Re: Tom Sherman - has he really gone for good?

On Jun 19, 2:14 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
>
news:87ddbdc7-eb06-4bb9-8c98-f3e9301f5de6@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> > On Jun 18, 10:37 am, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
>
>>news:0bfbe6f5-cbf2-4691-9306-ae0b936b6536@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >> > On Jun 17, 2:53 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> >>
>>news:05431773-d388-47ce-a488-f43b01ac637a@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >> >> > On Jun 16, 2:55 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> >> [...]
> >> >> >> Tom Sherman deserved every kick in the butt he ever got from
me.
> >> >> >> But
> >> >> >> we
> >> >> >> now
> >> >> >> have some new trolls here on ARBR from the kooks group.
>
> >> >> > So, you've got company then ... or would that be rivals???
>
> >> >> If you can't recognize the difference between a message from the
kooks
> >> >> group
> >> >> and one from One so Great as Myself, then you are truly a lost
cause.
> >> >> You
> >> >> and Ed Gin deserved one another - you a whiner and a stalker and
he a
> >> >> criminal vandal troll. A match made in Heaven!
>
> >> > Pot calling the kettle black, Ed?  You are both a a stalker and a
> >> > troll!  Just how is one to recognize the difference in messages
when
> >> > your postings and those from the "kooks group" are virtual mirror
> >> > images?  At least "the kooks" have the common decency not to deny
what
> >> > and who they are.  In that sense, they score much better on the
> >> > objectivity meter.  I hope you are enjoying a dose of your own
> >> > medicine.  Kooks deserve one another, speaking of matches made in
> >> > heaven.
>
> >> JimmyMac is a stalker, but not a troll any more than I am. The
assholes
> >> from
> >> the kooks group are all trolls as far as I can tell. Ed Dolan the
Great
> >> is
> >> NOT a troll. He never has been and he never will be. Why? Because he
does
> >> not have the required stupidity for it.
>
> > I never said I was a troll.  I said you were a troll and a stalker and
> > you are.  You have stalked Tom Sherman for years.  As concerns not
> > being a troll, you have several times admitted to being a troll though
> > you have often qualified that by stating that you were a "good
> > troll" ... an oxymoron, of course.
>
> I am telling you what you are. You are a stalker - period! Only
****ed-up
> wretches can be stalkers.

And tit for tat, I'm telling you what you are ... a Tom Sherman
stalker.  Care to take a poll?

> Tom Sherman and I dueled as equals. As much as I
> disliked his political opinions (he was a liberal ideologue), I at least
> respected him. That is more than I can say for you. A stalker is even
lower
> than a troll.

Trust me I have the same lack of respect for you.

> >> Both JimmyMac and Ed Dolan are responsive to whatever is being said.
> >> Trolls
> >> could care less about what is being said. Their only intent is to
disrupt
> >> and destroy. Ed Gin was an example of a troll (a criminal one because
he
> >> forged addresses and names) and he in fact destroyed ARBR single
handedly
> >> some years ago. The key to not being a troll is responsiveness to
what is
> >> being said. As long as you are doing that you are engaging on a
rational
> >> level.
>
> > So then, you are a responsive troll.  Thanks for clearing that up.
>
> Read the above paragraph a dozen times until it soaks into your addled
> brain. Not all trolls are created equal. A good troll is NOT a troll. A
> RESPONSIVE troll is NOT a troll. Jeez ... what an idiot you are!

Read what you wrote a dozen times ... "A good troll is NOT a troll",
and ty to make sense of it. Conan the Librarian, GOOO is merely an
adjective and in this particular context an inappropriate one.  There
is no such thing as a GOOD troll.  Remove the adjective, and the
sentence would read ... "A troll is not a troll ... DUh!!!  Now go
back and read what I wrote again and substitute the word RESPONSIVE
for GOOD, since the same applies. Can you be any more dense???

> Ed Gin was a troll and a criminal one to boot (he forged names and
> addresses). The kooks group are trolls. None of them are responsive nor
are
> they good. They mean to disrupt and to destroy.

What is completely laughable is that you don't consider yourself to be
disruptive or a troll.  What a hoot.  So much for insight and
objectivity!!!

> That is what trolls do.
> Usenet is the pits because there is no way to prevent any of this. All
> newsgroups must have a moderator that will edit (censor) what gets said.
> There is no other way.

If there were a moderator here, you'd be one of the bery first to be
show the door.

> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota