George J. Dance wrote:
> > > > > On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 4:59:01 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
> > > > > > On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 4:30:37 PM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > And speaking of death fantasies.
> > > > > > > > You mean George Dance's death fantasy about Mr Burrows?
> > > > > > > You mean the one NGBS was peddling around here yesterday?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > <quote>
> > > > > > > Epic Flame - Reddit Here!1!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Did George J Dance wish death on a sick person in the hospital- and just for criticizing him?! That's damned cold and damned screwed up coming from someone saying they're the victim and the supposed "good guy".
> > > > > > > </q>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > That turned out to be misinformation. Please update your story.
> > > > > > Nope, the tag trail shows my source.
> > > > > Sure does. You had one source: the poor "sick person" who was trolling me at the time, and made it up; you confirmed your story by doublechecking with the *same guy.*
> > > > > > All I can credit you with is at least you got the propaganda 'omission for out of context' trick right.
> > > > > I can't even credit you with getting that right; since that quote NG posted out of context also refutes your story - your story was dead in the water when NG posted that.
> > > > > > Sorry to tell you, I broke the news before anyone else
> > > > > You sure did (except for BB, who made it up). Too bad it was of the usual NGBS calibre: fake news.
> > > > Is this an example of "Tit for Tat"?
> > >
> > > I suppose so. Mr. Wurthing wants a flame war, too, so I've given him what he wants as well. But there is a moral difference: he's spreading lies about me, and I'm telling the truth about him.
> >
> > I don't know which post/s you're referring to, but Ash has never acted dishonestly in the past.
>
> You've said you miss posts. Did you miss his story last month, where he was calling me an "anti-vaccer" (sic)?
>
> > Like I've said, your post really angered a lot of people... and extreme anger can lead to extremity on one's response.
>
> First, Second, even if I'd made a "death wish", that is not something that arouses anger here. You've seen death wishes, and death curses, here plenty of times, and even made a few yourself. That's not to call you a "hypocrite" -- that's become just a term to score points in a flame war. But it does compel me to believe that you're feigning anger now. The same for the others who've expressed anger: Mr. Senetto, Miss ME, the Misses Nancy Gene, and Mr. Wurthing.
> Second, even if some people were angered, they weren't angered at my post.. Remember that we're talking about 2 distinct "statements" here:
> (1) the one I actually made, which nobody reacted to until you produced it days later -- as far as I know, no one (including Mr. Wurthing, saw it until you posted it; there's no reason to think anyone but Mr. Burrows was angered by it.
> (2) the one Mr. Burrows, and then Mr. Wurthing, claimed I'd made, which may or may not be the same as (1). (Neither of them have confirmed or denied that it was; they simply ignored my requests to do so.) That, not my actual post, was the one that actually angered people, assuming those who replied were angry.
> Third, no matter how consciously, you're allowing "Ash" to pull a bait-and-switch: to substitute (1) (which he didn't read, or even look for) for (2) (the one he claimed to have seen, but couldn't produce when challenged). The result, if not the intent, is to confuse (1) and (2) just to confuse anyone about what I'd actually said.
>
> > I suspect that Ash's post contains some exaggeration -- which is a matter of emotion rather than one of morality.
>
> It looks to me as if Mr. Wurthing's post was based entirely on what he'd read in Mr. Burrows's flames of Will Dockery on the subject; he didn't exaggerate what I said, because he didn't bother to read what I'd said.
>
> > > Mr. Burrows decided to claim falsely that I'd wished for his death. So why shouldn't I claim that he made it up? The fact is he did: whether he misunderstood what I'd said, or simply decided to outright lie just to make me look worse, the effect is the same.
> >
> > I'm sure that's what he took your post to mean. You didn't specifically state that you wished him dead, but you acted as though his death were both immanent and probable.
> >
>
> Everone's death is not just probable but certain; the point being that one should live each day as if their death were imminent, and chose their time on what's important; and what's important to him acting as if he's "better" than Will Dockery.
>
> > > > The truth is that you'd made a callous remark and BB reacted to it.
> > >
> > > The truth is: we were in a flame war, by his choice and initiation; one of my flames stung; and he had a meltdown.
> >
> > Damn it, George -- what you wrote went well beyond flaming.
>
> I've seen plenty worse in flaming; and, as I've said, the people you've said were angry not only tolerated that, but engaged in it.
>
> > I've always said that AAPC fights should not cross over into real life (I don't always keep to that, but we're not talking about me).
>
> Not directly, but it is relevant in discussing what statements here get you angry. I don't think it's the statements at all, but who made them and to whom they were made.
>
> > When someone is in a hospital undergoing chemotherapy and (IIRC) bone marrow transplant, the last thing they want to hear is that you've already written them off as a goner.
>
> Since Mr. Burrows has "forgiven" me for not saying what he claimed I did, I can excuse him for getting it wrong. There is no excuse for Mr. Wurthing, who did not bother to check or even confirm what I'd said, but merely started posting about it as part of his flame war.
>
> > > > > Duh! I'm fully aware you were playing tag team: BB went after me to defend/deflect from JO, then you jumped in to defend/deflect from BB. I've seen it enough times to know how it works.
> > >
> > > > You're sounding more than a tad paranoid, George.
> > >
> > > Really: you deny that's exactly what happened on my thread?
> >
> > Yes, I am denying that.
>
> Well, for the reasons I've govem you, I'm affirming it.
>
> > It's true that different people had strong reactions to your post, but these were spontaneous reactions -- not a concerted effort to play "tag team."
>
> None of those reples were in reaction to my post (1), and I'm not talking the people who flamed Will over Mr. Burrows's claims (2). The 'tag' in this case occurred when I pressed Mr. Burrows on his claim, and in response Mr.. Wurthing started this "Epic Flame War" of his with me.
>
> > >
> > > Not to question your desire for peace, but: isn't exactly what you're doing for the Jism Gang yourself in this thread?
> >
> > Taking my turn in the ring? Not at all.
> >
> > Actually, I'm interceding for you -- insofar as one can with regard to your post.
>
> Interceding with whom? You've only been posting to me about it.
>
> > > > > > till I saw what you were doing to Mr Burrows.
> > > > > Correction: til you read what "Mr. Burrows" *said* I was doing. You wouldn't even give me the details of your story; you wouldn't even share your money quote (which also didn't corroborate BB's charges).
> > > > BB was mistaken in saying that you'd wished for his death, however, your statement struck most of us as being every bit as nasty as if you had..
> > >
> > > Yes, and (given Mr. Burrows's gang affiliation) his prior nastiness has gone into the memory hole, while the whole gang is pissing their collective pants over my "nastiness." Boo-hoo.
> >
> > Since when has Bob been a member of "the gang"?
>
> I'd say, since he came back to the group a while ago and began flaming for them. Of course he's not a full member; he's not here enough.
>
> > He's avoided the flame wars almost as much as Karen.
> >
>
> He's confined himself to flaming Will and Zod, which you don't count as "flame wars."
>
> > As to the "gang"s being upset over your perceived nastiness... why shouldn't they be? I'm upset over it. And, in spite of our having had battles in the past, it's something I never would have expected from you.
>
> Assuming Mr. Wurthing had seen (1), then he was not that upset enough about it. or wouldn't have seen any need to embellish it into something more upsetting (2). Nor, I'm afraid, have you convinced me that you were all that upset, since we both know that you have both approved and made far worse ones.
>
> > > > If that discussion had taken place in a real life situation, you'd have left the room with a black eye, a busted nose, and several missing teeth. Seriously, it was *that* bad.
>
> Your analogy is bad, BTW; usent is not like RL, precisely because there is no physical danger here. I don't believe for a minute that you go about in RL telling people to their face that you wish they were dead, much less calling them things like pond scum or child molesters (far worse statements, from Which you might not have even walked away). Again I'm not playing the "hypocrite" card, but pointing out what's wrong with your analogy.
>
> > > If he'd started screaming at me in real life, I'd probably have just left the room. But of course he wouldn't, and I wouldn't have had to say anything nasty back.
> >
> > You didn't *have* to say anything nasty, back. The high road is always an option.
> >
> > > > I can't understand how you find nothing wrong with it.
> > >
> > > The only thing you find wrong with it is that it was an effective flame; it mentioned something true about him: he has a limited time to live, and he wants to spend it being a nasty, disagreeable piece of shit to other people. So it stung. That's exactly what I find right about it: he got the appropriate response.
> > >
> >
> > We all have a limited time to live, and we all deal with that knowledge as best as we can. But one someone has been diagnosed with leukemia and is in the hospital undergoing chemotherapy, their ability to deal with it is going to be extremely compromised.
>
> As I said, his first reaction (to whatever he saw), and his first post on it, is excusable. What is less excusable is his repeatdly using it, once again, troll Will Dockery. And what is completely inexcusable is Mr. Wurthing's attempt to spread it around the group, when he apparently had no idea what he was talking about.
>
> > You're giving me the impression that you're incapable of experiencing empathy -- which would make you either a sociopath or a Vulcan.
>
> No, I have empathy with almost everyone, and even with humanity in general. A person has to do something thoroughly repellent - something a person would not do - to make me lose all empathy for him; to not care whether he lives or dies, as I put it to Mr. Burrows.
>
> > > > > > But how can one have peace when one side would desist and your side, sensing the advantage, would continue flaming and trolling anyone WHO DARES to say even the most minor negative thing about your side.
> > > > > Precisely why I've stopped "desisting". I agree with every reason MP says working for peace, but I've noticed that in practice it's always been just me "desisting" while your side continues flaming and trolling anyone else (irrespective of what they actually say or do).
> > > > >
> > > > I think that a large part of the problem might be in your assigning everyone to "sides."
>
> > > You've done the same thing, with the same players. The only difference is your names for the sides: you call the Jism Gang "everyone" or "the group," and their targets "pond scum" and the like.
> >
> > I see the so-called "Jism Gang" (of which you've implied my membership in) as being individuals who share a common dislike of Will Donkey and his sockpuppet's antics. I don't see them as a "gang," anymore than I saw you, me and Donkey as being members of "The Dunce Gang," as PJR dubbed us.
>
> > IIRC, you didn't see yourself as the leader of any gang, then. You need to look at this with the same level of understanding.
>
> Mr. Wurthing has in fact assigned me to a gang, though he disagrees on who the leader is:
> <quote>
> > Oh wait, hypocrite willy idnorances what his posse does-- Zod's nasty name calling, GD's troll threads and smutty name calling, Rachel's anti-Semitic statements and Ilya' misogynistic and racist essays.
> </q>
>
> > > > Apart from Will and his splooges (who were brought here by him *specifically* to kiss his ass and attack his "enemies") no one else here is actually part of an organized "team."
>
> So apparently all three of us agree that there is a gang of people who kiss ass and attack everyone else (whom they see as the enemy). All we disagree on is who that gang's members are.
>
> > > Oh, right -- the fact that these shits -- from Miss NancyGene to Miss ME to the new recruit, Mr. Wurthing -- spend their days here kissing Mr. Senetto's ass and attacking his "enemies" is because they're all free-thinking individuals. Got it.
> >
> > People like Jim. I like Jim. Jim's a likeable guy.
> >
> > People tend to defend those they consider their friends.
>
> Sure; and they tend to judge behavior wrt to them and their friends, differently from how they judge behavior wrt to their enemies; even if it's exactly the same behavior. Which, I'm afraid, is what it looks like what you're doing here; it really strikes me that your major problem with what I actually told Mr. Burrows was not what I said, but to whom I said it.
>
> I'm sorry, but this is already too long, and I'm afraid I'm going to have to snip here. The other topics you've raised, the past history of the group etc., are all things worth discussing, but I'd like to keep the focus on Mr. Wurthing's flame war. If you think I've snipped too much, feel free to put anything back in.
>
> snip

