Where'd all the feminazis go?

What happened to this group? Looks like all the "man must pay for woman's
choice" folks crawled back into their holes.

news

2010-02-15 05:23:41 UTC

Post by Chris
What happened to this group? Looks like all the "man must pay for woman's
choice" folks crawled back into their holes.

This group was mostly men whinging about having to pay for child support,
men ranting about the evil bitches they impregnated with the rugrats that
the courts ordered to suck the life out of them, and men who didn't have
to, but came to bitch about oh! the unfairness of it all. There was also
the rare female who stumbled upon the group asking about how to collect
child support from some absconding sperm donor, but they got shot down fast.

Chris

2010-02-15 20:07:07 UTC

Post by Chris
What happened to this group? Looks like all the "man must pay for woman's
choice" folks crawled back into their holes.

What's fair about legally forcing a man to pay for a choice that legally he
is incapable of making?

Post by news
There was also the rare female who stumbled upon the group asking about
how to collect child support from some absconding sperm donor, but they
got shot down fast.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a donation is a gift. Thus, once a "donation"
takes place, the recipient becomes the owner of such donation. What the
recipient chooses to do with the donation is their SOLE choice; and along
with the choice comes the sole RESPONSIBILITY for such choice. Am I wrong?

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-15 20:20:01 UTC

Post by Chris
What happened to this group? Looks like all the "man must pay for
woman's choice" folks crawled back into their holes.

What's fair about legally forcing a man to pay for a choice that legally
he is incapable of making?

Post by news
There was also the rare female who stumbled upon the group asking
about how to collect child support from some absconding sperm donor,
but they got shot down fast.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a donation is a gift. Thus, once a
"donation" takes place, the recipient becomes the owner of such
donation. What the recipient chooses to do with the donation is their
SOLE choice; and along with the choice comes the sole RESPONSIBILITY for
such choice. Am I wrong?

Looks like you answered your own question, who in their right mind would
stick around to talk to a lowlife whose only ambition is to neglect his
kids and pretend he has no responsibility for them? Civilized folks have
evolved well beyond your way of thinking. The rest of you congregate
here, tell lies to each other and defend each other's lies to the death.
There are far better forums for real information about child support.

Chris

2010-02-16 01:39:21 UTC

Post by Chris
What happened to this group? Looks like all the "man must pay for
woman's choice" folks crawled back into their holes.

What's fair about legally forcing a man to pay for a choice that legally
he is incapable of making?

Post by news
There was also the rare female who stumbled upon the group asking about
how to collect child support from some absconding sperm donor, but they
got shot down fast.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a donation is a gift. Thus, once a
"donation" takes place, the recipient becomes the owner of such donation.
What the recipient chooses to do with the donation is their SOLE choice;
and along with the choice comes the sole RESPONSIBILITY for such choice.
Am I wrong?

Looks like you answered your own question, who in their right mind would
stick around to talk to a lowlife whose only ambition is to neglect his
kids and pretend he has no responsibility for them? Civilized folks have
evolved well beyond your way of thinking. The rest of you congregate here,
tell lies to each other and defend each other's lies to the death. There
are far better forums for real information about child support.

Hey, it's YOU again. I see you decided to crawl back out. So tell me; while
we await the answers to my questions from the other poster, care to give it
a shot?
By the way, I googled your name "***@XXX" and here is the first result on
the list: http://xxxonxxx.com/ You aren't by chance affiliated with this
site, are you?

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-16 02:22:14 UTC

Post by Chris
What happened to this group? Looks like all the "man must pay for
woman's choice" folks crawled back into their holes.

What's fair about legally forcing a man to pay for a choice that
legally he is incapable of making?

Post by news
There was also the rare female who stumbled upon the group asking
about how to collect child support from some absconding sperm donor,
but they got shot down fast.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a donation is a gift. Thus, once a
"donation" takes place, the recipient becomes the owner of such
donation. What the recipient chooses to do with the donation is their
SOLE choice; and along with the choice comes the sole RESPONSIBILITY
for such choice. Am I wrong?

Looks like you answered your own question, who in their right mind
would stick around to talk to a lowlife whose only ambition is to
neglect his kids and pretend he has no responsibility for them?
Civilized folks have evolved well beyond your way of thinking. The
rest of you congregate here, tell lies to each other and defend each
other's lies to the death. There are far better forums for real
information about child support.

Hey, it's YOU again. I see you decided to crawl back out. So tell me;
while we await the answers to my questions from the other poster, care
to give it a shot?
on the list: http://xxxonxxx.com/ You aren't by chance affiliated with
this site, are you?

Like I said, it is amusing to read through your ape like attempts to
communicate your frustration from time to time, nobody who spends his
time ranting that he shouldn't be responsible for his offspring has
anything sensible to say.

Your question about where everyone went and why this group is completely
dead was answered in your first response. Your attempt to troll up a
fight is pathetic and sad, but funny enough to jump in and make fun of
you again.

Chris

2010-02-16 19:21:57 UTC

Post by Chris
What happened to this group? Looks like all the "man must pay for
woman's choice" folks crawled back into their holes.

What's fair about legally forcing a man to pay for a choice that
legally he is incapable of making?

Post by news
There was also the rare female who stumbled upon the group asking
about how to collect child support from some absconding sperm donor,
but they got shot down fast.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a donation is a gift. Thus, once a
"donation" takes place, the recipient becomes the owner of such
donation. What the recipient chooses to do with the donation is their
SOLE choice; and along with the choice comes the sole RESPONSIBILITY
for such choice. Am I wrong?

Hey, it's YOU again. I see you decided to crawl back out. So tell me;
while we await the answers to my questions from the other poster, care to
give it a shot?
the list: http://xxxonxxx.com/ You aren't by chance affiliated with this
site, are you?

Like I said, it is amusing to read through your ape like attempts to
communicate your frustration

I'm not frustrated.

Post by x***@xxx.com
from time to time, nobody who spends his time ranting that he shouldn't be
responsible for his offspring

No one is proclaiming that "he shouldn't be responsible for his offspring".
The government people make it ILLEGAL for a man to "be responsible" for his
offspring!

Post by x***@xxx.com
anything sensible to say.
Your question about where everyone went and why this group is completely
dead was answered in your first response.

You may just be on to something here. Quite possibly, most of the fools
finally realized the rest of us were telling the truth. Thus, no need to
argue against reality.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Your attempt to troll up a fight is pathetic and sad, but funny enough to
jump in and make fun of you again.

Perhaps THAT'S why folks left, because people of your caliber come here to
make fun of others rather than address the facts. You might want to try
alt.mockothers for your purposes.

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-16 22:34:13 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Like I said, it is amusing to read through your ape like attempts to
communicate your frustration

I'm not frustrated.

