|
Home > Archive > alt.certification.mcse > July 2005 > Scooby do not read
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Scooby do not read
|
|
|
| In alt.certification.mcse, Shnookey climbed on a soapbox & opined:
> You could be just as stupid. Perhaps, you should know that "stupider"
> is not a real word. Since I have never heard pond scum say "stupider"
> than I must believe that pond scum IS more intelligent than you. 
>
Jeez, I seem to have failed in my attempt to communicate. Let's try to be
absolutely clear here.
Bite me, assXXXXer.
JaR
| |
| Scooby 2005-07-27, 7:49 pm |
| "JaR" <plente@spamsuxsofthome.net> wrote in message
news:Xns956E5E63A5BAplentespam
suxsofthom@130.133.1.4...
> In alt.certification.mcse, Shnookey climbed on a soapbox & opined:
>
>
> Jeez, I seem to have failed in my attempt to communicate. Let's try to be
> absolutely clear here.
>
> Bite me, assXXXXer.
>
> JaR
I have to agree with Shnookey. It does seem that your intelligence is at a
juvenile level. The only way you can make a point is with insult and
profanity.
| |
|
| In alt.certification.mcse, Scooby climbed on a soapbox & opined:
> I have to agree with Shnookey. It does seem that your intelligence is
> at a juvenile level. The only way you can make a point is with insult
> and profanity.
>
>
>
I wondered whether you could resist. Didn't think so. What do you call
someone that keeps coming back to things that cause them distress?
Are you a masochist, Scooby? Or just a humorless twit that needs to try and
impress others with your grasp of Usenet etiquette?
Oh, by the way, it seems that the only way you could make your point there
was with an insult. Pot > kettle?
HAD, doofus.
JaR
| |
| Scooby 2005-07-27, 7:49 pm |
| "JaR" <plente@spamsuxsofthome.net> wrote in message
news:Xns956E74042C5Cplentespam
suxsofthom@130.133.1.4...
> In alt.certification.mcse, Scooby climbed on a soapbox & opined:
>
>
> I wondered whether you could resist. Didn't think so. What do you call
> someone that keeps coming back to things that cause them distress?
>
> Are you a masochist, Scooby? Or just a humorless twit that needs to try
and
> impress others with your grasp of Usenet etiquette?
>
> Oh, by the way, it seems that the only way you could make your point there
> was with an insult. Pot > kettle?
>
> HAD, doofus.
>
> JaR
I'm just trying to give you a taste of your own medicine. Why do you keep
coming back and reading/posting on the spam? Are you a masochist? I'm not
trying to impress anyone. I'm just trying to get you to act civil and
mature - is that really too much to ask?
| |
| FrisbeeŽ 2005-07-27, 7:49 pm |
| Scooby wrote:
> "JaR" <plente@spamsuxsofthome.net> wrote in message
> news:Xns956E74042C5Cplentespam
suxsofthom@130.133.1.4...
>
>
> I'm just trying to give you a taste of your own medicine.
Hippo Crate.
> I'm not trying to impress anyone. I'm just trying to get
> you to act civil and mature - is that really too much to ask?
Hippo Crate.
| |
| Scooby 2005-07-27, 7:49 pm |
| "FrisbeeŽ" <billLASTINIT@dasi-software.com> wrote in message
news:2rj7vkF1bfvigU1@uni-berlin.de...
> Scooby wrote:
>
> Hippo Crate.
>
>
> Hippo Crate.
>
>
Whatever... I've looked back and can not find a single useful post by
either you or JaR. Why are you even around here? You don't seem to
contribute to this group, you just pollute it. in my opinion, you are no
better than the spammers (acutally worse) and I wish YOU would go away.
What makes you think you are any better than them?
| |
| FrisbeeŽ 2005-07-27, 7:49 pm |
| Scooby wrote:
> "FrisbeeŽ" <billLASTINIT@dasi-software.com> wrote in message
> news:2rj7vkF1bfvigU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
> Whatever...
What are you? Twelve?
> I've looked back and can not find a single useful post by
> either you or JaR.
