On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 09:12:02 GMT, Speeding biz.org> wrote:

No, this answers the question of whether you are Gordon Roy Parker, or
simply another one of those occasional pimple faced young sycophants
Parker is able lead around by the nose and get into all sorts of
trouble, at least until he tries to get them to do something with
severe legal culpability attached to it. Then they seem to get a clue
and hit the bricks, quick.

So, in four years of his senseless and useless legal frivolity, only
Gordon Roy Parker has ever tried to use the terms "domain name" and
web site interchangeably in this newsgroup, referring to both
incessantly by the incorrect term "domain". It's not accurate and not
true, and only you do it, Parker, so you've just burned yourself, GRP.

You stated this exact wording in your lawsuit against me, Parker, but
I have never said I had [quoting what you just said] "...created a
site about him."
Never, anywhere, as it pertains to the RayFAQ. Never. So, only you-
Gordon Roy Parker, have ever accused me of admitting something I've
never said. Only you. Big mistake, gasoline freak.

I said I owned the domain name and it pointed to a website where
someone [and I clearly stated it wasn't me] had authored an FAQ about
GRP [you]. You still think you can convince a federal judge that
pointing a domain name to a site lets you control the site, eh? When
are you going to give it up, Gordon? Domain name owners know it's not
true, six year olds know it's not true, federal judges know it's not
true, and it doesn't fly, because anybody who uses domain names knows
the truth. Try something else for a change. Next lie, Parker.

Again you try to run with the crap argument that a domain name and a
web site are the same thing. I have never said I owned the site of the
FAQ, Dumbass. Do you know how stupid and ignorant that makes you
sound, Gordon? Besides the fact that it gives your real identity
totally away. They're not the same thing and the more you try to sell
it to people, the more people realize (1) you're Gordon Roy Parker, no
matter what nym you're using at the time (2) you're a liar, (3) you're
full of crap (4) you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

I own over 60 domain names and half don't even point to websites or
name servers anywhere on the internet. How can that be, Gordon Roy,
since according to you, a domain name can't exist without a website to
point to. Hunh, dumbass?
I owned the name, pointed it to a website with content authored by
somebody else, and said that. You quoted that, or are you so stupid
you don't read what you quote? Want to throw some gas and flick a Bic
now, Sparky?

Keep going, Gordon Roy Parker, rope and plenty of it. There's a method
to keeping you ranting on the same old lies.

I owned the domain name Ray-Gordon.com and only Gordon Roy Parker has
ever claimed that means I owned the website it pointed to *ONLY
BECAUSE I OWNED THE DOMAIN NAME*. Only you, Gordon, and now we know
who you really are, Parker. You outed yourself with your stupid crap.
Blame yourself. Get Mom's baseball bat ready, loser. You're going to
need it.

No, because only you, Parker, have tried to claim owning a domain name
means owning the website it points to. Only you, in all of the
internet, billions of pages and millions of readers, surfers and
authors, only you and you alone. Revealing isn't it, Parker?? Can you
say the word, Parker? OUTED! Oh my gawd, Mommy, where's that slugger?

I've posted the how-to of pointing a domain name and how to set up a
domain name in a host's DNS name servers. Of course, you have a vested
interest in not admitting the way the system really works. So, you,
Parker, are the only human on the entire planet who says he uses
domain names but he's so stupid he can't understand how a person can
point a domain name to a website they don't own.

BTW, this was all covered in the answer to the last complaint in PAED,
so don't you think some of the readers here have already read the
info? I thought you called yourself a genius, geenooos? Do you need
some unleaded to go with that death spell, Parker?

For the archives, one more time, [bring up the band in the background
for the terminally stupid child threateners out there]
I set the DNS settings at the name registrar to point to the name
servers of a web host. They were numbers I got in an email message. I
set those numbers. End of story. I didn't have to author content, own
the site hosting account or have access to the control panel of the
web site, just set the DNS settings at the company where I registered
the domain name. DUH, gee, dum dee dum, golly mr. wizaard. You're a
lying Dumbass, Parker. Wanta throw a spell at my knees now, einstein?