Then what is your excuse for this lame troll? Why are you so desperate
to get the attention of people who consider you a useless pile of shit?
Are you just lonely?

Post by x***@xxx.com
from time to time, nobody who spends his time ranting that he
shouldn't be responsible for his offspring

No one is proclaiming that "he shouldn't be responsible for his
offspring". The government people make it ILLEGAL for a man to "be
responsible" for his offspring!

You are proclaiming EXACTLY that. You are claiming that you should not
be responsible for your kids because it is not your choice. You are
willing to lie from one post to the next to try and make your silly
point and you wonder why you are not taken seriously. Tell us how you
feel about paying taxes, do you refuse to pay taxes because it isn't
your choice which war we waste the money on?

Post by x***@xxx.com
anything sensible to say.
Your question about where everyone went and why this group is
completely dead was answered in your first response.

You may just be on to something here. Quite possibly, most of the fools
finally realized the rest of us were telling the truth. Thus, no need to
argue against reality.

Nobody ever realized that, you all just seem desperate to convince
people that you are not irresponsible AND that you should have no legal
responsibility for your kids. Your reality is one where everyone has
cotton candy for brains.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Your attempt to troll up a fight is pathetic and sad, but funny enough
to jump in and make fun of you again.

Perhaps THAT'S why folks left, because people of your caliber come here
to make fun of others rather than address the facts. You might want to
try alt.mockothers for your purposes.

Nobody of my caliber spends much time here, this is a place for folks of
your moral fiber who don't want responsibility for their children. A
very small and much disrespected minority of society. If there was any
sensible advice dispensed here for people who actually want to support
their children, maybe there would be more than 1 post (from you or a cut
and paste from a dopey blog) per month. You begged for some attention in
your pathetic lonely post and I obliged, if you were a decent human
being you would have thanked me for my time and gone back to your job
search.

Chris

2010-02-17 03:04:40 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Like I said, it is amusing to read through your ape like attempts to
communicate your frustration

I'm not frustrated.

Then what is your excuse for this lame troll? Why are you so desperate to
get the attention of people who consider you a useless pile of shit?

I'm not.

Are you just lonely?

No. Are YOU?

Post by x***@xxx.com
from time to time, nobody who spends his time ranting that he shouldn't
be responsible for his offspring

No one is proclaiming that "he shouldn't be responsible for his
offspring". The government people make it ILLEGAL for a man to "be
responsible" for his offspring!

You are proclaiming EXACTLY that. You are claiming that you should not be
responsible for your kids because it is not your choice.

Not even CLOSE. With all due respect, is English your second language?

You are willing to lie

Untrue. But I welcome you to prove that I do not believe my own claim.

from one post to the next to try and make your silly point and you wonder
why you are not taken seriously.

I know EXACTLY why you don't take me seriously; because you reject the
truth, that's why!

Tell us how you feel about paying taxes, do you refuse to pay taxes
because it isn't your choice which war we waste the money on?

Post by x***@xxx.com
anything sensible to say.
Your question about where everyone went and why this group is completely
dead was answered in your first response.

You may just be on to something here. Quite possibly, most of the fools
finally realized the rest of us were telling the truth. Thus, no need to
argue against reality.

Nobody ever realized that,

Speak for yourself.

you all just seem desperate to convince people that you are not
irresponsible AND that you should have no legal responsibility for your
kids.

However do you arrive at THAT conclusion? And by the way, how about leaving
everybody else out of this. It is between you and ME.

Your reality is one where everyone has cotton candy for brains.

Well thank you for your opinion.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Your attempt to troll up a fight is pathetic and sad, but funny enough
to jump in and make fun of you again.

Perhaps THAT'S why folks left, because people of your caliber come here
to make fun of others rather than address the facts. You might want to
try alt.mockothers for your purposes.

Nobody of my caliber spends much time here, this is a place for folks of
your moral fiber who don't want responsibility for their children.

That could not be further from the truth. This is a place for folks to
EXPOSE the truth. Hurts, don't it.

A very small and much disrespected minority of society. If there was any
sensible advice dispensed here for people who actually want to support
their children, maybe there would be more than 1 post (from you or a cut
and paste from a dopey blog) per month.

There has been TRUCKLOADS of such advice. But it always comes down to the
same ole' thing "if she or her government allies say no, then you're just
s--- o-- o- l---". [Fill in the blanks]

You begged for some attention

No I didn't.

in your pathetic lonely post and I obliged, if you were a decent human
being you would have thanked me for my time and gone back to your job
search.

And just what job am I searching for?

[You seem to have a fixation on me the person rather than the topic at hand.
Attacking the author instead of the argument only proves the folly of the
opponent. Don't take MY word for it, google it.]

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-17 14:57:29 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Then what is your excuse for this lame troll? Why are you so desperate
to get the attention of people who consider you a useless pile of shit?

I'm not.

Then explain your trolling. Do you just like the negative attention? Do
you miss the feminazis you dislike so much? Are you just incredibly stupid?

Post by x***@xxx.com
Are you just lonely?

No. Are YOU?

See above.

Post by x***@xxx.com
You are proclaiming EXACTLY that. You are claiming that you should not
be responsible for your kids because it is not your choice.

Not even CLOSE. With all due respect, is English your second language?

You are either stupid or lying, I don't care which.

Post by x***@xxx.com
You are willing to lie

Untrue. But I welcome you to prove that I do not believe my own claim.

Done.

Post by x***@xxx.com
from one post to the next to try and make your silly point and you
wonder why you are not taken seriously.

I know EXACTLY why you don't take me seriously; because you reject the
truth, that's why!

No, because you reject your own responsibilities. I don't care one way
or another about a loser like you. I am just helping you understand why
nobody bothers to fight with you anymore and why your little dipshit
newsgroup is nearly dead.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Your question about where everyone went and why this group is
completely dead was answered in your first response.

Nobody ever realized that,

Speak for yourself.

I can speak for everyone with an IQ over 80 who has any sense of
responsibility in this case.

Post by x***@xxx.com
you all just seem desperate to convince people that you are not
irresponsible AND that you should have no legal responsibility for
your kids.

However do you arrive at THAT conclusion? And by the way, how about
leaving everybody else out of this. It is between you and ME.

By reading your post where you said ... Why should I be responsible for
my child .... I didn't have a choice blah blah blah.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Nobody of my caliber spends much time here, this is a place for folks
of your moral fiber who don't want responsibility for their children.

That could not be further from the truth. This is a place for folks to
EXPOSE the truth. Hurts, don't it.

The truth is that you are and should be responsible for your own
children. I am fine with the truth, it is you who seems desperatge to
undo evolution.

Post by x***@xxx.com
You begged for some attention

No I didn't.

Yes you did look at the title of your post. "Where did the people I hate
go? Why won't they argue with me anymore?" pretty sad. You never thanked
me for obliging though, you are rude as well as pathetic.

