XPost: alt.computer.workshop, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.homosexual
From: brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com
On Jul 26, 2025 at 2:00:03 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote
:
> pothead news:10619s8$1876e$2@dont-email.me Sat, 26
> Jul 2025 01:09:28 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
>
>> On 2025-07-25, Gremlin wrote:
>>> Without a doubt. He's so fucking nutty, he doesn't even realize that
>>> he's proving my case for me. He doesn't read well; he continues to
>>> prove that by sharing my comments out of context and what he thought
>>> they meant. When he morphed it again to include comments I wrote to
>>> David Brooks specifically about my wall greeter, he actually
>>> demonstrated (again!) that he does struggle, greatly, to understand
>>> what I write.
>>
>> True.
>> I'm becoming convinced that snit is mentally incapacitated in some way.
>> While some of it might be an act, no person could keep up the same act
>> for decades without wavering.
>> It's not possible.
>
> I agree. If Snit was faking all of it, he couldn't have done it this long.
>
>> It's like a pathological liar, which snit is, trying to remember and
>> keep straight all of his lies.
>> Pretty much impossible.
>
> I don't think he even tries to remember what he claimed previously. FFS,
> he doubles down on things even when you provide full proof that shows he's
> full of shit. He just won't admit it.
>
>>> I appreciate that he's so willing to help me out by exposing his
>>> reading comprehension on such a grand level. I couldn't ask for better
>>> proof of his disability if I'd asked.
>>
>> snit manages to screw up even simple concepts.
>> He hasn't figured out yet that our little shun group operates by not
>> replying DIRECTLY to his posts but doesn't have any effect on speaking
>> of snit between ourselves.
>> Simple concept for a 3rd grader, but this is snit we are dealing with.
>
> Which adds to the humour value. :)
>
>> ROTFLMAO !!!
>>
>> It's entertaining watching snit go bat shit crazy.
>
> Yes. Yes, it is.
No MID from you. No quote. No receipt. Just anger from you.
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:
https://chatgpt.com/share/681ea0aa-d35c-800c-b586-185275735e26
-----
Gremlin repeatedly claims he hasn’t seen the source code
for Carroll’s flood bot—yet he calls it a “seriously piss
poor example of writing software” and boasts that
disassembly “tells you everything about the program.” So
either he’s seen the code or reverse-engineered it—meaning
he has examined it closely enough to know how it works. He
criticizes it like someone who’s dug into its inner
workings, but dances around admitting it outright. And for
someone who sometimes denies Carroll is behind the bot, he
sure acts like he knows a lot about it.
-----
You did as you do -- bragged. And then later you spoke of Carroll's bot code
being YOUR code:
Gremlin
-----
He got pissed off over a reply I wrote to you and wrote
the floodbot story in response to that. He wrongly assumed
I was trolling him with my reply. You asked him to help
you with my source code.
-----
Did you have a stroke mid paragraph? Are you really saying the floodbot is
YOUR
source code? YOURS?
LOL! Just like with your claimed degrees and so many other stories, your
claims change with the telling.
--
It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with
you.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