I see you bumping something about a jism gang, you must be talikin' about yourselves cause y'all get worked up when you buddy writes poems about jism!

Now I would respond to more to your ass posts, but I have people waiting on me so I'm signing off to Rivendell and I'll leave you fools to your ruined Eregion. Jordy will be jealous, I'll be seeing friendly people, not vainly posting to no one here...

Zod wrote:

> George J. Dance wrote:
>> > > > > On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 4:59:01 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
>> > > > > > On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 4:30:37 PM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > > And speaking of death fantasies.
>> > > > > > > > You mean George Dance's death fantasy about Mr Burrows?
>> > > > > > > You mean the one NGBS was peddling around here yesterday?
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > <quote>
>> > > > > > > Epic Flame - Reddit Here!1!
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Did George J Dance wish death on a sick person in the hospital- and just for criticizing him?! That's damned cold and damned screwed up coming from someone saying they're the victim and the supposed "good guy".
>> > > > > > > </q>
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > That turned out to be misinformation. Please update your story.
>> > > > > > Nope, the tag trail shows my source.
>> > > > > Sure does. You had one source: the poor "sick person" who was trolling me at the time, and made it up; you confirmed your story by doublechecking with the *same guy.*
>> > > > > > All I can credit you with is at least you got the propaganda 'omission for out of context' trick right.
>> > > > > I can't even credit you with getting that right; since that quote NG posted out of context also refutes your story - your story was dead in the water when NG posted that.
>> > > > > > Sorry to tell you, I broke the news before anyone else
>> > > > > You sure did (except for BB, who made it up). Too bad it was of the usual NGBS calibre: fake news.
>> > > > Is this an example of "Tit for Tat"?
>> > >
>> > > I suppose so. Mr. Wurthing wants a flame war, too, so I've given him what he wants as well. But there is a moral difference: he's spreading lies about me, and I'm telling the truth about him.
>> >
>> > I don't know which post/s you're referring to, but Ash has never acted dishonestly in the past.
>>
>> You've said you miss posts. Did you miss his story last month, where he was calling me an "anti-vaccer" (sic)?
>>
>> > Like I've said, your post really angered a lot of people... and extreme anger can lead to extremity on one's response.
>>
>> First, Second, even if I'd made a "death wish", that is not something that arouses anger here. You've seen death wishes, and death curses, here plenty of times, and even made a few yourself. That's not to call you a "hypocrite" -- that's become just a term to score points in a flame war. But it does compel me to believe that you're feigning anger now. The same for the others who've expressed anger: Mr. Senetto, Miss ME, the Misses Nancy Gene, and Mr. Wurthing.
>> Second, even if some people were angered, they weren't angered at my post.. Remember that we're talking about 2 distinct "statements" here:
>> (1) the one I actually made, which nobody reacted to until you produced it days later -- as far as I know, no one (including Mr. Wurthing, saw it until you posted it; there's no reason to think anyone but Mr. Burrows was angered by it.
>> (2) the one Mr. Burrows, and then Mr. Wurthing, claimed I'd made, which may or may not be the same as (1). (Neither of them have confirmed or denied that it was; they simply ignored my requests to do so.) That, not my actual post, was the one that actually angered people, assuming those who replied were angry.
>> Third, no matter how consciously, you're allowing "Ash" to pull a bait-and-switch: to substitute (1) (which he didn't read, or even look for) for (2) (the one he claimed to have seen, but couldn't produce when challenged). The result, if not the intent, is to confuse (1) and (2) just to confuse anyone about what I'd actually said.
>>
>> > I suspect that Ash's post contains some exaggeration -- which is a matter of emotion rather than one of morality.
>>
>> It looks to me as if Mr. Wurthing's post was based entirely on what he'd read in Mr. Burrows's flames of Will Dockery on the subject; he didn't exaggerate what I said, because he didn't bother to read what I'd said.
>>
>> > > Mr. Burrows decided to claim falsely that I'd wished for his death. So why shouldn't I claim that he made it up? The fact is he did: whether he misunderstood what I'd said, or simply decided to outright lie just to make me look worse, the effect is the same.
>> >
>> > I'm sure that's what he took your post to mean. You didn't specifically state that you wished him dead, but you acted as though his death were both immanent and probable.
>> >
>>
>> Everone's death is not just probable but certain; the point being that one should live each day as if their death were imminent, and chose their time on what's important; and what's important to him acting as if he's "better" than Will Dockery.
>>
>> > > > The truth is that you'd made a callous remark and BB reacted to it.
>> > >
>> > > The truth is: we were in a flame war, by his choice and initiation; one of my flames stung; and he had a meltdown.
>> >
>> > Damn it, George -- what you wrote went well beyond flaming.
>>
>> I've seen plenty worse in flaming; and, as I've said, the people you've said were angry not only tolerated that, but engaged in it.
>>
>> > I've always said that AAPC fights should not cross over into real life (I don't always keep to that, but we're not talking about me).
>>
>> Not directly, but it is relevant in discussing what statements here get you angry. I don't think it's the statements at all, but who made them and to whom they were made.
>>
>> > When someone is in a hospital undergoing chemotherapy and (IIRC) bone marrow transplant, the last thing they want to hear is that you've already written them off as a goner.
>>
>> Since Mr. Burrows has "forgiven" me for not saying what he claimed I did, I can excuse him for getting it wrong. There is no excuse for Mr. Wurthing, who did not bother to check or even confirm what I'd said, but merely started posting about it as part of his flame war.
>>
>> > > > > Duh! I'm fully aware you were playing tag team: BB went after me to defend/deflect from JO, then you jumped in to defend/deflect from BB. I've seen it enough times to know how it works.
>> > >
>> > > > You're sounding more than a tad paranoid, George.
>> > >
>> > > Really: you deny that's exactly what happened on my thread?
>> >
>> > Yes, I am denying that.
>>
>> Well, for the reasons I've govem you, I'm affirming it.
>>
>> > It's true that different people had strong reactions to your post, but these were spontaneous reactions -- not a concerted effort to play "tag team."
>>
>> None of those reples were in reaction to my post (1), and I'm not talking the people who flamed Will over Mr. Burrows's claims (2). The 'tag' in this case occurred when I pressed Mr. Burrows on his claim, and in response Mr.. Wurthing started this "Epic Flame War" of his with me.
