From: mike_steiner@qm.claris.com (Mike Steiner)
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
Subject: Re: t: Post for Week of Nov  9
Date: 10 Nov 92 21:22:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: 192.mike_steiner-101192131405
Followup-To: rec.org.mensa

In article <1992Nov9.173959.22825@ncsu.edu>, scott@bogus.network.address
(Scott Tai) wrote:
> 
> 
> ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic) writes:
> : As far as a network address is concerned, the idea is - 
> : ain't nobody but me at "ecsd@tfs.com" - and the mail doesn't 
> : bounce - and I usually reply to everyone I can remember to
> 
> Well, it's pretty plain.  There's no one except Tai at 
> mensa@nyx.cs.du.edu.  The mail doesn't bounce, and I try to 
> reply to everyone (only phil and radams, so far...)
> 
> : Now: if that mensa mail address is for real, then there must 
> : be some routing mechanism that gets your mail to YOU - since 
> : nobody on the list is named Scott Tai - so? Who are YOU?
> 
> The question is irrelevant: all these affecting details are no
> business of yours.  What possible difference does a name make?
> A post should be judged by its contents, not its author; and 
> likewise, criticisms should be directed towards the contents of 
> an article and not to its author.  Some of you can't help being
> partial, I've noticed.  

When the author of a message has a history of falsification and lies, the
message should be judged by its author as well as by its contents.  When
the author of a message makes himself the subject of criticism, then
criticism of him is not out of order.


> mike_steiner@qm.claris.com (Mike Steiner) writes:
> : scott@ailab (Scott Tai) writes:
> : > I must confess I don't quite understand him.  No doubt he has a 
> : > motive, and probably a bad one.  I know he has a bad nature.  But I'm 
> : > glad I've a better, to forgive it; and however miserable he makes us,
> : > we shall still have the revenge of thinking that his cruelty arises
> : > from his greater misery.
> [...]
> : My motive is that I do not care for liars and hypcrites--you have 
> : proven yourself to be both.  If didn't post your lies and your 
> : hypocricy, I wouldn't have come down on you.  The only misery you 
> : are getting on this newsgroup is of your own making; you have
> : brought it down upon yourself.
> 
> Judas!  traitor!  You are a hypocrite, too, are you?  A deliberate
> deceiver.
> 
> And I want you to be aware that I know you have treated me infernally!
> And if you flatter yourself that I don't perceive it, you are a fool;
> and if you think I can be consoled by sweet words, you are an idiot;
> and if you fancy I'll suffer unrevenged, I'll convince you of the
> contrary, in a very little while!
> 
> You scandalous old hypocrite!  I warn you to refrain from provoking 
> me, or I'll ask your abduction as a special favor.
> 
> :)

Well, I see that you're developing a sense of humor at last.  Perhaps Adams
was right and you are improving/reforming.  We shall see.
 

> mike_steiner@qm.claris.com (Mike Steiner) writes:
> : For instance, I usually attempt to write at the sixth-grade level 
> : when writing to you, so that you can understand it.
> 
> You are incurable, mike_steiner, and you shall pay me for the plague 
> of having you eternally in my sight!  Fellow-martyrs, have at him!  
> Drag him down, and crush him to atoms, that the place which knows him 
> may know him no more!

Yes, you're most definitely developing a sense of humor....

> mike_steiner@qm.claris.com (Mike Steiner)
> : As a short, skinny, bespectacled geek who usually had his head 
> : buried in a book, I was often picked on by schoolyard bullies.
> 
> It wasn't because you were a short, skinny, bespectacled geek.
> It was because you were as annoying as you are on this newsgroup.

But you still have a ways to go...

> : radams@BNR.CA (Rodney Adams) writes:
> : > The fact stands that your attacks have frequently devolved into 
> : > name-calling, and, in fact, your recently post to Tai is little 
> : >better than such.
> :
> : True, because that is all he deserved.
> 
> I thought if I had caused the cloud on rec.org.mensa, it was my duty
> to make an effort to dispel it; so, I refrained from all flames.

You should have tried harder, so we could have seen some results of your
efforts.

> mike_steiner, however, chose to continue flaming.  He is a spoiled
> child, and fancies the world was made for his accomodation; and though
> I humor him, I think a smart chastisement might improve him all the
> same.  Don't imagine that he contains depths of benevolence and affection
> beneath a rough exterior!  He's a fierce, pitiless, wolfish man.

As I said, you still have a ways to go.

+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Now that I have a reader that can do .sigs, I can't think of a witty |
|one to put here, so I won't.  All normal disclaimers apply.          |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa