XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, comp.os.linux.advocacy   
   From: brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com   
      
   On Dec 4, 2025 at 9:00:15 PM MST, "Charlie Glock" wrote   
   <693258cf$3$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.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.   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)