If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
What it's like to interact with Snit - a video perspective
A video perspective of the experience one can look forward to when
interacting with Snit. In this video, Keith will be playing the role of Snit. The voice is a pretty close match, wouldn't you agree? Matt will be playing the role of myself and anyone else who's had the misfortune of dealing with Snit. Yes folks, someone who thinks with the logic of Snit; the keith. Just listen as they make a ****load of mistakes and ramble on, and then, try to link it all together. Uh huh. Just like Snit does with their obnoxious trolling replies and posts about various others. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAue1i58GOQ -- The worst of all deceptions is self-deception. -Plato |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
What it's like to interact with Snit - a video perspective
Gremlin wrote:
A video perspective of the experience one can look forward to when interacting with Snit. In this video, Keith will be playing the role of Snit. The voice is a pretty close match, wouldn't you agree? Matt will be playing the role of myself and anyone else who's had the misfortune of dealing with Snit. Yes folks, someone who thinks with the logic of Snit; the keith. Just listen as they make a ****load of mistakes and ramble on, and then, try to link it all together. Uh huh. Just like Snit does with their obnoxious trolling replies and posts about various others. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAue1i58GOQ Hey, let’s do a Zoom session and record it and share it with others! You can ask me whatever you want. And I get to do the same with you. What day and time works for you? Happy to do it. Would be fun! Heck, we can both post it to make sure all is fair and honest. Don’t trip over your laces. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
What it's like to interact with Snit - a video perspective
John Doe
Thu, 30 Jul 2020 06:47:46 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: Chronic nym-shifting deranged troll... Dumbass, how many times do you need to be told to learn to use a filter on your client? What point is there in responding and ADDING an additional newsgroup to your reply: From my post these newsgroups were selected: alt.computer.workshop,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp. sys.mac.advocacy,talk ..politics.guns,alt.comp.os.windows-10 And yours is: alt.computer.workshop,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp. sys.mac.advocacy,talk ..politics.guns,alt.comp.os.windows-10,free.spam I suspect you got confused, the free.spam should have been in the followup to section of your headers, dumb****. Otherwise, your reply makes no sense whatsoever, because, you ADDED an additional newsgroup to the collection. Either way, you're a dumb ****. User-Agent: Xnews/2006.08.05 Xnews does have working filtering code, and it's not difficult to setup. Learn to use your ****ing client. -- Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati - Possum Lodge Motto |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
What it's like to interact with Snit - a video perspective
Snit
Thu, 30 Jul 2020 07:25:42 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: John Doe wrote: Chronic nym-shifting deranged troll... Diesel / Gremlin / whatever other names he uses is flipping out. Ah yes, the flipping out routine. That's covered in the snitlist, too. Are you still going to tell us that everything written about you in the so called snitlist is completely untrue and otherwise bull**** written by your detractors to slime you? As well, You used one of your known lines with your asshat response, is why I'm asking. But I will still be happy to do a Zoom session with him. Would love it. He can try to impress me all he wants! He can repeat all his accusations and let me respond in real time. Snit, you avoid discussing anything you've been writing so far. I have no intentions to let David get a birds eye view of my location, inside or out. I'd have to be a ****ing idiot to think this video idea is entirely your doing. And, I see no possible benefit to doing this, other than providing David additional stalking information. Sounds like fun! You can't hold a conversation with me on usenet, I seriously doubt a video chat would be any different. Infact, it would be worse for you, because, your facial expressions would be available for reading and analysis when you responded to my questions, if you actually did so. You avoid them here, so I don't see why you wouldn't try the same ruse on zoom. With your facial expressions available on video when I ask my questions, you wouldn't be able to con anyone (not that you actually have) concerning any misunderstanding about the false accusations you've continued making against me. Not to mention your snide remarks concerning what you think I do/don't know. I'd just own you on video same as I already do on usenet. No question about it. But I bet he refuses. Yea.. another prediction right? Btw, check the headers before you respond, The previous dumbass added an additional newsgroup while they professed inability to setup a filter on their client. -- You want computer jokes? Ok: IBM, NEC, DEC, Microsoft... |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
What it's like to interact with Snit - a video perspective
Snit
Thu, 30 Jul 2020 07:25:41 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: Gremlin wrote: A video perspective of the experience one can look forward to when interacting with Snit. In this video, Keith will be playing the role of Snit. The voice is a pretty close match, wouldn't you agree? Matt will be playing the role of myself and anyone else who's had the misfortune of dealing with Snit. Yes folks, someone who thinks with the logic of Snit; the keith. Just listen as they make a ****load of mistakes and ramble on, and then, try to link it all together. Uh huh. Just like Snit does with their obnoxious trolling replies and posts about various others. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAue1i58GOQ Hey, let’s do a Zoom session and record it and share it with others! You can ask me whatever you want. And I get to do the same with you. Hey, that's not too bad of an idea, except for a few little problems I can think of off the top of my head. Snit, due to previous, and quite severe 'misunderstandings', I'm being *very* sarcastic by using the word 'little'. I do hope I've dumbed this down enough so that you understand without issue, but I won't bet on it. Anyways, here's a few of those little problems: 1) You lack the ability to have a discussion with me on usenet. Video wouldn't be any different, you'd most likely just talk over me as I responded to something you asked, or began asking you something. I'd let you do this, because my radio background already taught me that the audience isn't going to hear both of us well at the same time. 2) Based on previous interactions with David Brooks concerning videos and pictures which outright belong to me, or have shared copyright as a video with you would - being placed anywhere he likes, requiring me to file multiple dmca notifications all over again. 3) I'm really not too keen on providing David Brooks any video background of my shop. I have a real problem doing that, for what should be obvious reasons. as I realize you're clueless about that too, intentionally, I'll dumb this down further too: David Brooks has attempted to use video and pictures I've shared previously to stalk me. To find my current and actual meatspace, which if he had, would be shared as much as he could possibly share it. I have no reason to trust that a 'zoom' video with you wouldn't be abused by David Brooks shortly after you released it. Likely with your blessings for him to abuse as he sees fit. 4) I don't believe the video idea is an original one from you. I believe you had an individual make the suggestion. 5) The video result would be the same as the video I selected for this threads Creation. I'd be playing the role of Matt, and you'd be playing one of the callers who doesn't comprehend logic thought for a nanosecond. If theres anything i'm missing, or, otherwise left out, feel free to let me know. What day and time works for you? Happy to do it. Would be fun! Heck, we can both post it to make sure all is fair and honest. Ahh. Yes, both post it... rofl. Dude, you aren't honest so far on usenet, I have no reason to think that would change via video. The only thing video would do is provide David more information on me. And, I just don't see any advantage for me to do that. -- My sister-in-law sat on my glasses and broke them. It was my own fault. I should have taken them off. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
