From: frants@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Leonid Frants)
Subject: Re: Don't blame lawyers!
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 01:34:08 GMT

In article <1993Jan2.191214.785@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>In article <1993Jan2.224925.26446@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>, frants@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Leonid Frants) writes:
>> 
>> Well you are wrong here - I represent the collective conscience of
>> r.g.c. (right guys?). My viewpoint, which you are you too slow to
>
>Hmmm....but other people have been posting that your line of posts are clearly
>not proper.
>

Because the other people are too nice to morons like you, while I have
very little tolerance for them.

>Maybe you really represent the collective conscience of the terminally
>unconscious...
>

Yeah, right. I hear the subconscious voice of Don Wedding - well
actually not so subconscious...



>> notice despite any lack of ambiguity on my side, is that you are a
>> dweeb and jerk (whose real name is Don Wedding - and I do not give a
>> shit if all the GM's of the world think otherwise).
>
>Sorry Dude. My name, as I have pointed out to others with your lack of 
>IQ, is Darrell M. Crosgrove. If you don't believe it, look at my userstring.
>Notice how it reads DCROSGR, and Mr. Wedding's reads DWEDDIN. Notice that the
>system here uses your first initial and the first six of your last name.
>
>Please, read WHO you are posting to before you post. (I realize that maybe you
>needed someone else to read this to you, and they got it worng, so I'll give
>you the benefit of the doubt that this was an honset error.)
>

No error at all. The account is in the name of DCROSGR but the poster
is Don Wedding. Of course with you reputation here when you claim that
it is beyond your intelligence how this can be achieved people will
easily believe you.

>>>Or are you just one of those whiners who sit back and bitch?
>> 
>> I do not whine or bitch - I state that that you are an IDIOT - I never
>> asked you not to be one. I am too wise to hope for an impossible.
>
>Ahh...you have stated a position. Something which I am sure you have the
>ability to justify or defend.
>
>Please, state your valid reasons for believing I am an idiot, and make sure
>they are factual reasons.
>

What, me argue with an idiot? Never! Just insult them for public
pleasure - this will justify their existence in this world.

>
>Oh, one more thing Loenid, one of the drawbacks about mounting a personal
>attack is that someone, like myself, might very well ask you to give reasons
>for what you have said. 
>
>You now are in the position of either coming up with a mature statement,
>founded in good logic and solid facts, as to why you believe I am an idiot and
>can barely learn how to move a knight, or you get to rant and rave, much like
>Sven is, while people watch you yell and scream like a spoiled child. Since you
>have access to internet, I would hope you have the skills to avoid the
>spoiled child situation.
>

>Do tell Leonid, aside from the fact you can't stand me, WHAT is wrong with the
>poisitions I have posited here? Anything factually wrong? Any analogiees which
>you believe are invalid?
>
>Please, we are all waiting for the fount of your wisdom to flow freely, that we
>may all drink.
>
>DMC
>
>PS. Five bucks says he can't do it!
>

All right, if you insist here you are. You are an IDIOT for either one
or most likely both of the following:

1. Genetic reasons.
2. Environmental reasons.

Leonid Frants.


P.S> I will relax for awhile as can feel any day now I may mount a
personal attack on this twerp.


Newsgroups: rec.games.chess