I'll bet you spent a whole two minutes looking, too.
> Why are you even around here?
42.
> You don't seem to
> contribute to this group, you just pollute it.
I'm pretty sure my E.P.A. approval is current.
> in my opinion, you
> are no better than the spammers (acutally worse) and I wish YOU would
> go away.
Please hold your breath until I do.
> What makes you think you are any better than them?
Well, I'm not doing anything illegal or unethical. I seem to be pissing you
off, but I don't think that's a crime. I don't think that's unethical
either.
Please... let's continue this wonderful discussion. Last one to post wins,
right?
--
Fris "Scooby Doo Not Red" beeŽ, MCNGP #13
The MCNGP Team - We're here to help!
http://www.mcngp.com
Certaholics
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/certaholics
| |
| Scooby 2005-07-27, 7:49 pm |
| "FrisbeeŽ" <billLASTINIT@dasi-software.com> wrote in message
news:2rj9crF10dvhdU1@uni-berlin.de...
> Scooby wrote:
>
> What are you? Twelve?
No, that's just my way of saying trying to reason with someone that refuses
to reason is pretty senseless. You are one to question age here with your
childish manners.
>
>
> I'll bet you spent a whole two minutes looking, too.
>
>
> 42.
Huh?
>
>
> I'm pretty sure my E.P.A. approval is current.
>
>
> Please hold your breath until I do.
>
Okay, you start first <grin>.
>
> Well, I'm not doing anything illegal or unethical. I seem to be pissing
you
> off, but I don't think that's a crime. I don't think that's unethical
> either.
>
Well, there lies the difference between us. I think these posts are
completely unethical. That is what started my discussion in the first
place. I mean, c'mon, is your attempt to rid these
spammers/braindumpers/whoever no matter what it takes? You could go to
their house and whack them out - that would stop them, but that just
wouldn't be right. Same idea, your approach is just not right, and it is
unethical.
And, actually, you aren't pissing me off, I was hoping for the reverse.
I've rather enjoyed letting you show everyone how childish you can be in
defending such juvenile acts. Do you really expect people to take you
seriously after that?
> Please... let's continue this wonderful discussion. Last one to post
wins,
> right?
>
> --
> Fris "Scooby Doo Not Red" beeŽ, MCNGP #13
>
> The MCNGP Team - We're here to help!
> http://www.mcngp.com
>
> Certaholics
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/certaholics
>
| |
|
| In alt.certification.mcse, Scooby climbed on a soapbox & opined:
> I'm just trying to give you a taste of your own medicine.
Ah, so you're a humorless twit *and* a hypocrite.
>Why do you
> keep coming back and reading/posting on the spam?
Because I detest the SOB's that keep posting it. Because I take it as a
personal challenge to run them off like we did in the other group. But
mainly because it's fun.
>Are you a
> masochist?
See above.
>I'm not trying to impress anyone.
Good, because it isn't working very well if you were.
>I'm just trying to get
> you to act civil and mature - is that really too much to ask?
>
Probably. Try to remember my juvenile intelligence level. Keep any
further discussion in single-syllable words, please.
JaR
Thug #22
| |
| ImhoTech 2005-07-27, 7:49 pm |
|
"Scooby" <mmscooby1@removeme.earthlink.net> wrote in message news:0t_4d.143>
>
> Huh?
>
That says it all. You are devoid of geekness entirely, and have no answers.
> Well, there lies the difference between us. I think these posts are
> completely unethical.
And? This is usenet, There are no ethics.
> That is what started my discussion in the first
> place. I mean, c'mon, is your attempt to rid these
> spammers/braindumpers/whoever no matter what it takes? You could go to
> their house and whack them out - that would stop them, but that just
> wouldn't be right.
Well...it wouldn't be THAT wrong.
>Same idea,
Ludicrous.
>your approach is just not right, and it is
> unethical.
More ethics. Pffbt!
>
> And, actually, you aren't pissing me off,
So you were just trolling then?
>I was hoping for the reverse.
> I've rather enjoyed letting you show everyone how childish you can be in
> defending such juvenile acts.