What it's like to interact with Snit - a video perspective
On Aug 4, 2020 at 6:12:35 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote:
Snit Thu, 30 Jul 2020 07:25:41 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: Gremlin wrote: A video perspective of the experience one can look forward to when interacting with Snit. In this video, Keith will be playing the role of Snit. The voice is a pretty close match, wouldn't you agree? Matt will be playing the role of myself and anyone else who's had the misfortune of dealing with Snit. Yes folks, someone who thinks with the logic of Snit; the keith. Just listen as they make a ****load of mistakes and ramble on, and then, try to link it all together. Uh huh. Just like Snit does with their obnoxious trolling replies and posts about various others. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAue1i58GOQ Hey, let’s do a Zoom session and record it and share it with others! You can ask me whatever you want. And I get to do the same with you. Hey, that's not too bad of an idea, except for a few little problems I can think of off the top of my head. Snit, due to previous, and quite severe 'misunderstandings', I'm being *very* sarcastic by using the word 'little'. I do hope I've dumbed this down enough so that you understand without issue, but I won't bet on it. Here come your excuses for not having a Zoom session. The reality is you fear being utterly humiliated in a new medium. You clearly have a lot of trouble understanding the written word, but for you to show you cannot understand interactive voice even with a video would be even worse for you. Anyways, here's a few of those little problems: Below you project and troll. Bot interested. 1) You lack the ability to have a discussion with me on usenet. Video wouldn't be any different, you'd most likely just talk over me as I responded to something you asked, or began asking you something. I'd let you do this, because my radio background already taught me that the audience isn't going to hear both of us well at the same time. I assure you I would be happy to give you plenty of time to dig your hole. It would be fun to watch it, really! 2) Based on previous interactions with David Brooks concerning videos and pictures which outright belong to me, or have shared copyright as a video with you would - being placed anywhere he likes, requiring me to file multiple dmca notifications all over again. It would be open. You or I can use it as we want. Others likely would. Whatever. I have no fear. 3) I'm really not too keen on providing David Brooks any video background of my shop. I have a real problem doing that, for what should be obvious reasons. as I realize you're clueless about that too, intentionally, I'll dumb this down further too: Zoom has the ability to have a backdrop. Does not look great but who cares? I would be happy to teach you how. And you can use a curtain if you do not like that or cannot figure it out. It is not that hard but it might be a bit advanced for a beginner. David Brooks has attempted to use video and pictures I've shared previously to stalk me. To find my current and actual meatspace, which if he had, would be shared as much as he could possibly share it. I have no reason to trust that a 'zoom' video with you wouldn't be abused by David Brooks shortly after you released it. Likely with your blessings for him to abuse as he sees fit. You want to blame David for you being afraid to have a Zoom discussion. Whatever. 4) I don't believe the video idea is an original one from you. I believe you had an individual make the suggestion. I did not create the idea of video chats. Good for you to figure that out! But nobody suggested I make this offer to you. Heck, you can even invite Carroll to back you up... after all you would need it. I would love it. 5) The video result would be the same as the video I selected for this threads Creation. I'd be playing the role of Matt, and you'd be playing one of the callers who doesn't comprehend logic thought for a nanosecond. And yet you, not I, are the one who is refusing. Again, you do not owe me -- but the excuses you give are hilarious! If theres anything i'm missing, or, otherwise left out, feel free to let me know. How funny your excuses are. Face it -- you are simply scared. You could not push the crap you do in real time as easily as you do in a forum like this. It is also why Carroll will NEVER agree to such a conversation. You two troll a lot alike in many ways. What day and time works for you? Happy to do it. Would be fun! Heck, we can both post it to make sure all is fair and honest. Ahh. Yes, both post it... rofl. Dude, you aren't honest so far on usenet, I have no reason to think that would change via video. The only thing video would do is provide David more information on me. And, I just don't see any advantage for me to do that. He would see your face... and hear your voice. He already knows how badly you understand things and how poorly you support your claims. It would be fun to show it in a different medium. But you will not. That is for certain. It was trivial to predict. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
What it's like to interact with Snit - a video perspective
Gremlin wrote:
some thing wrote: Diesel / Gremlin / whatever other names he uses is flipping out. Ah yes, the flipping out routine. That's covered in the snitlist, too. Are you still going to tell us that everything written about you in the so called snitlist is completely untrue and otherwise bull**** written by your detractors to slime you? That thing will claim that no one has been able to quote it lying. Ever. It lies without shame, man. Lying is pretty-much all that it does. -- "Many claim, for example, that I have lied... but *none* can find any example of this. Not a single example." - some thing, lying shamelessly (but no one can quote it lying) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
What it's like to interact with Snit - a video perspective
Snit wrote:
On Aug 4, 2020 at 6:12:35 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote: Snit Thu, 30 Jul 2020 07:25:41 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: Gremlin wrote: A video perspective of the experience one can look forward to when interacting with Snit. In this video, Keith will be playing the role of Snit. The voice is a pretty close match, wouldn't you agree? Matt will be playing the role of myself and anyone else who's had the misfortune of dealing with Snit. Yes folks, someone who thinks with the logic of Snit; the keith. Just listen as they make a ****load of mistakes and ramble on, and then, try to link it all together. Uh huh. Just like Snit does with their obnoxious trolling replies and posts about various others. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAue1i58GOQ Hey, let’s do a Zoom session and record it and share it with others! You can ask me whatever you want. And I get to do the same with you. Hey, that's not too bad of an idea, except for a few little problems I can think of off the top of my head. Snit, due to previous, and quite severe 'misunderstandings', I'm being *very* sarcastic by using the word 'little'. I do hope I've dumbed this down enough so that you understand without issue, but I won't bet on it. Here come your excuses for not having a Zoom session. The reality is you fear being utterly humiliated in a new medium. You clearly have a lot of trouble understanding the written word, but for you to show you cannot understand interactive voice even with a video would be even worse for you. No response from Gremlin AKA Diesel. Anyways, here's a few of those little problems: Below you project and troll. Bot interested. 