Post by Chris
And just what job am I searching for?
[You seem to have a fixation on me the person rather than the topic at
hand. Attacking the author instead of the argument only proves the folly
of the opponent. Don't take MY word for it, google it.]

The topic is you and your pathetic attempt to dredge up an argument in
this dead newsgroup. I found it funny enough to play along with you. So
don't think of this as an attack, just a description of your actions.

Chris

2010-02-17 18:10:34 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Then what is your excuse for this lame troll? Why are you so desperate
to get the attention of people who consider you a useless pile of shit?

I'm not.

Then explain your trolling.

I'm not trolling.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Do you just like the negative attention? Do you miss the feminazis you
dislike so much? Are you just incredibly stupid?

You, you, you. Only problem is, it's NOT about me. Read the topic again, and
perhaps you might learn this.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Are you just lonely?

No. Are YOU?

See above.

Post by x***@xxx.com
You are proclaiming EXACTLY that. You are claiming that you should not
be responsible for your kids because it is not your choice.

Not even CLOSE. With all due respect, is English your second language?

You are either stupid or lying,

False dilemma. So, was that a "yes" or a "no"?

Post by x***@xxx.com
I don't care which.

Post by x***@xxx.com
You are willing to lie

Untrue. But I welcome you to prove that I do not believe my own claim.

Done.

Where's the proof?

Post by x***@xxx.com
from one post to the next to try and make your silly point and you
wonder why you are not taken seriously.

I know EXACTLY why you don't take me seriously; because you reject the
truth, that's why!

No, because you reject your own responsibilities.

Untrue.

Post by x***@xxx.com
I don't care one way or another about a loser like you. I am just helping
you understand why nobody bothers to fight with you anymore and why your
little dipshit newsgroup is nearly dead.

I would wager that it is "nearly dead" because fewer people are willing to
help others extort money. Perhaps you can be a hero and soup it up again.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Your question about where everyone went and why this group is
completely dead was answered in your first response.

Nobody ever realized that,

Speak for yourself.

I can speak for everyone with an IQ over 80

Not without their consent. Not to mention, who are YOU to determine one's
IQ?

Post by x***@xxx.com
who has any sense of responsibility in this case.

Post by x***@xxx.com
you all just seem desperate to convince people that you are not
irresponsible AND that you should have no legal responsibility for your
kids.

However do you arrive at THAT conclusion? And by the way, how about
leaving everybody else out of this. It is between you and ME.

By reading your post where you said ... Why should I be responsible for my
child .... I didn't have a choice blah blah blah.

Since your above premise is false, your conclusion simply cannot follow. In
other words, I NEVER said that.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Nobody of my caliber spends much time here, this is a place for folks of
your moral fiber who don't want responsibility for their children.

That could not be further from the truth. This is a place for folks to
EXPOSE the truth. Hurts, don't it.

The truth is that you are and should be responsible for your own children.

When you say "you", exactly what do you mean in the above context?

Post by x***@xxx.com
I am fine with the truth,

Then why the resistance to it?

Post by x***@xxx.com
it is you who seems desperatge to undo evolution.

Post by x***@xxx.com
You begged for some attention

No I didn't.

Yes you did look at the title of your post. "Where did the people I hate
go? Why won't they argue with me anymore?" pretty sad.

With all due respect, ya gotta layoff that pipe.

Post by x***@xxx.com
You never thanked me for obliging though, you are rude as well as
pathetic.

Thank you for your opinion.

Post by Chris
And just what job am I searching for?

Again, what job am I searching for?

Post by Chris
[You seem to have a fixation on me the person rather than the topic at
hand. Attacking the author instead of the argument only proves the folly
of the opponent. Don't take MY word for it, google it.]

The topic is you

No it's not.

Post by x***@xxx.com
and your pathetic attempt to dredge up an argument in this dead newsgroup.

A question or statement does NOT make an arguement. It is the response that
does so. You might want to review the concept.

Post by x***@xxx.com
I found it funny enough to play along with you. So don't think of this as
an attack, just a description of your actions.

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-18 02:06:22 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Then explain your trolling.

I'm not trolling.

Pointless posts made for the sole reason of getting people to argue with
you is trolling.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Do you just like the negative attention? Do you miss the feminazis you
dislike so much? Are you just incredibly stupid?

You, you, you. Only problem is, it's NOT about me. Read the topic again,
and perhaps you might learn this.

It is about you and your trolling for an argument. This group is so dead
now that if I didn't post, your trolling would have been completely ignored.

Post by x***@xxx.com
You are either stupid or lying,

False dilemma. So, was that a "yes" or a "no"?

Stick to the topic of your lame attempts to troll up an argument in a
dead newsgroup.

Post by Chris
Untrue. But I welcome you to prove that I do not believe my own claim.

Done.

Where's the proof?

In all of your posts.

Post by x***@xxx.com
No, because you reject your own responsibilities.

Untrue.

My mistake, you WANT to reject your responsibility if only you could
prove that they aren't yours.

Post by Chris
I would wager that it is "nearly dead" because fewer people are willing
to help others extort money. Perhaps you can be a hero and soup it up
again.

You'd lose, it is dead because of single issue idiots like you posting
ridiculous nonsense. Who would bother to take those posts seriously?

Post by x***@xxx.com
I can speak for everyone with an IQ over 80

Not without their consent. Not to mention, who are YOU to determine
one's IQ?

I have their consent, they are all just thrilled that I am willing to do
the dirty work and make fun of you so they can continue to ignore you.
We had a meeting, of course you didn't know about it.

Post by Chris
Since your above premise is false, your conclusion simply cannot follow.
In other words, I NEVER said that.

read your own posts, maybe you were too drunk to remember posting it.

Post by x***@xxx.com
The truth is that you are and should be responsible for your own children.

When you say "you", exactly what do you mean in the above context?

Everyone with children.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Yes you did look at the title of your post. "Where did the people I
hate go? Why won't they argue with me anymore?" pretty sad.

With all due respect, ya gotta layoff that pipe.

you don't even understand yourself, do you? What other reason did you
have for asking for all the people who make fun of you?

Post by Chris
A question or statement does NOT make an arguement. It is the response
that does so. You might want to review the concept.

It was you begging for an argument, since the group is dead you need to
troll a little just to get anyone to respond. That is and will remain
the topic of my posts.

Chris

2010-02-18 15:41:50 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Then explain your trolling.

I'm not trolling.

Pointless posts made for the sole reason of getting people to argue with
you is trolling.

Since "pointless" is a matter of opinion, and in my opinion it was not
pointless, per YOUR definition I was not trolling.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Do you just like the negative attention? Do you miss the feminazis you
dislike so much? Are you just incredibly stupid?

