Tim Smith wrote:
> In article <1254093.93XEx7k4xv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> were saying about Rex. And since Peter will surely read this message, I
>> might as well add that his Google Groups search tells a similar story. He
>> must have been an effective Linux advocate when he posted more
>> frequently.
>
> Well, if you consider
>
> (1) quoting large posts just to add one line ("idiot"),
>
I rarely quote large posts.
And when someone deservedly gets labled "idiot", the quoting before consists
most of the time of a < snip >
> (2) repeatedly posting identical long messages over and over,
>
You mean flatfish nyms? They serve a very needed purpose
But then, trolls like you defend other trolls and liars no matter what
> (3) making ridiculous claims like everyone who uses a Mac (excuse me,
> "MAK") is a moron,
>
Well, have you seen *anyone* posting here in cola and using a mac who is not
a moron? Tell me, what distinguishes Oxretard from dirt? That dirt is
actually smart compared to him? What excuse will you make up for Snot? What
valid reason will you invent for Sandmans post-editing?
> and
>
> (4) posting flames with followups set to groups that wasn't in the thread,
> to try to cause trouble in those groups,
>
I do that very rarely, and when I do, I sent the thread where it belongs
And pray tell, what kind of "trouble" do you expect in csma, for example?
> to be effective Linux advocacy, then yes, Peter was effective.
>
Fine. You, on the other hand, are a very ineffective Erik F "wannabee"
--
Avoid reality at all costs.
|
|