>>
>> > >
>> > > Not to question your desire for peace, but: isn't exactly what you're doing for the Jism Gang yourself in this thread?
>> >
>> > Taking my turn in the ring? Not at all.
>> >
>> > Actually, I'm interceding for you -- insofar as one can with regard to your post.
>>
>> Interceding with whom? You've only been posting to me about it.
>>
>> > > > > > till I saw what you were doing to Mr Burrows.
>> > > > > Correction: til you read what "Mr. Burrows" *said* I was doing. You wouldn't even give me the details of your story; you wouldn't even share your money quote (which also didn't corroborate BB's charges).
>> > > > BB was mistaken in saying that you'd wished for his death, however, your statement struck most of us as being every bit as nasty as if you had..
>> > >
>> > > Yes, and (given Mr. Burrows's gang affiliation) his prior nastiness has gone into the memory hole, while the whole gang is pissing their collective pants over my "nastiness." Boo-hoo.
>> >
>> > Since when has Bob been a member of "the gang"?
>>
>> I'd say, since he came back to the group a while ago and began flaming for them. Of course he's not a full member; he's not here enough.
>>
>> > He's avoided the flame wars almost as much as Karen.
>> >
>>
>> He's confined himself to flaming Will and Zod, which you don't count as "flame wars."
>>
>> > As to the "gang"s being upset over your perceived nastiness... why shouldn't they be? I'm upset over it. And, in spite of our having had battles in the past, it's something I never would have expected from you.
>>
>> Assuming Mr. Wurthing had seen (1), then he was not that upset enough about it. or wouldn't have seen any need to embellish it into something more upsetting (2). Nor, I'm afraid, have you convinced me that you were all that upset, since we both know that you have both approved and made far worse ones.
>>
>> > > > If that discussion had taken place in a real life situation, you'd have left the room with a black eye, a busted nose, and several missing teeth. Seriously, it was *that* bad.
>>
>> Your analogy is bad, BTW; usent is not like RL, precisely because there is no physical danger here. I don't believe for a minute that you go about in RL telling people to their face that you wish they were dead, much less calling them things like pond scum or child molesters (far worse statements, from Which you might not have even walked away). Again I'm not playing the "hypocrite" card, but pointing out what's wrong with your analogy.
>>
>> > > If he'd started screaming at me in real life, I'd probably have just left the room. But of course he wouldn't, and I wouldn't have had to say anything nasty back.
>> >
>> > You didn't *have* to say anything nasty, back. The high road is always an option.
>> >
>> > > > I can't understand how you find nothing wrong with it.
>> > >
>> > > The only thing you find wrong with it is that it was an effective flame; it mentioned something true about him: he has a limited time to live, and he wants to spend it being a nasty, disagreeable piece of shit to other people. So it stung. That's exactly what I find right about it: he got the appropriate response.
>> > >
>> >
>> > We all have a limited time to live, and we all deal with that knowledge as best as we can. But one someone has been diagnosed with leukemia and is in the hospital undergoing chemotherapy, their ability to deal with it is going to be extremely compromised.
>>
>> As I said, his first reaction (to whatever he saw), and his first post on it, is excusable. What is less excusable is his repeatdly using it, once again, troll Will Dockery. And what is completely inexcusable is Mr. Wurthing's attempt to spread it around the group, when he apparently had no idea what he was talking about.
>>
>> > You're giving me the impression that you're incapable of experiencing empathy -- which would make you either a sociopath or a Vulcan.
>>
>> No, I have empathy with almost everyone, and even with humanity in general. A person has to do something thoroughly repellent - something a person would not do - to make me lose all empathy for him; to not care whether he lives or dies, as I put it to Mr. Burrows.
>>
>> > > > > > But how can one have peace when one side would desist and your side, sensing the advantage, would continue flaming and trolling anyone WHO DARES to say even the most minor negative thing about your side.
>> > > > > Precisely why I've stopped "desisting". I agree with every reason MP says working for peace, but I've noticed that in practice it's always been just me "desisting" while your side continues flaming and trolling anyone else (irrespective of what they actually say or do).
>> > > > >
>> > > > I think that a large part of the problem might be in your assigning everyone to "sides."
>>
>> > > You've done the same thing, with the same players. The only difference is your names for the sides: you call the Jism Gang "everyone" or "the group," and their targets "pond scum" and the like.
>> >
>> > I see the so-called "Jism Gang" (of which you've implied my membership in) as being individuals who share a common dislike of Will Donkey and his sockpuppet's antics. I don't see them as a "gang," anymore than I saw you, me and Donkey as being members of "The Dunce Gang," as PJR dubbed us.
>>
>> > IIRC, you didn't see yourself as the leader of any gang, then. You need to look at this with the same level of understanding.
>>
>> Mr. Wurthing has in fact assigned me to a gang, though he disagrees on who the leader is:
>> <quote>
>> > Oh wait, hypocrite willy idnorances what his posse does-- Zod's nasty name calling, GD's troll threads and smutty name calling, Rachel's anti-Semitic statements and Ilya' misogynistic and racist essays.
>> </q>
>>
>> > > > Apart from Will and his splooges (who were brought here by him *specifically* to kiss his ass and attack his "enemies") no one else here is actually part of an organized "team."
>>
>> So apparently all three of us agree that there is a gang of people who kiss ass and attack everyone else (whom they see as the enemy). All we disagree on is who that gang's members are.
>>
>> > > Oh, right -- the fact that these shits -- from Miss NancyGene to Miss ME to the new recruit, Mr. Wurthing -- spend their days here kissing Mr. Senetto's ass and attacking his "enemies" is because they're all free-thinking individuals. Got it.
>> >
>> > People like Jim. I like Jim. Jim's a likeable guy.
>> >
>> > People tend to defend those they consider their friends.
>>
>> Sure; and they tend to judge behavior wrt to them and their friends, differently from how they judge behavior wrt to their enemies; even if it's exactly the same behavior. Which, I'm afraid, is what it looks like what you're doing here; it really strikes me that your major problem with what I actually told Mr. Burrows was not what I said, but to whom I said it.
>>
>> I'm sorry, but this is already too long, and I'm afraid I'm going to have to snip here. The other topics you've raised, the past history of the group etc., are all things worth discussing, but I'd like to keep the focus on Mr. Wurthing's flame war. If you think I've snipped too much, feel free to put anything back in.
>>
>> snip

