On 2006-07-13, Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> posted something concerning:
> On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 16:21:32 GMT, Sinister Midget wrote:
>
>> On 2006-07-13, nessuno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <nessuno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> posted something concerning:
>>>> My god, now you're claiming to be PJ's "source" for her news items?
>>>
>>> He is on some of them. I suggested that he send his news catches to
>>> PJ, since she has a news column and probably a much bigger readership
>>> than cola. (For one thing, groklaw is moderated, and impolite behavior
>>> is not allowed. It makes it a much more pleasant experience to read.)
>>> It was a way of magnifying the impact of Roy's work. PJ is now posting
>>> some of Roy's news items.
>>
>> Erik FUDsucker can't believe anybody here may have some impact
>> elsewhere. He doesn't have any. No reason to believe anybody else
>> might.
>>
>> Why do you think he attacks Roy and Rex so vehemently. If they were
>> kooks and whackjobs he could leave them alone and they'd eventually
>> whither away. His fear is that they _won't_ disappear, and what they
>> have to say may have real impact. So he has to find cheapshot ways too
>> attack them.
>>
>> Including intentional attempts at character assassination and false
>> claims of making shit up or "stealing" others' property, wherever and
>> whenever possible.
>
> Wow, so that explains your obsession with me.
Wrong assumption.
> You do realize that your own behavior echoes exactly what you are
> projecting onto me, right?
Not so.
Also, no projection involved.
I have no fear that you'll be effective outside of COLA. I only believe
you'd be effective _inside_ COLA if people let you get on with your
falsehoods. They don't. You won't.
I'm not don't believe you're a whackjob who will eventually cease to
exist. I think you're an intentional liar who will continue to lie even
though your lies are exposed at evrey turn.
I haven't resorted to character assassination. I've only offered my
opinions, and proof when possible, that you're a lying, conniving FUD
propagator.
I also haven't resorted to trying to find dirt on you to intentionally
destroy you in the eyes of others. I've taken posts you've made to
usenet, quoted them in usenet, characterized them in usenet. I've taken
posts made to COLA and pointed to them or quoted them back to you in
COLA, where they are indeed relevant. But I haven't looked for outside
information in other locations to put you down as you've tried to do to
others.
Other than those things, plus the perceived assumption of obsession
being wrong, you're close to being correct in your statement above.
--
If Windows is the answer, it must have been a stupid question.
|
|
