From: recscuba_google@huntzinger.com   
      
   On 2/22/26 18:09, Socialism is for losers wrote:   
   > On Sun, 22 Feb 2026 16:20:10 -0500, -hh wrote:   
   >> On 2/22/26 09:25, Socialism is for losers wrote:   
   >>> On Sun, 22 Feb 2026 08:03:56 -0500, -hh wrote:   
   >>>> On 2/21/26 17:58, Socialism is for losers wrote:   
   >>>>> On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 16:01:28 -0500, -hh wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 2/21/26 15:13, Socialism is for losers wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 16:17:34 -0000 (UTC), pothead   
   >>>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On 2026-02-21, Socialism is for losers  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 09:16:24 -0500, NoBody    
   wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 06:56:08 -0500, -hh wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> On 2/21/26 02:19, Socialism is for losers wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 20 Feb 2026 21:51:08 -0500, -hh wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> Nah, I used that minor windfall to poke at another luzer   
   sockpuppet.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> Since they ran, you're welcome to take their arrow:  in what   
   year did   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> you exceed $25/hr in your career (if ever)?  Do be ready to   
   prove it.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Right after you prove you've been published....   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Already done weeks ago, by citing a paper which cited it.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>    
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> You post a link to an 8 page document with no specifics about what   
   >>>>>>>>>> you're trying to say.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Typical response from you.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> FYI, you've tried & failed to show that you yourself passed too:   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Pot, kettle, black.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Hughie insinuated that he was "special"   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Special?   
   >>>>>>>> So Hugh was/is a short bus passenger?   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Hughie doesn't document any of his claims, ...   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Except for how you saw & tried to disregard one just ~6 hours earlier:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Hughie makes claims that he doesn't back up. I don't make claims.   
   >>>>> Hughie asked a question and I answered it. It wasn't a claim. It was   
   >>>>> an answer to a question and since I felt no obligation to answer, I   
   >>>>> felt no obligation to document it.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> No, for your "answer" wasn't to what the question had asked.   
   >>>   
   >>>  You asked if and when I first earned $25/hour and I told you   
   >>> would have been in the early to mid 1980s.   
   >>   
   >> Not quite, because what you actually said was:   
   >>   
   >> " Without looking it up, I'd say it was early or mid 1980s   
   >> that I made over $50K annually,....I'm pretty sure of what I posted   
   >> based on what I was investing back then"   
   >>   
   >> That's you admitting that you were relying on total household income   
   >> including passive (not 'earned') income sources.   
   >   
   > Take it or leave it. I don't care.   
      
   "The lady, she doth protest too much..."  /s   
      
      
   >>>> That's been pointed out to you and you've been silent.   
   >>>> Telling.   
   >>   
   >> Still.   
   >   
   > I'm kind of a quiet guy.   
      
   Your posting proliferation proves otherwise.   
      
      
      
   >>>>>> "Nope, sorry. I saw that before and it doesn't work."   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> LOL> Says the guy you insinuated there was something special about a   
   >>>>> simple picture he had on his poorly constructed web site that anybody   
   >>>>> could have had.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Not a random photo, but relevant to that topic.   
   >>>   
   >>>  A picture of part of a weapon that anybody could have had.   
   >>   
   >> Nope, the FN-303 is a restricted item that US public can't legally own.   
   >   
   > Nope. It is not universally illegal to own one, Dummy.   
      
   Goalpost move attempt.   
   In the US that their sale is restricted.   
      
   >>>>> ...and then he said, "oh lookie, lookie at what I can do.  I can make   
   >>>>> it so you can't see it any more. Aren't I just so special because I   
   >>>>> can do that?"   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Nope.  It was showing relevant knowledge of the topic at hand.   
   >>>   
   >>>  It did no such thing. One could show a picture of a nuclear   
   >>> reactor without knowing anything about nuclear reactors, you pathetic   
   >>> moron.   
   >>   
   >> "The public doesn't get to see everything."   
      
   Silence.  Hmmmm!   
      
   >>>> Plus it shows ownership/control of the domain I'm posting from, which   
   >>>> neither none of the anonymous troll sockpuppets here can do.   
   >>>   
   >>> Oh, Hughie owns the domain...   You're special, Hughie, oh so   
   >>> special...   
   >>>   
   >>> ...as if anyone can't register their own domain....   
   >>   
   >> You certainly could too...but you've not.   
   >   
   >  What makes you believe that?   
      
   You're not using it.   
      
   >>>>> Hey, hughie, ya pathetic dimbulb, I've got several thousand pictures   
   >>>>> on my hard drives that don't exist anywhere on the Internet.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Because context matters.  How many of them are uniquely of nonlethal   
   >>>> weapons used by LEO that was part of that topic on ICE, hmmm?   
   >>>   
   >>> Dimwitted Hughie thinks that he's the only person that can get   
   >>> themselves a picture of an FN303...   
   >>>   
   >>> It's not like a person can't own one, photograph it, and give the   
   >>> photo to the halfwitted wimp who stocks the soda pop isle at the   
   >>> grocery store.   
   >>>   
   >>> https://botach.com/fnh-fn303-mk2-less-lethal-launcher/   
   >>   
   >> Go ahead and try to buy one, since that's what it will take for you to   
   >> figure out for yourself that it is a regulated product that's not   
   >> available to the US general public.   
   >   
   > I've no reason to own one, but I suspect I could if I wanted.   They are>   
   hard to come by, but not impossible.   
      
   True, you could try to steal one from a police department.   
      
   > It's not illegal to own one, you know. It does not require a Federal   
   > Firearms License to own one, at least where I live.   
      
   Because its a FN restriction to exclude the general public, selling them   
   as a "Law Enforcement only" product.  That pedantically doesn't exclude   
   things like resale by a random agency, but that sort of action can and   
   has attracted the attention of FN Legal dept for investigation, if not   
   also others.   
      
   >>>>>>> ...including that silliness about him making $25/hour as a volunteer,   
   >>>>>>> but he asks other people if they made that much and demands that   
   >>>>>>> they be prepared to document it.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Because the dodging & whining response was the point ... and the Tell.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> No, Hughie, the point is that you are a sad little phony who has never   
   >>>>> done anything of significance who is trying to pretend that you have.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Even humble ones are more than any accomplishments you've shown.   
   >>>   
   >>>  Unlike you, Hughie, I have no need to show my accomplishments.   
   >>> Unlike you, my ego is not dependent on attempts to collect accolades   
   >>> and acknowledgments from other people.   
   >>   
   >> Except that I'm not bragging:   
   >   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)