Subj : Rawley's Incessant Whine To : Ralph Zetter From : Joseph Voigt Date : Fri Nov 03 2000 07:05 am Friday November 03 2000 07:13, RALPH ZETTER wrote to JOSEPH VOIGT: >> RZ> Huh? Man, what a dumbass you are. >> >> Just look at yourself, Ralph. I ask you a simple question where a >> "yes" or "no" should suffice and you fly off the handle (you didn't >> answer the question, BTW). Then you resort to name-calling, >> labelling me a "dumbass". You're no better than Todd or Constance. RZ> I was responding to the level of spite that you were producing. With reason, Ralph, with reason. RZ> if you don't like it, change your ways. My ways are just fine. You don't get to decide them for me. The fact that you and Constance resort to name-calling is your own little issue that YOU must deal with. It exposes you for who you are is all. No reason for me to change my ways when the problem is your own. RZ> But if you don't wanna change your attitude little boy, Still name-calling, huh, Ralph? My attitude is just fine. RZ> and you choose to call people hateful when that what YOU are, I call 'em as I see 'em, Ralph, no hate on my part at all. You are, however, hateful. RZ> then don't be surprised if people think evil of you because of it. They can think all they want, as can I. But, remember who started this little war of epithets of yours, Ralph, and look who isn't playing. Bet you didn't even notice. Now, you were saying? >> >> RZ> I don't even know you and already I don't like you. >> >> Do you dislike everyone you don't know? Well? >> Not in this echo, I haven't been. Todd started the name-calling RZ> No, you haven't, Well, then. RZ> you've just been baby-ish. Nope, I've only been addressing what has been put to me. >> me an INSANE PERVERT and then Constance dragged in Matzdobre and RZ> I'm inclined to agree with him. Well, he has since recanted. Do you still agree with him? >> onslaught of name-calling as well. Why don't you be honest with >> yourself? This isn't the Matzdobre echo and I had been rational here >> all along until Constance started her character attacks against me >> merely because I post in Matzdobre. It's people like you that make >> me sick. RZ> Yeah, justify yourself. Go ahead. I just did. >> RZ> I read your reply to Todd's stuff about schools teaching kids >> RZ> fisting, and your only reply was that it was nice to see >> RZ> someone rebel against whatever, not even mentioned that to >> RZ> teach kids that stuff in school is perverted. So yeah, your >> RZ> message looked perverted. >> >> You didn't even understand the context. Had you read the earlier >> exchange it might have been clearer to you. I made no commentary on >> what was being taught by anyone. I commented on the school board >> for standing up to whatever group it was. My message was NOT >> perverted and you know it. RZ> I understood the context, I reviewed the material, I saw the exchange, RZ> and you were pegged rightly so. You didn't understand the context and you pegged me wrong. >> RZ> I've gone back through the messages here and have read many of >> RZ> the posts to get a feel for everyone here. At every moment you >> RZ> act like a spoiled brat who is trying to stretch stuff and win, >> RZ> it's like you have a small penis and are trying to make up for >> RZ> it or something. >> >> Just look at yourself, Ralph. Now you are comparing penises? >> What's the matter with you? Act like a spoiled brat? I don't >> stretch anything to win anything. I use reasoned argument. RZ> If you say so. I just did. >> RZ> If a person doesn't agree with Todd or whoever, then they can >> RZ> disagree and explain why they think he, Constance, or whoever, >> RZ> is wrong. >> >> That's what I HAD been doing. THEY launched this character attack >> crusade, Ralph. I certainly didn't. RZ> Oh, it's THEIR FAULT!! You have it exactly right, Ralph. It is their fault. RZ> Sure, you never were abrasive or aggressive before then, were you? Of course I was. I am abrasive and aggressive rather often, actually. But neither are considered character attacks. Perhaps you should learn that. RZ> Sure, they had no reason to think ill of you, did they? I don't care what they think of me. The issue was their unwarranted character attacks without basis. RZ> Well young fellow, I've been catching up on some of the past stuff in RZ> the echo, and I see you as being too eager to "win", like a child. I am neither a young fellow nor eager to win anything here. I only point out flaws in reasoning that beg to be addressed. RZ> You're willing to attack and exaggerate things just to artificially RZ> make someone else look bad. I attack arguments that are flawed, but certainly exaggerate nothing. If the recipient looks bad to themselves, they need only readjust their argument is all. >> RZ> challenge to see his messages over there. I went through pages >> RZ> and pages and pages of crap from morons like you, and I only >> RZ> saw a small tiny percentage of posts made by Todd here and >> RZ> there. >> >> So, everyone who posts there are morons then? Just look at how you >> label rational, intelligent people like that. Why do you call >> people morons when they simply aren't? RZ> Rational intelligent people don't continually act like that. You didn't answer my question. I'll ask it again. Is everyone who posts in Matzdobre a moron? Rational, intelligent people act any way they like. And you don't get to tell them how they must act in order to remain rational and intelligent. RZ> Grow up. ?? You mean, I should stop posting in Matzdobre and then I'll become a grownup like you? LOL. RZ> I figured you to be about 17 - 20 years old. You figured wrong. But judging by the content of your posts, lack of experience, lack of wisdom, and lack of learning, I'd guess you're an adolescent or very young adult. >> >> RZ> I suppose Joseph is an atheist. >> >> >> >> Suppose all you want. But I'm a little more honest than you, >> >> else I'd suppose you are Celtic Scientologist. >> >> RZ> No. >> >> I say you are. RZ> I don't even know what that is. I've heard of Scientologists, but not RZ> a Celtic one. Your "hearing" of Scientolgists, and your not seeming to know anything about the Celts, tells me my above is likely accurate. >> >> tells me you are deliberately dishonest in calling me something >> >> I simply am >> >> RZ> The only liar here is you, little man. >> >> You're lying, Ralph. Still name-calling, I see. RZ> What a joke you are. Not at all, Ralph. RZ> You call me a liar by saying I'm dishonest, and that's OK. It IS okay and is not name-calling, as your being dishonest is spot-on. RZ> I say you are a liar and just use fewer words, and I'm bad RZ> for that? Yes. Because your calling me a liar when that is not the case is a lie. RZ> Hmmmm....maybe you ARE insane. Not, but maybe you should jostle around those lies of yours inside your head for a little while. >> Are you going to call me a PERVERT now too? RZ> Ya certainly ain't normal. Normality has quite a range, Ralph, and I fit very nicely within that range. Did you just notice that you have yet another lie of yours to add to that jostle? RZ> back on the farm, we had uses for folks like you. Is that a veiled threat? Now, work on all that anger of yours. .... Freedom *OF* religion includes freedom *FROM* religion. --- FastEcho 1.46 (reg) * Origin: The Danse - Where Norse Gods Ponder Their Navels (1:387/638) .