1) You lack the ability to have a discussion with me on usenet. Video wouldn't be any different, you'd most likely just talk over me as I responded to something you asked, or began asking you something. I'd let you do this, because my radio background already taught me that the audience isn't going to hear both of us well at the same time. I assure you I would be happy to give you plenty of time to dig your hole. It would be fun to watch it, really! No response from Gremlin AKA Diesel. 2) Based on previous interactions with David Brooks concerning videos and pictures which outright belong to me, or have shared copyright as a video with you would - being placed anywhere he likes, requiring me to file multiple dmca notifications all over again. It would be open. You or I can use it as we want. Others likely would. Whatever. I have no fear. No response from Gremlin AKA Diesel. 3) I'm really not too keen on providing David Brooks any video background of my shop. I have a real problem doing that, for what should be obvious reasons. as I realize you're clueless about that too, intentionally, I'll dumb this down further too: Zoom has the ability to have a backdrop. Does not look great but who cares? I would be happy to teach you how. No response from Gremlin AKA Diesel. Maybe he thinks the lesson is too advanced for him. And you can use a curtain if you do not like that or cannot figure it out. It is not that hard but it might be a bit advanced for a beginner. No response from Gremlin AKA Diesel. David Brooks has attempted to use video and pictures I've shared previously to stalk me. To find my current and actual meatspace, which if he had, would be shared as much as he could possibly share it. I have no reason to trust that a 'zoom' video with you wouldn't be abused by David Brooks shortly after you released it. Likely with your blessings for him to abuse as he sees fit. You want to blame David for you being afraid to have a Zoom discussion. Whatever. 4) I don't believe the video idea is an original one from you. I believe you had an individual make the suggestion. I did not create the idea of video chats. Good for you to figure that out! But nobody suggested I make this offer to you. No response from Gremlin AKA Diesel. Heck, you can even invite Carroll to back you up... after all you would need it. I would love it. 5) The video result would be the same as the video I selected for this threads Creation. I'd be playing the role of Matt, and you'd be playing one of the callers who doesn't comprehend logic thought for a nanosecond. And yet you, not I, are the one who is refusing. Again, you do not owe me -- but the excuses you give are hilarious! No response from Gremlin AKA Diesel. If theres anything i'm missing, or, otherwise left out, feel free to let me know. How funny your excuses are. Face it -- you are simply scared. You could not push the crap you do in real time as easily as you do in a forum like this. It is also why Carroll will NEVER agree to such a conversation. You two troll a lot alike in many ways. What day and time works for you? Happy to do it. Would be fun! Heck, we can both post it to make sure all is fair and honest. Ahh. Yes, both post it... rofl. Dude, you aren't honest so far on usenet, I have no reason to think that would change via video. The only thing video would do is provide David more information on me. And, I just don't see any advantage for me to do that. He would see your face... and hear your voice. He already knows how badly you understand things and how poorly you support your claims. It would be fun to show it in a different medium. But you will not. That is for certain. It was trivial to predict. No response from Gremlin AKA Diesel. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
What it's like to interact with Snit - a video perspective
Snit
Wed, 05 Aug 2020 01:44:08 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: On Aug 4, 2020 at 6:12:34 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote: Snit Thu, 30 Jul 2020 07:25:42 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: John Doe wrote: Chronic nym-shifting deranged troll... Diesel / Gremlin / whatever other names he uses is flipping out. Ah yes, the flipping out routine. Can you do something other than that? It's not my routine, so how would I know what else you can/cannot do, snit. It's one of several comments you're known for making to avoid answering questions or otherwise engage in two way productive dialogue. That's covered in the snitlist, too. Remember when you denied how much Carroll manipulated you... now you brag about it. The snitlist as it's known has nothing to do with carroll. it's a collection of quotes written by various posters, all about, you. And you're well aware of that, too. You've even gone so far as to claim it's a pile of forgeries by carroll and otherwise, completely made up bull**** about you designed to make people dislike you before they have the chance to get to know anything about you. Atleast, that's what you'd very much like for myself and others to believe is the case. I know some of the people who's quotes are part of the snitlist, too. I respect their professional opinions. And none of them, as far as I've been able to determine so far are 'forgies' of any kind, either. The people credited for writing the post sections on the list are not denying they wrote the comments, Snit. I've yet to read a single post from someone quoted on that list denying they wrote the material in question. The problem is that, well, I can show examples of your interactions with myself alone that covers almost all, if not all of the examples, on that snitlist. If the contents of the list were nothing more than a slimeballs attempt to besmirch you, no actual examples of you doing what you're accused of would exist. But, they do. You actually are as described by various people who's quotes are on that list. The MIDs are included for each post. From those MIDs, you can pull the entire thread in full context to see that nothing being quoted about you was either forged or otherwise, untrue, or, posted by a forger. Not a single example on the snitlist is something a normal adult would be striving to achieve, but then we have you. Not only do you work hard to ensure the accuracy of the so called snit list, you take a certain amount of pride in your trolling. I really don't know what it is you actually get from your interactions and well earned usenet reputation, I really don't. Alas, I don't claim to understand everything all the time either. Computers make much more sense to me than the behavior of most humans... And we've already seen how quick you'll accuse Carroll of a post, even if there's no ****ing way in hell he wrote it. Take your recent accusation towards me concerning a reply I wrote - Despite the reply being signed with Gremlin over Diesel, the actual contents of the reply clealy indicated who the author of the reply was. You've been using the Diesel/Gremlin thing as a smokescreen to cover up the fact you really *cannot read well*; and I cite the recent, first post I did with Gremlin as an example of that. That post was riding you over mistakes you made concerning MY AZ program and it's algorithm. We went round and round over that for a period of time, too. So.. If you actually read my reply, before you opted to respond with a "you're carroll and/or a sock", you would have known who wrote it. It becomes quite evident, even for you at this point, you have serious problems understanding the written word. You can't hide it, you can't deflect from it. You continue to demonstrate your life long learning disability along with the