Careful Gordon, you just used the words "domain name" instead of
"domain". Slip has been noted for later.

Way back, they all cost $35 because the only place to register a name
was Network Solutions. A net pro would know that. Oops, get the bat
toe wart spell ready...

Domain names don't sit at ICANN. ICANN only oversees the
administration of the naming process and resolves name conflicts.
Domain names don't exist in name servers, anywhere, until they are
registered the first time. All registrars use a registration mechanism
that goes through NetSol's servers. ICANN owns no internet wide domain
name servers.

Now you're back to using the word "domain" to refer to a name. A big
OOPS in that last slipup, eh Parker?

I owned a domain name, not a "domain", and you [Gordon Roy Parker] are
the only human to ever try to use that argument. The same BS over and
over does get boring, but you're constantly trying to claim you're the
only person on the entire internet who doesn't understand how domain
name pointing and hosting works. The only person. That says something
when you try to shill and pose, Parker. It says it all, and it reveals
why you insist on retelling it again and again. Sanctions. Right,
Psrker, because if you can't convince a judge you're simply stpid, you
face sanctions for filing a case with no merit to it. If you can
convince a judge you THOUGHT it had merit, you think you can avoid
sanctions.

They posted content to their site and I set my domain name settings to
point to their web host's name server IP numbers. Definitely not
rocket science and everybody who uses domain names knows how it works.
You have zero hopes of convincing a federal judge you're that stupid.
So who are you trying to lie to? The NG, the judges? That won't stop a
sanctions motion.

I didn't buy a domain, Parker, I bought a domain name. A "domain",
without the word "name" after it, technically refers to a hosted
website and the content on it, not the name that points to it. Again,
your lie catches up to you. You're the only person who has ever tried
to tell that lie, Parker.

The reference "Domain name" came about the same way the reference "dog
name"or "company name" came about. It's a reference to a NAME used to
list an IP number for a hosting account website somewhere, IF IT'S
USED FOR THAT PURPOSE AND IF THERE IS ONE TO POINT TO. Like a street
address in a phone book. It might point to an empty lot or an occupied
building. It might point somewhere and it might not.

Are you saying a domain name can't sit without being pointed anywhere?
Man up, if you can Parker. Is that what you're saying?

Common daily public practice and factual reality proves pointing a
domain name gives no control over a website pointed to. You have to
own the hosting account and/or have access to the hosting account's
control panel [the hosting industry standard is cPanel].

I set the DNS settings at my name registrar, that's all, Bingo bunko.
Are you saying that's not how it works?

Again with the "domain" and not the proper "domain name" tripe again.
Give it a rest, Parker. That alone was grounds for a plain and simple
motion and you were warned.

Only Gordon Roy Parker has tried to call my domain name the ray-gordon
domain. You see, Parker, only you won't acknowledge the difference
between a domain name and a website it points to. Only you and nobody
else. But we both know why you can't. It's that pesky legal problem
again. Sanctions. If you admit knowing they are two separate and
differnet things, you are subject to sanctions for filing a complaint
based on a lie and had no merit.

You know as well as I do, you can't publicly admit there's a
difference, because it would sink your fake accusations in the courts.
You're committed to trying to convince the courts you're stupid about
domain names and web sites, so you can claim ignorance of the truth
when I hit the courts up for sanctions for filing a complaint and
appeal based on a lie.

The mere fact that you're lying about that one issue constitutes proof
you knew your argument was doomed, therefore shouldn't have been taken
as far as you did. You know, as well as I do, that constitutes proof
of a frivolous suit before the courts, proof needed for sanctions. But
you think if you play stupid until the very end, it will mean you can
all of a sudden say, "gee, golly, I never knew it worked like that."

