about me. It's quite clear that you
will not be doing that anytime soon, and as I told you
yesterday, the apology itself was always a secondary goal.
The primary goal was to show what you are to the rest of
the regulars of this newsgroup. And by show them what you
are, let them see you for you, without any prodding or
help from your detractors. Nobody told you to lie about
me, you went and did that entirely on your own.
-----
And yet there the statement is, of you directly admitting your demands
were an attempt to manipulate how others see me -- to try to get them to
agree with your view instead of reality.

Again, I show a message ID and a quote. Perhaps you are not sure what
those mean?
Post by Diesel
Yes, my statement. It's not quoted out of context this time around,
but it clearly does NOT support your claim that I was going to
manipulate, or even so much as attempt to do so.
Perhaps you are getting confused by the use of the word "manipulate"?
From Websters:
-----
to change by artful or unfair means so as to serve one's
purpose.
-----

Your admission of having these secondary goals to try to control how
others see me fits that very well.

Snip your story where you try to set me up as your villain -- remember,
while I understand that on some sick level you placing me in such a key
area of your personal story is a compliment, it is not one I want, and I
shan't encourage you by even quoting it.

...
--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
Loading...