Re: prof_jonez mocks hackers

On 18 Jul 2008 20:22:15 -0400, tjab@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (tjab) wrote:

>In article <ko2084165ehudoiiqged9ib8dd25ksvpri@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>Kent Wills  <compuelf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>On 17 Jul 2008 22:35:24 -0400, tjab@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (tjab) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <j4vs7412dmqqqqrgv38423fd0l92iqpfao@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>>>Kent Wills  <compuelf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>On 16 Jul 2008 09:53:54 -0400, tjab@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (tjab) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>[...]
>>>>
>>>>>>> It took you a year to create THAT lie, Jonesie? No wonder you
can't
>>>>>>>make new insults about me. SHEESH!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    To be fair, tjab was the first one to make the claim.  
>>>>>
>>>>>I was? Cite?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    Yes.
>>>
>>>Did you forget to include a cite?
>>
>>     No.
>>     You have confused a lack of desire with a laps in memory.
>
>You have confused a lack of ability with a lack of desire.
>

    Not so.  But do continue to lie, if it will make your life a bit
easier.

>>>
>>>>>>Like
>>>>>>Jonezie, nothing was offered by way of proof.
>>>>>
>>>>>Pretty funny, coming from you, who has offered no evidence other than
your
>>>>>worthless word that it was Jonez.
>>>>
>>>>    Yet you commented on part of the evidence by calling it, and I
>>>>quote you, "Bull****."
>>>
>>>Bull**** is not evidence. Neither is simple assertion, which is all
>>>you have to offer.
>>>
>>
>>     You commented on other aspects of the evidence.
>
>Pointing out that what you call evidence is not evidence is not
>"commenting on the evidence."

     It is evidence.  But feel free to continue lying, if doing so
brings you joy.

>
>>     Did you forget how you wanted his E-mail address to be his nym?
>
>A semantic quibble that is irrelevant to your assertion, given that the
>poster in question forged numerous email addresses and nyms alike.

    To the best of my recollection, Jonezie always altered the
address.  If, as you are now claiming, he failed to alter one or more,
please be kind enough to post the MID(s) and/pr Google link(s) to the
post(s).  
     It is possible he left his address, but I don't recall it, and
your word isn't anywhere near good enough.

>
>Incidentally, what is the source of your delusion that I wanted his/her
>email address to be his/her nym? 

     There is no delusion.  When I stated his nym was used, you lied
and claimed his E-mail address was his nym.
     Now you lie and present that you didn't make the claim.

>
>>     You may as well give up.  No amount of your dishonesty will ever
>>alter the truth.
>
>No amount of projection will alter the simple fact that you are a
>compulsive liar.

     If your claim were true, you would have been able to prove at
least one lie from me.

>
>As far as altering the truth, if I were *looking* for some truth to
>alter (I'm not), I certainly wouldn't be looking for it in your posts.
>

    Yet you frequently try.

-- 
"Exterminieren! Exterminieren! "
   -- The Daleks   'Doctor Who: Journey's End'

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>