On Wednesday, August 17, 2022 at 8:57:11 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
>
> I see you bumping something about a jism gang, you must be talikin' about yourselves

No, you're just confused again.

> cause y'all get worked up when you buddy writes poems about jism!
>
> Now I would respond to more to your ass posts, but I have people waiting on me so I'm signing off to Rivendell and I'll leave you fools to your ruined Eregion. Jordy will be jealous, I'll be seeing friendly people, not vainly posting to no one here...

Have fun.

🙂

On Wednesday, 17 August 2022 at 23:40:10 UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> Zod wrote:
>
> > George J. Dance wrote:
> >> > > > > On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 4:59:01 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
> >> > > > > > On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 4:30:37 PM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
> >>
> >> > > > > > > > > And speaking of death fantasies.
> >> > > > > > > > You mean George Dance's death fantasy about Mr Burrows?
> >> > > > > > > You mean the one NGBS was peddling around here yesterday?
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > <quote>
> >> > > > > > > Epic Flame - Reddit Here!1!
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Did George J Dance wish death on a sick person in the hospital- and just for criticizing him?! That's damned cold and damned screwed up coming from someone saying they're the victim and the supposed "good guy".
> >> > > > > > > </q>
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > That turned out to be misinformation. Please update your story.
> >> > > > > > Nope, the tag trail shows my source.
> >> > > > > Sure does. You had one source: the poor "sick person" who was trolling me at the time, and made it up; you confirmed your story by doublechecking with the *same guy.*
> >> > > > > > All I can credit you with is at least you got the propaganda 'omission for out of context' trick right.
> >> > > > > I can't even credit you with getting that right; since that quote NG posted out of context also refutes your story - your story was dead in the water when NG posted that.
> >> > > > > > Sorry to tell you, I broke the news before anyone else
> >> > > > > You sure did (except for BB, who made it up). Too bad it was of the usual NGBS calibre: fake news.
> >> > > > Is this an example of "Tit for Tat"?
> >> > >
> >> > > I suppose so. Mr. Wurthing wants a flame war, too, so I've given him what he wants as well. But there is a moral difference: he's spreading lies about me, and I'm telling the truth about him.
> >> >
> >> > I don't know which post/s you're referring to, but Ash has never acted dishonestly in the past.
> >>
> >> You've said you miss posts. Did you miss his story last month, where he was calling me an "anti-vaccer" (sic)?
> >>
> >> > Like I've said, your post really angered a lot of people... and extreme anger can lead to extremity on one's response.
> >>
> >> First, Second, even if I'd made a "death wish", that is not something that arouses anger here. You've seen death wishes, and death curses, here plenty of times, and even made a few yourself. That's not to call you a "hypocrite" -- that's become just a term to score points in a flame war. But it does compel me to believe that you're feigning anger now. The same for the others who've expressed anger: Mr. Senetto, Miss ME, the Misses Nancy Gene, and Mr. Wurthing.
> >> Second, even if some people were angered, they weren't angered at my post.. Remember that we're talking about 2 distinct "statements" here:
> >> (1) the one I actually made, which nobody reacted to until you produced it days later -- as far as I know, no one (including Mr. Wurthing, saw it until you posted it; there's no reason to think anyone but Mr. Burrows was angered by it.
> >> (2) the one Mr. Burrows, and then Mr. Wurthing, claimed I'd made, which may or may not be the same as (1). (Neither of them have confirmed or denied that it was; they simply ignored my requests to do so.) That, not my actual post, was the one that actually angered people, assuming those who replied were angry.
> >> Third, no matter how consciously, you're allowing "Ash" to pull a bait-and-switch: to substitute (1) (which he didn't read, or even look for) for (2) (the one he claimed to have seen, but couldn't produce when challenged). The result, if not the intent, is to confuse (1) and (2) just to confuse anyone about what I'd actually said.
> >>
> >> > I suspect that Ash's post contains some exaggeration -- which is a matter of emotion rather than one of morality.
> >>
> >> It looks to me as if Mr. Wurthing's post was based entirely on what he'd read in Mr. Burrows's flames of Will Dockery on the subject; he didn't exaggerate what I said, because he didn't bother to read what I'd said.
> >>
> >> > > Mr. Burrows decided to claim falsely that I'd wished for his death.. So why shouldn't I claim that he made it up? The fact is he did: whether he misunderstood what I'd said, or simply decided to outright lie just to make me look worse, the effect is the same.
> >> >
> >> > I'm sure that's what he took your post to mean. You didn't specifically state that you wished him dead, but you acted as though his death were both immanent and probable.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Everone's death is not just probable but certain; the point being that one should live each day as if their death were imminent, and chose their time on what's important; and what's important to him acting as if he's "better" than Will Dockery.
> >>
> >> > > > The truth is that you'd made a callous remark and BB reacted to it.
> >> > >
> >> > > The truth is: we were in a flame war, by his choice and initiation; one of my flames stung; and he had a meltdown.
> >> >
> >> > Damn it, George -- what you wrote went well beyond flaming.
> >>
> >> I've seen plenty worse in flaming; and, as I've said, the people you've said were angry not only tolerated that, but engaged in it.
> >>
> >> > I've always said that AAPC fights should not cross over into real life (I don't always keep to that, but we're not talking about me).
> >>
> >> Not directly, but it is relevant in discussing what statements here get you angry. I don't think it's the statements at all, but who made them and to whom they were made.
> >>
> >> > When someone is in a hospital undergoing chemotherapy and (IIRC) bone marrow transplant, the last thing they want to hear is that you've already written them off as a goner.
> >>
> >> Since Mr. Burrows has "forgiven" me for not saying what he claimed I did, I can excuse him for getting it wrong. There is no excuse for Mr. Wurthing, who did not bother to check or even confirm what I'd said, but merely started posting about it as part of his flame war.
> >>
> >> > > > > Duh! I'm fully aware you were playing tag team: BB went after me to defend/deflect from JO, then you jumped in to defend/deflect from BB. I've seen it enough times to know how it works.
> >> > >
> >> > > > You're sounding more than a tad paranoid, George.
> >> > >
> >> > > Really: you deny that's exactly what happened on my thread?
> >> >
> >> > Yes, I am denying that.
> >>
> >> Well, for the reasons I've govem you, I'm affirming it.
> >>
> >> > It's true that different people had strong reactions to your post, but these were spontaneous reactions -- not a concerted effort to play "tag team."
> >>
> >> None of those reples were in reaction to my post (1), and I'm not talking the people who flamed Will over Mr. Burrows's claims (2). The 'tag' in this case occurred when I pressed Mr. Burrows on his claim, and in response Mr.. Wurthing started this "Epic Flame War" of his with me.
> >>
> >> > >
> >> > > Not to question your desire for peace, but: isn't exactly what you're doing for the Jism Gang yourself in this thread?
