A little understanding, please

Who cares what he says

Quoted message said:

, which he uses,
completely incorrectly to support his fallacious stances. It is interesting
to
note that although utterly obsessed with top posting, and the need to "obey
the
rule" (even though there is no "rule" as such"😉, he is quite happy to post
obscenities in a ng which could very easily have an audience of minors.

Even when forced into a corner by a poster who analyses all his errors, and
explains them clearly and consisely, he is not fazed. He simply states
"wrong"
after each point made, presumably in the (quite absurd) belief that this will
somehow answer logically constructed arguments, and demonstrable truths.

So, please, realize that you are not going to get anywhere with this sad and
disturbed individual. I don't doubt he'll reply to this post with his usual
spurious nonesense, and will be quite happy that in doing so he has
vindicated
himself once again (which is how he sees his asinine responses).

I suggest we just leave him to it.

Andy

Fx199 said:

Who cares what he says

Quoted message said:

, which he uses,
completely incorrectly to support his fallacious stances. It is
interesting to
note that although utterly obsessed with top posting, and the need
to "obey the
rule" (even though there is no "rule" as such"😉, he is quite happy
to post obscenities in a ng which could very easily have an audience
of minors.

Even when forced into a corner by a poster who analyses all his
errors, and explains them clearly and consisely, he is not fazed. He
simply states "wrong"
after each point made, presumably in the (quite absurd) belief that
this will somehow answer logically constructed arguments, and
demonstrable truths.

So, please, realize that you are not going to get anywhere with this
sad and disturbed individual. I don't doubt he'll reply to this post
with his usual spurious nonesense, and will be quite happy that in
doing so he has vindicated
himself once again (which is how he sees his asinine responses).

I suggest we just leave him to it.

Andy

To really [censored] him off you should have left the entire original article
untrimmed, like this: :-D

Andy Simmonds said:

I've been reading this group for some time, and I've found it to be
normally friendly and informative.

Of late, however, it seems to be suffering from the attentions of a
rather troubled individual calling himself "DRS". I have avoided
saying anything so far, because I thought that the matter would die
out in its own time, but I see he is posting again, so I would like
to offer a little insight into his condition in the hope that it will
enable people people to let him be. My only qualification for
offering these insights is that I work with children with special
needs, and I recognize the particular problem this poster has.

There is no way that anyone is going to make any progress, such is his
delusional mentality.

What you must realize if that he does not see the world as normal
people see it. He is quite obsessed with a relatively trivial
annoyance: "top posting", and for him it is like a holy crusade.
Although he has, in this instance mistaken a quite innocent posting
of an article, it is just the same to him as if it was a genuine top
posting incident, and in his mind he sees himself as some of hero,
some crusader who must defeat a great evil. Once he has latched onto
that which he detests, he is quite immune to reason.

In his mind, all the people who read and post to rbm naturally agree
with him, and only a very few "idiots" post disputing what to him is
obviously clearly correct. He has learned the expression "argumentum
ad numerum", which he uses, completely incorrectly to support his
fallacious stances. It is interesting to note that although utterly
obsessed with top posting, and the need to "obey the rule" (even
though there is no "rule" as such"😉, he is quite happy to post
obscenities in a ng which could very easily have an audience of
minors.

Even when forced into a corner by a poster who analyses all his
errors, and explains them clearly and consisely, he is not fazed. He
simply states "wrong" after each point made, presumably in the (quite
absurd) belief that this will somehow answer logically constructed
arguments, and demonstrable truths.

So, please, realize that you are not going to get anywhere with this
sad and disturbed individual. I don't doubt he'll reply to this post
with his usual spurious nonesense, and will be quite happy that in
doing so he has vindicated himself once again (which is how he sees
his asinine responses).

I suggest we just leave him to it.

Andy

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington
University

"Andy Simmonds" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]

Quoted message said:

I've been reading this group for some time, and I've found it to be
normally friendly and informative.

Of late, however, it seems to be suffering from the attentions of a
rather troubled individual calling himself "DRS". I have avoided
saying anything so far, because I thought that the matter would die
out in its own time,

It had until you chimed in.

