I spy....

"Kitkat" wrote in message
...
Mary wrote:
"Kitkat" wrote in message
m...

Mary wrote:


I just try to take people for who they are...the good, the bad, the
ugly.


What does this mean? We have no choice, do we? Do
you mean "accept" people for who they are?

I mostly mean on usenet. I try not to get *too* hysterical over the
things people will say. And yes, I think saying "accept" people for
who
they are is more of what I meant.



Do you mean that you try not to make any value judgments?

yes.



Do you mean that you do not have the courage of your convictions?

this has nothing to do with my convictions.



Or do you mean that you have no convictions?

clearly i dont mean this.

Is there really no reality, just perception, and does this really

mean

that Lynnie is a horse's ass, literally?

I'm not touching that one!!!




HOwever, the cancer comments clearly hit a RAW nerve for me.


So you react only based upon what a comment or a behavior does
to *you?"

No, I react to plenty of stuff, but I try not to get personal. I'm a
little touchy right now though. I blame it on the radioactivity.



Do you see this as something to be proud of?

?



Inquiring minds, you know. 80)

your questions have been answered! one by one! at least *i* answer
direct questions. not like some people... hehehe...


Okay. But ...

Never mind. It's just Usenet after all.

What? Chu-don't like mah answers?


I am trying not to make any value judgments.


Clearly, there are times when I fail miserably at this.

Those are good moments. There are battles worthy of
our weapons, even on Usenet.

Mary wrote:
"Kitkat" wrote in message
...

Mary wrote:

"Kitkat" wrote in message
.com...


Mary wrote:



I just try to take people for who they are...the good, the bad, the
ugly.


What does this mean? We have no choice, do we? Do
you mean "accept" people for who they are?

I mostly mean on usenet. I try not to get *too* hysterical over the
things people will say. And yes, I think saying "accept" people for

who

they are is more of what I meant.




Do you mean that you try not to make any value judgments?

yes.




Do you mean that you do not have the courage of your convictions?

this has nothing to do with my convictions.




Or do you mean that you have no convictions?

clearly i dont mean this.


Is there really no reality, just perception, and does this really

mean


that Lynnie is a horse's ass, literally?

I'm not touching that one!!!





HOwever, the cancer comments clearly hit a RAW nerve for me.


So you react only based upon what a comment or a behavior does
to *you?"

No, I react to plenty of stuff, but I try not to get personal. I'm a
little touchy right now though. I blame it on the radioactivity.




Do you see this as something to be proud of?

?




Inquiring minds, you know. 80)

your questions have been answered! one by one! at least *i* answer
direct questions. not like some people... hehehe...


Okay. But ...

Never mind. It's just Usenet after all.

What? Chu-don't like mah answers?


I am trying not to make any value judgments.



Clearly, there are times when I fail miserably at this.


Those are good moments. There are battles worthy of
our weapons, even on Usenet.

I'll agree with that!

whitershadeofpale wrote:
Only thing, I know you're just here to finger **** the group

Oh please, Sweetums. You and Tapey and Torchie finger-****ed this
group months ago with your incessant babbling. Anyone who was even
half-way decent left for cleaner waters. What is left is a free-for
all of waste and BS. I am merely administering my devastating final
blow before I depart.


then leave,

Yeah because unlike you and your ilk, I have a life.

-L.

"-L." wrote in message
oups.com...


whitershadeofpale wrote:
Only thing, I know you're just here to finger **** the group

Oh please, Sweetums. You and Tapey and Torchie finger-****ed this
group months ago with your incessant babbling. Anyone who was even
half-way decent left for cleaner waters. What is left is a free-for
all of waste and BS. I am merely administering my devastating final
blow before I depart.

Lynnie, doll, you cannot even devastate your own sad problems.

You are the most ineffectual person I have ever encountered.

An impotent woman. Wow.




then leave,

Yeah because unlike you and your ilk, I have a life.


Oh you do, indeed. And what a life it is.

CatNipped wrote:
And yet all of you were quite friendly to me *before* I declined to jump on
the "hate Mary" bandwagon!

No Jackass. I was nice to you before the Megan fiasco. I even tried
to "explain" that you were being annoying, in terms of netiquette,
then:

***paste***
From: "-L."
snip

Message-ID: .com
snip

CatNipped wrote:

I think anyone would understand, after all this, why I am a bit
upset.

