From: Humbug on
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 00:29:26 -0000, "Fran"
<autumnacorn(a)vendredi.fr.com> wrote:

>
>"Humbug" <humbug(a)tofee.net> wrote in message
>news:jd9mg5h7jjkdiiei2p60b39slo239i69qc(a)4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:43:21 -0000, "Fran"
>> <autumnacorn(a)vendredi.fr.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Humbug" <humbug(a)tofee.net> wrote in message
>>>news:5e4mg5h9ja2q3psnf2khlf25skqq35kr4n(a)4ax.com...
>>>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:43:07 +0000, totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk
>>>> (The Older Gentleman) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Humbug <humbug(a)tofee.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm only a tiny bit concerned about the way that Fran seems to be
>>>>>> escalating where Spacker left off ... there always has to be *one*,
>>>>>> doesn't there?
>>>>>
>>>>>Oh, indeed. I see it played the racist card. Again....
>>>>
>>>> Hang on, Fran has no reason to be racist, does he?
>>>>
>>>
>>>They are referring, I suspect, to the fact that I stated my objection to
>>>racism, when replying to a single quoted post I saw that totally
>>>misrepresented my actions. I've chosen to ignore by the judicious use of a
>>>killfile the twaddle that I suspect has still been perpetrated here
>>>despite
>>>all the supposed wishes for peace and harmony. I have had the temerity to
>>>post on some EBay topics: dear heaven, the nerve of it.
>>>
>>>Now, if you are choosing to interpret that as my being racist, then I am
>>>deeply saddened and very disappointed to find you are not the person I
>>>thought you to be. And pretty disgusted, too. Again, if you did not mean
>>>that, my apologies for my own misinterpretation. I do actually hope that I
>>>have misunderstood your meaning.
>>
>> I imagine that you are no more racist than I am. I'm not going to
>> bother to search for the threads where it was suggested by you and
>> your friend that I was.
>>
>
>I have never suggested you were racist. I do, however, think you are
>choosing to start an argument with me for some strange and insane reason
>that is frankly beyond my comprehension. Unless it's because you actually do
>believe I'm someone I'm not, of course - or I am some sort of substitute.
>
>I've tried to remain reasonable with you tonight, but you've tried my
>patience too much. Go and find someone else as a target, I'm not answering
>any more of this.

I don't like being a target either.

Thank you for your sympathy.

--
Humbug
From: Humbug on
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 00:31:20 -0000, "Fran"
<autumnacorn(a)vendredi.fr.com> wrote:

>
>"Humbug" <humbug(a)tofee.net> wrote in message
>news:kn9mg5hml3ghl8dlnhd5o1hb03mdmchm2l(a)4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:35:11 -0000, "Fran"
>> <autumnacorn(a)vendredi.fr.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Humbug" <humbug(a)tofee.net> wrote in message
>>>news:j94mg5lt5ugfcm94e59g6025hkfbco44h0(a)4ax.com...
>>>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:03:56 GMT, petrolcan <petrolcanSPAM(a)gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>In article <8jtlg59b30hpm5l24hn1kj0hq1k95mgtgi(a)4ax.com>, Humbug says...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 08:53:54 GMT, petrolcan <petrolcanSPAM(a)gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >In article <1j9l99j.dq9yxq1xw6qvcN%totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk>,
>>>>>> >The
>>>>>> >Older Gentleman says...
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> petrolcan <petrolcanSPAM(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> > In article <hebdq6$v3o$3(a)aioe.org>, lurker says...
>>>>>> >> > >
>>>>>> >> > > as above
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > Why is it that you have an obsession with spacker?
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > He's gone, hopefully forever.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> The other half of the Fracker entity is still posting the same
>>>>>> >> shite,
>>>>>> >> though.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >Same as it ever was.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >> I wonder how proud it feels at having effectively killed what was a
>>>>>> >> good
>>>>>> >> thriving and useful ng?
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >Oi! Whilst it may take a while for the thriving to reappear, this NG
>>>>>> >is
>>>>>> >still very useful.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Exactly so.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm pleased to have been able to take you out of my killfile now that
>>>>>> you don't have a troll to incense your posts.
>>>>>
>>>>>Think about it, why exactly do you think I kept replying?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I know. I just got fed up with reading it.
>>>>
>>>>>> This NG will thrive once again with valuable posters who are not
>>>>>> driven off-topic by malicious interlopers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm only a tiny bit concerned about the way that Fran seems to be
>>>>>> escalating where Spacker left off ... there always has to be *one*,
>>>>>> doesn't there?
>>>>>
>>>>>fran's time will come.
>>>>
>>>> [sigh] Yes, I suppose so :-(
>>>>
>>>
>>>Now who's escalating, hm?
>>
>> The case rests.
>>
>
>I now understand what you've been doing. And why.

Explain that please.

>Humbug, you were one of those I at least had respect for. Not any more. I
>won't play your mind games, find someone else.

Who else should that be?

--
Humbug
From: Humbug on
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:13:02 +0000, lurker <graham423(a)googlemail.com>
wrote:

>Humbug wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:11:27 +0000, lurker <graham423(a)googlemail.com>
>> wrote:
>
>> Anyway ...
>>
>> Edward Renner has perpetrated a considerable number of libels against
>> contributors to this newsgroup, myself included.
>>
>> I would be prepared to contribute towards legal action against him,
>> provided that my contribution would be covered by the costs awarded
>> when he loses the case.
>
>He's made a public apology and has ceased and desisted after he posted
>his own address.

Yes, he has.

>He's not silly you know.

No, he is.

--
Humbug
From: lurker on
Humbug wrote:

>> I've tried to remain reasonable with you tonight, but you've tried my
>> patience too much. Go and find someone else as a target, I'm not answering
>> any more of this.
>
> I don't like being a target either.

STOP BULLYING FRANCESCA !
From: petrolcan on
In article <hef94o$bae$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Fran says...
>
> "Humbug" <humbug(a)tofee.net> wrote in message

> >>He's Jason Drake. Ignore him.
> >
> > Aha.
> >
> > You can spot a troll after all!
> >
> > If only you'd seen through someone else months ago ...
> >
>
> Humbug, I've no clue what your problem is with me, or why you are choosing
> to regurgitate an argument that was best left lie.

Translates to 'I don't want to admit I was wrong'

> I do not appreciate the
> constant attacks from you tonight, nor will I perpetuate them. This is
> unworthy of you. Find another target, I won't be yours.

Someone a little sensitive lately?


First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Prev: Is ebay being slow for you tonight?
Next: Problem with ebay?