From: gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga)
Subject: Re: Happy Anniversary!  (Four days and counting)
Organization: Stay Awake Software
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 17:42:04 GMT

<1992Aug15.232244.14853@csus.edu> chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) :
>In article <yd6mlza.gordons@netcom.com> gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga) :
>><1992Aug12.215027.1814@csus.edu> chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney):
>>><1992Aug11.181819.9370@coopsol.com> gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga) :
>>>><1992Aug10.171155.7841@csus.edu> chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) :
...
>>>>>And none'ya have been able to remove me yet, 
>>>>...
>>>>Kinda like a barnacle.  Seriously, has someone *really* tried to get your
>>>>net access removed?  Do you have proof of this accusation?  Isn't true
>>>>that you think it was wonderful that Dan Bredy lost his net access?  And
>>>>now you are whining that you think someone tried to remove yours.
>>>
>>>Susan Garvin? 
>>
>>I see a name.  I don't see any *proof*.
>
>She tried to complain about my having posted and twisted her name and
>substituting it with mine, as a joke. Even as though my system admins
>tossed it out and went on with business as usual. 

You buffoon.  Why do you continue to pretend?  Susan didn't contact your
sysadmins.  She contacted *her* sysadmins.  They apparently contacted yours
and asked that you *stop doctoring posts*, not that you have your access
removed.

>>>Well, as for the others, I wouldn't say they wanted my access removed;
>>
>>Then why did you imply above that they were trying to do so?
>
>I was implying that they were harassing myself and CSUS in general
>about their Dennis Hall prank, and Scott Roby said in his letter that
>he wanted to urge CSUS system admins to take direct action against me.

Nope, you implied that they all tried to get your access pulled.  Why else
did you crow about still being around and that they had failed?  And Scott
Roby only asked that you stop posting as two different people.

>Well, maybe I was wrong: he couldn't do it because I never posted as
>DH so I couldn't be messed with by him. But the threat sure looked
>serious enough to me, so I am justified in saying that he was trying
>to get my net.access compromised, if not taken away. 

In your own little mind, but the fact that you also believe you are/were a
fighter plane and an inhuman alien race doesn't speak well for your
"justification".

...
>>>		  Pro-Choice means pro-adult/child sex! 
>>>	        With the little girl's consent, of course. 
>>
>>Poor Steve, not even aware that a growing number of child molestations are
>>being perpetrated on young boys (see "Catholic Priest"). 
>
>Whoopity-do. It'll be dealt with by the cops. 

"Whoopity-do"???  That's your comment about child-abuse?

>And the number of priests who are illegally bothering with boys, can't
>be as many as the number of non-priests in general. 

That's right.  And the greatest number of child-abusers are heterosexual
men.  Usually the child's father or relative.


Gordon
Pro-abortion, Pro-person, Pro-women's-rights and ex-boytoy of Susan, Muriel,
Cathi, Nora, Jennifer, Sarah, Lynn, Diana (catwoman), and Diana (Sorceress), 
and married to a goddess among women, and proud of it all.
-- 
The opinions expressed are my own, and not the beliefs or opinions
of whatever company you think I work for.  So there, thhhbbbt!
Message to Kodak:  Freedom for Dan Bredy.
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:31589 alt.flame:12057