You, you, you. Only problem is, it's NOT about me. Read the topic again,
and perhaps you might learn this.

It is about you

Like I said, read the topic. As a matter of fact, how about quoting it, then
explaining what part of it is about ME.

Post by x***@xxx.com
and your trolling for an argument. This group is so dead now that if I
didn't post, your trolling

I was not trolling.

Post by x***@xxx.com
would have been completely ignored.

Post by x***@xxx.com
You are either stupid or lying,

False dilemma. So, was that a "yes" or a "no"?

Stick to the topic of your lame attempts to troll up an argument in a dead
newsgroup.

Again, was that a "yes" or a "no"?

Post by Chris
Untrue. But I welcome you to prove that I do not believe my own claim.

Done.

Where's the proof?

In all of your posts.

In all these posts, what, exactly, have I said that proves so?

Post by x***@xxx.com
No, because you reject your own responsibilities.

Untrue.

My mistake, you WANT to reject your responsibility if only you could prove
that they aren't yours.

Mistake number TWO. Carefully read what you wrote above, and you just might
see that it is a senseless statement.

Post by Chris
I would wager that it is "nearly dead" because fewer people are willing
to help others extort money. Perhaps you can be a hero and soup it up
again.

You'd lose,

Try me!

Post by x***@xxx.com
it is dead because of single issue idiots like you posting ridiculous
nonsense.

Guess again.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Who would bother to take those posts seriously?

Post by x***@xxx.com
I can speak for everyone with an IQ over 80

Not without their consent. Not to mention, who are YOU to determine one's
IQ?

I have their consent,

And how have you determined their IQs to be over 80?

Post by x***@xxx.com
they are all just thrilled that I am willing to do the dirty work and make
fun of you so they can continue to ignore you. We had a meeting, of course
you didn't know about it.

And this is relevant how?

Post by Chris
Since your above premise is false, your conclusion simply cannot follow.
In other words, I NEVER said that.

read your own posts, maybe you were too drunk to remember posting it.

Enlighten me.

Post by x***@xxx.com
The truth is that you are and should be responsible for your own children.

When you say "you", exactly what do you mean in the above context?

Everyone with children.

Meaning biological parents, legal parents, physical guardians.... ? Will you
be more specific?

Post by x***@xxx.com
Yes you did look at the title of your post. "Where did the people I hate
go? Why won't they argue with me anymore?" pretty sad.

With all due respect, ya gotta layoff that pipe.

you don't even understand yourself, do you? What other reason did you have
for asking for all the people who make fun of you?

Like I said, the pipe's killin' you......

Post by Chris
A question or statement does NOT make an arguement. It is the response
that does so. You might want to review the concept.

It was you begging for an argument,

Perhaps in YOUR opinion. Thanks for sharing.

Post by x***@xxx.com
since the group is dead you need to troll a little just to get anyone to
respond.

I did not troll; therefore, your claim is false.

Post by x***@xxx.com
That is and will remain the topic of my posts.

Since I am the original poster, I, NOT you, set the topic of this
discussion. Any attempt to change it is nothing more than a red herring.

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-18 22:34:25 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Pointless posts made for the sole reason of getting people to argue
with you is trolling.

Since "pointless" is a matter of opinion, and in my opinion it was not
pointless, per YOUR definition I was not trolling.

Right, your point was to get some attention and try to get an argument
started in your dead newsgroup. That is trolling.

Post by x***@xxx.com
It is about you

Like I said, read the topic. As a matter of fact, how about quoting it,
then explaining what part of it is about ME.

The part where you posted asking where all the people you don't like
were rather than just being happy that they ignore you now. The topic of
this post is you and your lame trolling.

Post by Chris
I was not trolling.

You were. As dense and unable to face facts as you are, even you can see
that your post was just a troll to get people who ignore you to argue
with you.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Stick to the topic of your lame attempts to troll up an argument in a
dead newsgroup.

Again, was that a "yes" or a "no"?

Was what? Your lame attempt to troll?

Post by Chris
In all these posts, what, exactly, have I said that proves so?

the first trolling post in its entirety.

Post by x***@xxx.com
My mistake, you WANT to reject your responsibility if only you could
prove that they aren't yours.

Mistake number TWO. Carefully read what you wrote above, and you just
might see that it is a senseless statement.

You can't even own up to the fact that you were trolling this dead
newsgroup for an argument, honesty just isn't expected of you anymore.

Post by Chris
I would wager that it is "nearly dead" because fewer people are
willing to help others extort money. Perhaps you can be a hero and
soup it up again.

You'd lose,

Try me!

So you are claiming that the regular posters in here were willing to
help others extort money? Seems you can't read at all. Or else this is
just another lame attempt to troll up an argument.

Post by Chris
And how have you determined their IQs to be over 80?

I tested them

Post by x***@xxx.com
they are all just thrilled that I am willing to do the dirty work and
make fun of you so they can continue to ignore you. We had a meeting,
of course you didn't know about it.

And this is relevant how?

As relevant as your attempt to troll, just establishing a baseline of
your stupidity and inability to understand even the most basic things.

Post by x***@xxx.com
read your own posts, maybe you were too drunk to remember posting it.

Enlighten me.

I'm not equipped to do that, you need a team of psychiatrists and a
lawyer before anything will penetrate your dense skull.

Post by Chris
Meaning biological parents, legal parents, physical guardians.... ? Will
you be more specific?

No thanks, I'm just here to help you with your trolling, hopefully this
uses up some of the time you normally spend neglecting your kids and
annoying people in liquor stores. Its a public service I'm doing.

Post by x***@xxx.com
It was you begging for an argument,

Perhaps in YOUR opinion. Thanks for sharing.

It was, and you're quite welcome.

Post by x***@xxx.com
since the group is dead you need to troll a little just to get anyone
to respond.

I did not troll; therefore, your claim is false.

Yes you did and I'm here to make sure you aren't completely ignored as
you usually are. Maybe this good deed on my part will help you gain some
confidence and by this time next year you won't be reduced to trolling
in a dead newsgroup for negative attention.

Post by x***@xxx.com
That is and will remain the topic of my posts.

Since I am the original poster, I, NOT you, set the topic of this
discussion. Any attempt to change it is nothing more than a red herring.

It is you being a troll, you still don't know where all the feminazis
went because everyone except me just ignored you like they usually do.
You can thank me for making your troll a semi sucessful one.

Chris

2010-02-19 02:05:41 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Pointless posts made for the sole reason of getting people to argue with
you is trolling.

Since "pointless" is a matter of opinion, and in my opinion it was not
pointless, per YOUR definition I was not trolling.

Right, your point was to get some attention and try to get an argument
started in your dead newsgroup. That is trolling.

So you're saying that was the point of my post?