> >> >
> >> > Taking my turn in the ring? Not at all.
> >> >
> >> > Actually, I'm interceding for you -- insofar as one can with regard to your post.
> >>
> >> Interceding with whom? You've only been posting to me about it.
> >>
> >> > > > > > till I saw what you were doing to Mr Burrows.
> >> > > > > Correction: til you read what "Mr. Burrows" *said* I was doing.. You wouldn't even give me the details of your story; you wouldn't even share your money quote (which also didn't corroborate BB's charges).
> >> > > > BB was mistaken in saying that you'd wished for his death, however, your statement struck most of us as being every bit as nasty as if you had..
> >> > >
> >> > > Yes, and (given Mr. Burrows's gang affiliation) his prior nastiness has gone into the memory hole, while the whole gang is pissing their collective pants over my "nastiness." Boo-hoo.
> >> >
> >> > Since when has Bob been a member of "the gang"?
> >>
> >> I'd say, since he came back to the group a while ago and began flaming for them. Of course he's not a full member; he's not here enough.
> >>
> >> > He's avoided the flame wars almost as much as Karen.
> >> >
> >>
> >> He's confined himself to flaming Will and Zod, which you don't count as "flame wars."
> >>
> >> > As to the "gang"s being upset over your perceived nastiness... why shouldn't they be? I'm upset over it. And, in spite of our having had battles in the past, it's something I never would have expected from you.
> >>
> >> Assuming Mr. Wurthing had seen (1), then he was not that upset enough about it. or wouldn't have seen any need to embellish it into something more upsetting (2). Nor, I'm afraid, have you convinced me that you were all that upset, since we both know that you have both approved and made far worse ones.
> >>
> >> > > > If that discussion had taken place in a real life situation, you'd have left the room with a black eye, a busted nose, and several missing teeth. Seriously, it was *that* bad.
> >>
> >> Your analogy is bad, BTW; usent is not like RL, precisely because there is no physical danger here. I don't believe for a minute that you go about in RL telling people to their face that you wish they were dead, much less calling them things like pond scum or child molesters (far worse statements, from Which you might not have even walked away). Again I'm not playing the "hypocrite" card, but pointing out what's wrong with your analogy.
> >>
> >> > > If he'd started screaming at me in real life, I'd probably have just left the room. But of course he wouldn't, and I wouldn't have had to say anything nasty back.
> >> >
> >> > You didn't *have* to say anything nasty, back. The high road is always an option.
> >> >
> >> > > > I can't understand how you find nothing wrong with it.
> >> > >
> >> > > The only thing you find wrong with it is that it was an effective flame; it mentioned something true about him: he has a limited time to live, and he wants to spend it being a nasty, disagreeable piece of shit to other people. So it stung. That's exactly what I find right about it: he got the appropriate response.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > We all have a limited time to live, and we all deal with that knowledge as best as we can. But one someone has been diagnosed with leukemia and is in the hospital undergoing chemotherapy, their ability to deal with it is going to be extremely compromised.
> >>
> >> As I said, his first reaction (to whatever he saw), and his first post on it, is excusable. What is less excusable is his repeatdly using it, once again, troll Will Dockery. And what is completely inexcusable is Mr. Wurthing's attempt to spread it around the group, when he apparently had no idea what he was talking about.
> >>
> >> > You're giving me the impression that you're incapable of experiencing empathy -- which would make you either a sociopath or a Vulcan.
> >>
> >> No, I have empathy with almost everyone, and even with humanity in general. A person has to do something thoroughly repellent - something a person would not do - to make me lose all empathy for him; to not care whether he lives or dies, as I put it to Mr. Burrows.
> >>
> >> > > > > > But how can one have peace when one side would desist and your side, sensing the advantage, would continue flaming and trolling anyone WHO DARES to say even the most minor negative thing about your side.
> >> > > > > Precisely why I've stopped "desisting". I agree with every reason MP says working for peace, but I've noticed that in practice it's always been just me "desisting" while your side continues flaming and trolling anyone else (irrespective of what they actually say or do).
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > I think that a large part of the problem might be in your assigning everyone to "sides."
> >>
> >> > > You've done the same thing, with the same players. The only difference is your names for the sides: you call the Jism Gang "everyone" or "the group," and their targets "pond scum" and the like.
> >> >
> >> > I see the so-called "Jism Gang" (of which you've implied my membership in) as being individuals who share a common dislike of Will Donkey and his sockpuppet's antics. I don't see them as a "gang," anymore than I saw you, me and Donkey as being members of "The Dunce Gang," as PJR dubbed us.
> >>
> >> > IIRC, you didn't see yourself as the leader of any gang, then. You need to look at this with the same level of understanding.
> >>
> >> Mr. Wurthing has in fact assigned me to a gang, though he disagrees on who the leader is:
> >> <quote>
> >> > Oh wait, hypocrite willy idnorances what his posse does-- Zod's nasty name calling, GD's troll threads and smutty name calling, Rachel's anti-Semitic statements and Ilya' misogynistic and racist essays.
> >> </q>
> >>
> >> > > > Apart from Will and his splooges (who were brought here by him *specifically* to kiss his ass and attack his "enemies") no one else here is actually part of an organized "team."
> >>
> >> So apparently all three of us agree that there is a gang of people who kiss ass and attack everyone else (whom they see as the enemy). All we disagree on is who that gang's members are.
> >>
> >> > > Oh, right -- the fact that these shits -- from Miss NancyGene to Miss ME to the new recruit, Mr. Wurthing -- spend their days here kissing Mr.. Senetto's ass and attacking his "enemies" is because they're all free-thinking individuals. Got it.
> >> >
> >> > People like Jim. I like Jim. Jim's a likeable guy.
> >> >
> >> > People tend to defend those they consider their friends.
> >>
> >> Sure; and they tend to judge behavior wrt to them and their friends, differently from how they judge behavior wrt to their enemies; even if it's exactly the same behavior. Which, I'm afraid, is what it looks like what you're doing here; it really strikes me that your major problem with what I actually told Mr. Burrows was not what I said, but to whom I said it.
> >>
> >> I'm sorry, but this is already too long, and I'm afraid I'm going to have to snip here. The other topics you've raised, the past history of the group etc., are all things worth discussing, but I'd like to keep the focus on Mr. Wurthing's flame war. If you think I've snipped too much, feel free to put anything back in.
> >>
> >> snip
>
> > What he said
> He made his point, indeed.

On Wednesday, 17 August 2022 at 20:57:11 UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
> I see you bumping something about a jism gang, you must be talikin' about yourselves cause y'all get worked up when you buddy writes poems about jism!
>
> Now I would respond to more to your ass posts, but I have people waiting on me so I'm signing off to Rivendell and I'll leave you fools to your ruined Eregion. Jordy will be jealous, I'll be seeing friendly people, not vainly posting to no one here...