Fat chance, Parker, fat chance. I can prove to the courts you know a
domain name is not a website hosting account and doesn't control a
hosting account. So, there's my proof you knew your complaint was
filed solely for frivolous purposes, since it was based on a lie. A
lie you've purposely told and intentionally repeated in every
kooksoot.
I'll argue you lied about it and you can only argue you're stupid.
We'll see who wins the argument. Awww...itching for that gas can now,
Parker?

You tried to use that same gun analogy in one of your kooksoots,
talking about the ray-gordon.com domain name, then you switched to a
car analogy in the last soot. Another "tell" Parker. You still can't
get that through your head about the "tells" can you? Geenooos my ass.
Want to take a whiz on a grave, Parker?

Yes you are, Parker, and you're restating, word for word, the same
lame tired arguments you've repeated in your stupid kooksoots for the
last 4 years, from the gun and car analogies, to "a domain name lets
you control a website" to "a domain name and a website hosting account
are the same thing", to "it's illegal to point a domain name or loan
it to somebody". Give it up, einstein.

Not the lies I was talking about, and that's a lame attempt at
misdirection, Parker. I was talking about your lies about knowing I
wasn't the author of the FAQ. I proved you knew I wasn't the author,
but you continued to argue I was and accused me of it in every
kooksoot. That's the lie told under penalty of perjury. Another basis
for sanctions. I have you nailed dead bang. Live with it, gasoline
boy.

So, when 2600.com pointed a domain name at the Ford corporate site,
they were aiding Ford? Funny that Ford tried to sue them to stop them
from pointing the domain name there. Yep, you make absolutely zero
sense, Parker. I included that case in the complaint response to your
last kooksoot, Parker, Ford versus 2600.com. Can't you read? Duh,
einstein.

Bullshit, why don't you drop the "I'm just a guy..." jibberish? Do you
think, after you've outed yourself with half a dozen slips in the last
two messages, that anybody doesn't know who you are? Get a clue
matchboy, everybody is reading the same content and knows what's been
said and what hasn't.

I never said I never had "any contact or involvement wiht anything
involving him."

In fact, you quoted my statement above...

Now, you lie about what I said when you've quoted the actual
statement. Only you're that terminally stupid, Parker. That's another
character flaw you have that you can't seem to get a handle on. It's a
"tell", just like your repeating lies under new names, lies that only
you tell. Gee, GRP, we'd never know it was you.

Ah, so now we see you've had contact with someone in the city.
Jurisdiction, Parker, jurisdiction. It's an amazing thing and one you
have little concept or understanding of. Like when you publicly
claimed to have talked to somebody at my former employer's office.
Jurisdiction, Parker.
How would I know you've had contact with anyone in my federal
district? Think about it, geenooos, if your one or two brain cells can
handle the workload.

Again, it's interesting you've spent so much time tracking my personal
causes, so much you know things that aren't on the website you looked
at. Again, Parker, jurisdiction. I know why and how you THINK you know
those things, Parker. You'll find out how I know soon enough.

Why do you insist on socking new screen names, Parker? Do you think
repeating the same lame crap under new names makes it any better or
adds any truth to any of it?

-A domain name is still not the same as a hosting account
-pointing a domain name still doesn't allow control over the site site
it points to
-and you're still a lazy loser who's spent the last ten years mooching
off an elderly woman, driving her into bankruptcy, simply because
you're too damnned worthless to get out and get a job, Gordon Roy
Parker.

Look for that jurisdiction thing to come back and bite you in the ass.
Remember, civil suits are real property in this state and can be
seized to satisfy legal judgments. You were warned and you wouldn't
listen. How smart is that?

Need a loan for that gas, Parker?

Thom E. Geiger, Domain Name Owner
ChewOnThis.Org
(the Official GRP NewsLoon tracking website)
Ray-Gordon.com
Ray-Gordon.net
Newsloon.com

Don't buy anything from any business trying to use SLAPP lawsuits to
stop criticism of the company, owners, officers or products.

Guido Gump Parker blames a baseball bat death threat on his own mother, Penny "Skull Crusher" Parker: