XPost: bc.politics, ont.politics, qc.politique   
   XPost: can.politics   
   From: chompchomp@chompchompchomp.chomp   
      
   On 7/22/2014 3:04 PM, Uncle Steve wrote:   
   > On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 01:16:37PM -0700, Alan Baker wrote:   
   >> On 2014-07-22 20:03:37 +0000, Uncle Steve said:   
   >>   
   >>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 12:43:09PM -0700, Alan Baker wrote:   
   >>>> On 2014-07-22 19:40:49 +0000, Uncle Steve said:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 12:33:38PM -0700, Alan Baker wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 2014-07-22 19:30:16 +0000, (ಠ_ಠ)РаиÑ�а said:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> On 7/21/2014 8:35 PM, M.I.Wakefield wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> "Alan Baker"  wrote in message news:lqkl69$5ml$1@news.datemas.de...   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> On 2014-07-22 02:09:59 +0000, (ಠ_ಠ)РаиÑ�а   
   >>>>>>>>> said:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Snip!   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> But let's start out from accurate information.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Karen will need directions to there.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Who's "Karen"?  Your fictitious nemesis?  I'll bet you had fictitious   
   >>>>>>> friends when you were a kid.   
   >>>>>>> No one else would play with you.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> You are "Karen", Karen.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Happy to straighten that out for you.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> How?  By informing everyone that you're a pathological liar and a   
   >>>>> bigot besides?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> How does anything I've ever said suggest I'm either of those?   
   >>>   
   >>> Why should I explain my reasoning to you when you would never do the   
   >>> same (unless you were somehow compelled by an authority you could not   
   >>> otherwise avoid)?   
   >>   
   >> Ducking?   
   >>   
   >> I understand.   
   >>   
   >> Writing why you won't explain is a lot easier than writing an explanation...   
   >>   
   >> ...when you don't really have one.   
   >   
   > No, I'm explaining the concept of reciprocity.  You imagine I am   
   > obligated to concede to you when all you do is take take take and   
   > provide nothing in return except lies and insults.   
   >   
   > What you're about is harassing certain individuals past the point of   
   > tolerance, and no uncivlized amoral dirty trick is too illegal, too   
   > immoral, or to extreme for your tastes.  You "win" when you've   
   > provoked something actionable, but of course nothing of your behaviour   
   > or actions will be allowed to be considered when that happens.  No   
   > different from a corrupt pig who commits unprovoked violence against a   
   > citizen and who then arrests that citizen if he dares to defend   
   > himself.   
   >   
   > Just another uncivlized piece of lying filth in the company of more   
   > uncivilized filth infesting these newsgroups.  But oh, no, it's all in   
   > my imagination and you could never be the corrupt, malicious fuck you   
   > are in reality.   
      
   Now, would you call that a rant or a rave?   
      
   Holy doodle, somebody needs a Prozac.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)