Quoted message said:

but I see he is posting again, so I would like
to offer a little insight into his condition in the hope that it will
enable people people to let him be. My only qualification for
offering these insights is that I work with children with special
needs, and I recognize the particular problem this poster has.

Correction: you are a child with special needs.

Quoted message said:

There is no way that anyone is going to make any progress, such is his
delusional mentality.

What you must realize if that he does not see the world as normal
people see it. He is quite obsessed with a relatively trivial
annoyance: "top posting", and for him it is like a holy crusade.

Wrong. You don't have the slightest evidence to show that. I called out
one person. That's it. What you do have is evidence that I won't be
bullied into backing down on a subject where I am incontrovertably right.

Quoted message said:

Although he has, in this instance mistaken a quite innocent posting
of an article, it is just the same to him as if it was a genuine top
posting incident, and in his mind he sees himself as some of hero,
some crusader who must defeat a great evil. Once he has latched onto
that which he detests, he is quite immune to reason.

Wrong. I'm always amenable to reason. If you tried using it I might even
be amenable to one of your arguments instead of treating your present
attempt with the utter contempt it deserves.

Quoted message said:

In his mind, all the people who read and post to rbm naturally agree
with him, and only a very few "idiots" post disputing what to him is
obviously clearly correct. He has learned the expression "argumentum
ad numerum", which he uses, completely incorrectly to support his
fallacious stances.

Don't use jargon you don't understand. I have correctly identified that
fallacy several times. That people keep repeating that particular error
even after I've pointed it out to them so many times is indicative of their
stupidity. That you think I used is wrongly is indicative of yours.

Quoted message said:

It is interesting to note that although utterly
obsessed with top posting,

Wrong. Already done and dealt with.

Quoted message said:

and the need to "obey the rule" (even
though there is no "rule" as such"😉, he is quite happy to post
obscenities in a ng which could very easily have an audience of
minors.

What possible relationship does one have with the other? Anyway, I didn't
start the abuse but I'm quite happy to send it back with interest. Of
course, I don't see you saying anything to or about those who did start the
abuse. That would take integrity and you have none.

Quoted message said:

Even when forced into a corner by a poster who analyses all his
errors, and explains them clearly and consisely, he is not fazed.

That hasn't happened on this subject. There's just a few twits like
yourself saying bugger all with lots and lots of words.

Quoted message said:

He
simply states "wrong" after each point made, presumably in the (quite
absurd) belief that this will somehow answer logically constructed
arguments, and demonstrable truths.

I'm not going to keep repeating the same old refutations. You seem to be
referring to that fool Doug Evans. What a [censored]! He wouldn't know reason
if it leapt up and bit him. Much like you, in fact.

Quoted message said:

So, please, realize that you are not going to get anywhere with this
sad and disturbed individual. I don't doubt he'll reply to this post
with his usual spurious nonesense, and will be quite happy that in
doing so he has vindicated himself once again (which is how he sees
his asinine responses).

Just crawl back under your rock and lick your wounds.

Quoted message said:

I suggest we just leave him to it.

Liar. You only posted this [censored] because the other two threads had died
down.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Poor little DRS. He really has lost the plot completely. I agree with
Andy that he does seem to be out of touch with reality.

Does he actualy believe the garbage he posts? Or is he just compelled
by his weird disorder to disgorge any old tripe to try and save face?
Does he think that anyone takes him seriously?

I guess he's going to keep it going as long as we let him.

It's getting to the point where it could become quite funny pulling
his strings.

"DRS" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"Andy Simmonds" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]

Quoted message said:

I've been reading this group for some time, and I've found it to be
normally friendly and informative.

Of late, however, it seems to be suffering from the attentions of a
rather troubled individual calling himself "DRS". I have avoided
saying anything so far, because I thought that the matter would die
out in its own time,

It had until you chimed in.

Quoted message said:

but I see he is posting again, so I would like
to offer a little insight into his condition in the hope that it will
enable people people to let him be. My only qualification for
offering these insights is that I work with children with special
needs, and I recognize the particular problem this poster has.

Correction: you are a child with special needs.