You have these delusions often?
| |
| FrisbeeŽ 2005-07-27, 7:49 pm |
| Scooby wrote:
> "FrisbeeŽ" <billLASTINIT@dasi-software.com> wrote in message
> news:2rj9crF10dvhdU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
> No, that's just my way of saying trying to reason with someone that
> refuses to reason is pretty senseless. You are one to question age
> here with your childish manners.
No, "Whatever..." means "you're not worth my time or effort." Usually said
by children and teenagers, and people who refuse to continue a discussion or
budge even an inch in said discussion. "I'm right, you're wrong, and we're
done discussing this... nyah!"
>
> Huh?
Well, I've learned one thing about you, then. No big deal.
>
> Okay, you start first <grin>.
Egads, a sense of humor.
>
> Well, there lies the difference between us. I think these posts are
> completely unethical.
I don't, but then that's me. How much profanity have you seen me use? Do
you live in a world where there's none, or very little?
> That is what started my discussion in the first
> place. I mean, c'mon, is your attempt to rid these
> spammers/braindumpers/whoever no matter what it takes?
Well, I'm reserving the nukes, because I only have so much plutonium.
> You could go
> to their house and whack them out - that would stop them, but that
> just wouldn't be right.
There's lots of things I -could- do. Why does it bother you that I call
people who cheapen my profession bad names? Do you think what they're doing
doesn't directly affect me? "Evil prevails when good men do nothing."
Although I'm sure you wouldn't consider me one of the "good men" and of
course, instead of not "doing nothing" I should be Mr. Nicey-Nicey and give
them the CharminŽ Gentle Spanking.
> Same idea, your approach is just not right,
> and it is unethical.
It's not the same idea. Calling a spammer an a$$fscker, while surely
offensive to some, is not the same as going into their house and "whacking"
them, no matter how much you wish to think it is.
> And, actually, you aren't pissing me off, I was hoping for the
> reverse. I've rather enjoyed letting you show everyone how childish
> you can be in defending such juvenile acts. Do you really expect
> people to take you seriously after that?
What makes you think I've ever wanted anyone to take me seriously? I
thought you said you'd gone back and read my posts! You lie! Oh, and
"neener neener boo boo!"
--
Fris "<singing> The Lurkers support me in e-mail </singing>" beeŽ, MCNGP #13
The MCNGP Team - We're here to help!
http://www.mcngp.com
Certaholics
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/certaholics
| |
|
| "Scooby" <mmscooby1@removeme.earthlink.net> wrote
> in my opinion, you are no
> better than the spammers (acutally worse) and I wish YOU would go away.
You'll find the answer to your wishes under the Message menu. Its called
"block sender". That way we don't have to listen to this any more.
T-Bone
MCNGP XL
La-la-la I'm not listening
| |
| Scooby 2005-07-27, 7:49 pm |
| "FrisbeeŽ" <billLASTINIT@dasi-software.com> wrote in message
news:2rjbuhF1b0dmkU1@uni-berlin.de...
<snip>
>
> No, "Whatever..." means "you're not worth my time or effort." Usually
said
> by children and teenagers, and people who refuse to continue a discussion
or
> budge even an inch in said discussion. "I'm right, you're wrong, and
we're
> done discussing this... nyah!"
>
That may be what it means to you. I meant it how I said I meant it. If you
want to have a mature and reasonable debate, let's go. If you just want to
twist what I say to suit your needs and argument, then it is 'whatever'.
So, point me to your most recent one in the cisco or mcse cert groups.
[color=blue]
>
> Well, I've learned one thing about you, then. No big deal.
>
Again, whatever. If you want to share where my ignorance is to your little
code, be my guest. But, it doesn't bother me one bit. I've got a very good
job in the networking world and your opinion doesn't bother me a bit. BTW -
it didn't really take much to figure out what your code was after you
bashing me for it. Just cause I don't support your lame little cult doesn't
mean I'm not geek worthy.
<snip>
>
> Egads, a sense of humor.
Oh, you'd be surprised.