Post by x***@xxx.com
It is about you

Like I said, read the topic. As a matter of fact, how about quoting it,
then explaining what part of it is about ME.

The part where you posted asking where all the people you don't like

I never did any such thing. Now produce QUOTES to back your claim. You DO
know what quotes are, right?

Post by x***@xxx.com
were rather than just being happy that they ignore you now. The topic of
this post is you and your lame trolling.

Support your claim.

Post by Chris
I was not trolling.

You were.

I was not.

Post by x***@xxx.com
As dense and unable to face facts as you are, even you can see that your
post was just a troll to get people who ignore you to argue with you.

Sorry, I cannot see that which does NOT exist.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Stick to the topic of your lame attempts to troll up an argument in a
dead newsgroup.

Again, was that a "yes" or a "no"?

Was what?

The answer to my question.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Your lame attempt to troll?

Post by Chris
In all these posts, what, exactly, have I said that proves so?

the first trolling post in its entirety.

Ok, let's try it this way: How about quoting what I said that proves so.

Post by x***@xxx.com
My mistake, you WANT to reject your responsibility if only you could
prove that they aren't yours.

Mistake number TWO. Carefully read what you wrote above, and you just
might see that it is a senseless statement.

You can't even own up to the fact

I own up to any fact concerning my actions; and guess what, trolling AIN'T
one of 'em.

Post by x***@xxx.com
that you were trolling

Untrue.

Post by x***@xxx.com
this dead newsgroup for an argument, honesty just isn't expected of you
anymore.

Post by Chris
I would wager that it is "nearly dead" because fewer people are willing
to help others extort money. Perhaps you can be a hero and soup it up
again.

You'd lose,

Try me!

So you are claiming that the regular posters in here were willing to help
others extort money?

No.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Seems you can't read at all. Or else this is just another lame attempt to
troll up an argument.

False dilemma.

Post by Chris
And how have you determined their IQs to be over 80?

I tested them

Post by x***@xxx.com
they are all just thrilled that I am willing to do the dirty work and
make fun of you so they can continue to ignore you. We had a meeting, of
course you didn't know about it.

And this is relevant how?

As relevant as your attempt to troll,

Then that'd be about as relevant as the jewish Pope.

Post by x***@xxx.com
just establishing a baseline of your stupidity and inability to understand
even the most basic things.

Post by x***@xxx.com
read your own posts, maybe you were too drunk to remember posting it.

Enlighten me.

I'm not equipped to do that,

Nor is anybody else since it is IMPOSSIBLE to reproduce that which was never
produced in the first place.

Post by x***@xxx.com
you need a team of psychiatrists and a lawyer before anything will
penetrate your dense skull.

Post by Chris
Meaning biological parents, legal parents, physical guardians.... ? Will
you be more specific?

No thanks,

I see, it remains a mystery just who these folks are.

Post by x***@xxx.com
I'm just here to help you with your trolling, hopefully this uses up some
of the time you normally spend neglecting your kids and annoying people in
liquor stores. Its a public service I'm doing.

Post by x***@xxx.com
It was you begging for an argument,

Perhaps in YOUR opinion. Thanks for sharing.

It was, and you're quite welcome.

Post by x***@xxx.com
since the group is dead you need to troll a little just to get anyone to
respond.

I did not troll; therefore, your claim is false.

Yes you did

No, I didn't.

Post by x***@xxx.com
and I'm here to make sure you aren't completely ignored as you usually
are. Maybe this good deed on my part will help you gain some confidence
and by this time next year you won't be reduced to trolling in a dead
newsgroup for negative attention.

Post by x***@xxx.com
That is and will remain the topic of my posts.

Since I am the original poster, I, NOT you, set the topic of this
discussion. Any attempt to change it is nothing more than a red herring.

It is you being a troll,

Correction: I am not a troll. Now, care to address the topic?

Post by x***@xxx.com
you still don't know where all the feminazis went

I know EXACTLY where they went; they crawled back into their holes.

Post by x***@xxx.com
because everyone except me just ignored you

Untrue.

Post by x***@xxx.com
like they usually do. You can thank me for making your troll

Irrelevant since "your troll" does not exist AND is a red herring.

Post by x***@xxx.com
a semi sucessful one.

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-19 13:07:31 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Right, your point was to get some attention and try to get an argument
started in your dead newsgroup. That is trolling.

So you're saying that was the point of my post?

It is understandable, you need a place to regurgitate your
mensrights.org blog articles and argue with people about them.
Unfortunately for you nobody really cares anymore and that has become a
bore. Even the whine choir who usually agrees with your regurgitations
and swears to your lies doesn't bother to post anymore.

I can see why you are trolling a dead newsgroup now with your Rush
Limbaugh feminazis stupidity, you are desperate to drag someone back
into your arguments and want to try and revive the newsgroup so when you
cut and paste your nitwit articles there will be someone here who cares.

Some times it is just best to let it go, nobody cares, the newsgroup is
dead and no amount of trolling on your part will bring it back to life.

Chris

2010-02-19 15:42:15 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Right, your point was to get some attention and try to get an argument
started in your dead newsgroup. That is trolling.

So you're saying that was the point of my post?

It is understandable, you need a place to regurgitate your mensrights.org
blog articles and argue with people about them. Unfortunately for you
nobody really cares anymore and that has become a bore. Even the whine
choir who usually agrees with your regurgitations and swears to your lies
doesn't bother to post anymore.
I can see why you are trolling a dead newsgroup now with your Rush
Limbaugh feminazis stupidity, you are desperate to drag someone back into
your arguments and want to try and revive the newsgroup so when you cut
and paste your nitwit articles there will be someone here who cares.
Some times it is just best to let it go, nobody cares, the newsgroup is
dead and no amount of trolling on your part will bring it back to life.

I must admit, the above beats Daddy Dewdrop's version HANDS DOWN!

Dusty

2010-02-19 18:23:15 UTC

"***@XXX.COM" <***@xxx.com> wrote in message news:hlm2ek$gvg$***@news.eternal-september.org...

[snip]

Post by x***@xxx.com
Some times it is just best to let it go, nobody cares, the newsgroup is
dead and no amount of trolling on your part will bring it back to life.

Then why are -you- here?? Trolling, eh?

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-20 01:14:02 UTC

Post by Dusty
[snip]

Post by x***@xxx.com
Some times it is just best to let it go, nobody cares, the newsgroup
is dead and no amount of trolling on your part will bring it back to
life.

Then why are -you- here?? Trolling, eh?

Look you finally have a friend to play with. Good for you 2, maybe now
you can get back to the trolling for interest in your dead newsgroup.
Good luck to you both, happy trolling.

Phil #3

2010-02-22 19:56:43 UTC

Post by Dusty
[snip]

Post by x***@xxx.com
Some times it is just best to let it go, nobody cares, the newsgroup is
dead and no amount of trolling on your part will bring it back to life.