Quoted message said:

There is no way that anyone is going to make any progress, such is his
delusional mentality.

What you must realize if that he does not see the world as normal
people see it. He is quite obsessed with a relatively trivial
annoyance: "top posting", and for him it is like a holy crusade.

Wrong. You don't have the slightest evidence to show that. I called out
one person. That's it. What you do have is evidence that I won't be
bullied into backing down on a subject where I am incontrovertably right.

Quoted message said:

Although he has, in this instance mistaken a quite innocent posting
of an article, it is just the same to him as if it was a genuine top
posting incident, and in his mind he sees himself as some of hero,
some crusader who must defeat a great evil. Once he has latched onto
that which he detests, he is quite immune to reason.

Wrong. I'm always amenable to reason. If you tried using it I might even
be amenable to one of your arguments instead of treating your present
attempt with the utter contempt it deserves.

Quoted message said:

In his mind, all the people who read and post to rbm naturally agree
with him, and only a very few "idiots" post disputing what to him is
obviously clearly correct. He has learned the expression "argumentum
ad numerum", which he uses, completely incorrectly to support his
fallacious stances.

Don't use jargon you don't understand. I have correctly identified that
fallacy several times. That people keep repeating that particular error
even after I've pointed it out to them so many times is indicative of their
stupidity. That you think I used is wrongly is indicative of yours.

Quoted message said:

It is interesting to note that although utterly
obsessed with top posting,

Wrong. Already done and dealt with.

Quoted message said:

and the need to "obey the rule" (even
though there is no "rule" as such"😉, he is quite happy to post
obscenities in a ng which could very easily have an audience of
minors.

What possible relationship does one have with the other? Anyway, I didn't
start the abuse but I'm quite happy to send it back with interest. Of
course, I don't see you saying anything to or about those who did start the
abuse. That would take integrity and you have none.

Quoted message said:

Even when forced into a corner by a poster who analyses all his
errors, and explains them clearly and consisely, he is not fazed.

That hasn't happened on this subject. There's just a few twits like
yourself saying bugger all with lots and lots of words.

Quoted message said:

He
simply states "wrong" after each point made, presumably in the (quite
absurd) belief that this will somehow answer logically constructed
arguments, and demonstrable truths.

I'm not going to keep repeating the same old refutations. You seem to be
referring to that fool Doug Evans. What a [censored]! He wouldn't know reason
if it leapt up and bit him. Much like you, in fact.

Quoted message said:

So, please, realize that you are not going to get anywhere with this
sad and disturbed individual. I don't doubt he'll reply to this post
with his usual spurious nonesense, and will be quite happy that in
doing so he has vindicated himself once again (which is how he sees
his asinine responses).

Just crawl back under your rock and lick your wounds.

Quoted message said:

I suggest we just leave him to it.

Liar. You only posted this [censored] because the other two threads had died
down.

Actually, I noticed that *you* were the last person to post before
Andy.

Perhaps you don't want it to die down.

Perhaps you crave attention, and crave it so badly that you don't care
that you are rapidly becoming the biggest buffoon on the dear old
'net.

I've heard of heroic failures, but you seem to be a heroic imbecile.

"Mike VM" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]

Quoted message said:

Poor little DRS. He really has lost the plot completely. I agree with
Andy that he does seem to be out of touch with reality.

Who cares what you think?

Quoted message said:

Does he actualy believe the garbage he posts? Or is he just compelled
by his weird disorder to disgorge any old tripe to try and save face?
Does he think that anyone takes him seriously?

I guess he's going to keep it going as long as we let him.

You don't get to "let" me do anything, [censored].

Quoted message said:

It's getting to the point where it could become quite funny pulling
his strings.

You wish. But you're too easy to trash. You bore me.

--

Bottom vs. top posting and quotation style on Usenet
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html

Why is Bottom-posting better than Top-posting
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html

http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/gey_stv0.htm

http://www.fscked.co.uk/writing/top-posting-cuss.html

DRS said:

Quoted message said:

What you must realize if that he does not see the world as normal
people see it. He is quite obsessed with a relatively trivial
annoyance: "top posting", and for him it is like a holy crusade.

Wrong. You don't have the slightest evidence to show that. I called out
one person. That's it. What you do have is evidence that I won't be
bullied into backing down on a subject where I am incontrovertably right.

DRS, the evidence is all over this ng.

Quoted message said:

That's it. What you do have is evidence that I won't be
bullied into backing down on a subject where I am incontrovertably right.

It's sad that you still see it that way. What we _really_ have is evidence that
you simply cannot understand the various resoned arguments that have shown you
to be 100% WRONG.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

In his mind, all the people who read and post to rbm naturally agree
with him, and only a very few "idiots" post disputing what to him is
obviously clearly correct. He has learned the expression "argumentum
ad numerum", which he uses, completely incorrectly to support his
fallacious stances.

Don't use jargon you don't understand. I have correctly identified that
fallacy several times.

Once againg, you delude yourself. What you have done is try to apply the
argumentum ad numerum retort where it is quite inappropriate.

If ten people tell you that 1+1 = 3, you are entitled to cry: "argumentum ad
numerum"

When ten people tell you that in their opinion you are an arogant fool, it is a
meaningless response. It is also meaningless when you use it as a comeback when
everyone who has posted on the subject has stated or implied that they are more
persuaded by your opponents argument that no top posting took place, than by
your that it did.

Once again, in the vainest of vain hope that it will sink in. The OP did NOT top
post (whatecer he or she may have said), because the expression "top post" is
only relevant when you are REPLYING to something, and the OP was not replying,
they were FORWARDING.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It is interesting to note that although utterly
obsessed with top posting,

Wrong. Already done and dealt with.

Oh do TRY and maintain SOME contact with reality. It is absolutely clear that
you are utterly obsessed with top posters. Even to the extent of whining about
it in the middle of an obituary thread.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

and the need to "obey the rule" (even
though there is no "rule" as such"😉, he is quite happy to post
obscenities in a ng which could very easily have an audience of
minors.

What possible relationship does one have with the other?

You are pathetically obsessed with one rule because those breaking it bother
YOU, but you have no compunction about breaking other rules if you feel like it.
That is the mark of a grade one hypocrite.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Even when forced into a corner by a poster who analyses all his
errors, and explains them clearly and consisely, he is not fazed.

That hasn't happened on this subject. There's just a few twits like
yourself saying bugger all with lots and lots of words.

I've seen it happen at least three times. It's your dubious mental state that
stops you recognizing when it has occured.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

He
simply states "wrong" after each point made, presumably in the (quite
absurd) belief that this will somehow answer logically constructed
arguments, and demonstrable truths.

I'm not going to keep repeating the same old refutations. You seem to be
referring to that fool Doug Evans.

Doug's post was an excellent, clear and consise explanation of why you are
wrong.

Quoted message said:

Just crawl back under your rock and lick your wounds.

The only wounds you are causing are those that are self-inflicted. If only you
had the wherewithall to see that.

Quoted message said:

Liar. You only posted this [censored] because the other two threads had died
down.

DRS, YOU help keep this going. Like most obsessives, you feel you must have the
last word. The trouble seems to be that there are so many people who are
disgusted by your behavior that you're in for a long haul.

Mary

"Mary Thompson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]

Quoted message said:

DRS said:

Quoted message said:

What you must realize if that he does not see the world as normal
people see it. He is quite obsessed with a relatively trivial
annoyance: "top posting", and for him it is like a holy crusade.

Wrong. You don't have the slightest evidence to show that. I
called out one person. That's it. What you do have is evidence
that I won't be bullied into backing down on a subject where I am
incontrovertably right.

DRS, the evidence is all over this ng.

Only of what I just said, not of your deluded fantasies. I called out one
person for top-posting. That cannot be evidence of an obsession by any
reasonable person. I know that definition excludes you lot but so what?
It's still true and you're still wrong.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That's it. What you do have is evidence that I won't be
bullied into backing down on a subject where I am incontrovertably
right.

It's sad that you still see it that way. What we _really_ have is
evidence that you simply cannot understand the various resoned
arguments that have shown you to be 100% WRONG.