I see that dance has also started deleting original posts from his threads.
Are they really that stupid?

Zod wrote:

> George J. Dance wrote:
>> > > > > On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 4:59:01 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
>> > > > > > On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 4:30:37 PM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > > And speaking of death fantasies.
>> > > > > > > > You mean George Dance's death fantasy about Mr Burrows?
>> > > > > > > You mean the one NGBS was peddling around here yesterday?
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > <quote>
>> > > > > > > Epic Flame - Reddit Here!1!
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Did George J Dance wish death on a sick person in the hospital- and just for criticizing him?! That's damned cold and damned screwed up coming from someone saying they're the victim and the supposed "good guy".
>> > > > > > > </q>
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > That turned out to be misinformation. Please update your story.
>> > > > > > Nope, the tag trail shows my source.
>> > > > > Sure does. You had one source: the poor "sick person" who was trolling me at the time, and made it up; you confirmed your story by doublechecking with the *same guy.*
>> > > > > > All I can credit you with is at least you got the propaganda 'omission for out of context' trick right.
>> > > > > I can't even credit you with getting that right; since that quote NG posted out of context also refutes your story - your story was dead in the water when NG posted that.
>> > > > > > Sorry to tell you, I broke the news before anyone else
>> > > > > You sure did (except for BB, who made it up). Too bad it was of the usual NGBS calibre: fake news.
>> > > > Is this an example of "Tit for Tat"?
>> > >
>> > > I suppose so. Mr. Wurthing wants a flame war, too, so I've given him what he wants as well. But there is a moral difference: he's spreading lies about me, and I'm telling the truth about him.
>> >
>> > I don't know which post/s you're referring to, but Ash has never acted dishonestly in the past.
>>
>> You've said you miss posts. Did you miss his story last month, where he was calling me an "anti-vaccer" (sic)?
>>
>> > Like I've said, your post really angered a lot of people... and extreme anger can lead to extremity on one's response.
>>
>> First, Second, even if I'd made a "death wish", that is not something that arouses anger here. You've seen death wishes, and death curses, here plenty of times, and even made a few yourself. That's not to call you a "hypocrite" -- that's become just a term to score points in a flame war. But it does compel me to believe that you're feigning anger now. The same for the others who've expressed anger: Mr. Senetto, Miss ME, the Misses Nancy Gene, and Mr. Wurthing.
>> Second, even if some people were angered, they weren't angered at my post.. Remember that we're talking about 2 distinct "statements" here:
>> (1) the one I actually made, which nobody reacted to until you produced it days later -- as far as I know, no one (including Mr. Wurthing, saw it until you posted it; there's no reason to think anyone but Mr. Burrows was angered by it.
>> (2) the one Mr. Burrows, and then Mr. Wurthing, claimed I'd made, which may or may not be the same as (1). (Neither of them have confirmed or denied that it was; they simply ignored my requests to do so.) That, not my actual post, was the one that actually angered people, assuming those who replied were angry.
>> Third, no matter how consciously, you're allowing "Ash" to pull a bait-and-switch: to substitute (1) (which he didn't read, or even look for) for (2) (the one he claimed to have seen, but couldn't produce when challenged). The result, if not the intent, is to confuse (1) and (2) just to confuse anyone about what I'd actually said.
>>
>> > I suspect that Ash's post contains some exaggeration -- which is a matter of emotion rather than one of morality.
>>
>> It looks to me as if Mr. Wurthing's post was based entirely on what he'd read in Mr. Burrows's flames of Will Dockery on the subject; he didn't exaggerate what I said, because he didn't bother to read what I'd said.
>>
>> > > Mr. Burrows decided to claim falsely that I'd wished for his death. So why shouldn't I claim that he made it up? The fact is he did: whether he misunderstood what I'd said, or simply decided to outright lie just to make me look worse, the effect is the same.
>> >
>> > I'm sure that's what he took your post to mean. You didn't specifically state that you wished him dead, but you acted as though his death were both immanent and probable.
>> >
>>
>> Everone's death is not just probable but certain; the point being that one should live each day as if their death were imminent, and chose their time on what's important; and what's important to him acting as if he's "better" than Will Dockery.
>>
>> > > > The truth is that you'd made a callous remark and BB reacted to it.
>> > >
>> > > The truth is: we were in a flame war, by his choice and initiation; one of my flames stung; and he had a meltdown.
>> >
>> > Damn it, George -- what you wrote went well beyond flaming.
>>
>> I've seen plenty worse in flaming; and, as I've said, the people you've said were angry not only tolerated that, but engaged in it.
>>
>> > I've always said that AAPC fights should not cross over into real life (I don't always keep to that, but we're not talking about me).
>>
>> Not directly, but it is relevant in discussing what statements here get you angry. I don't think it's the statements at all, but who made them and to whom they were made.
>>
>> > When someone is in a hospital undergoing chemotherapy and (IIRC) bone marrow transplant, the last thing they want to hear is that you've already written them off as a goner.
>>
>> Since Mr. Burrows has "forgiven" me for not saying what he claimed I did, I can excuse him for getting it wrong. There is no excuse for Mr. Wurthing, who did not bother to check or even confirm what I'd said, but merely started posting about it as part of his flame war.
>>
>> > > > > Duh! I'm fully aware you were playing tag team: BB went after me to defend/deflect from JO, then you jumped in to defend/deflect from BB. I've seen it enough times to know how it works.
>> > >
>> > > > You're sounding more than a tad paranoid, George.
>> > >
>> > > Really: you deny that's exactly what happened on my thread?
>> >
>> > Yes, I am denying that.
>>
>> Well, for the reasons I've govem you, I'm affirming it.
>>
>> > It's true that different people had strong reactions to your post, but these were spontaneous reactions -- not a concerted effort to play "tag team."
>>
>> None of those reples were in reaction to my post (1), and I'm not talking the people who flamed Will over Mr. Burrows's claims (2). The 'tag' in this case occurred when I pressed Mr. Burrows on his claim, and in response Mr.. Wurthing started this "Epic Flame War" of his with me.
>>
>> > >
>> > > Not to question your desire for peace, but: isn't exactly what you're doing for the Jism Gang yourself in this thread?
>> >
>> > Taking my turn in the ring? Not at all.
>> >
>> > Actually, I'm interceding for you -- insofar as one can with regard to your post.
>>
>> Interceding with whom? You've only been posting to me about it.
>>
>> > > > > > till I saw what you were doing to Mr Burrows.
>> > > > > Correction: til you read what "Mr. Burrows" *said* I was doing. You wouldn't even give me the details of your story; you wouldn't even share your money quote (which also didn't corroborate BB's charges).
>> > > > BB was mistaken in saying that you'd wished for his death, however, your statement struck most of us as being every bit as nasty as if you had..
>> > >
>> > > Yes, and (given Mr. Burrows's gang affiliation) his prior nastiness has gone into the memory hole, while the whole gang is pissing their collective pants over my "nastiness." Boo-hoo.
>> >
>> > Since when has Bob been a member of "the gang"?
>>
>> I'd say, since he came back to the group a while ago and began flaming for them. Of course he's not a full member; he's not here enough.
>>
>> > He's avoided the flame wars almost as much as Karen.
>> >
>>
>> He's confined himself to flaming Will and Zod, which you don't count as "flame wars."
>>
>> > As to the "gang"s being upset over your perceived nastiness... why shouldn't they be? I'm upset over it. And, in spite of our having had battles in the past, it's something I never would have expected from you.
>>
>> Assuming Mr. Wurthing had seen (1), then he was not that upset enough about it. or wouldn't have seen any need to embellish it into something more upsetting (2). Nor, I'm afraid, have you convinced me that you were all that upset, since we both know that you have both approved and made far worse ones.
>>
>> > > > If that discussion had taken place in a real life situation, you'd have left the room with a black eye, a busted nose, and several missing teeth. Seriously, it was *that* bad.
>>
>> Your analogy is bad, BTW; usent is not like RL, precisely because there is no physical danger here. I don't believe for a minute that you go about in RL telling people to their face that you wish they were dead, much less calling them things like pond scum or child molesters (far worse statements, from Which you might not have even walked away). Again I'm not playing the "hypocrite" card, but pointing out what's wrong with your analogy.
>>
>> > > If he'd started screaming at me in real life, I'd probably have just left the room. But of course he wouldn't, and I wouldn't have had to say anything nasty back.
>> >
>> > You didn't *have* to say anything nasty, back. The high road is always an option.
>> >
>> > > > I can't understand how you find nothing wrong with it.
>> > >
>> > > The only thing you find wrong with it is that it was an effective flame; it mentioned something true about him: he has a limited time to live, and he wants to spend it being a nasty, disagreeable piece of shit to other people. So it stung. That's exactly what I find right about it: he got the appropriate response.
>> > >
>> >
>> > We all have a limited time to live, and we all deal with that knowledge as best as we can. But one someone has been diagnosed with leukemia and is in the hospital undergoing chemotherapy, their ability to deal with it is going to be extremely compromised.
>>
>> As I said, his first reaction (to whatever he saw), and his first post on it, is excusable. What is less excusable is his repeatdly using it, once again, troll Will Dockery. And what is completely inexcusable is Mr. Wurthing's attempt to spread it around the group, when he apparently had no idea what he was talking about.
>>
>> > You're giving me the impression that you're incapable of experiencing empathy -- which would make you either a sociopath or a Vulcan.
>>
>> No, I have empathy with almost everyone, and even with humanity in general. A person has to do something thoroughly repellent - something a person would not do - to make me lose all empathy for him; to not care whether he lives or dies, as I put it to Mr. Burrows.
>>
>> > > > > > But how can one have peace when one side would desist and your side, sensing the advantage, would continue flaming and trolling anyone WHO DARES to say even the most minor negative thing about your side.
>> > > > > Precisely why I've stopped "desisting". I agree with every reason MP says working for peace, but I've noticed that in practice it's always been just me "desisting" while your side continues flaming and trolling anyone else (irrespective of what they actually say or do).
>> > > > >
>> > > > I think that a large part of the problem might be in your assigning everyone to "sides."
>>
>> > > You've done the same thing, with the same players. The only difference is your names for the sides: you call the Jism Gang "everyone" or "the group," and their targets "pond scum" and the like.
>> >
>> > I see the so-called "Jism Gang" (of which you've implied my membership in) as being individuals who share a common dislike of Will Donkey and his sockpuppet's antics. I don't see them as a "gang," anymore than I saw you, me and Donkey as being members of "The Dunce Gang," as PJR dubbed us.
>>
>> > IIRC, you didn't see yourself as the leader of any gang, then. You need to look at this with the same level of understanding.
>>
>> Mr. Wurthing has in fact assigned me to a gang, though he disagrees on who the leader is:
>> <quote>
>> > Oh wait, hypocrite willy idnorances what his posse does-- Zod's nasty name calling, GD's troll threads and smutty name calling, Rachel's anti-Semitic statements and Ilya' misogynistic and racist essays.
>> </q>
>>
>> > > > Apart from Will and his splooges (who were brought here by him *specifically* to kiss his ass and attack his "enemies") no one else here is actually part of an organized "team."
>>
>> So apparently all three of us agree that there is a gang of people who kiss ass and attack everyone else (whom they see as the enemy). All we disagree on is who that gang's members are.
>>
>> > > Oh, right -- the fact that these shits -- from Miss NancyGene to Miss ME to the new recruit, Mr. Wurthing -- spend their days here kissing Mr. Senetto's ass and attacking his "enemies" is because they're all free-thinking individuals. Got it.
>> >
>> > People like Jim. I like Jim. Jim's a likeable guy.
>> >
>> > People tend to defend those they consider their friends.
>>
>> Sure; and they tend to judge behavior wrt to them and their friends, differently from how they judge behavior wrt to their enemies; even if it's exactly the same behavior. Which, I'm afraid, is what it looks like what you're doing here; it really strikes me that your major problem with what I actually told Mr. Burrows was not what I said, but to whom I said it.
>>
>> I'm sorry, but this is already too long, and I'm afraid I'm going to have to snip here. The other topics you've raised, the past history of the group etc., are all things worth discussing, but I'd like to keep the focus on Mr. Wurthing's flame war. If you think I've snipped too much, feel free to put anything back in.
>>
>> snip

