>From: Sarah Czepiel cox.net>
>Newsgroups: alt.nuke.the.usa,alt.obituaries,alt.usenet.kooks
>Subject: Re: Karen Anderson's snatch, was re Re: Karen Anderson, serial stalker, you creep me out, was Re:
>Message-ID: <4j8eb45pbhi4nn6pn0fjqdafbnki7b11bk@4ax.com>
>References: dizum.com> f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> <32bc4cd8-8150-4b03-818f-a1b2f32572c1@l64g2000hse.googlegroups.com> drn.newsguy.com> <7dd80543-d35a-44d1-a2a1-fec17863b103@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com> n38g2000prl.googlegroups.com>
>Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 18:11:43 -0400
>
>On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 14:52:46 -0700 (PDT), "DEAD GILMER aka Cmelak with an
>ASS fetish." yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>:>On Aug 28, 12:25 pm, AssPyrateJohn gmail.com> wrote:
>:>Look in the mirror, you'll see it again.
>
>Bend over Silly Billy. You're being boned. ;)

>On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 17:11:26 GMT, Demon Lord Henry Schmidt of Confusion
>verwirren.confused.k00ks.caballista.org> wrote:
>
>On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 01:44:52 -0700, SSS333 attempted to confuse the issue
>further by squeaking:

>> On Aug 15, 7:37 pm, Snarky wrote:

>>> On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 15:14:32 -0700, PyrateJohn wrote these lies,
>>> denials, arrogant assertions, erroneous presuppositions, and/or
>>> obfuscations:
>>>

>>>> What's the award for the most verbose post? And is Cmelak, a/k/a
>>>> ZapRat even close, or do I need to get him REALLY wound up and
>>>> pissed off in order to get a verbose post of Massive Proportions out
>>>> of him?  ;)

>>>
>>> The Unabomber Surprise has somewhat elastic requirements -- tonnes of
>>> the same, or just a lot of foam, as long as it doesn't tend to have a
>>> point besides "John Gilmer's a mean, MEAN man!" That's about all I've
>>> seen from Cmelak/Anderson, boiled down, and the same description could
>>> be applied to moi, by the k00ks I own.

>>
>> I am, as quoted above, "Cmelak, a/k/a ZapRat."
>>
>> How may I present my side of the story to counter outright lies and
>> untruths told about me?

>
>You can start by dumping the re-hashed flamewar, about which only you,
>Karen, and perhaps one or two other people give a rat's fart in a
>hurricane, and moving on. Gilmer has my sympathy because he has a sense of
>humour, while you don't because you have self-pity. The funniest part of
>the whole mess is that, if you have a beef with anyone, it's with Karen,
>for hijacking years of your life because of her obsession with younger men
>-- Gilmer doesn't care about the flamewar at all. He'd drop all talk of
>lawsuits if Karen just fucked off and quit worrying about her good name
>being besmirched, or her hurt feelings about being rejected by him, and
>she'd do a lot better if she took her meds regularly.
>

>> I am being judged through fallacious statements made by Gilmer and friends
>> of his who have grievously maligned me over the past four years.

>
>Awwww, he said mean things about you on teh usernets! Allow me to
>introduce you to of The Outer Filth Trio (they may be one guy,
>they may be three, but one of them did indeed say that "only he" had done
>any outing, when in fact all three participated), who had some *very*
>nasty things to say to me a couple years back, in my .sig. Here's a sample:
>
>"Plenty of people post under their real names and do not attempt to hide
>their contact info. You are scared of being 'outed' because you are a
>pathological abuser of usenet, and people rightly despise you for it.
>You're afraid of being reported to the authorities or, better, visited
>by a couple of guys with baseball bats. Other people don't have this
>obsessive fear. Ward Hardman himself has posted plenty of personal
>information - nothing that anyone else added was hidden in any way.
>You're so fucking scared you've built up this whole sick mythology about
>different categories of bad dudes who 'out' scum like you."
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>I'm judging you by your _reaction_ to his allegedly "fallacious"
>statements, Billy, which is to whine and cry about Teh Lies, for years, as
>though they really /matter/, both on and off usenet, and even IRL. Allow
>me to explain something: Usenet is not "real life". Not only that, it
>doesn't resemble "real life" (as Spaffie The Great famously pointed out).
>Usenet is a world unto itself, where your reactions to being flamed and/or
>trolled define you (in the minds of other usenetters, or at least the ones
>possessing clue) far more than the content of those flames and trolls.
>