I understand them full well. I also understand why they are wrong. I have
explained how and why more than once.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

In his mind, all the people who read and post to rbm naturally agree
with him, and only a very few "idiots" post disputing what to him is
obviously clearly correct. He has learned the expression "argumentum
ad numerum", which he uses, completely incorrectly to support his
fallacious stances.

Don't use jargon you don't understand. I have correctly identified
that fallacy several times.

Once againg, you delude yourself. What you have done is try to apply
the argumentum ad numerum retort where it is quite inappropriate.

If ten people tell you that 1+1 = 3, you are entitled to cry:
"argumentum ad numerum"

When ten people tell you that in their opinion you are an arogant
fool, it is a meaningless response. It is also meaningless when you
use it as a comeback when everyone who has posted on the subject has
stated or implied that they are more persuaded by your opponents
argument that no top posting took place, than by your that it did.

They are just jumping on the bandwagon because it's the only time in their
sad little lives they get to feel good about themselves. Calling someone
"human garbage" and the like because they call out one self-admitted
top-poster is so out of proportion to the non-existent offense that it
beggars belief that anyone could be so stupid as to still be pushing the
matter.

Quoted message said:

Once again, in the vainest of vain hope that it will sink in. The OP
did NOT top post (whatecer he or she may have said), because the
expression "top post" is only relevant when you are REPLYING to
something, and the OP was not replying, they were FORWARDING.

But (for the umpteenth time), HE THOUGHT HE WAS TOP-POSTING, KNEW IT WAS
WRONG YET WENT AHEAD ANYWAY! That's the very nub of the matter. It's so
simple even you idiots should be able to get it. I frankly think you do but
you're just being contrary for the sake of it. You're not even coming close
to having a coherent argument.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It is interesting to note that although utterly
obsessed with top posting,

Wrong. Already done and dealt with.

Oh do TRY and maintain SOME contact with reality. It is absolutely
clear that you are utterly obsessed with top posters. Even to the
extent of whining about it in the middle of an obituary thread.

Wrong. It is not clear. It cannot be clear. You have no evidence at all
to supoprt your absurd contention. And I don't whine.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

and the need to "obey the rule" (even
though there is no "rule" as such"😉, he is quite happy to post
obscenities in a ng which could very easily have an audience of
minors.

What possible relationship does one have with the other?

You are pathetically obsessed with one rule because those breaking it
bother YOU, but you have no compunction about breaking other rules if
you feel like it. That is the mark of a grade one hypocrite.

Wrong. I have already demonstrated I am not obsessed with it so your
ridiculous argument instantly falls to pieces. Done and dealt with.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Even when forced into a corner by a poster who analyses all his
errors, and explains them clearly and consisely, he is not fazed.

That hasn't happened on this subject. There's just a few twits like
yourself saying bugger all with lots and lots of words.

I've seen it happen at least three times. It's your dubious mental
state that stops you recognizing when it has occured.

It has not happened at all. And my mental state is fine. It's clearly
functioning much better than yours. You really should stop embarrassing
yourself in public like this.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

He
simply states "wrong" after each point made, presumably in the
(quite absurd) belief that this will somehow answer logically
constructed arguments, and demonstrable truths.

I'm not going to keep repeating the same old refutations. You seem
to be referring to that fool Doug Evans.

Doug's post was an excellent, clear and consise explanation of why
you are wrong.

It was utter, utter [censored] by a complete fool.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Just crawl back under your rock and lick your wounds.

The only wounds you are causing are those that are self-inflicted. If
only you had the wherewithall to see that.

You're blind.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Liar. You only posted this [censored] because the other two threads had
died down.

DRS, YOU help keep this going. Like most obsessives, you feel you
must have the last word.

Wrong (yet again). I have ignored several posters in the vain hope it would
die down but every time I think it has some moronic [censored] sticks his or
her two cents in. I don't need your permission to answer my critics and
that's not obsession, that's just Usenet. Deal with it.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

DRS said:

I have ignored several posters in the vain hope it would
die down but every time I think it has some moronic [censored] sticks his or
her two cents in. I don't need your permission to answer my critics and
that's not obsession, that's just Usenet. Deal with it.

