On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 18:11:36 +0000, Mark Kent wrote:
> Jim Richardson <warlock@xxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 11:12:23 +0000,
>> Mark Kent <mark.kent@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Jim Richardson <warlock@xxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 09:06:18 +0000,
>>>> Kier <vallon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 08:08:33 +0000, Mark Kent wrote:
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>> Does Kier work for the BBC?
>>>>>
>>>>> Is Mark an idiot or just round the bend?
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course I don't work for the BBC, you loon! I have in fact stated
>>>>> several times on various posts what I do for a living, and is has zero to
>>>>> do with the BBC or MS.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Mark has issues.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Can't see what was wrong with that question, myself. It is perfectly
>>> reasonable. For kier, and yourself, to react in that way indicates
>>> where the issues are - they are obviously not with me.
>>>
>>> Clearly, the answer to this question is either "yes" or "no". Neither
>>> you, nor Kier, seem able to achieve this. Instead, you are trolling,
>>> Jim. Now, why would you be trolling me?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Kier clearly stated that he *doesn't* work for the BBC, you even quoted
>> him saying so in the above section. Do you even read the posts you reply
>> to ?
>>
>
> He stated that after I asked it, but not before a stack of abuse, as you
> can see. If you can explain to me how asking Kier if he works for the
> BBC shows that I "have issues", then I'll consider your explanation. It
> still looks a lot like trolling to me.
>
> I don't expect you to be able to explain why he was abusive - I know the
> answer, he's trolling for a response. He is a troll, plain and simple,
> as is proven above.
You are a liar. I called you names because you desrved them, asking me
utterly idiotic, and deliberately loaded questions, and calling me a
troll, which I am not, never have been, and never will be.
--
Kier
|
|