Then why are -you- here?? Trolling, eh?

Look you finally have a friend to play with. Good for you 2, maybe now you
can get back to the trolling for interest in your dead newsgroup. Good
luck to you both, happy trolling.

Anyone care to hazard a guess as to why this lowlife, XXX, never, ever
answers a question?
Phil #3

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-22 20:07:52 UTC

Post by Dusty
[snip]

Post by x***@xxx.com
Some times it is just best to let it go, nobody cares, the newsgroup
is dead and no amount of trolling on your part will bring it back to
life.

Then why are -you- here?? Trolling, eh?

Look you finally have a friend to play with. Good for you 2, maybe now
you can get back to the trolling for interest in your dead newsgroup.
Good luck to you both, happy trolling.

Anyone care to hazard a guess as to why this lowlife, XXX, never, ever
answers a question?
Phil #3

Great now there are 3 of you, it is a deadbeat party now. Keep up the
excellent trolling, 3 cheers for 3 guys who want no responsibility for
their offspring. This group hasn't seen this much activity since the
last time I responded to a thread.

Chris

2010-02-23 04:06:50 UTC

Post by Dusty
[snip]

Post by x***@xxx.com
Some times it is just best to let it go, nobody cares, the newsgroup
is dead and no amount of trolling on your part will bring it back to
life.

Then why are -you- here?? Trolling, eh?

Look you finally have a friend to play with. Good for you 2, maybe now
you can get back to the trolling for interest in your dead newsgroup.
Good luck to you both, happy trolling.

Anyone care to hazard a guess as to why this lowlife, XXX, never, ever
answers a question?
Phil #3

By your standards, if the number of folks determines the validity of their
claim, then you LOSE because you are the minority.

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-23 19:42:24 UTC

Post by Chris
By your standards, if the number of folks determines the validity of
their claim, then you LOSE because you are the minority.

Those are not my standards, you are just trying to troll up a new
argument. My point is still that your group is so dead that you've been
reduced to trying to troll up arguments.

Chris

2010-02-24 18:34:51 UTC

Post by Chris
By your standards, if the number of folks determines the validity of
their claim, then you LOSE because you are the minority.

Those are not my standards, you are just trying to troll up a new
argument. My point is still that your group is so dead that you've been
reduced to trying to troll up arguments.

1. "Dead" (in this context) is a matter of opinion.
2. Never, have I tried to troll up anything.
3. A careful review of that which you deleted from this discussion will
reveal that those ARE your standards.
4. Trolling STILL is not the topic of this discussion

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-24 23:10:46 UTC

Post by Chris
By your standards, if the number of folks determines the validity of
their claim, then you LOSE because you are the minority.

Those are not my standards, you are just trying to troll up a new
argument. My point is still that your group is so dead that you've
been reduced to trying to troll up arguments.

1. "Dead" (in this context) is a matter of opinion.

It is a dead newsgroup and you are seeming more and more desperate to
troll up an argument.

Post by Chris
2. Never, have I tried to troll up anything.

Except an argument in your dead newsgroup here. Pretty sad attempt
though, you only got me to take the bait and I only took it because you
seemed so pathetic and lonely.

Post by Chris
3. A careful review of that which you deleted from this discussion will
reveal that those ARE your standards.

No they aren't. You are wrong as usual.

Post by Chris
4. Trolling STILL is not the topic of this discussion

As you can see, it is. Your trolling for some interest in an argument
with you to be specific.

Chris

2010-02-25 02:26:28 UTC

Post by Chris
By your standards, if the number of folks determines the validity of
their claim, then you LOSE because you are the minority.

Those are not my standards, you are just trying to troll up a new
argument. My point is still that your group is so dead that you've been
reduced to trying to troll up arguments.

1. "Dead" (in this context) is a matter of opinion.

It is a dead newsgroup

You've shared such opinion numerous times. But guess what, I heard you the
FIRST time.

Post by x***@xxx.com
and you are seeming more and more desperate to troll up an argument.

Post by Chris
2. Never, have I tried to troll up anything.

Except

..never.

Post by x***@xxx.com
an argument in your dead newsgroup here. Pretty sad attempt though, you
only got me to take the bait and I only took it because you seemed so
pathetic and lonely.

Post by Chris
3. A careful review of that which you deleted from this discussion will
reveal that those ARE your standards.

No they aren't. You are wrong as usual.

Sorry, but it is YOU who is wrong..... as usual.

Post by Chris
4. Trolling STILL is not the topic of this discussion

As you can see, it is.

I cannot see that which does not exist.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Your trolling for some interest in an argument with you to be specific.

Amazing ability! So tell me, which stocks do you recommend?

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-25 03:30:26 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Your trolling for some interest in an argument with you to be specific.

Amazing ability! So tell me, which stocks do you recommend?

Please !!! people I hate who make fun of me PLEASE come argue with me so
I won't be lonely in my internet deadbeat world !!!! If it trolls like a
duck .......

Chris

2010-02-25 05:48:23 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Your trolling for some interest in an argument with you to be specific.

Amazing ability! So tell me, which stocks do you recommend?

Please !!! people I hate who make fun of me PLEASE come argue with me so I
won't be lonely in my internet deadbeat world !!!! If it trolls like a
duck .......

Try alt.psychhelp. It just might help.

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-25 19:54:17 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Your trolling for some interest in an argument with you to be specific.

Amazing ability! So tell me, which stocks do you recommend?

Please !!! people I hate who make fun of me PLEASE come argue with me
so I won't be lonely in my internet deadbeat world !!!! If it trolls
like a duck .......

Try alt.psychhelp. It just might help.

You could try that but you'll still be a lonely troll.

Chris

2010-02-25 20:56:33 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Your trolling for some interest in an argument with you to be specific.

Amazing ability! So tell me, which stocks do you recommend?

Please !!! people I hate who make fun of me PLEASE come argue with me so
I won't be lonely in my internet deadbeat world !!!! If it trolls like a
duck .......

Try alt.psychhelp. It just might help.

You could try that but you'll still be a lonely troll.

Your red herring has worn its welcome. Have a nice day.

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-25 23:42:28 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
You could try that but you'll still be a lonely troll.

Your red herring has worn its welcome. Have a nice day.

What happened to ignoring me? Not being worth your valuable trolling
time and all that? Did your loneliness get the better of you again?
Couldn't resist after getting that ONE solitary bit of interest in your
sad little troll?

Your trolling is unwelcome and I will respond to every one of your
attempts to troll if only to remind you that you are just trolling and
that trolling is not welcome in most newsgroups. Maybe you can go troll
the Rush Limbaugh group, those people are so sensitive and dumb that you
might get 20 responses. That would really make you feel good, wouldn't it?