maturity of a small child with almost every single of your replies to myself and various others. You lie about people, and when caught doing it, outright caught, you still continue to claim you were misunderstood; that you didn't lie, except that well, you did. And I'm not writing about little white lies here - I'm writing about your efforts to sell a story that I had anything whatsoever to do with the usenet bot that floods here. A bot, I've noticed has gone silent since I started really grilling you about that particular set of lies. It's probably just a coincidence, or, maybe who ever is behind the bot has taken some of what I've written and checked it out, seen for themselves that I haven't been bsing and aren't as interested in taking unnecessary risk to themselves for a little usenet entertainment. I could very well be wrong though. I do hope I am. As, well, if the bot owner has smartened up, and I eventually do learn who's behind it, I can't exactly drill them retroactively and not look like a total ****ing asshole to my peers as I did so. If you had peers, you'd understand that concept. Suffice to say, peer pressure is real. The struggle is real mannnn! Are you still going to tell us that everything written about you in the so called snitlist is completely untrue and otherwise bull**** written by your detractors to slime you? I will note I have responded to this many times and it would be great if you learned to understand what you read. Remember when you used to claim you did? You're welcome to continue repeating your bs story about me, but don't expect to make very many sales, and do expect to have to accept returns due to a fraudulent transaction on your part, Snit. Snit, the problem is, myself and others have been checking out the contents of that list. The MIDs have been provided for all the quotes. They couldn't all be carroll socks, on your best day - Especially considering that I've known several individuals quoted on that list for a very long time, and I have a great amount of respect for their professional opinions. I have no reason to doubt them. You've given me no reason whatsoever to take anything you write at face value without supporting evidence to confirm what you write is true. You've provided far too many examples where this isn't the case. And, you're still trying to defend your bot post accusations towards me. Although, as "projected" by the snitlist, you've been attempting to change it into a misunderstanding. There was no misunderstanding on my end at any point in time, and you didn't misunderstand the words you used when you specifically claimed I was called out for having it, and later clarified I had the executable version of the program. You event went so far as to ask a question about how I got the code to the bot; would I ever tell. As if to directly claim what you wrote previous to that question had already been well established as the truth. At no time, was anything you wrote about my involvement with the bot true. There are no posts calling me out, and no posts where I clarified I had the bot in compiled form. You would have shared MIDs to them by now to properly shut me up about this - but you can't very well share what doesn't exist. Posting an invalid MID (one you made up) won't work for those of us who can search using them. And, I'm sure even you realize that. So, no MIDs to support what you claimed took place he http://al.howardknight.net/?ID=159159190100 Diesel made it clear he had access not just to the output of the bot but to the code itself. When called out on this he clarified it was merely the compiled code he had: ----- Do you think when you disassemble something that you're provided the original source code that was compiled/assembled by the author? You aren't, what you're given looks nothing like the original source code, but it still tells you *everything* about the program. ----- So how did Diesel get a copy of the program, compiled or not? My guess: he will NEVER say. *** end paste You made it up, and tried to use something completely unrelated that you quoted out of context to try and support your accusations. It doesn't and you can't. And, you've been trying to deflect/divert and otherwise project, basically, anything to avoid answering my questions about what you wrote. You've provided 14 MIDs where you repeat yourself by claiming if I wasn't writing about the floodbot specifically, what was I writing about. Both Apd and myself answered that question, multiple times, for you. You quickly dismissed BOTH OF US because what we told you didn't support your narrative. Sorry, snit, but I know damn well what I meant by what I wrote, and so does everyone else who doesn't have a reading comprehension problem. Which is why Apd told you the same thing I did concerning what you quoted me out of context above: Message-ID: "Snit" wrote: On 6/11/20 5:19 PM, Apd wrote: "Steve Carroll - fretwizzer" wrote: [...] you can see he's doing the same thing with Diesel right now. Yup. Diesel is playing a very immature game. He insists he meant some code other than the code to Carroll's Usenet flood bot. OK. Maybe I missed the context -- but if so then what code did he mean. He never says. That shoots down his own argument. He was speaking about code in general, not any particular piece of software. He said as much. [...] So if I ever directly said Diesel *WAS* helping Carroll I rescind that. You should perhaps reply to a post of his with that. [...] We all make mistakes. I simply cannot see why it matters so much to Diesel. None of us like to be accused of doing what we are not. ** end And yes, for the record, you did accuse me of helping carroll in the same post as the one you made up about my involvement with the floodbot here. If what I wrote isn't what has taken place Snit, why does Apd feel the same about your post as myself? We both agree, you falsely accused me of something I didn't have anything to do with. Here's more of the post I've been sharing, Snit. The lines above what I shared previously, actually. As you and everyone else can see, when I provide more of your post, it's even more obvious you lied about the entire thing, and I'm starting to suspect you knew you were lying when you wrote it. Let's get specific with a few more of them now. "Diesel made it clear he could find the IP of the person running the bot. And he made it clear it would be easy for him to make a Sandman-like time table of posting, but showing Carroll and the bot and myself." I've already checked my sent items, so I've already verified for myself what I actually wrote about the bots IP address. And, what I wrote does NOT support what you claimed, there. So, that's a lie. Wanna start keeping count? It's just additional lies, all intended to support the primary lie you tried to sell - That I had the bot itself, in compiled code form no less. That's a lie, snit. an unproven lie, written by you about me. "Was he lying when he said that? Maybe. But I do not think so. And if he was merely lying he would not have access to the program itself, which he makes VERY clear he did." When you take into consideration that at no point in time did I make it clear I could find the bots IP address, I'd have to say I wasn't lying, no; you're simply making that up. So, that's lie number 2! Now, on we go to your claim that I made it very clear I had access to the program itself. Where are the MIDs which support your accusation, Snit? There aren't any. So, that's lie number 3! "Diesel and Carroll were trolling together." We've covered this, you backpeddled with Apd, but haven't done as Apd advised and made your retraction clear with me. You know, the one you accused. I'm pretty sure "trolling together" means I was helping Carroll in snit language. Proof: [...] So if I ever directly said Diesel *WAS* helping Carroll I rescind that. You should perhaps reply to a post of his with that. "The bot goes silent." Being as I have the bot filtered with my client, I wouldn't know from using my client whether the bot has gone silent or not. Since you