ME wrote:
>
> I see that dance has also started deleting original posts from his threads.
> Are they really that stupid?

Again, several others have also deleted their posts.

On Wednesday, August 17, 2022 at 11:39:06 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 17, 2022 at 8:57:11 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
> >
> > I see you bumping something about a jism gang, you must be talikin' about yourselves
> No, you're just confused again.
> > cause y'all get worked up when you buddy writes poems about jism!
> >
> > Now I would respond to more to your ass posts, but I have people waiting on me so I'm signing off to Rivendell and I'll leave you fools to your ruined Eregion. Jordy will be jealous, I'll be seeing friendly people, not vainly posting to no one here...
> Have fun.
>
> 🙂

On 2022-08-18 12:32 a.m., ME wrote:
>
> I see that dance has also started deleting original posts from his threads.

As you fucking well know, MEatpuppet, I can't delete posts from Google
Groups.

> Are they really that stupid?

I don't think even your fellow sphincters are stupid enough to believe you.

On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 2:22:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> On 2022-08-18 12:32 a.m., ME wrote:
> >
> > I see that dance has also started deleting original posts from his threads.
> As you fucking well know, MEatpuppet, I can't delete posts from Google
> Groups.
> > Are they really that stupid?
> I don't think even your fellow sphincters are stupid enough to believe you.

Why not?

Everyone else can?

On 2022-08-18 2:27 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 2:22:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>> On 2022-08-18 12:32 a.m., ME wrote:
>>>
>>> I see that dance has also started deleting original posts from his threads.
>> As you fucking well know, MEatpuppet, I can't delete posts from Google
>> Groups.
>>> Are they really that stupid?
>> I don't think even your fellow sphincters are stupid enough to believe you.
>
> Why not?
>

I'm afraid you'll have to ask Google Groups that.

> Everyone else can?

I'm afraid you'll have to ask them that.

On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 2:27:49 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 2:22:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > On 2022-08-18 12:32 a.m., ME wrote:
> > >
> > > I see that dance has also started deleting original posts from his threads.
> > As you fucking well know, MEatpuppet, I can't delete posts from Google
> > Groups.
> > > Are they really that stupid?
> > I don't think even your fellow sphincters are stupid enough to believe you.
> Why not?
>
> Everyone else can?

George Dance uses Eternal-September.

On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 2:49:24 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 2:27:49 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 2:22:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > On 2022-08-18 12:32 a.m., ME wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I see that dance has also started deleting original posts from his threads.
> > > As you fucking well know, MEatpuppet, I can't delete posts from Google
> > > Groups.
> > > > Are they really that stupid?
> > > I don't think even your fellow sphincters are stupid enough to believe you.
> > Why not?
> >
> > Everyone else can?
> George Dance uses Eternal-September.

Google rules.