"O wad some Power the giftie gie us
To see oursels as ithers see us!
It wad frae monie a blunder free us,
An' foolish notion"

- Robert Burns

jeverett3<AT>earthlink<DOT>net http://home.earthlink.net/~jeverett3

DRS said:

"Mary Thompson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]

[...major snip...]

But (for the umpteenth time), HE THOUGHT HE WAS TOP-POSTING, KNEW IT WAS
WRONG YET WENT AHEAD ANYWAY!

Other than you, WHO THE [censored] *CARES*?!?

Lambasting him in the context of his forwarding of an obit was
crass at best.

Quoted message said:

[...a large pile snipped...]

--
Chris BeHanna
Software Engineer (Remove "allspammersmustdie" before responding.)
[email hidden]
I was raised by a pack of wild corn dogs.

"Chris BeHanna" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]

Quoted message said:

DRS said:

"Mary Thompson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]

[...major snip...]

But (for the umpteenth time), HE THOUGHT HE WAS TOP-POSTING, KNEW IT
WAS WRONG YET WENT AHEAD ANYWAY!

Other than you, WHO THE [censored] *CARES*?!?

I only care to the extent that sundry morons have chosen to repeatedly
attack me on it, despite (or perhaps because of) their manifest lack of
understanding of the entire matter. Since you are pretending not to care
why did you raise this yet again?

Quoted message said:

Lambasting him in the context of his forwarding of an obit was
crass at best.

No, it wasn't. The fact of its being an obituary is a red herring. Content
is not an excuse for top-posting. Obituaries are not a free pass.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

A: DRS
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

I thought it was funny...

Quoted message said:

ubject: Re: A little understanding, please
From: "DRS" [email hidden]
Date: 8/21/2004 9:55 AM US Eastern Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

"Jeff Starr" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]

Quoted message said:

A: DRS
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

We already knew you are a [censored]. You've made that unoriginal and unfunny
joke before.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

DRS said:

"Jeff Starr" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]

Quoted message said:

A: DRS
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

We already knew you are a [censored].

Wrong.

Quoted message said:

You've made that unoriginal and unfunny
joke before.

Wrong. It was hilarious.

Quoted message said:

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Wrong.

Austin

I enjoyed it, me :-)

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 00:55:04 +1000, "DRS"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

"Jeff Starr" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]

Quoted message said:

A: DRS
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

We already knew you are a [censored]. You've made that unoriginal and unfunny
joke before.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

Little Meow said:

Excuse me for top-posting,
but what is this all about?

Just that poor miserable lamer DRS still striving to make sure that
*everyone* on rbm knows that he's the biggest [censored] on usenet.
(Newsflash - we all knew that over a week ago)

He thinks if he keeps whining on that black is white long enough,
everyone will start to believe him - poor deluded fool.

Perhaps we should humor him:
That's right, DRS. You're the only sane one. It's everyone else in the
world that's mad, n'est pas? 😉

Quoted message said:

DRS said:

"Mary Thompson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]

Quoted message said:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:53:58 +1000, "DRS"
<[email hidden]> wrote:

>> What you must realize if that he does not see the world as

normal

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> people see it. He is quite obsessed with a relatively trivial
>> annoyance: "top posting", and for him it is like a holy crusade.
>
> Wrong. You don't have the slightest evidence to show that. I
> called out one person. That's it. What you do have is evidence
> that I won't be bullied into backing down on a subject where I am
> incontrovertably right.

DRS, the evidence is all over this ng.

Only of what I just said, not of your deluded fantasies. I called

out

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

one person for top-posting. That cannot be evidence of an

obsession

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

by any reasonable person. I know that definition excludes you lot

but

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

so what? It's still true and you're still wrong.

Quoted message said:

> That's it. What you do have is evidence that I won't be
> bullied into backing down on a subject where I am

incontrovertably

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> right.

It's sad that you still see it that way. What we _really_ have is
evidence that you simply cannot understand the various resoned
arguments that have shown you to be 100% WRONG.

I understand them full well. I also understand why they are wrong.