Hugs,

CatNipped

Look. I like you. I do. I can see you have a ton of great qualities.
But dragging personal emails to a newsgroup is the height of rude
netiquette. You're a Usenet newbie so I will cut you some slack. Do
yourself a favor - spend some time on the 'net researching Usenet
netiquette. Study the posting habits of people you admire in the ngs.
Learn from them. At this point your posting habits are getting
annoying and disruptive - at best. Even though you may not want to,
take a step back and rethink what Megan wrote to you. There is a lot
of wisdom there.

***end paste***

What Megan had wrote to you (which I was referencing) was this (same
thread):

***paste***

You were wrong and you lied, and your repeated "God is an iron"
response
or lack of anything of substance in the rest of your message is sad yet
hilarious in it's bluster and merits no response. Whine whine whine.
Poor Lori. No personal responsibility for her.

WRT to more examples of attention seeking behaviors, we could go on
about the numerous minute by minute posts about Bandit (and what
happened to her was really tragic and sad) *but* when you post a
zillion
1000 photos of every angle of every hair follicle and minute, moment by
moment details of every time the poor cat even took a **** or faced in
a
different direction (note the sarcasm if you haven't figured it out),
you spent days and days milking that tragedy for all it was worth
because YOU got attention, and that's an insult to your poor kitty who
didn't deserve to be used or exploited that way. Or your deciding to
post a zillion emails from "Holly" so you could be perceived as some
angel of mercy helping out a cancer victim even though the evidence of
her lies and deceit was staring you right in the face. Or your whining
about getting criticized, your repeated use of the exact same
exaggerated sentence about hearing a message that had the F-word in it
(my god how did you survive such a horrendous insult to your
sensibilities- let's give you a medal for biggest martyr of all time)
and the list goes on and on.
You admire the fact that I tell it like it is, except for when the
subject is you. Too bad.

***paste***


I killfiled you after the Megan fiasco. *Then* you aligned yourself
with Mary because so many of us told you you were annoying.

It's hilarious how you now try to rewrite
history.

Look it up, Cat****. Look it up. I am not the only person who has
recongized your need for drawing attention to yourself.

Face it, Mommy Dearest, either *you all* were hypocrites back then
for hating me but acting so nicey-nice,

I didn't "hate" you until you became more and more annoying. Honestly,
I thought the behavior would stop. It didn't. It still hasn't. And
for the record, I don't hate you, I merely think you are pathetic.

....and then of course there's the matter of playing the "victim" when
Megan called you. You totally brought that whole fiasco on yourself,
and then tried to vilify Megan. ****ing GROW UP. How many people wil
tell you that before you start to accept responsibility for your
cations?


or you're being hypocrites now in
denying the real reason you hate me!

Go read the thread, Torchie. It's there in black and white.

Your duplicity is transparent and, as
more than a few posters here have noted, you're losing it! LOL

I don't give a **** if you align yourself with Tapeworm. In fact, I
think you two are a perfect pair. You deserve each other.

-L.

Cheryl wrote:

A Usenet "troll" has a mission of making a group unusable. You
started out as a troll; after a while you decided that your tactic
was all wrong here. You changed all that and decided to be civil,
only on certain levels. That didn't work too well, so you decided
to befriend every newbie, slurp every male, and now have succeeded
in making this group unusable. You're a Usenet ho.

Bingo.

-L.

whacked book report

Good Lawd! get your ass in the bed already! It's OVER!

whitershadeofpale wrote:
whacked book report

Good Lawd! get your ass in the bed already! It's OVER!

Hey! It was only 12:30 here. I am a nighthawk.

-L.

-L. wrote:
whitershadeofpale wrote:
whacked book report

Good Lawd! get your ass in the bed already! It's OVER!

Hey! It was only 12:30 here. I am a nighthawk.

-L.

yebbut (that's like a rabbit, but you can't fry them)

Yeah, but, you've been at it for daaaays now.

You're hyped up on something aintcha! lol

whitershadeofpale wrote:

yebbut (that's like a rabbit, but you can't fry them)

Yeah, but, you've been at it for daaaays now.

You're hyped up on something aintcha! lol

I just usually post in other groups - you donna see me, usually. Like
I said I'm just throwing my cow patty into the fire for fun.

-L.