XPost: alt.usenet.kooks, alt.astrology   
      
   Sofa King wrote:   
   >CFA wrote:   
   >> Sofa King wrote:   
   >>>CFA wrote:   
   >>>> Sofa King wrote:   
      
   >>>of course i am.  i do not deny this.  is there something wrong with me that   
   i wonder why some dude   
   >>>would hide behind a pseudonym for 15 years and rail against some   
   inconsequential astrologer.   
   >>   
   >> You haven't been paying attention. It's been said to you, several   
   >> times.   
   >   
   >i don't really think that it has, but you can say it again or post an MID.   
   >   
   >THANKS   
      
   Bullies tend to draw fans, donchaknow. Lots of dick-waving and such...   
   If that doesn't make sense to you, you're in over your head.   
      
   >>>>>> He started the whole thing of going RL on people in aa.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> He and his buddy Kettler xposted to sci.sceptic, daring people to   
   >>>>>> prove them wrong about astrology.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>so?  did anybody on your supposed "side" of this stupid "internets war"   
   actually put forth the   
   >>>>>scientific integrity and do such a thing?  ...or did you guys just go   
   apeshit and lob feces and   
   >>>>>that was just awsm?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> There was never any point in trying to 'convince' others.   
   >>>   
   >>>yes there is.   
   >>   
   >> Participation in usenet, especially high-velocity groups, tends to   
   >> harden positions, not change them.   
   >   
   >repeating the same lie many times has a similar "hardening" effect, innit?   
      
   innit? you mean 'doesn't it?'   
      
   It would seem hard to tell who's lying without having been here when   
   certain things happened. Or having a good archive.   
      
   >>> because the dark ages are over and this sort of witchhunt mentality has   
   been replaced   
   >>>with scientific reason and scientific method.   
   >>>   
   >>>i don't believe in astrology, but if you want to disprove it, try using   
   science not namecalling   
   >>>and   
   >>>appeal to ridicule.  less people will question your motives.   
   >>   
   >> Oh, you think this is about astrology.   
   >   
   >well, it was in ALT.ASTROLOGY and even the moderated groups.   
      
   So?   
      
   >this IS the group to harangue edmo   
   >over a 15 year old tiff and not ever come off like a psycho-retard who can't   
   move on with their   
   >lives, correct?   
      
   I notice there was no mention of 'astrology' in your statement.   
      
   >>>>>yes.  *STORY*   
   >>>>   
   >>>> As in, you weren't here when it happened.   
   >>>   
   >>>YES: as in, you can't prove you were there when it happened.   
   >>   
   >> You can see my handle littered through responses in aa from '97 on,   
   >> and a few in '96. If you'd bothered to look.   
   >   
   >your handle?  i have no proof that this is you and that is you?  are you daft?   
   >   
   >so i repeat with inflection:   
   >   
   >YES: as in, YOU CAN'T PROVE you were there when it happened.   
      
   You can't prove you are who you are, either, so you can take my word,   
   or not.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)