On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 2:22:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> On 2022-08-18 12:32 a.m., ME wrote:
> >
> > I see that dance has also started deleting original posts from his threads.
> As you fucking well know, MEatpuppet, I can't delete posts from Google
> Groups.
> > Are they really that stupid?
> I don't think even your fellow sphincters are stupid enough to believe you.

Dunce
(your "sphincter" lame deserved a tat and I have plenty more of that)
by your own words and standards, you rank pretty lowly, you're as low-ranking as those you belittle it seems...
I was thinking your sold your soul for Usenet tats-- but now I'm wonderin', did you ever have any dignity to trade away?
Just sayin'!

When marking something as spam with the abuse button first marks it as to be made invisible to the person reporting it-- if Google then does decide to remove it either by algorithm automatic removal or manual review and removal, then it will disappear completely from the Google archives and public view in Google Groups.

On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 7:35:13 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> ME wrote:
> >
> > I see that dance has also started deleting original posts from his threads.
> > Are they really that stupid?
> Again, several others have also deleted their posts.

I have rarely deleted a post, usually if I'm replacing it with a revised post like in the collected collected poetry threads. The times I deleted something to remove it completely, I can probably count on one hand. I am rarely embarrassed by what I say, and I won't leave till I said what I came here to say. Y'all cannot go to your graves without knowing what you have made...

DOOM I SAY...
"The horseman on the white horse was clad in a showy and barbarous attire.... While his horse continued galloping, he was bending his bow in order to spread pestilence abroad. At his back swung the brass quiver filled with poisoned arrows, containing the germs of all diseases."
"The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse" (1916) Vicente Blasco Ibáñez
Welcome back Polio to the U.S.!

On 2022-08-18 4:35 p.m., Ash Wurthing wrote:
> On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 2:22:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>> On 2022-08-18 12:32 a.m., ME wrote:
>>>
>>> I see that dance has also started deleting original posts from his threads.
>> As you fucking well know, MEatpuppet, I can't delete posts from Google
>> Groups.
>>> Are they really that stupid?
>> I don't think even your fellow sphincters are stupid enough to believe you.
>
> Dunce
> (your "sphincter" lame deserved a tat and I have plenty more of that)
> by your own words and standards, you rank pretty lowly, you're as low-ranking as those you belittle it seems...
> I was thinking your sold your soul for Usenet tats-- but now I'm wonderin', did you ever have any dignity to trade away?
> Just sayin'!
>
> When marking something as spam with the abuse button first marks it as to be made invisible to the person reporting it-- if Google then does decide to remove it either by algorithm automatic removal or manual review and removal, then it will disappear completely from the Google archives and public view in Google Groups.

On 2022-08-18 4:35 p.m., Ash Wurthing wrote:
> On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 2:22:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>> On 2022-08-18 12:32 a.m., ME wrote:
>>>
>>> I see that dance has also started deleting original posts from his threads.
>> As you fucking well know, MEatpuppet, I can't delete posts from Google
>> Groups.
>>> Are they really that stupid?
>> I don't think even your fellow sphincters are stupid enough to believe you.
>
> Dunce
> (your "sphincter" lame deserved a tat and I have plenty more of that)
> by your own words and standards, you rank pretty lowly, you're as low-ranking as those you belittle it seems...

You're flattering yourself.

> I was thinking your sold your soul for Usenet tats-- but now I'm wonderin', did you ever have any dignity to trade away?
> Just sayin'!

> When marking something as spam with the abuse button first marks it as to be made invisible to the person reporting it--

I'm glad you've figured that out. Then you began reporting my posts,
like the MEatpuppet does?

> if Google then does decide to remove it either by algorithm automatic removal or manual review and removal, then it will disappear completely from the Google archives and public view in Google Groups.

So why did you guys lie and say I deleted that post?

Here's what looks like the deleted OP (from a non-deleted reply:)

On Thursday, October 28, 2021 at 8:19:54 PM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>
> In accordance with the Misses NancyGene's wishes, I've moved this
discussion to a new thread.
>
> On Friday, October 22, 2021 at 10:44:36 AM UTC-4, NancyGene wrote:
> > Get the fuck off this thread if you have nothing intelligent to say
about Elizabeth Barrett Browning or Robert Browning.
>
> I'd appreciate it if discussion in this thread be confined to Mr.
Wurthing's "Epic Flame War" against me.
>
> For background, Mr. Wurthing has posted yet another false story about
me on aapc, and I've asked him to correct it:
>
> On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 4:30:37 PM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
> > On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 4:03:05 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
> > > Epic Flame here!5!
> > > On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 2:47:47 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > And speaking of death fantasies.
> > > You mean George Dance's death fantasy about Mr Burrows?
> > You mean the one NGBS was peddling around here yesterday?
> >
> > <quote>
> > Epic Flame - Reddit Here!1!
> >
> > Did George J Dance wish death on a sick person in the hospital- and
just for criticizing him?! That's damned cold and damned screwed up
coming from someone saying they're the victim and the supposed "good guy".
> > </q>
> >
> > That turned out to be misinformation. Please update your story.

On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 4:51:06 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
> On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 7:35:13 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > ME wrote:
> > >
> > > I see that dance has also started deleting original posts from his threads.
> > > Are they really that stupid?
> > Again, several others have also deleted their posts.
> I have rarely deleted a post,

Did you delete your posts at the beginning of this thread?

usually if I'm replacing it with a revised post like in the collected collected poetry threads. The times I deleted something to remove it completely, I can probably count on one hand. I am rarely embarrassed by what I say, and I won't leave till I said what I came here to say. Y'all cannot go to your graves without knowing what you have made...
>
> DOOM I SAY...
> "The horseman on the white horse was clad in a showy and barbarous attire.... While his horse continued galloping, he was bending his bow in order to spread pestilence abroad. At his back swung the brass quiver filled with poisoned arrows, containing the germs of all diseases."
> "The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse" (1916) Vicente Blasco Ibáñez
> Welcome back Polio to the U.S.!

On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 5:47:58 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> On 2022-08-18 4:35 p.m., Ash Wurthing wrote:
> > On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 2:22:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >> On 2022-08-18 12:32 a.m., ME wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I see that dance has also started deleting original posts from his threads.
> >> As you fucking well know, MEatpuppet, I can't delete posts from Google
> >> Groups.
> >>> Are they really that stupid?
> >> I don't think even your fellow sphincters are stupid enough to believe you.
> >
> > Dunce
> > (your "sphincter" lame deserved a tat and I have plenty more of that)
> > by your own words and standards, you rank pretty lowly, you're as low-ranking as those you belittle it seems...
> You're flattering yourself.
> > I was thinking your sold your soul for Usenet tats-- but now I'm wonderin', did you ever have any dignity to trade away?
> > Just sayin'!
>
> > When marking something as spam with the abuse button first marks it as to be made invisible to the person reporting it--
> I'm glad you've figured that out. Then you began reporting my posts,
> like the MEatpuppet does?
> > if Google then does decide to remove it either by algorithm automatic removal or manual review and removal, then it will disappear completely from the Google archives and public view in Google Groups.
> So why did you guys lie and say I deleted that post?

They seem to make things up as they go along.

Will Dockery wrote:

> On Wednesday, August 17, 2022 at 8:57:11 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
>>
>> I see you bumping something about a jism gang, you must be talikin' about yourselves

> No, you're just confused again.

As Ash so often tends to be....

>> cause y'all get worked up when you buddy writes poems about jism!
>>
>> Now I would respond to more to your ass posts, but I have people waiting on me so I'm signing off to Rivendell and I'll leave you fools to your ruined Eregion. Jordy will be jealous, I'll be seeing friendly people, not vainly posting to no one here...

> Have fun.

**************************