Path: ...!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Diesel <nobody@haph.org>
Newsgroups: alt.computer.workshop
Subject: Re: Search result
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2020 21:48:09 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <XnsABA3B57802D79HT1@Vpb8ZPT28vTL4Q0zoGM6PIG2.31o1vBvQ471401MuKVecjzqKm2TVKxnZ2s1YK9>
References: <g8VlG.87755$mf1.8531@fx45.iad> <hfr3noFrhaiU1@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2020 21:48:09 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="35a863138dce3659993f802cc87457b6";
	logging-data="27573"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19qPf8PFUKTi4r+Y7HvefK6TGnBo1BklAw="
User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25
Cancel-Lock: sha1:3wuiL2TnJDt/vKoBKckClAtdeEk=
Bytes: 3502

Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid>
news:hfr3noFrhaiU1@mid.individual.net Thu, 16 Apr 2020 13:09:11 GMT
in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: 

> David wrote:
>> To review later
> 
> Consider the 'psychology' of googling someone whose persona
> someone (ie BD/DB) has only casually encountered online.
> 
> Some would consider that malicious stalking and so brand BD/DB w/ 
> intense criticism.
> 
> DB would consider it 'just fine' and 'flourish' his googling here;
> or maybe accept it as an insignificant 'nosy parker' trait of his.
> 
> DB's friends here would also consider it 'just fine' or 'just
> David being David' or even consider the findings of his 'person
> google' to be fodder for discussion here.
> 
> To me, it is a negative trait and behavior that should NOT be 
> flourished; but, not /usually/ as 'evil' as others consider it,
> until DB 'goes nuts' and weaponizes whatever he has found to make
> others unhappy in the form of mean and hateful doxxing exposure.
> 
> It seems to me like DB treating some other persona like some kind
> of 'bug' to be put on a pin in his little glass entomology case. 
> I don't think that most people want to be treated that way by
> someone, particularly certain someones.
> 
> That 'going nuts' business is another matter.
> 

Your efforts to save face after writing the horse shit you did 
defending david aren't working as well as you're hoping. I don't have 
a short memory, and I doubt many of the other regulars here do 
either, Mike.

I'm not sure if it was you writing horse shit defending him, multiple 
times, or completely unable/unwilling to even defend what you wrote, 
multiple times that makes me call you out for the two faced, pos you 
are these days. Ayep, piece of shit, hypocritical, joke.. Who's now 
trying to put spin on what he previously wrote, defending david and 
the bullshit david has been pulling for nearly two decades now.

You aren't going to pull that game with me, Mike. You falsely claimed 
I'd bullied him, AND he wasn't a stalker, debating the fucking 
dictionary usage of the word, which incidently, confirmed HE IS A 
STALKER. You and Apt both tried that bullshit routine. I wouldn't let 
him slide on it either, and I damn sure won't let you.

Continue at the rate you're going with this and you'll be right up 
there with snit for credibility value. :) It's probably just as well, 
you've been off center for awhile now.



-- 
I'm not loafing. I work so fast I'm always finished