The moon isn't full but you're all crazy

wrote in message
ups.com...

Trish wrote:
It may not have anything to do with embarrassment, some people here feel
its ok to threaten posters by phone calls and nasty e-mails. These same
people feel its ok to contact family members, their kids and employers,
hey some even go so low as to contact employers of family members, go
figure. (I was in a usenet group where this actually happened over a
debate of birth control/non birth control, the husband was contemplating
a vasectomy and worked as a teacher in a private catholic school, note I
said worked, he no longer does (: ) So to avoid this people use socks
when making a point that they know will not be accepted be a certain few
here. This also explains why many people do not use their own names.

That's utter bull**** and you know it. People use socks to stir up
**** because they are cowardly assholes and grow a spine under an
assumed name. Your friend Mary is the A #1 culprit, despite all of her
bellowing about "free speech" and asserting that (and I quote)
"whatever happens in Usenet is okay by me. All of it, any of it, I just
love a free-for-all. " She's a ****ing hypocrite and she knows it.
The first mention of her name, she ran away with her tail between her
legs because she was embarassed.


If that's true, then why do you seem to be seeing her everywhere?

Bet You Missed Me! wrote:
If that's true, then why do you seem to be seeing her everywhere?

You're only seen under a sock, jackass, because you don't have the
balls to post under your real name eventhough we all know it. You're
afraid you will embarass yourself.

-L.

wrote in message
oups.com...

Bet You Missed Me! wrote:
If that's true, then why do you seem to be seeing her everywhere?

You're only seen under a sock, jackass, because you don't have the
balls to post under your real name eventhough we all know it. You're
afraid you will embarass yourself.


Funny, I don't see your name here, though everyone knows it.

As for embarrassment, well, you know Lyn, Jonathan and Will
are going to experience all of that for you, since you don't have
the sense to. Jonathan is going to love reading all your posts one
day, I'm sure. Particularly the ones about blowjobs and how much
you like to swallow, and how much his daddy's breath stinks.

Hang in there, Lynette. After all, what's the alternative?

wrote in message
oups.com...

Bet You Missed Me! wrote:
If that's true, then why do you seem to be seeing her everywhere?

You're only seen under a sock, jackass, because you don't have the
balls to post under your real name eventhough we all know it. You're
afraid you will embarass yourself.

-L.


I have noticed that ladies over at alt.infertility.parenting do not seem to
miss you,
Lynette. I cannot imagine why not.

wrote:

Personally, I though Candace's attempt at soxing was cute. Sexy Soxy,
and all.

You haven't seen the last of me.

SS

On 29 Aug 2005 23:48:39 -0700, wrote:


Trish wrote:
It may not have anything to do with embarrassment, some people here feel
its ok to threaten posters by phone calls and nasty e-mails. These same
people feel its ok to contact family members, their kids and employers,
hey some even go so low as to contact employers of family members, go
figure. (I was in a usenet group where this actually happened over a
debate of birth control/non birth control, the husband was contemplating
a vasectomy and worked as a teacher in a private catholic school, note I
said worked, he no longer does (: ) So to avoid this people use socks
when making a point that they know will not be accepted be a certain few
here. This also explains why many people do not use their own names.

That's utter bull**** and you know it. People use socks to stir up
**** because they are cowardly assholes and grow a spine under an
assumed name. Your friend Mary is the A #1 culprit, despite all of her
bellowing about "free speech" and asserting that (and I quote)
"whatever happens in Usenet is okay by me. All of it, any of it, I just
love a free-for-all. " She's a ****ing hypocrite and she knows it.
The first mention of her name, she ran away with her tail between her
legs because she was embarassed.

If Mary traded on her anonymity, her attackers have done likewise and
have used it to play dirtier tricks than anything Mary ever did.

We have seen the web site with Cheryl's name and those of some of her
fellow parishioners. No big deal, right? But what if some idiot got
the bright idea to collect email addresses or mailing addresses for as
many of those people as possible, and send lurid, defamatory
information about Cheryl? "Did you know that one of your fellow
parishioners, Cheryl S, is a Nazi sympathizer who belongs to an
underground Internet society that attacks computer systems, causing
billions of dollars of economic damage every year?"