I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

have explained how and why more than once.

Quoted message said:

>> In his mind, all the people who read and post to rbm naturally
>> agree with him, and only a very few "idiots" post disputing what

to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> him is obviously clearly correct. He has learned the expression
>> "argumentum ad numerum", which he uses, completely incorrectly

to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> support his fallacious stances.
>
> Don't use jargon you don't understand. I have correctly

identified

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> that fallacy several times.

Once againg, you delude yourself. What you have done is try to

apply

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the argumentum ad numerum retort where it is quite inappropriate.

If ten people tell you that 1+1 = 3, you are entitled to cry:
"argumentum ad numerum"

When ten people tell you that in their opinion you are an arogant
fool, it is a meaningless response. It is also meaningless when

you

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

use it as a comeback when everyone who has posted on the subject

has

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

stated or implied that they are more persuaded by your opponents
argument that no top posting took place, than by your that it did.

They are just jumping on the bandwagon because it's the only time

in

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

their sad little lives they get to feel good about themselves.
Calling someone "human garbage" and the like because they call out

one

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

self-admitted top-poster is so out of proportion to the

non-existent

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

offense that it beggars belief that anyone could be so stupid as to
still be pushing the matter.

Quoted message said:

Once again, in the vainest of vain hope that it will sink in. The

OP

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

did NOT top post (whatecer he or she may have said), because the
expression "top post" is only relevant when you are REPLYING to
something, and the OP was not replying, they were FORWARDING.

But (for the umpteenth time), HE THOUGHT HE WAS TOP-POSTING, KNEW

IT

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

WAS WRONG YET WENT AHEAD ANYWAY! That's the very nub of the

matter.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It's so simple even you idiots should be able to get it. I frankly
think you do but you're just being contrary for the sake of it.
You're not even coming close to having a coherent argument.

Quoted message said:

>> It is interesting to note that although utterly
>> obsessed with top posting,
>
> Wrong. Already done and dealt with.

Oh do TRY and maintain SOME contact with reality. It is absolutely
clear that you are utterly obsessed with top posters. Even to the
extent of whining about it in the middle of an obituary thread.

Wrong. It is not clear. It cannot be clear. You have no evidence

at

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

all to supoprt your absurd contention. And I don't whine.

Quoted message said:

>> and the need to "obey the rule" (even
>> though there is no "rule" as such"😉, he is quite happy to post
>> obscenities in a ng which could very easily have an audience of
>> minors.
>
> What possible relationship does one have with the other?

You are pathetically obsessed with one rule because those breaking

it

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

bother YOU, but you have no compunction about breaking other rules

if

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

you feel like it. That is the mark of a grade one hypocrite.

Wrong. I have already demonstrated I am not obsessed with it so

your

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

ridiculous argument instantly falls to pieces. Done and dealt

with.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> Even when forced into a corner by a poster who analyses all his
>> errors, and explains them clearly and consisely, he is not

fazed.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>
> That hasn't happened on this subject. There's just a few twits

like

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> yourself saying bugger all with lots and lots of words.

I've seen it happen at least three times. It's your dubious mental
state that stops you recognizing when it has occured.

It has not happened at all. And my mental state is fine. It's
clearly functioning much better than yours. You really should stop
embarrassing yourself in public like this.

Quoted message said:

>> He
>> simply states "wrong" after each point made, presumably in the
>> (quite absurd) belief that this will somehow answer logically
>> constructed arguments, and demonstrable truths.
>
> I'm not going to keep repeating the same old refutations. You

seem

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> to be referring to that fool Doug Evans.

Doug's post was an excellent, clear and consise explanation of why
you are wrong.

It was utter, utter [censored] by a complete fool.

Quoted message said:

> Just crawl back under your rock and lick your wounds.

The only wounds you are causing are those that are self-inflicted.

If

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

only you had the wherewithall to see that.

You're blind.

Quoted message said:

> Liar. You only posted this [censored] because the other two threads

had

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> died down.

DRS, YOU help keep this going. Like most obsessives, you feel you
must have the last word.