Phil #3

2010-03-01 19:31:57 UTC

Post by Dusty
[snip]

Post by x***@xxx.com
Some times it is just best to let it go, nobody cares, the newsgroup
is dead and no amount of trolling on your part will bring it back to
life.

Then why are -you- here?? Trolling, eh?

Look you finally have a friend to play with. Good for you 2, maybe now
you can get back to the trolling for interest in your dead newsgroup.
Good luck to you both, happy trolling.

Anyone care to hazard a guess as to why this lowlife, XXX, never, ever
answers a question?
Phil #3

And as always, you don't have a clue what you're ranting about. My kids are
still all grown. I don't own their mother a cent except in your world where
men owe women.
Phil #3

x***@xxx.com

2010-03-02 03:46:29 UTC

Post by Dusty
[snip]

Post by x***@xxx.com
Some times it is just best to let it go, nobody cares, the
newsgroup is dead and no amount of trolling on your part will
bring it back to life.

Then why are -you- here?? Trolling, eh?

Look you finally have a friend to play with. Good for you 2, maybe
now you can get back to the trolling for interest in your dead
newsgroup. Good luck to you both, happy trolling.

Anyone care to hazard a guess as to why this lowlife, XXX, never,
ever answers a question?
Phil #3

And as always, you don't have a clue what you're ranting about. My kids
are still all grown. I don't own their mother a cent except in your
world where men owe women.
Phil #3

As always we both know the truth, only I am willing to type it. You are
trying to save your dimwitted friend with your own dimwitted troll. If I
started a thread asking a dead newsgroup "Where have all the deadbeat
losers gone" you might understand how trolling works, but you are a liar
and a scumbag so you refuse to admit the truth and are dedicated to
defending other scumbags. The truth might set you free (unless you are
really stupid)

Phil #3

2010-03-05 13:51:26 UTC

Post by Dusty
[snip]

Post by x***@xxx.com
Some times it is just best to let it go, nobody cares, the newsgroup
is dead and no amount of trolling on your part will bring it back to
life.

Then why are -you- here?? Trolling, eh?

Look you finally have a friend to play with. Good for you 2, maybe now
you can get back to the trolling for interest in your dead newsgroup.
Good luck to you both, happy trolling.

Anyone care to hazard a guess as to why this lowlife, XXX, never, ever
answers a question?
Phil #3

And as always, you don't have a clue what you're ranting about. My kids
are still all grown. I don't own their mother a cent except in your world
where men owe women.
Phil #3

You wouldn't know the truth if it painted itself green and kicked you in
your undoubtedly ample ass.
You're an unapologetic anti-father (probably anti-male) shithead feminist.
You have called several people here "liars" but you have yet to produce ANY
evidence of a lie.
They don't come any stupider than you.
Phil #3

x***@xxx.com

2010-03-08 19:44:52 UTC

Post by Dusty
[snip]

Post by x***@xxx.com
Some times it is just best to let it go, nobody cares, the
newsgroup is dead and no amount of trolling on your part will
bring it back to life.

Then why are -you- here?? Trolling, eh?

Look you finally have a friend to play with. Good for you 2, maybe
now you can get back to the trolling for interest in your dead
newsgroup. Good luck to you both, happy trolling.

Anyone care to hazard a guess as to why this lowlife, XXX, never,
ever answers a question?
Phil #3

Great now there are 3 of you, it is a deadbeat party now. Keep up
the excellent trolling, 3 cheers for 3 guys who want no
responsibility for their offspring. This group hasn't seen this much
activity since the last time I responded to a thread.

And as always, you don't have a clue what you're ranting about. My
kids are still all grown. I don't own their mother a cent except in
your world where men owe women.
Phil #3

As always we both know the truth, only I am willing to type it. You
are trying to save your dimwitted friend with your own dimwitted
troll. If I started a thread asking a dead newsgroup "Where have all
the deadbeat losers gone" you might understand how trolling works, but
you are a liar and a scumbag so you refuse to admit the truth and are
dedicated to defending other scumbags. The truth might set you free
(unless you are really stupid)

You wouldn't know the truth if it painted itself green and kicked you in
your undoubtedly ample ass.

Some ignorant speculation on your part or just another troll?

Post by Phil #3
You're an unapologetic anti-father (probably anti-male) shithead feminist.

More incorrect speculation and trolling. Do you ever get tired of being
wrong? Are you a liar as well? Lets see. Was Chris trolling in his
initial post? Was there any point to his post other than trolling for an
argument? Is there any point to your desperate and defensive responses?

Post by Phil #3
You have called several people here "liars" but you have yet to produce
ANY evidence of a lie.
They don't come any stupider than you.
Phil #3

You all seem to ignore the truth 99% of the time, liar is an apt
description for both of you. You can't even admit the obvious fact that
Chris was trolling for an argument in your dead newsgroup.

Chris

2010-03-09 16:44:45 UTC

Post by Dusty
[snip]

Post by x***@xxx.com
Some times it is just best to let it go, nobody cares, the
newsgroup is dead and no amount of trolling on your part will
bring it back to life.

Then why are -you- here?? Trolling, eh?

Look you finally have a friend to play with. Good for you 2, maybe
now you can get back to the trolling for interest in your dead
newsgroup. Good luck to you both, happy trolling.

Anyone care to hazard a guess as to why this lowlife, XXX, never,
ever answers a question?
Phil #3

And as always, you don't have a clue what you're ranting about. My kids
are still all grown. I don't own their mother a cent except in your
world where men owe women.
Phil #3

You wouldn't know the truth if it painted itself green and kicked you in
your undoubtedly ample ass.

Some ignorant speculation on your part or just another troll?

Post by Phil #3
You're an unapologetic anti-father (probably anti-male) shithead feminist.

More incorrect speculation and trolling. Do you ever get tired of being
wrong? Are you a liar as well? Lets see. Was Chris trolling in his initial
post?

NO.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Was there any point to his post other than trolling for an argument? Is
there any point to your desperate and defensive responses?

Post by Phil #3
You have called several people here "liars" but you have yet to produce
ANY evidence of a lie.
They don't come any stupider than you.
Phil #3

You all seem to ignore the truth 99% of the time, liar is an apt
description for both of you. You can't even admit the obvious fact that
Chris was trolling for an argument in your dead newsgroup.

Guess again.........

x***@xxx.com

2010-03-09 21:06:46 UTC

more trolling and lies

Your will power in ignoring me is almost as embarrassing as your
trolling ability.

Chris

2010-03-09 23:55:50 UTC

more trolling and lies

Your will power in ignoring me is almost as embarrassing as your trolling
ability.

Just curious: Do you regularly create imaginary discussions, or only once in
a while?

x***@xxx.com

2010-03-10 02:21:17 UTC

more trolling and lies

Your will power in ignoring me is almost as embarrassing as your
trolling ability.

