miguel <mjc101@gmail.com> Thou obese poor worm. Thou greasy-haired head
of a bodkin. Thou damnable box of envy. Thou divel. Ye poured forth and
ye guffawed:

> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>> miguel <mjc101@gmail.com> Thou worthless saucy fellow. Thou boozy
>> false-trembling coward. Thou peevish officer. Thou swag-bellied,
>> roguish filthy piece of work. Ye poured out and ye gossiped:
>>
>>> 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?
>
>> You need to [*****SLAP!]

Snip it all you like, chew-toy. The object of your fear is still there in
the original.

Monkey see, monkey do, btw. That's the #1 lame, and the snip is #3.

[Insert obIKYABWAI here]

> Isn't it about time you died again, *****?

#7

>>>>> It's a shame this wasn't awarded posthumously, *****.

1. spnak! nice backpedal! You replied so I win. (dance, owned
etc.) You are my *****. Spank. You are my toy. You are
delusional. You love me. You are jealous. You follow me
around. You are obsessed. YHBT. Monkey see, monkey do.
2. Slurp! Get a room. etc.
3. My rules count. I won't reply anymore therefore I win. Post
edit, context snip, etc.
4. Sheep ****er, fag, native, **** your mother, sister, brother,
father. Cock sucker, *******, brain damaged, retard, jackass,
newbie, incompetent, monkey, boring, asswipe, loser, child,
village idiot, immature, paedophile, head > groin, **** you,
**** off, stfu, geriatric, amateur, nigger, inmate etc.
5. Testicles, anus, penis, faecal matter, urine, vagina, bodily
excretions, masturbation etc.
6. blink (clueless)
7. Nazi, MEOW, repeat, same old ... etc.
8. Typo, spelling, grammar, punctuation, comprehension lame.
9. I'm rubber, you're glue! IKYABWAI. Lame by proxy, truth
hurts, takes one to know one. So you don't know the answer
then? That proves my point. Get a life, etc.
10. Whine/pout/flip-flop, FOOM self-nuke, Autoflame.

> miguel

Your score sheet so far:

1. #
2.
3. #
4.
5.
6.
7. #
8.
9.
10.

Good going, cranston. You managed three obLames and **** all else in a
single post.

--
alt.usenet.kooks - Hammer of Thor: February 2007.
Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker:
September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.

Vescere puter subgalia meis.

"Now I know what it is. Now I know what it means when an
alt.usenet.kook x-post shows up."
AOK in news:ermdlu$nli$1@registered.motzarella.org