Wrong (yet again). I have ignored several posters in the vain hope

it

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

would die down but every time I think it has some moronic [censored]
sticks his or her two cents in. I don't need your permission to
answer my critics and that's not obsession, that's just Usenet.

Deal

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

with it.

"Mike VM" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]

Quoted message said:

Little Meow said:

Excuse me for top-posting,
but what is this all about?

Just that poor miserable lamer DRS still striving to make sure that
*everyone* on rbm knows that he's the biggest [censored] on usenet.
(Newsflash - we all knew that over a week ago)

I call out one self-confessed top-poster and all of a sudden I'm a [censored]?
No way, dumbfuck.

Quoted message said:

He thinks if he keeps whining on that black is white long enough,
everyone will start to believe him - poor deluded fool.

White is white, dumbfuck. I called out a self-confessed top-poster. That's
it. No biggie except to you morons with tiny minds and even smaller lives.

Quoted message said:

Perhaps we should humor him:
That's right, DRS. You're the only sane one. It's everyone else in the
world that's mad, n'est pas? 😉

A mere handful of dumbfucks does not "the rest of the world" make.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

DRS said:

I call out one self-confessed top-poster and all of a sudden I'm a [censored]?

No, you've been a [censored] all along. It's just your behavior over this incident
that has allowed the entire ng to become painfully aware of the fact.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

He thinks if he keeps whining on that black is white long enough,
everyone will start to believe him - poor deluded fool.

White is white, dumbfuck.

Good, you're getting there!

Now, all you have to learn is that black isn't 😉

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Perhaps we should humor him:
That's right, DRS. You're the only sane one. It's everyone else in the
world that's mad, n'est pas? 😉

A mere handful of dumbfucks does not "the rest of the world" make.

It seems to me that you are conning yourself into believing that only those who
disagree with you are posting. That's possible, but unlikely. EVERYONE who has
posted has "called you out" for being an arrogant, insensitive, overbearing
[censored], and for not understanding what actually constitutes top posting.

And please don't start bleating on about "argumentum ad numerum". It's been
clearly explained to you why that is not appropriate in this case. In fact, all
your mistakes have been clearly explained to you, several times over, in several
different ways. It's just that you're too mind numbingly stupid to understand.

Rick

"Rick Travis" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]

Quoted message said:

DRS said:

I call out one self-confessed top-poster and all of a sudden I'm a
[censored]?

No, you've been a [censored] all along.

[censored]. I've been right all along and you're trying to make that my
problem but you've failed miserably.

Quoted message said:

It's just your behavior over
this incident that has allowed the entire ng to become painfully
aware of the fact.

It's not a fact. It's the overblown opinion of a handful of dumbfucks who
don't matter and their mindless minions who think it's all just a good [censored]
stir.

[...]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Perhaps we should humor him:
That's right, DRS. You're the only sane one. It's everyone else in
the world that's mad, n'est pas? 😉

A mere handful of dumbfucks does not "the rest of the world" make.

It seems to me that you are conning yourself into believing that only
those who disagree with you are posting. That's possible, but
unlikely. EVERYONE who has posted has "called you out" for being an
arrogant, insensitive, overbearing [censored], and for not understanding
what actually constitutes top posting.

I have amply demonstrated I know precisely what constitutes top-posting and
also that the OP *thought* he was top-posting, which is what matters. One
day you and you fellow fools might come to understand that.

Quoted message said:

And please don't start bleating on about "argumentum ad numerum".
It's been clearly explained to you why that is not appropriate in
this case.

Wrongly.

Quoted message said:

In fact, all your mistakes have been clearly explained to
you, several times over, in several different ways. It's just that
you're too mind numbingly stupid to understand.

I'm far too intelligent and well educated to allow myself to be bullied into
abandoning a position where I am manifestly right.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Toss in conceited, annoying and wrong, throw in some delusions of grandeur, and
it come up DRS
There is no "right" when it comes to a difference of opinion. Keep memorizing
things out of books.
Doesn't make you intelligent.
We're supposed to be communicating about bicycles.
Pathetic really.

Quoted message said:

I'm far too intelligent and well educated to allow myself to be bullied into
abandoning a position where I am manifestly right.