Gaubster is Steve Crane's sock puppet -- it's now official!!!

in thread : shelly
whittled the following words:

On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 13:28:13 -0600, diddy
wrote:

Well they might be interested in how much PAID time you spent posting.

believe it or not, some paid time is my own to do with as i see fit.

It shouldn't be hard to prove considering that rhetoric flows from you
like an overflowing stool. Simply compare your postings to your work
hours. Should be interesting

knock yourself out. however, i really doubt my boss is going to waste
her time comparing my posting times with my work schedule. she's
quite happy with my job performance and, i suspect, has much better
things to do.


Since you enjoy trying to get people fired, or getting their connections
discontinued, then you shouldn't really mind then if we try then, huh?
What comes around, goes around.

On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 14:13:31 -0500, "Mary"
wrote:

You don't know that. You assume that. It's a false conclusion.

no, i can't know for 100% certain that they are aware of his actions.
however, i think it's a safe enough assumption that i'm willing to
make it.

What if he is the one who handles the email? lol

i really doubt that he works in their complaints department.
lololololol!

--
shelly
http://home.bluemarble.net/~scouvrette || http://cat-sidh.blogspot.com

Is this a sexy tune Mrs. Badcrumble?
-- Eddie Izzard

On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 13:38:20 -0600, diddy
wrote:

Since you enjoy trying to get people fired,

i had no such intention. that would be malicious. i already
explained that my purpose in contacting Hill's was to inform them that
their company's integrity was being compromised. i would've thought
they might care about such things, but i guess not. i could care less
whether or not they sanctioned Steve for his actions. that's frankly
none of my business.

or getting their connections discontinued,

what on earth are you referring to? i haven't said bupkis to Steve's
ISP. besides, i can't imagine that he's done anything to violate his
TOS.

then you shouldn't really mind then if we try then, huh?
What comes around, goes around.

i already invited you to knock yourself out. good luck!

--
shelly
http://home.bluemarble.net/~scouvrette || http://cat-sidh.blogspot.com

We can't all, and some just don't. That's all there is to it.
-- A.A. Milne

wrote
It is. Go to this page and scroll down to the executive officer bio:
http://www.ksdemolay.org/info.html

It makes it even *more* scummy that someone who supposedly lives a faith
based life engages in such fraud. It's the ultimate hypocrisy.

Megan

I thought it was odd that the only topic Gaubster responded to, besides cat
food discussions, was school prayer and politics.

--
-Kelly
kelly at farringtons dot net
"Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG

"shelly" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 14:19:18 -0500, "Mary"
wrote:

http://www.indiana.edu/~libadmin/iuln/11iuln1601.html

When you post using your first and last name, skill is
not necessary.

duh. have you bothered to look at my headers? i am not posting from
IU. maybe you could get Blue Marble to give a ****, but i *really*
doubt it.

You asked how diddy decided you worked at IU, and I told you.
I personally do not give a poop.



oh, and that's hopelessly out of date info. i no longer work there.
again, HTH!

*smooches*
--

If kisses would help you, I'd send one. However, I think
you are pretty much beyond help. Before you start
netcopping people to their bosses, uh, it might be best
for you to remove your full name from your posts.
*shaking my head.*

On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 14:48:04 -0500, "Mary"
wrote:

You asked how diddy decided you worked at IU, and I told you.

no, that's not what i asked Diddy. i asked her which parts of my
headers indicate i'm posting from IU. that sort of thing might become
important if she intends to bitch to my employer.

Before you start
netcopping people to their bosses, uh, it might be best
for you to remove your full name from your posts.

why? what possible interest could my employer have in my posting to
Usenet?

--
shelly
http://home.bluemarble.net/~scouvrette || http://cat-sidh.blogspot.com

You must have chaos in your heart to give birth to a dancing star.
-- Friedrich Nietzsche

On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 13:46:48 -0600, diddy
wrote:

Sure. Riiiight. You are so sanctimonious it stinks. I can't for the life of
me figure how you justify yourself, and even more amazing how you get
people to support you. One twisted sister.

oh please. **this** coming from the asshole who goes around
cancelling people's posts? you setting yourself up as an arbiter of
morality must be some sort of cruel joke.

--
shelly
http://home.bluemarble.net/~scouvrette || http://cat-sidh.blogspot.com

It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with
potatoes.
-- Douglas Adams

In article ,
diddy wrote:
Since you enjoy trying to get people fired, or getting their connections
discontinued, then you shouldn't really mind then if we try then, huh?

The flip side is that if you really think it's wrong it's
not something you should be trying, yourself.

I've been on the receiving end of this kind of thing and I
really don't like it. Back before the paying customers
arrived pretty much everybody participated in Usenet from
work and for many of us it was seen as an employmnent
benefit. I was working for Cornell when BST was first
released, and I was involved with some discussions of it on
misc.rural. I posted some information from a local ag
newsletter on its expected economic impact. The next day I
got a call from an extension agent in another part of the
state asking me if I'd heard from Cornell yet about it.
Apparently an employee of the USDA library had posted a
bibliography and then had her posting privileges revoked by
her employer (the Ag Department Library). And sure enough,
the Department of Agriculture contacted Cornell and wanted
to know why a Cornell employee was saying apparently
negative things about BST. The University promptly let me
know that I should knock it off. (BST was developed at
Cornell with federal money and then licensed to Monsanto.)
Basically, the Department of Agriculture was trying to
suppress discussion of BST.

And I think that that's typically the case when contacting
an employer - it's usually either an attempt to censor
discussion or to punish someone over a difference of
opinion.

That said, it's really not black and white. If someone is
posting here as an agent of their employer and they're
either lying or causing other kinds of problems, then it
definitely is the employer's business. Still, these things
are fuzzy and I prefer to err on the side of the free
exchange of, um, "ideas." Yeah, that's what I'll call them.

So in that sense Crane's behavior is probably more a matter
of interest to his employer than Gaub's. I'm pretty sure
the latter is a freelance asshole and while his behavior is
ethically problematic I doubt Hill told him "Go forth and
offend the crap out of everybody."

And I am shocked - shocked, I tell you - shocked, that Gaub
has behaved unethically.
^L
Psych!
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

George Bush's proposed budget will create $1.6 trillion in additional
federal debt, compared to just tracking inflation, according to the CBO.

On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 14:01:26 -0600, diddy
wrote:

Because it's on company time?

or so you assume.

actually, i do spend a good bit of time Googling and searching Usenet
and reading various mail lists, as well as searching a buttload of
on-line resources. it's a boring-as-hell part of my j-o-b. HTH!

And it's not just an occassional occurance.

really? why don't you go total up all those posts that i've made on
"company time."

--
shelly
http://home.bluemarble.net/~scouvrette || http://cat-sidh.blogspot.com

We walked 5 miles backwards to get where we are today.
-- Melora (Rasputina)

On 13 Mar 2005 14:59:10 -0500, (Melinda Shore) wrote:

And I am shocked - shocked, I tell you - shocked, that Gaub
has behaved unethically.

lololololol. (do you suppose it's coinkydinks that my spell checker
wants to turn that into lobotomized?)

i'm gobsmacked at the lack of critical thinking some folks are
suffering from. i know it shouldn't be surprising, and yet, it is.

and! for some reason, it's a huge deal that someone got caught with
his sillypants down, but apparently it's okay that that same person
has spent umpty years undermining his company's credibility? what is
wrong with people?

--
shelly
http://home.bluemarble.net/~scouvrette || http://cat-sidh.blogspot.com

To live a creative life, we must lose our fear of being wrong.
-- Joseph Chilton Pearce