XPost: alt.computer.workshop, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh   
   From: nobody@haph.org   
      
   Brock McNuggets    
   news:6965b693$2$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com Tue, 13 Jan 2026 03:05:55   
   GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:   
      
   > On Jan 12, 2026 at 6:31:51 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote   
   > :   
   >   
   >> Brock McNuggets    
   >> news:69613944$1$20$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com Fri, 09 Jan 2026   
   >> 17:22:12 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>> Remember, I go with evidence, not what the "Dear Leader" says.   
   >>   
   >> You don't even know what the word evidence means.   
   >   
   > This is a meaningless insult designed to stop the conversation. Again,   
   > to me EVIDENCE matters.   
      
   It's nothing of the sort. If you watch the video Nobody shared, it's clear   
   as day that she was being told to get out of the car. Instead of complying,   
   she attempted to drive off and hit the agent in the process. He had every   
   right to shoot her. She made the choice to do what she did. Nobody was   
   murdered. She was shot and killed for attempting to run an agent over. I   
   don't know of any police officer here who would let you hit them with your   
   car and not put rounds in you for your effort.   
      
   > I do not go with what "Dear Leader" (Trump) says, nor Fox, nor anything   
   > else other than the evidence and morality -- in my case a focus on equal   
   > rights and the environment. Now when I say I do this, I do not mean I do   
   > it perfectly -- I do not... but at least I try and do a good job.   
      
   Look at the video. She actually hit him with her car! How much more evidence   
   do you require?   
      
   >> Take your receipts for example.   
   >   
   > These are strong evidence. Your denial does not change that.   
      
   They're nothing of the sort - which is why others have ridden you over them,   
   multiple times. You have serious problems comprehending what you read. You   
   confused general coder questions with that of showing that I had insider   
   knowledge of the floodbot for example. Nothing I wrote supported your   
   conclusion. Nothing I wrote supported your conclusion that I had a copy of   
   the floodbot either in source or compiled form either.   
      
   >> Your interpretations of my asking you questions about coding in   
   >> general and how you tried to spin that into my having 'insider   
   >> knowledge' of the bot.   
   >   
   > This is you focusing on your petty squabbles... and no interpretation is   
   > needed:   
      
      
   > Gremlin   
   > :   
   >     -----   
   >     It needs to be recoded anyway, it's a seriously piss poor   
   >     example of writing software.   
   >     -----   
   >   
   > Gremlin    
   >     -----   
   >     Do you think when you disassemble something that you're   
   >     provided the original source code that was   
   >     compiled/assembled by the author? You aren't, what you're   
   >     given looks nothing like the original source code, but it   
   >     still tells you *everything* about the program.   
   >     -----   
   >   
   > If you can understand what you read you will come to the same conclusion   
   > as ChatGPT, which I shared the full posts with:   
      
   I'm not the one who has well documented issues understanding what they read.   
   You are. It's why Apd, FromTheRafters and myself have all taken issue with   
   what you assumed I was writing about.   
      
   >> A bot you initially accused me of having either in source or compiled   
   >> form.   
   >   
   > I noted YOUR comments about it. YOUR WORDS.   
   >   
   You completely misunderstood what I wrote and rolled with it. When Apd and   
   FromTheRafters also tried to explain this to you, you argued with them and   
   otherwise ignored what they also told you as you continued to falsely accuse   
   me. That's what you did. You *lied* about me and stuck to it. You're still   
   lying about what you did. It's your nature. Your very well known documented,   
   dishonest as fucking possible, Nature.   
      
      
   > Stop crying about your words. Move on.   
      
   I'm not crying about anything, Michael. You didn't understand what I was   
   writing. You incorrectly interpreted what I wrote and fasely accused me of   
   having a copy of the floodbot. That's entirely on you. *You* fucked up.   
      
      
      
   --   
   Liar, lawyer; mirror show me, what's the difference?   
   Kangaroo done hung the guilty with the innocent   
   Liar, lawyer; mirror for ya', what's the difference?   
   Kangaroo be stoned. He's guilty as the government   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)