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.
--
________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! mhm 29x21; TM#5; COOSN-029-06-71069; Usenet Ruiner #5
The God of Odd Statements, the Ugliest Pigfucker In The Universe
Official Overseer of Kooks & Trolls on rec.arts.drwho
Stupidity Takes Its Toll. Please Have Exact Change.
Most Hated Usenetizen of All Time #13; Lits Slut #16
Gutter Chix0r #17; BowTie's Spuriously Accused Pedo Photographer #4
AUK Psycho & Felon #21; Parrot & Zombie #2; AUK Hate Machine Cog #19
Anonymous Psycho Criminal #18
Remove all the confusion and k00ks from my posting addy to send me your
sekrit messages.
"The most useful tool for dealing with management types is, of course,
an automatic weapon."
