XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, comp.os.linux.advocacy   
   From: charlieglock@localhost.com   
      
   On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 04:59:30 -0000 (UTC), Gremlin wrote:   
      
   > Johnson    
   > news:MPG.4396d26a8f73c0b59896ba@usnews.blocknews.net Mon, 01 Dec 2025   
   > 03:15:46 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:   
   >   
   >> In article <692d0331$2$21$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,   
   >> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...   
   >>> Denial does not change the facts.   
   >>   
   >> I'm not denying anything.   
   >> I'm simply stating that your evidence does in no way back up your   
   >> claims.   
   >   
   > He's been told this many times by a variety of people. He ignores them   
   > all and continues to post the bullshit he calls 'evidence' or 'receipts'   
   > and he will continue doing so. It's what he does. It's part of his   
   > newsgroup destructive routine. He follows a simple concept. Repeat the   
   > bs often enough, it'll convince someone it's true.   
      
   It didn't take Johnson long to figure out the snit troll.   
   He's dissected snit like a board certified surgeon.   
   Johnson posts in one of the Linux system admin groups frequently and is   
   well respected.   
      
      
   >> You are one hell of a liar.   
   >   
   > Some of us are well aware of this. Others have to learn this about him   
   > the hard way. By the time they realize they've been snookered, and   
   > snookered well, it's already too late.   
      
   Yea.   
   Experience is the best teacher.   
      
   >> How do you live with yourself?   
   >   
   > Sadly, you're completely wasting your time. The majority of the regulars   
   > here are all well aware of him and generally ignore him. He thrives on   
   > any responses. even the negative ones. It allows him to repeat himself,   
   > ad nausem. It's the attention he seeks, good or bad, it's the attention.   
   > You're actually contributing to his efforts by calling him out. It took   
   > me a bit of time to come to this realization myself. I was warned by   
   > another new comer at the time to the newsgroup what he was actually   
   > about, but, I didn't listen to the sound advice. I engaged and defended   
   > myself. Which is exactly what Snit wanted - I was feeding him. Just as   
   > you presently are.   
   >   
   > None of snits so called 'evidence' backs his claims and they never will.   
   > He completely fabricated a story about me and then morphed what he did.   
   > At no time does he accept any responsibility for what he writes. It's   
   > always the other person. Always. You cannot reason with Snit. It's not   
   > why he's here. It's just the attention he seeks, and as long as you   
   > respond, you're giving him exactly what he wants.   
      
   I've had some down time recently and for lack of any better way to waste   
   my time I decided to check out some of snit's claims against you, Gremlin,   
   Steve Carroll and Pothead and after thoroughly visiting the links and   
   Message ID's that snit posted it quickly became obvious that snit is lying   
   and his links by any reasonable interpretation have absolutely zero   
   confirmation of his claims.   
      
   Examples include his claims you had the source code to snit's flooding   
   bot.   
   Steve Carroll stating the .gov site claimed snit had an order of   
   protection filed against him by his ex wife Anne Glasser.   
   It was pure speculation on Steve Carroll's part, a what if, and Steve   
   Carroll clearly said that.   
   Pothead being a racist bigot. Not even close. Snit fed list of statements   
   Pothead has made, like people who are not legal citizens of the U.S. ,   
   should not be given Medicaid, free cell phones and things like that.   
   Whoopee Einstein.   
   The vast majority of Americans believe the same thing.   
   Are they bigots and racists, white supremacists as well?   
   That's snit's faulty logic in action.   
      
      
   > Some of us have found that not directly responding to him, but   
   > discussing him, as i'm doing with you irks him to no end - to the point   
   > where other newsgroups have relieved themselves of him. If he can't get   
   > the attention and the back and forth bullshit, he pisses off -   
   > eventually. I strongly encourage you to proceed as the majority of us   
   > have been doing.   
      
   Snit responds to me even though I rarely respond to him.   
   He is scored down in pan.   
   He seems to crave attention even when it is negative.   
   That seems obtuse to me.   
      
   > I'm guilty recently of having directly responded to some of his nonsense   
   > -   
   > He likes to bait people into responses by doing what you've seen him   
   > repeatedly do towards Pothead. He will continue to bait you as well. A   
   > response is what he seeks, and he'll play this game with you until you   
   > catch onto what's up and treat him as he should be - not directly   
   > responded to, but discussed amongst ourselves.   
      
   That's how snit operates.   
   IMHO there is nothing wrong with correcting his lies, and there are plenty   
   to correct.   
      
   And for those of you who snit has used your real name, you have a very   
   good legal case against snit for defamation.   
   Nyms like Pothead or mine Glock have less of a case unless that nym is   
   well known on blogs, as a digital creator and situations like that.   
   That doesn't apply to me but maybe to Pothead, I can't say.   
   He seems like he laughs off snit and finds snit entertaining.   
   Again, just an observation.   
      
   > He will latch onto this reply of mine and do the same thing you've   
   > already seen with Pothead. Feel free to check out his so called   
   > 'receipts' towards me - You'll find it's the same thing he's been doing   
   > with Pothead. He gets off on doing this shit. Eventually you'll see this   
   > for yourself, if you haven't already started to suspect it. He knows   
   > what he posts about Pothead, Steve Carroll (SC), myself, and others is   
   > all bullshit - it doesn't matter to him as long as a response is coming.   
      
   100% true.   
   The regulars in the gun groups that snit infiltrated spotted this early   
   on.   
   It's how snit rolls.   
      
   > He baits people into responding, to call him out. He really doesn't care   
   > that you do. He's only interested in a response from you. He has a   
   > severe problem with reading comprehension as well - I suspect you've   
   > noticed that already.   
      
   I've noticed that.   
   Most of Usenet, technical discussions excepted, is about an 8th grade   
   reading level so it's sad that snit fails so often to comprehend what he   
   is reading and replying to.   
      
   And when he fucks up he rarely makes a full apology but somehow manages to   
   drag others into his apology.   
   It's weird.   
      
   > Here's some additional links you might find of interest. You can   
   > actually sample nearly any post from him and match it up to the snitlies   
   > methods link. He's that well known and his method is that well known.   
   > He's been doing this for decades and has no intentions of stopping. When   
   > enough people ignore him, he pisses off to yet another newsgroup and   
   > starts his bullshit all over again. It's what he does.   
   >   
   >>>     
   >>>    
   >>>    
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)