From: casper@vxcrna.cern.ch (CASPER,DAVI./PPE)
Newsgroups: alt.astrology
Subject: Re: Mr. CERN
Summary: STOP PANDERING
Date: 27 Sep 92 14:45:00 GMT
Organization: European Organization for Nuclear Research, CERN
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Sep26.115552.2391@tfs.com>, ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic) writes...

>Mr. CERN is NOT interested in learning anything; if he had been,
>he would have looked into my arguments trying to understand my position,
>rather than ignoring what he couldn't refute.

Your arguments were understood and refuted, to the extent they were not inapt
(based on incorrect analogies) or self-contradicting in the first place.  If
there is some important issue you felt was not addressed, repost instead of
hurling epithets.

>The group has the right to ignore the jerk and get on with life.
>PUT HIM IN A KILLFILE please. DO NOT FALL for this "you have to prove
>this to me *personally*" bullshit.

Yes, please anyone who is upset by what I write to the point of physical anger,
please put me in your killfile.  I don't want to be responsible for giving
anyone a stroke.

>I am very busy now. Those who want my attention, please address posts
>to me personally - Mr. CERN excepted until he replies that he has read
>what I have sent him (*honestly*) -
>At my fucking expense.

Well you offered.  I guess my willingness to read it is more evidence of my
unwillingness to learn.  I seriously doubt that if I sent you a book reviewing
the negative evidence *you* would bother to read it, would you?

>It is a subjective, occult art/science. Mr. CERN is blind yet asking for a
>description of 'red' versus 'green' - please PUT HIM IN YOUR KILLFILE.
>Wiser people than I came to this conclusion many posts before I did.
>When I describe the Mr. CERN phenomenon to coworkers, they say he is
>looking for attention.

Wow, like, now I'm a phenomenon, dude.

>This is ALT.ASTROLOGY, not ALT.CATER.TO.ASSHOLES.SAPPING.BANDWIDTH
>so I suggest we get on with what *most* of us would rather do.

i.e., agreeing with ourselves...

>Answer those sincerely asking for confirmation and taking *your* word
>for what you do. Those who deny *your* perceptions without knowing them
>are UN-SELF-AWARE PINHEADS.

Funny how all these wiser, self-aware people sincerely asking for confirmation
seem to be the ones who can't have a disagreement without resorting to
name-calling within about 1 week.

>Sorry for the very *hot* flames, I'm just ticked seeing others trying to
>deal with someone who does not play fair.

Actually, I'd only give you about a 5.5 on the flame-o-meter.  I've been called
a lot worse.  I'm interested in what you consider to be "not playing fair".
It couldn't mean flaming someone and then putting them in your kill file, could
it?

>Do you want to practice astrology?
>So let's get on with it. I have seen no other group so harassed by ONE person.

Disagreement = harassment.

>Let's get on with the VERY SPECIFIC subject of the group; let Mr. CERN
>go to alt.skeptic where he belongs, where he can get all the *hugs* he wants.

Gee, I can't remember the last time anyone here gave me a hug.  Actually, it
sounds like you're the one looking for hugs...and anyone who refuses is to be
flamed and then KILLed.

Actually, I don't like sci.skeptic very much, since 95% of the people there
agree.  Not conducive to much learning or interesting discussion.


Dave
a.k.a. Mr. CERN (I wouldn't call myself that around Carlo...)
Newsgroups: alt.astrology