>> I am able to present ample evidence showing that numerous identities I
>> have created over the past four years were established because Gilmer had
>> forged and transmitted hundreds of usenet messages using each of my
>> identities in turn as a means to discredit me. After he posted hundreds of
>> messages while forging an identity of mine, I would create a new identity
>> only to have him forge that one as well and he'd begin posting hundreds
>> more messages to discredit the newer identity.

>
>So, you create IDs, and allege that he forges the ones you create. One
>could theorise that he never actually "forges" (forgery is net-abuse, BTW,
>and entirely reportable), but only *frogs* (i.e. creates either munged
>email addresses or addresses which are genuinely his own), which can be a
>highly enjoyable way to poke a frothing k00k who won't shut up anyway.
>

>> Gilmer's creation of numerous troll email addresses using variations of my
>> real name and that of my father, quite often with descriptive denigrating
>> terms added to them, were more egregious acts of abuse committed against
>> me.

>
>LMAO! You could have owned him, for that, but instead you let him pwn you,
>but good. He still owns you now.
>

>> Gilmer and his cohorts have repeatedly stated that I was posting via a
>> number of identities I have never utilized. They also incorrectly stated
>> that I was one of three or more different people, or, that I shared
>> identities and internet accounts with them. They have made these claims
>> for four ears without providing a shred of evidence to back up their
>> claims.

>
>They really trolled the fuck out of you, eh? Kudos to Gilmer and friends.
>

>> One person in the group harassing me recently stated that his wife was
>> able to have my main usenet account and two secondary ones terminated for
>> transmitting abuse. The truth is, I am still using the same main account
>> with no lapse in access and was in no way connected with, or knowledgeable
>> about, the other two accounts. The husband stated he was amazed that I am
>> still utilizing the (main) account after his wife had it terminated.
>> Again, they provide no evidence to back up their claims because they
>> cannot do so. They got accounts closed down that were utilized by someone
>> else; whose, I don't know. I cannot be accountable for actions I not only
>> had no part in, I also had no knowledge of whatever it is they claim in
>> error.

>
>Or so you say. I take it you refer to the Ehretts? It would seem so.
>

>> I do not appreciate that Gilmer and Sarah Czpiel have submitted erroneous
>> information about me into this newsgroup and that I am subsequently being
>> assessed through their bullshit and lies.

>
>You should have a "little chat" with Karen about her histrionics. She
>keeps shooting you both in the feet, which is very poor strategy for
>winning a flamewar.
>

>> What is the proper procedure for me to present evidence into this
>> newsgroup which supports my statements that Gilmer has created numerous
>> troll identities to malign me (and a number of other people), along with
>> his having transmitted hundreds, if not thousands of usenet while
>> employing forgeries of identities I was forced to create in response to
>> his abuse?

>
>Message-IDs, to start with; quotes from the relevant messages; being
>entertaining about the whole thing and having a sense of humour helps,
>too. Oh, and not doing any of the things you accuse him of doing -- that's
>essential. Don't look now, but there seems to be a large dildo up your
>butt. Yes, I'd say you're fucked.
>

>> I respectfully request the opportunity to defend myself against the false
>> accusations made against me. Whatever judgments may be made about me based
>> upon deceit and lies are unfair and unjust.

>
>The story Gilmer told me doesn't feature you as much of a major character,
>I'm afraid. You're just Karen K. Anderson's henchman, helping her stalk
>some guy who rejected her k00ky advances. However, if you wish to be
>featured as the main character in this drama, do feel free to take centre
>stage.