<snip>
>
> I don't, but then that's me. How much profanity have you seen me use? Do
> you live in a world where there's none, or very little?
Not you in particular. This was started due to JaR's posts. Your little
gang seemed to jump on board after that. You are certainly going to great
lengths to defend it. No, I hear lots of profanity - doesn't mean I have to
like it. I think it is a trait of a weak mind. I believe in using respect
in a public forum. Also, I have kids. Apparently, you do too. Is this the
kind of example you'd like to set for them?
>
> There's lots of things I -could- do. Why does it bother you that I call
> people who cheapen my profession bad names? Do you think what they're
doing
> doesn't directly affect me? "Evil prevails when good men do nothing."
> Although I'm sure you wouldn't consider me one of the "good men" and of
> course, instead of not "doing nothing" I should be Mr. Nicey-Nicey and
give
> them the CharminŽ Gentle Spanking.
>
I didn't say "do nothing". There are many approaches you could take without
lowering yourself to their level - or below, like your gang has.
>
> It's not the same idea. Calling a spammer an a$$fscker, while surely
> offensive to some, is not the same as going into their house and
"whacking"
> them, no matter how much you wish to think it is.
>
It was an exaggeration for the sake of example. No, it is not the same.
But, the point was that they are both unethical. You are the one that
brought up ethics in the first place.
>
> What makes you think I've ever wanted anyone to take me seriously? I
> thought you said you'd gone back and read my posts! You lie! Oh, and
> "neener neener boo boo!"
>
> --
> Fris "<singing> The Lurkers support me in e-mail </singing>" beeŽ, MCNGP
#13
>
> The MCNGP Team - We're here to help!
> http://www.mcngp.com
>
> Certaholics
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/certaholics
>
So, does this MCNGP board belong to you and your little gang? Trying to
profit off of this nonsense? Is that the idea? As far as I'm concerned you
guys are spammers - just taking a different approach. After reading your
posts here and on that site, I don't believe for a minute this is really
about protecting certifications. Seems more like either money, or just a
way for you guys to say you are better than others. Or, perhaps both.
Either way, I'll put you right there in the same class as the spammers.
Maybe even a class lower.
What is this requirement of "provide a proven track record of techincally
competent posts" - seems like all you guys do is flame. Is that what you
call technically competent?
| |
| TechGeekPro 2005-07-27, 7:49 pm |
| On Sep 24, 2004 at 2:07pm "Scooby" blathered:
> I have to agree with Shnookey. It does seem that your intelligence is at a
> juvenile level. The only way you can make a point is with insult and
> profanity.
And I have to agree with Scooby. I mean really JaR. Do you really *have* to
be so XXXXing vulgar?
--
TechGeekPro, MCNGP #36
MCNGP.com - We're here to help!
Not only am I certified, I'm certifiable.
| |
| TechGeekPro 2005-07-27, 7:49 pm |
| On Sep 24, 2004 at 4:35pm "Scooby" blathered:
> So, does this MCNGP board belong to you and your little gang?
No, it "belongs" to the entire MCNGP Team. Who is this "little gang" you
keep referring to?
> Trying to
> profit off of this nonsense?
As the one who designed the Website I can assure you, it was not for
profit (although there is a lot of nonsense).
> Is that the idea?
If it was, then it was a really bad idea because so far we profited
absolutely nothing.
> As far as I'm concerned
> you guys are spammers - just taking a different approach.
How are we spammers? Because some of us choose to add a link to our sig?
Bullbutter!!! ($2 to Jtyc)
> After reading
> your posts here and on that site, I don't believe for a minute this is
> really about protecting certifications.
Well, to be honest, it's mainly for our own amusement.
> Seems more like either money,
> or just a way for you guys to say you are better than others.
We're not better than all others, just the lazy, cheating, br@indumping,
assXXXXing ones.
> Or,
> perhaps both. Either way, I'll put you right there in the same class as
> the spammers. Maybe even a class lower.
When I first started posting the the m.p.c.e.mcse newsgroup I thought the
exact same thing. Then I began to realize that having that stick shoved up
my XXX was really uncomfortable. So I pulled it out and now I'm feeling
/much/ better.
