Mike Vandeman <mjvande@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> On 27 Jun 2008 12:21:31 -0700, nobody@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Bill Z.)
> wrote:
>
> >Mike Vandeman <mjvande@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> >
> >> On 26 Jun 2008 18:55:14 -0700, nobody@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Bill Z.)
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Mike Vandeman <mjvande@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> >> >
> >> >> On 25 Jun 2008 23:19:52 -0700, nobody@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Bill Z.)
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >Mike Vandeman <mjvande@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> On 22 Jun 2008 21:48:39 -0700, nobody@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Bill
Z.)
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >Mike Vandeman <mjvande@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> On 21 Jun 2008 23:57:09 -0700, nobody@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Bill Z.)
> >> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >Mike Vandeman <mjvande@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Irrelevant - you claimed that copyright infringement
was a victimless
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >crime and it clearly isn't.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> If the email isn't marketable, then he hasn't been
victimized. I've
> >> >> >> >> >> >> taken nothing of value. On the contrary, it is
WORTHLESS. Hence the
> >> >> >> >> >> >> only victim is ME.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >If you break into a car and steal a radio from it,
you've committed a
> >> >> >> >> >> >crime even if the radio is broken and not reparable, and
hence
> >> >> >> >> >> >worthless.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> WRONG. I would have done him a FAVOR to remove that trash
-- a
> >> >> >> >> >> victimless crime.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >Run that one past a judge. Or better yet, try it as an
experiment,
> >> >> >> >> >repeating enough times to get cought. My guess is that we
might be
> >> >> >> >> >spared from your presense on usenet for some time.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> I know that mountain bikers would LOVE for me to stop
telling the
> >> >> >> >> truth about their selfish, destructive, disgusting s****t,
but it isn't
> >> >> >> >> going to happen, and my postings to the newsgroups will be
around
> >> >> >> >> forever, even after I'm gone, to carry on my message. What's
YOUR
> >> >> >> >> excuse for living?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Non sequitur (due to having no cogent reply), plus showing an
arrogant
> >> >> >> >disregard for human life.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I knew you couldn't answer that, because you HAVE no good
excuse for
> >> >> >> living. You are a waste of good protoplasm.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Vandeman, go f___ yourself. That's the only response you
deserve.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks for proving my point. I couldn't have done it any better.
> >> >
> >> >No point of yours was proved. When you call someone a "good waste
> >> >of protoplasm", you deserve to be treated just like the low-life,
> >> >contemptible excuse for humanity that you are.
> >>
> >> Thanks for proving my point AGAIN! I couldn't have done it any
better.
> >
> >You have no "point", troll. You were simply rude and were told off
> >for inexcusable conduct.
>
> I know: you are just a boor, and can't help it. You have amply proven
> it. Just look up.
Vandeman, you are a mindless troll.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
