XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, comp.os.linux.advocacy   
   From: pothead@snakebite.com   
      
   On 2025-12-05, Charlie Glock  wrote:   
   > 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.   
      
   That doesn't surprise me at all.   
   Johnson seems intelligent, writes well without ai and figured snit out rather   
   quickly which is eating at snit as he tries to recover.   
   At this point snit can't put Humpty Dumpty (snit Brock) back together again so   
   he will resort to one of his one liners like boring or accusing people of   
   being socks   
   which is a claim snit never seems to prove.   
      
      
   >   
   >>> 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.   
      
      
   In some cases.   
   Snit's been trolling for decades and he knows how to rope people into his   
   snit rodeo.   
   People as a rule tend to be trusting and snit relies on that characteristic to   
   run   
   his troll farm.   
      
   >>> 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.   
      
   Several other posters have reached the same conclusions.   
   Snit's tactic is to toss everything possible at the wall and see   
   what sticks.   
   So far nothing is sticking as even his supporters, all 2 of them, refuse   
   to back snit.   
      
      
   > Examples include his claims you had the source code to snit's flooding   
   > bot.   
      
   Snit's horrid reading comprehension strikes again and once snit is proved   
   to be obviously wrong, instead of a polite mea culpa he will double   
   down on his lies.   
      
   > 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.   
      
   That is true.   
   Someone posted a screenshot of snit's criminal harassment case.   
   Others saw it while it was on the gov site before it was removed.   
   Snit can deny this all he likes but the facts prove him wrong. They always do.   
      
      
   > 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.   
      
   Pretty much.   
   Snit gets all wound up when the topic of people leeching off the government   
   is broached.   
   And that's because he is one of the government leeches himself.   
   Snit has been scamming the US government for years.   
   He refuses to work but instead expects the working taxpayers to finance him   
   and his trolling.   
      
      
   >   
   >> 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.   
      
   Snit would eat dog poop on a live stream if he was assured it would get him   
   attention.   
   He's basically a lunatic with serious mental problems.   
      
      
   >> 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.   
      
      
   It would be a full time job!   
      
   > 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.   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)