started with your bs story concerning my involvement with it though, I have been double checking the newsgroup via GG where nothing is filtered. In any event, whatever the bot is or isn't doing has nothing to do with me, as I've maintained all along - despite your unfounded (read: lies) to the contrary. So, that's lie number 4! Snit. "Diesel then says if the bot is just turned off he will let it slide. "Does that sound like Diesel to you?" I did state that, yes. As far as what you think I sound like, quite recently, you claimed Carroll was responsible for a post I authored; despite the post riding you about my AZ program; you still tried to claim it was Carroll himself and/or a sock. All to cover up the fact you have a severe, well demonstrated, reading comprehension problem. There's no other possible reason for you to have assumed Carroll wrote a post that was riding you about your ****ups with my AZ program. And he also say this: ----- ----- It needs to be recoded anyway, it's a seriously **** poor example of writing software. ----- ** end share Indeed, I did. I provided my expert opinion on the bot. Yep. It's a piece of ****, and if it's author can't write code/script any better than that, they shouldn't even bother. I've seen better code samples from a third grader. I am always open to reviewing new evidence though, so if you can provide MIDs to posts where people are questioning the snitlist by claiming they didn't write what is quoted on that list, feel free to share those MIDS and I will spend the time to review them as I can. And, I'll get back to you on what I learned as a result. [snip] Snit, you avoid discussing anything you've been writing so far. A direct lie on your part. But not surprising. Obviously, it's not a direct lie on my part. How many times have I been asking you to apologize for your bull**** story about my involvement with the bot now? And, that's not even the only lie you've told about me since you got here. It's just one i'm holding onto for the time being. I've got several more, and i'll introduce them as time goes on. [snip] Isn't your business known? Yep. I've got quite the reputation as a "computer wizard" in this "small town" Would you like to read some news articles about me? Or, would that be bragging or otherwise trying to impress you, Snit? I seek clarification. You lie, I know you lie, I have an issue with your lying about me specifically and I just don't see how a video chat with you is going to resolve that. I can see how it might be a benefit to David for stalking purposes, though. Unless you're going to tell me the video call is going to be different somehow? If so, please, enlighten me, how this would be any different than our "interactions" here on usenet so far, Snit. I'd have to be a ****ing idiot to think this video idea is entirely your doing. I did not come up with the idea of video chats, but that does not prove you are NOT, as you say, "a ****ing idiot". I didn't say you came up with the idea of video chats, moron. Especially considering I was already doing this, albeit across the local network in highschool with windows 3.11 and novell systems in the early 90s; before 'webcamming' over the internet took off. Harddiskless 386sx machines no less. They booted off their nics into a novell login prompt, snit. Originally setup on a large token ring network. I later assisted the school in switching out all of the networking gear from token ring to cat5. That meant the switches, as well as all of the network cards in each machine; a four floor building with a lot of computers inside, Snit. A rather large, isolated, non internet aware, network. And it wasn't a matter of popping the case open and switching out the card and moving onto the next machine. The card had to be configured via jumpers for each install. And, you had to run a setup.exe file to configure the rest of the eeprom to tell the nic to load an OS from the network, not the local hard drive; since the majority of the computers on the network didn't have any hard drives. I'll tell you a funny story about a prank I pulled with that network if you'd like, I just want to make sure you won't accuse me of bragging before I do. It is an example of hacking AND cracking (yes, they are related, but actually different subjects). If you're interested just let me know in your no doubt, very short, and snarky reply evading everything I wrote, as usual. What I wrote, and mistakenly assumed would be clear was this video idea you've presented isn't entirely your own idea. In other words, I believe David suggested this, or you asked his opinion and he suggested you should make the offer. He's been dying to see what my lab looks like, Snit. I've held a very old video over his head for years. He's solicited the help of several people in cracking it open for him, too. So far, the algorithm I originally developed as a single digit age kid on a tandy color computer 3 is still holding. As well, it should. It's reasonably strong crypto, done right. Yep, I've been porting it along as I moved from system to system growing up snit, that's how long I've been writing serious code. It would give you a chance to have a discussion you keep begging to have. And it would be fun. That doesn't make any sense, Snit. You're unwilling so far, atleast, to answer the majority of my questions here on usenet. Why would a video chat be any different? You can't hold a conversation with me on usenet, I seriously doubt a video chat would be any different. Your comprehension might be better on video chat than on text. I would love to test that. My comprehension is fine. I do find it rather amusing that you're basically trying to throw something I wrote about you back at me, though. My question for that is, has that ever worked out with a positive result, even a single time, for you? You've been trying that ruse for awhile now. Quite telling. I really struck a chord didn't I...I bet if I were to go exploring a little further, there's probably a junction box and/or a mainbus of nerves I could get results from probing in the same general area. Heh, I'll have to ponder on that more - mental note to self if you will. Infact, it would be worse for you, because, your facial expressions would be available for reading and analysis when you responded to my questions, if you actually did so. And yet it is you, not I, who is saying no to this chat. I welcome it. I think it would be a hoot! It's your idea, snit. I don't have the same opinions of this idea as you do. I don't see how it would be any different than usenet has been so far - Why would you refuse to answer my questions over usenet, but be willing to do so via a video call? That doesn't make any sense. Especially when you've stated you will share the resulting video. Well, I'd be asking you the same questions and homing in on what you wrote, specifically, just as I've done here on usenet. I have no reason to think your avoidance/projection and diversion efforts would be any different - just easier to nail you on screen is all. But, no point in doing that either. I've already been able to establish that you're a liar who won't/can't backup what he writes about other people, and I didn't need a video chat with you to do that. So, explain what you think would be different about this, snit, and I'll give it more consideration. I'm guessing your available pretty much any time of day or night, right? Well, I don't have such freetime luxuries as that. So, if you want to do a video chat, I have to see a real, valid, and useful answer as to why I should humour you. I'd have to take time away from something else; or dig into my own personal time as I do when I respond to you on usenet. Either way, I have to give up something to do this, due to the fact I WORK FOR A LIVING, so what's in it for me, Snit? What can I possibly gain by interacting with you over video? But I also expect you to not do it. You do not owe me, of course but your excuses are quite telling! Heh, just like the snitlist claims: 10. Lies by reversing implication, e.g., "Firetrucks