It wouldn't ruin Cheryl's life, but it wouldn't be fair play, either.
That is the vicious cycle this group seems to be moving toward, with
your full support and encouragement.

Charlie

Charlie Wilkes wrote:

If Mary traded on her anonymity, her attackers have done likewise and
have used it to play dirtier tricks than anything Mary ever did.

Who did Charlie? Who did anything any "dirtier" than Mary? Besides
Karma, that is. I will admit that Karma printing Mary's boss' name and
address wasn't cool. *He* didn't deserve that. But other than that,
Mary got from Karma *exactly* what she did to me for months. Posting
my name, my kid's name, various things I have talked about in other
ngs, running off to AIparenting to "tattle tale" on me - which is
exactly what Karma did to her - dug up her dirty laundry and aired it
here. Big ****ing Deal. If Nancy wasn't such a pussy she would have
shrugged it off, called Karma an asshole and continued to post. The
truth is, she was embarassed by it so couldn't post any more. We knew
her real name, and she was embarassed to pull the crap she pulled for
over a year, under her real name. THEM'S the facts, Charlie. She
simply is a spineless jellyfish hiding behind a pseudonym.


We have seen the web site with Cheryl's name and those of some of her
fellow parishioners. No big deal, right?

No, especially since that's not her church.

But what if some idiot got
the bright idea to collect email addresses or mailing addresses for as
many of those people as possible, and send lurid, defamatory
information about Cheryl? "Did you know that one of your fellow
parishioners, Cheryl S, is a Nazi sympathizer who belongs to an
underground Internet society that attacks computer systems, causing
billions of dollars of economic damage every year?"

If somebody did that to Cheryl, she'd probably laugh it off as some
freakazoid stalker, as would I, or anyone else with half a brain, and
any bit of self-worth. Cheryl is no more a Nazi sympathizer than I am,
and everyone who knows her knows it.

Cheryl has never made any attempt to hide her last name, nor have I.
Neither of us has anything to be embarassed about. Unfortunately Mary
apparently does, and she wasn't smart enough to cover her tracks.


It wouldn't ruin Cheryl's life, but it wouldn't be fair play, either.

Honestly I doubt she'd give a **** if they did especially since that
Cheryl Sellner isn't her.

That is the vicious cycle this group seems to be moving toward, with
your full support and encouragement.

Oh really? Did I tell anyone to hunt down the **** and pull an Uzi on
her? Absolutely not. Did I even comment on the "Aerial Mary" post -
um, no, because anyone who has half a clue about the 'net knows those
sites exist. They have been discussed on the ngs for months, maybe
even years. So what? And what did I get in return in that thread?
Mary posting what she thought was my name, my husband's name, my kid's
name and addresses multiple times, in her reliable *sweet* fashion.

WTF did I ever do to her? Except disagree with her a couple of times
and tell her she didn't need to be such an asshole? And for that I
deserve to have my kid's name used over and over and over again? I
don't give a **** if she ****ing hates me, but why **** with my kid?
Hum? WTF did *he* do to her? Then she has the gall to comment on how
cute he is. And ya know, her printing his name really doesn't even
bother me. It's just the principle of the thing - ****ing with a
toddler - invading his privacy. That's just ****ed up, no matter how
you look at it.

Mary's an asshole in real life just as she was/is here, you can bet
your bank account. And if Karma is just, which it is, someday she'll
cross the wrong person in real life and reap what she has sown. THAT
you can bet your money on. She doesn't need to fear anonymous people
on the internet. She needs to fear her own stupidity and arrogance,
because ultimatley, THAT is what will get her in trouble.

If you think anyone on this newsgroup gives a **** enough about Mary to
do anything to her IRL, you're dellusional. She's nothing but a
tapeworm up the ass of a newsgroup; a petty annoyance. They come and
they go. She isn't the first and she won't be the last. You really
can't take this **** seriously, Charlie. I thought *you* knew that.

Anyway, carry on with your banter. I'm going back to cats.

-L.

Bet You Missed Me! wrote:
I have noticed that ladies over at alt.infertility.parenting do not seem to
miss you,
Lynette. I cannot imagine why not.

Blah blah bla. You're such a boor, regardless of which sock you use.
Don't you have some damage control you should be attending to?

-L.

