Meat Plow wrote:
> miguel wrote:
>> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>>> miguel <mjc101@gmail.com> Thou low-life common laugher. Thou saucy
>>> remorseless. Thou ineffectual fellow of no merits. Thou boozy manikin.
>>> Ye brown-nosed and ye whined:

>>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote:

>>>>>> Congratulations, Kadaitcha Man! I told you your luck would change
>>>>>> after January. It certainly did, as you managed to defeat a strong
>>>>>> field of worthy kookologists. All hail Kadaitcha Man!!!1!!
>>>>> Woo Hoo! Commiserations to the others, and thanks to all for the
>>>>> support and vote of confidence.
>>>> It's a shame this wasn't awarded posthumously, *****.
>>> Aw, poor you.

>>> Say, Cranston, you do realise that you spewed 4k of froth at Kali in one
>>> post, don't you?

>>>
>>> Of course there is variance in application of standards across
>>> individuals and situations. Of course this isn't a black and white
>>> issue. Very few things are. But what the **** does that have to do with
>>> the double standard I identified?

>>> Again: the kook crew here feels free to netkop somebody about the BI,
>>> but if you contact an ISP about TOS violations re content, that's
>>> verboten. If I were to contact Snarky's provider about his insults,
>>> suddenly I'm a netkkkopper. It's freaky stupid is what it is. Yet nearly
>>> everybody here has bought into it.

>>> These mores are adopted to insulate those who engage in ****ty behavior
>>> from the consequences of their behavior. It's the same with taking
>>> usenet to real life. Suppose somebody hides behind their keyboard
>>> calling an enemy all sorts of rancid names and making all sorts of
>>> outlandish claims. It's considered kooky to drag that person's ass from
>>> behind his keyboard and kick the **** out of him. The reason this
>>> standard exists is merely to protect that cowardly ******* that engages
>>> in this behavior. Such a standard exists nowhere else. What could
>>> possibly justify this standard?

>>> Well, psychology isn't a real science, so I understand your inferiority
>>> complex and your need to sound like you're educated.

>>> What's next? Suggesting I need anger management?

>>> LOL.

>>> Also, your pants are on fire. By the next post I'm quite sure they'll be
>>> hanging over the telephone wire.

>>> There is a difference between "presume" and "assume." One with your
>>> academic credentials should surely understand this.

>>> A real scientist would recognize that curves tend toward steep or flat.
>>> Curves aren't slow or fast. But you are a psychologist so this is
>>> probably new to you. Since you are so proud of your advanced database of
>>> knowledge perhaps you should add this little factoid to it. Next time
>>> you want to insult somebody by referencing his or her learning curve,
>>> the more precise (and precision is your paramount desire, we know) way
>>> to do it would be to suggest that they have a flat learning curve.
>>> Mathematically you could represent this as Y=0. This is, incidentally,
>>> Joan GriffinTHAL's learning curve.

>>> This is about as hard as doing reverse psychology on my grandson. When
>>> he was two.

>>> Well, are you?

>>> Feel free to flesh out your claim with examples.

>>> Tick tock.

>>> Feel free to flesh out your claim with examples.

>>> Tick tock.

>>> Feel free to provide them.

>>> Tick tock.

>>> Not true. Your first less than friendly act was to respond with feigned
>>> politeness to my original question. I responded to that with equally
>>> feigned politeness, mirroring yours. Next, you asked your loaded, er,
>>> pointed question that implied your belief I was paranoid -- definitely
>>> kookbait. I responded pedantically in order to return the insult. We've
>>> traded insults pretty equally from there, although in my opinion I'm
>>> certainly winning on points because mine are so much more clever, witty
>>> and cutting than yours.

>>> Sniggler^wSchoolmarm please!

>>> Your tendency to project disliked parts of yourself onto me is well
>>> evidenced in this thread.

>>> tee hee!

>>> miguel
>>>

>>>
>>> You have k0oK tattooed in 2" high letters on your steeply sloping forehead.
>>>
>>> Kookle Search Results
>>> 2 matches for "cranston".
>>>
>>> Mike "Miguel" Cranston
>>> Busted Urinal Award
>>>
>>> Mike "Miguel" Cranston, trained by Bookman
>>> Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle
>>>
>>> Oh. You have room to grow too.
>>>
>> Wow, *****, a little eight word sentence sure got you frothing! How much
>> time did you spend on the cut and paste?
>>
>> miguel
>
> The majority of said froth was a quote of your post.

You'd probably accuse the danimal of frothing. Quantity is not a sound
measure of emotional content. Most of you people are too dumb to realize
this, or too invested in using your fagboi retard nerd gimp weapons to
care. You surely aren't intellectually honest enough to acknowledge that
I pretty much matched Kali in output word for word.

What would that say about her posts?