are red, this apple is red, therefore this apple is a firetruck." You avoid them here, so I don't see why you wouldn't try the same ruse on zoom. With your facial expressions available on video when I ask my questions, you wouldn't be able to con anyone (not that you actually have) concerning any misunderstanding about the false accusations you've continued making against me. Not to mention your snide remarks concerning what you think I do/don't know. I'd just own you on video same as I already do on usenet. No question about it. And this is part of the reason you will not do what I think would be fun. LOL! Heh, answer my aforementioned questions snit, and I'll take your request more seriously. I bet Carroll pretends to believe you. I don't even know what you mean by that. I predict that instead of explaining what you meant, you'll claim I have a problem understanding what I read instead and leave it at that. But I bet he refuses. Yea.. another prediction right? And a correct one. It is not like you are hard to predict... or the first to troll me! Well snit, I'm not going to jump off a 100 story building just because someone asked me to do so either. It's easy to predict i'm not suicidal and realize, I can't fly like a bird. It's also easy to predict that I know the flight itself isn't the problem, it's the rather sudden stop at the end which ruins my otherwise, especially, fantastic day. If you noticed a Carlin resemblence, it was intentional. If you didn't, you need to experience the Carlin. A man beyond his years in wisdom, and DAMN GOOD comedy. RIP. (1937-2008) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IvmVqGycEo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hy-sVByUHqE Btw, check the headers before you respond, The previous dumbass added an additional newsgroup while they professed inability to setup a filter on their client. As predictable as you tend to be, I will say I did not expect you to openly speak about how you feel you are a "dumbass" when you add groups. See, you CAN be surprising still. Heh. Snit, you really are making this too easy for me. I'd prefer a challenge. You bore me. Message-ID: XnsAC0A19958B19AHT1@WQfND4ubf5P1A5ycOs38eyNyCr69n S17N8.45P That's my original post which started this thread. Message-ID: Is jackass joes post. With the addition of another newsgroup, free.spam. Tell us all again how you have no reading comprehension problem. You accused me of being carroll in another post, although even a semi literate individual with severe learning disabilities would have known Gremlin=Diesel NOT Gremlin=Carroll. And now, you're directly accusing ME of adding an additional newsgroup to this thread. I didn't, the asshat I was trying warn you to watch out for, did. And there you go, trying to spin what I wrote into something else entirely, much like an immature child. Care to talk about it over Zoom Talk about what Snit? it's obvious what childish **** you just tried to pull there. I bet not. What would be the difference between how you fail to address questions asked of you here, and take responsibility for things you've written here vs that of having a video chat with you, Snit? How would the video chat be any different? Are you going to answer the questions I've asked via usenet on video? You aren't answering them here.. So... If not, what's the point in the video chat? I don't know why you bother trying to limit your reply to a single newsgroup... I'm just going to fix it with my reply that quotes yours, so, uhh you aren't going to be running out from underneath my spotlight, cockroach. I selected these newsgroups for a reason, specifically for you, snit. Please, leave the headers alone, ok? -- Let me control the world's oxygen supply and I don't care who makes the laws. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
What it's like to interact with Snit - a video perspective
chrisv
Wed, 05 Aug 2020 11:57:48 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: Gremlin wrote: some thing wrote: Diesel / Gremlin / whatever other names he uses is flipping out. Ah yes, the flipping out routine. That's covered in the snitlist, too. Are you still going to tell us that everything written about you in the so called snitlist is completely untrue and otherwise bull**** written by your detractors to slime you? That thing will claim that no one has been able to quote it lying. Ever. I know. It continues to try and use that same ruse with me. Despite my catching it directly, in all kinds of lies. it's best one so far is the accusation that I had anything to do with the bot it's so fascinated with and wants to discuss so badly. Squirrel! It lies without shame, man. Lying is pretty-much all that it does. Sadly, I've noticed this. I prefer not to pre-judge, so I just gave snit all the rope it wanted to hang itself with. I just had no idea how much would be taken. Might have to start on another roll and bond them together. S/h/n/its going deep into the hole. -- When cows laugh, does milk come out of their nose? |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
What it's like to interact with Snit - a video perspective
Snit
Wed, 05 Aug 2020 01:52:31 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: [snip] Hey, that's not too bad of an idea, except for a few little problems I can think of off the top of my head. Snit, due to previous, and quite severe 'misunderstandings', I'm being *very* sarcastic by using the word 'little'. I do hope I've dumbed this down enough so that you understand without issue, but I won't bet on it. Here come your excuses for not having a Zoom session. excuses? The reality is you fear being utterly humiliated in a new medium. You clearly have a lot of trouble understanding the written word, but for you to show you cannot understand interactive voice even with a video would be even worse for you. I don't fear anything of the sort, but, I do agree, one of us has a severe reading comprehension problem. Let's see an example of it he Message-ID: http://al.howardknight.net/?ID=159667571100 This is what you were provided from the AZ documentation, fully explaining the algorithm: ENCODING IN THE AZ FORMAT EXPLAINED: Step 1. Determine the ASCII value of the character we intend to encode Step 2. Set A1 and A2 variables at the ascii value for A (On the IBM platform that value is 65) Set counter to 0. Step 3. Check to see if counter is equal to the ascii value obtained in Step 1. if so, convert A1 and A2, each to a character. Combine them in reverse order, as in A2 A1. This is our 2 byte encoded "AZ" format. Write this to the output file and return to Step 1. If the counter and the ascii value do not match, add 1 to A1. If A1 goes past the ascii value for Z (which is 90 on IBM), reset it to A (65 on IBM) and add 1 to A2. Add 1 to the counter and repeat Step 3. DECODING IN THE AZ FORMAT EXPLAINED: Step 1. Determine the "AZ" code to process. (As in read it from a file or a device, be sure to read in two characters :-)) Step 2. Set A1 and A2 variables at the ascii value for A (On the IBM platform that value is 65) Set counter to 0. Step 3. Convert A1 and A2, each to a character. Combine them in reverse order, as in A2 A1. This is a test "AZ" code to match with the one we read in, If they match, convert the counter into its character value and write it to the device or file (we have found the match, and the original code, we can now return to step 1 for more "AZ" codes). If they do not match, add one to the counter, and A1, if A1 is greater then 90, reset it to 65 and add one to A2. Return to step 3. If the counter hits 255, then no possible match has been found, Return to step 1. And this is your reply. I've also included the entire thread so anyone else can see for themselves how bad your comprehension actually is. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!se...er.workshop/az $20snit%7Csort:date/alt.computer.workshop/T5-Mammb0IA/SIvvu0IxBQAJ Message-ID: http://al.howardknight.net/?ID=159658625100 OK, looking at the encoding provided by Diesel... seems odd. Could be my lack of understanding in places, but clearly he also has some areas of confusion. ----- ENCODING IN THE AZ FORMAT EXPLAINED: Step 1. Determine the ASCII value of the character we intend to encode ----- Presumably this is just the first character. Then the second. Then the third. Until we get to the end. In simple language: Repeat with theCharacter from 1 to count of characters in theText Maybe it is count -1 since he seems to look at two characters at a time (though he never really says that). But so far so good. ----- Step 2. Set A1 and A2 variables at the ascii value for A (On the IBM platform that value is 65) Set counter to 0. ----- This is odd. Why not just set A1 and A2 to 65 given how that is ALWAYS the ASCII value of "A". This is true not only of 7 bit ASCII, but also 8 bit (extended) ASCII. So to use our simple language it is just: Set A1 to 65 Set A2 to 65 Set Counter to 0 So far so good. Ish. Why not just say that? ----- Step 3. Check to see if counter is equal to the ascii value obtained in Step 1. if so, convert A1 and A2, each to a character. Combine them in reverse order, as in A2 A1. This is our 2 byte encoded "AZ" format. Write this to the output file and return to Step 1. If the counter and the ascii value do not match, add 1 to A1. If A1 goes past the ascii value for Z (which is 90 on IBM), reset it to A (65 on IBM) and add 1 to A2. Add 1 to the counter and repeat Step 3. ------ This is where things get weird, at least to me. The Counter is set to the ASCII value of A, and then in the next round to the value of B. But with the A1 and A2 he is just rotating them 1 (similar to what I said with ROT-13 but only one character). And he has the wrap-around... so "A" becomes "B", "B" becomes "C".... "Z" becomes "A". But he has no such wrap around described for the counter... so after the first 26 additions to the Counter the value of Counter goes past the values of A-Z and would never match the ASCII value of a character. Seems the counter would have to be reset. And having the counter and comparing it to the value really adds very little except the occasional "bumping" of a character to rotate more than once. Oh, and does he ever say to look at the next character? He again talks about the ASCII value on "IBM", as if a "American Standard Code for Information Interchange" would be different on different systems when it is, by definition, a "standard". Seems amazingly odd a programmer would not know this... not putting Diesel down here but I am curious as to what he was thinking when he wrote that! Anyway, seems the counter needs to go back to the value of "A" (65) but he never says that. Again, maybe I am missing something. Diesel, can you explain? ----- As you can see, the AZ format is really not that hard to code for other programs such as OffLine Mail Readers and the like. ----- At least from what I can tell, and I might be wrong, you did not describe it correctly. *** end paste As various others in the thread all point out to you, the only one who has the problem with understanding things concerning AZ was and still is, you. And, only you. Everyone else understood the material I shared, except for you. And as anyone can see in the post here, everytime you ****up and don't understand something (which was a lot in this case), you try and make the other person share some/all of the blame. It's never your fault. Except, here, it clearly was; and various others even corrected your efforts to try and pin anything on me. I rest my case. mic drop 3) I'm really not too keen on providing David Brooks any video background of my shop. I have a real problem doing that, for what should be obvious reasons. as I realize you're clueless about that too, intentionally, I'll dumb this down further too: Zoom has the ability to have a backdrop. Does not look great but who cares? I would be happy to teach you how. Thanks, but, I sometimes use Zoom for clients, so I already know how to use it. G Heck, you can even invite Carroll to back you up... after all you would need it. I would love it. I don't need Carroll for anything. 5) The video result would be the same as the video I selected for this threads Creation. I'd be playing the role of Matt, and you'd be playing one of the callers who doesn't comprehend logic thought for a nanosecond. And yet you, not I, are the one who is refusing. Again, you do not owe me -- but the excuses you give are hilarious! Yep, I have no real interest in wasting my time to interact with you via video if the results are going to be the same as they already are on usenet. If you aren't willing to answer my questions here, there's absolutely no logical reason to assume you'd act any differently via a video call. No excuses, it's just how it is. How funny your excuses are. Face it -- you are simply scared. You could not push the crap you do in real time as easily as you do in a forum like this. It is also why Carroll will NEVER agree to such a conversation. I'm not scared of anything, Snit. Ahh. Yes, both post it... rofl. Dude, you aren't honest so far on usenet, I have no reason to think that would change via video. The only thing video would do is provide David more information on me. And, I just don't see any advantage for me to do that. He would see your face... and hear your voice. He already knows how badly you understand things and how poorly you support your claims. It would be fun to show it in a different medium. He's already seen my face and already knows my voice. I'm not concerned with that. Actually, snit, here's what he's written about me: Dustin and I have been in contact by email. He knows full well my 'agenda' and I hope that the skills he has learnt whilst a really bad boy will enable him to track down any malpractice at Annex and/or Dogagent. I just hope that my judgement is justified - I really do believe in what I call 'the greater consciousness of mankind' or what others sometimes call the Holy Spirit. Time will tell! g On MS groups, he's just playing the same game as me! wink= That's from one of the emails David sent me, Snit. It's dated from 2007. So, David has known about me and my past for a very long time. I can assure you, he's keeping you very much in the dark concerning me, Snit. I continue to show great restraint by not taking things outside of usenet and giving you a well deserved and proper skull****ing at this point. As far back as 2007 Snit, David doesn't deny I can do this to you. It's WHY he reached out to me. He becomes quite the impatient ****ing pest in the emails as times goes on too, Snit. I'm not doing what he wants done 'fast enough'; it starts with answering a few technical questions; and he's fact checking me (doesn't know I'm aware of this); I pass (obviously), I confirm my identity (he asks me directly if I'm also known as Raid formally of the SLAM virus writing group. I confirm that I am) and things go on from there. He wants my help, and by help, he wants me to break into gear he doesn't own, and he knows I can do this because he's read about my already having done it, lots and lots of times. He just wants me to do it again, despite the fact i'm a retired blackhat who's a grayhat now, as I explained to him via email. As I've tried to explain to him, over a ****ing decade later, on usenet. David didn't have any problems with me, OR HHI Snit, (Yes, I told him about HHI via email, way back in 2007) until he knew for certain he wasn't going to be able to convince me to do anything malicious to those sites, period. Full stop. I wasn't going to do what he wanted me to do. So, to get my attention, outside of email, he tried to dox me on usenet by publishing a gsv of what he thought was my house all over usenet. It wasn't restricted to a single newsgroup, Snit. Nor was it xposted. It was a new post for each newsgroup, some of which I didn't even lurk in. He was trying to get my attention; I basically told him if he wants to send me links to what he thinks points to malware, I'll check it out and report back, but I won't crack into the sites for him. He took this to mean I was telling him to **** off, and he responded accordingly via usenet with the aforementioned doxing attempt. Would you like to see the thread where myself and various others call him out on it, the first time around? It was over a decade ago. David is a stalker, Snit. You don't realize it, or maybe you do, but since he's the only ally you have here, you can't afford to be choosy. Watch your ass around him. -- 'I think so, Brain, but this time you wear the tutu.' -- Pinky |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