On 30 Aug 2005 02:14:38 -0700, "-L." wrote:


Charlie Wilkes wrote:

If Mary traded on her anonymity, her attackers have done likewise and
have used it to play dirtier tricks than anything Mary ever did.

Who did Charlie? Who did anything any "dirtier" than Mary? Besides
Karma, that is. I will admit that Karma printing Mary's boss' name and
address wasn't cool. *He* didn't deserve that. But other than that,
Mary got from Karma *exactly* what she did to me for months. Posting
my name, my kid's name, various things I have talked about in other
ngs, running off to AIparenting to "tattle tale" on me - which is
exactly what Karma did to her - dug up her dirty laundry and aired it
here. Big ****ing Deal. If Nancy wasn't such a pussy she would have
shrugged it off, called Karma an asshole and continued to post. The
truth is, she was embarassed by it so couldn't post any more. We knew
her real name, and she was embarassed to pull the crap she pulled for
over a year, under her real name. THEM'S the facts, Charlie. She
simply is a spineless jellyfish hiding behind a pseudonym.


We have seen the web site with Cheryl's name and those of some of her
fellow parishioners. No big deal, right?

No, especially since that's not her church.

But what if some idiot got
the bright idea to collect email addresses or mailing addresses for as
many of those people as possible, and send lurid, defamatory
information about Cheryl? "Did you know that one of your fellow
parishioners, Cheryl S, is a Nazi sympathizer who belongs to an
underground Internet society that attacks computer systems, causing
billions of dollars of economic damage every year?"

If somebody did that to Cheryl, she'd probably laugh it off as some

No, she wouldn't laugh it off. It wouldn't be funny to her, and it
wouldn't be funny to the people who got the emails. It would be weird
and alarming.

What is funny in the group -- where it's all out in the open and
everyone knows what is being said, whether it's coming from sock
puppets or whatever -- is no longer funny when someone gets singled
out as a target for harrassment by anonymous weirdos.

freakazoid stalker, as would I, or anyone else with half a brain, and
any bit of self-worth. Cheryl is no more a Nazi sympathizer than I am,
and everyone who knows her knows it.

Cheryl has never made any attempt to hide her last name, nor have I.
Neither of us has anything to be embarassed about. Unfortunately Mary
apparently does, and she wasn't smart enough to cover her tracks.


It wouldn't ruin Cheryl's life, but it wouldn't be fair play, either.

Honestly I doubt she'd give a **** if they did especially since that
Cheryl Sellner isn't her.

That is the vicious cycle this group seems to be moving toward, with
your full support and encouragement.

Oh really? Did I tell anyone to hunt down the **** and pull an Uzi on

You are scary.

her? Absolutely not. Did I even comment on the "Aerial Mary" post -
um, no, because anyone who has half a clue about the 'net knows those
sites exist. They have been discussed on the ngs for months, maybe
even years. So what? And what did I get in return in that thread?
Mary posting what she thought was my name, my husband's name, my kid's
name and addresses multiple times, in her reliable *sweet* fashion.

WTF did I ever do to her? Except disagree with her a couple of times
and tell her she didn't need to be such an asshole? And for that I
deserve to have my kid's name used over and over and over again? I
don't give a **** if she ****ing hates me, but why **** with my kid?
Hum? WTF did *he* do to her? Then she has the gall to comment on how
cute he is. And ya know, her printing his name really doesn't even
bother me. It's just the principle of the thing - ****ing with a
toddler - invading his privacy. That's just ****ed up, no matter how

Nobody is bothering your child. That is a figment of your
imagination. Your child doesn't know about any of this and will not
be affected by it, unless it affects your behavior toward him.

You're a little bit out there, Lyn. You maybe ought to see
someone.... seriously.

Charlie

"Candace" wrote in message
ups.com...
Justin L wrote:
On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 12:38:28 GMT, "Magic Mood Jeep©"
wrote:

for the full version, see previous posts in this thread

congratulations Candace, you have been outed!

how do you feel?

Somehow it's just not as satisfying as I had hoped. Sadly, MMJ's
headers weren't even necessary cuz Bobbi outed herself first. Bobbi's
a loser.

Candace

Hi Candace,
It's a shame you were in the position where you felt you needed to
use a sock.
I think if you're not crazy before you start posting here , you soon
will beG
Bobbi , that's a nice name . Any reason for choosing that?
Alison