--
TechGeekPro, MCNGP #36
MCNGP.com - We're here to help!
Not only am I certified, I'm certifiable.
| |
|
| "Scooby" <mmscooby1@removeme.earthlink.net> wrote > Well, there lies the
difference between us. I think these posts are
> completely unethical.
I think it is completely fair to judge a person by their own standards. You
are posting, yet you think these posts are unethical. J&R has no ethics, so
he's obviously not doing anything wrong in his mind. By your own standards,
you are in the wrong.
jjw
| |
|
| In alt.certification.mcse, TechGeekPro climbed on a soapbox & opined:
> When I first started posting the the m.p.c.e.mcse newsgroup I thought
> the exact same thing. Then I began to realize that having that stick
> shoved up my XXX was really uncomfortable. So I pulled it out and now
> I'm feeling /much/ better.
>
You fscker! Beer up the nose really stings!
JaR
Dripping Thug
| |
|
| In alt.certification.mcse, TechGeekPro climbed on a soapbox & opined:
> On Sep 24, 2004 at 2:07pm "Scooby" blathered:
>
>
> And I have to agree with Scooby. I mean really JaR. Do you really
> *have* to be so XXXXing vulgar?
>
You're right. I have seen the error of my ways. I will stop this shit right
XXXXing now.
JaR
Reformed Thug
| |
| TechGeekPro 2005-07-27, 7:50 pm |
| On Sep 25, 2004 at 4:24pm "JaR" blathered:
> You fscker! Beer up the nose really stings!
Only sissies drink beer with a straw. But if you really must, then try using
your mouth instead. Jeez.
--
TechGeekPro, MCNGP #36
MCNGP.com - We're here to help!
Not only am I certified, I'm certifiable.
| |
| TechGeekPro 2005-07-27, 7:50 pm |
| On Sep 25, 2004 at 4:27pm "JaR" blathered:
> You're right. I have seen the error of my ways. I will stop this shit
> right XXXXing now.
Good, now don't let that shit XXXXing happen again... dammit.
--
TechGeekPro, MCNGP #36
MCNGP.com - We're here to help!
Not only am I certified, I'm certifiable.
| |
| FrisbeeŽ 2005-07-27, 7:51 pm |
| TechGeekPro wrote:
> On Sep 25, 2004 at 4:27pm "JaR" blathered:
>
>
> Good, now don't let that shit XXXXing happen again... dammit.
Good $deity, y'all are worse than the XXXXing spammers.
I am truly offended.
--
Fris "Aren't you glad you use Dial? Don't you wish everybody did?" beeŽ,
MCNGP #13
The MCNGP Team - We're here to help!
http://www.mcngp.com
Certaholics
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/certaholics
| |
|
| In alt.certification.mcse, FrisbeeŽ climbed on a soapbox & opined:
> TechGeekPro wrote:
>
> Good $deity, y'all are worse than the XXXXing spammers.
>
> I am truly offended.
>
Hey! I resent that XXXXing shit. And anybody that has to XXXXing swear to
get their XXXXing point across oughtta be XXXXing ashamed of themselves.
And I XXXXing mean it, too!
XXXXin' JaR
Y'all guys ever notice that after you write a word a buncha times, it
starts looking weird?
| |
| TechGeekPro 2005-07-27, 7:52 pm |
| On Sep 29, 2004 at 3:30pm "FrisbeeŽ" blathered:
> Aren't you glad you use Dial? Don't you wish everybody did?
It...it...it was...soap poisoning!
--
TechGeekPro, MCNGP #36
MCNGP.com - We're here to help!
Not only am I certified, I'm certifiable.
| |
| TechGeekPro 2005-07-27, 7:52 pm |
| On Sep 29, 2004 at 3:30pm "FrisbeeŽ" blathered:
> I am truly offended.
Get the XXXX over it. ;-)
--
TechGeekPro, MCNGP #36
MCNGP.com - We're here to help!
Not only am I certified, I'm certifiable.
|
|
|
|
|