What it's like to interact with Snit - a video perspective
Snit
Wed, 05 Aug 2020 14:53:53 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: Snit wrote: On Aug 4, 2020 at 6:12:35 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote: Snit Thu, 30 Jul 2020 07:25:41 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: Gremlin wrote: A video perspective of the experience one can look forward to when interacting with Snit. In this video, Keith will be playing the role of Snit. The voice is a pretty close match, wouldn't you agree? Matt will be playing the role of myself and anyone else who's had the misfortune of dealing with Snit. Yes folks, someone who thinks with the logic of Snit; the keith. Just listen as they make a ****load of mistakes and ramble on, and then, try to link it all together. Uh huh. Just like Snit does with their obnoxious trolling replies and posts about various others. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAue1i58GOQ Hey, let’s do a Zoom session and record it and share it with others! You can ask me whatever you want. And I get to do the same with you. Hey, that's not too bad of an idea, except for a few little problems I can think of off the top of my head. Snit, due to previous, and quite severe 'misunderstandings', I'm being *very* sarcastic by using the word 'little'. I do hope I've dumbed this down enough so that you understand without issue, but I won't bet on it. Here come your excuses for not having a Zoom session. The reality is you fear being utterly humiliated in a new medium. You clearly have a lot of trouble understanding the written word, but for you to show you cannot understand interactive voice even with a video would be even worse for you. No response from Gremlin AKA Diesel. I don't sit at this particular computer all day, waiting to see a reply on usenet, Snit. Unlike you, I work for a living. And, I did reply to this nonsense already: Message-ID: http://al.howardknight.net/?ID=159668700200 I don't fear anything of the sort, but, I do agree, one of us has a severe reading comprehension problem. Let's see an example of it he Message-ID: http://al.howardknight.net/?ID=159667571100 I assure you I would be happy to give you plenty of time to dig your hole. It would be fun to watch it, really! No response from Gremlin AKA Diesel. 14. Lies by claiming the person he's attacking "ran away" if they don't obey his commands and meet his demands exactly. It would be open. You or I can use it as we want. Others likely would. Whatever. I have no fear. No response from Gremlin AKA Diesel. 14. Lies by claiming the person he's attacking "ran away" if they don't obey his commands and meet his demands exactly. Zoom has the ability to have a backdrop. Does not look great but who cares? I would be happy to teach you how. No response from Gremlin AKA Diesel. Maybe he thinks the lesson is too advanced for him. Message-ID: http://al.howardknight.net/?ID=159668700200 Thanks, but, I sometimes use Zoom for clients, so I already know how to use it. G And you can use a curtain if you do not like that or cannot figure it out. It is not that hard but it might be a bit advanced for a beginner. No response from Gremlin AKA Diesel. 17. Lies by introducing personal attacks and nonsense arguments and claims into the discussion, in order to motivate the person he's attacking to withdraw from the discussion. Glasser then claims victory. And yet you, not I, are the one who is refusing. Again, you do not owe me -- but the excuses you give are hilarious! No response from Gremlin AKA Diesel. 17. Lies by introducing personal attacks and nonsense arguments and claims into the discussion, in order to motivate the person he's attacking to withdraw from the discussion. Glasser then claims victory. He would see your face... and hear your voice. He already knows how badly you understand things and how poorly you support your claims. It would be fun to show it in a different medium. But you will not. That is for certain. It was trivial to predict. No response from Gremlin AKA Diesel. 17. Lies by introducing personal attacks and nonsense arguments and claims into the discussion, in order to motivate the person he's attacking to withdraw from the discussion. Glasser then claims victory. All item numbers are taken from the official Snitlist as preserved via archive.org -- Rubber bands have snappy endings! |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
What it's like to interact with Snit - a video perspective
Steve Carroll "Steve
Wed, 05 Aug 2020 15:13:31 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: On 2020-08-05, Snit wrote: Snit wrote: On Aug 4, 2020 at 6:12:35 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote: [snip] Here come your excuses for not having a Zoom session. The reality is you fear being utterly humiliated in a new medium. You clearly have a lot of trouble understanding the written word, but for you to show you cannot understand interactive voice even with a video would be even worse for you. No response from Gremlin AKA Diesel. LOL! Are you back to begging people to Skype (now it's Zoom) with you? Evidently, he is, yes. -- Dont get smart with me! Youre not qualified! |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
What it's like to interact with Snit - a video perspective
On 8/4/2020 6:12 PM, Gremlin wrote:
Snit Thu, 30 Jul 2020 07:25:42 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: John Doe wrote: Chronic nym-shifting deranged troll... Diesel / Gremlin / whatever other names he uses is flipping out. Ah yes, the flipping out routine. That's covered in the snitlist, too. Are you still going to tell us that everything written about you in the so called snitlist is completely untrue and otherwise bull**** written by your detractors to slime you? As well, You used one of your known lines with your asshat response, is why I'm asking. But I will still be happy to do a Zoom session with him. Would love it. He can try to impress me all he wants! He can repeat all his accusations and let me respond in real time. Snit, you avoid discussing anything you've been writing so far. I have no intentions to let David get a birds eye view of my location, inside or out. I'd have to be a ****ing idiot to think this video idea is entirely your doing. And, I see no possible benefit to doing this, other than providing David additional stalking information. Sounds like fun! You can't hold a conversation with me on usenet, I seriously doubt a video chat would be any different. Infact, it would be worse for you, because, your facial expressions would be available for reading and analysis when you responded to my questions, if you actually did so. You avoid them here, so I don't see why you wouldn't try the same ruse on zoom. With your facial expressions available on video when I ask my questions, you wouldn't be able to con anyone (not that you actually have) concerning any misunderstanding about the false accusations you've continued making against me. Not to mention your snide remarks concerning what you think I do/don't know. I'd just own you on video same as I already do on usenet. No question about it. But I bet he refuses. Yea.. another prediction right? Btw, check the headers before you respond, The previous dumbass added an additional newsgroup while they professed inability to setup a filter on their client. LOL |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
What it's like to interact with Snit - a video perspective
tldr
|
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|