From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
Subject: Re: Attention! (Chaney and Humphrey)
Keywords: You expect me to mark my deletions?  Dream on...
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date:  2 Nov 92 20:59:21 GMT

In <=6+1jxd@rpi.edu> keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.) writes:

>nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>->keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.) writes:
>->>nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>->>->keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.) writes:
>->>->>cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker) writes:
>->>->>->Does anyone else here picture a pouty five-year-old, fists jammed
>->>->>->firmly into ears, screaming "I can't hear you! I can't hear you!"
>->>->>->right after he knows he's lost the argument?

>->The first time I thought this referred to Gordon Storga.  

>i'm not surprised, given some of the more significant
>misunderstandings you've posted. i'm glad to see that
>you can admit to making a mistake.

>->Now I have a better candidate: Susan Garvin.  

>and here you go making another one.

>->Check out the BECKY BELL'S AUTOPSY AND 
>->COMMENTARY thread, where she has been bested by Steve Kellemeyer,
>->with the help of a bit of documentation by me and a lot of her own
>->stupid "my mind is made up, don't confuse me with facts" public statements.

I was referring, in particular, to the following exchange:

			______________________

Subject: Re: BECKY BELL'S AUTOPSY AND COMMENTARY
Keywords: Garvin, mind, made up, confuse, facts.
Distribution: world

In <7997@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:

>I'm dropping this thread.  Frankly, I don't have the stomach to
>discuss this with these two ghouls.  Nyikos and Kellmeyer are
>so anxious to believe that their gods Willke and Nathanson are
>telling them the truth that they know no limits.  

The deceased: Susan Garvin

Cause of death: A terminal case of MMIMUDCMWTF.  ("My mind is made
up, don't confuse me with the facts.")

But don't worry folks, though Susan calls us ghouls, we'll be 
as nice to her as Casper the Friendly Ghost.  And good will triumph
over evil, just as in that kiddie comic.
		____________________________

Hope you did not mind the zany last paragraph, folks, it was getting close to 
Haloween.  It has a serious hidden message, BTW: I haven't been
taking Susan Garvin's childish attacks so personally that I would
not be just as nice to her if we met as...well, Haloween is over,
so I won't repeat the comment.

>i've read every word posted on this thread and previous
>becky bell threads dating back well before you
>discovered t.a. after reading all of the evidence
>posted, it is clear to me that everything susan garvin
>posted on this thread is correct. it's interesting that
>you infer she was bested by anyone on this topic when
>the converse is obvious to most who followed the
>thread. this, and other of your comments about susan
>garvin make me think that she has intimidated you.

Judge for yourselves, folks.  From what I've seen of Keegan and
what Elizabeth Bartley has told me, I don't see any point in trying
to convince Keegan, and am defending myself only so others reading
this will see why I said the things I did earlier.

>->>->>this, "i'm posting this because blah-blah has you in a
>->>->>killfile so maybe they'll see this follow-up ......", i
>->>->>always speculate that the git who announced the killfile 
>->>->>really wasn't killfiling and instead begged some third 
>->>->>party to give them a chance to reply.

>->>->I believe your `git' refers to Elizabeth Bartley

>->>whoops, i made a typo. that should have been 'gits.' it
>->>was a generic observation. i won't argue with you if
>->>you want to single out ms. bartley for your own
>->>reasons.

>->Well, the sequel, which you omitted, certainly seemed to refer to
>->her.  You then talked about people who seemed to be trying to get
>->her to respond, like me, by following up to you.  Hence your 
>->plural below:

>the facts were posted for all to read. did you think
>ms. bartley had conducted herself like the "pouty
>five-year old" rocker referred to?

No, I thought you thought she did.

>->>so ..... when you wrote "Another example, heaping one
>->>accusation on top of another," what heap are you
>->>referring to? do post some of your heap.

>->Not my heap. Yours. 

>you seem confused. you raised the subject "heap." now
>that i've questioned you on "heap," you are denying
>that you raised the subject.

I did not deny that I raised the subject of "heap".  I raised it.
But it was your heap, not mine.

> i don't mind that you're
>backing off. some people aren't bright enough to
>realize they've made a mistake.

You know, when I read a post by drieux, I get the feeling that
I am reading the output of a computer rather than a person.  In
your case, I get the same impression, with the computer mis-wired
to boot.

>->Post it yourself.  You deleted it.

>support your assertion that i deleted any "heap" from
>your post. are you so frightened of me that you'd lie?

I did not lie.  I'll post your heap if someone else requests that
I do so.  I do not honor all requests from mis-wired computers, and
while I do not REALLY believe you are one, I don't honor all requests
from people who imitate mis-wired computers.

[BTW I don't really believe drieux is a computer any more than I
really believed he was Adrienne Regard.]

>->Sheesh--I start documenting Gordon Storga's deletions, then Chris
>->and M. Price and Keegan want to get into the act and see how much time
>->they can make me "waste".  No dice, Keegan.

>it's perfectly acceptable to me if you decline to
>support what you write so long as you don't ask others
>to do that which you refuse to do.

I generally support what I write, but I am waiting for a request
from someone other than Keegan.

Peter Nyikos


Newsgroups: talk.abortion