Just curious: Do you regularly create imaginary discussions, or only
once in a while?

Are you trying to lie again? Do you know that your post declaring that
you were planning to ignore me was a public post. You can look it up and
see how sad and lousy a troll you are.

Chris

2010-03-10 05:56:09 UTC

more trolling and lies

Your will power in ignoring me is almost as embarrassing as your
trolling ability.

Just curious: Do you regularly create imaginary discussions, or only once
in a while?

Are you trying to lie again?

Do you ALWAYS answer a question with a question?

Post by x***@xxx.com
Do you know that your post declaring that you were planning to ignore me
was a public post. You can look it up and see how sad and lousy a troll
you are.

x***@xxx.com

2010-03-10 13:08:25 UTC

Post by Chris
Do you ALWAYS answer a question with a question?

Do you know that your post declaring that you were planning to ignore
me was a public post. You can look it up and see how sad and lousy a
troll you are.

Chris

2010-03-11 02:46:57 UTC

Post by Chris
Do you ALWAYS answer a question with a question?

Do you know that your post declaring that you were planning to ignore
me was a public post. You can look it up and see how sad and lousy a
troll you are.

Again, do you regularly create imaginary discussions, or only once in a
while?

x***@xxx.com

2010-03-11 12:35:17 UTC

Post by Chris
Do you ALWAYS answer a question with a question?

Do you know that your post declaring that you were planning to ignore
me was a public post. You can look it up and see how sad and lousy a
troll you are.

Again, do you regularly create imaginary discussions, or only once in a
while?

Never actually, this is an actual discussion with an actual troll. See
how you keep responding to defend your weak attempt to troll? Let me
guess your next attempt to lie will be to pretend that you don't really
exist. Impressive willpower though, who could have guessed that you
could ignore this thread for almost 1 day after your declaration that
you weren't going to respond anymore.

Chris

2010-03-11 19:32:46 UTC

Post by Chris
Do you ALWAYS answer a question with a question?

Do you know that your post declaring that you were planning to ignore
me was a public post. You can look it up and see how sad and lousy a
troll you are.

Again, do you regularly create imaginary discussions, or only once in a
while?

Never actually,

Statement you pretend to be mine: "more trolling and lies"
Your response to such statement: "Your will power in ignoring me is almost
as embarrassing as your trolling ability."

Looks imaginary to me.

Post by x***@xxx.com
this is an actual discussion with an actual troll. See how you keep
responding to defend your weak attempt to troll? Let me guess your next
attempt to lie will be to pretend that you don't really exist.

I don't; I'm just a figment of your imagination......

Post by x***@xxx.com
Impressive willpower though, who could have guessed that you could ignore
this thread for almost 1 day after your declaration that you weren't going
to respond anymore.

Such declaration exists only in your head.

x***@xxx.com

2010-03-11 21:14:38 UTC

Post by Chris
Do you ALWAYS answer a question with a question?

Do you know that your post declaring that you were planning to ignore
me was a public post. You can look it up and see how sad and lousy a
troll you are.

Again, do you regularly create imaginary discussions, or only once in
a while?

Never actually,

Statement you pretend to be mine: "more trolling and lies"
Your response to such statement: "Your will power in ignoring me is
almost as embarrassing as your trolling ability."
Looks imaginary to me.

Do you consider yourself imaginary or is this just another phony
argument for why you shouldn't have to support your children?

Chris

2010-03-12 16:00:59 UTC

Post by Chris
Do you ALWAYS answer a question with a question?

Do you know that your post declaring that you were planning to ignore
me was a public post. You can look it up and see how sad and lousy a
troll you are.

Again, do you regularly create imaginary discussions, or only once in a
while?

Never actually,

Statement you pretend to be mine: "more trolling and lies"
Your response to such statement: "Your will power in ignoring me is
almost as embarrassing as your trolling ability."
Looks imaginary to me.

Do you consider yourself imaginary or is this just another phony argument
for why you shouldn't have to support your children?

False dilemma, straw man, AND complex question. I did not think it was
possible to cram so many fallacies into one sentence!

x***@xxx.com

2010-03-12 23:52:49 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Do you consider yourself imaginary or is this just another phony
argument for why you shouldn't have to support your children?

False dilemma, straw man, AND complex question. I did not think it was
possible to cram so many fallacies into one sentence!

phony argument then keep up the good ignoring, it is making you look
extra sane.

Chris

2010-03-13 19:56:10 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Do you consider yourself imaginary or is this just another phony
argument for why you shouldn't have to support your children?

False dilemma, straw man, AND complex question. I did not think it was
possible to cram so many fallacies into one sentence!

phony argument then keep up the good ignoring, it is making you look extra
sane.

With all due respect, I've not a CLUE what message you're trying to convey.

x***@xxx.com

2010-03-14 07:11:11 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Do you consider yourself imaginary or is this just another phony
argument for why you shouldn't have to support your children?

False dilemma, straw man, AND complex question. I did not think it
was possible to cram so many fallacies into one sentence!

phony argument then keep up the good ignoring, it is making you look
extra sane.

With all due respect, I've not a CLUE what message you're trying to convey.

Did I forget to mention that you are just trolling or are you just too
stupid to understand what you read?

Dusty

2010-03-14 08:56:26 UTC

"***@XXX.COM" <***@xxx.com> wrote in message news:hni26d$hu1$***@news.eternal-september.org...

[snip]

Post by x***@xxx.com
Did I forget to mention that you are just trolling or are you just too
stupid to understand what you read?

Funny, I've asked you a nearly identical question several times. Haven't
gotten a straight answer from you yet!

x***@xxx.com

2010-03-14 09:41:28 UTC

Post by Dusty
[snip]

Post by x***@xxx.com
Did I forget to mention that you are just trolling or are you just too
stupid to understand what you read?

Funny, I've asked you a nearly identical question several times.
Haven't gotten a straight answer from you yet!

He lies you swear to it, your MO is sadly obvious. Support your local
troll. The newsgroup is dead, you need a new forum for your whining.

Chris

2010-03-14 19:57:46 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Do you consider yourself imaginary or is this just another phony
argument for why you shouldn't have to support your children?

False dilemma, straw man, AND complex question. I did not think it was
possible to cram so many fallacies into one sentence!

phony argument then keep up the good ignoring, it is making you look
extra sane.

With all due respect, I've not a CLUE what message you're trying to convey.

Did I forget to mention that you are just trolling or are you just too
stupid to understand what you read?

False dilemma. In case you were not aware, the burden of communication rests
with the messenger.

XXX@XXX.COM

2010-03-15 06:41:12 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Do you consider yourself imaginary or is this just another phony
argument for why you shouldn't have to support your children?

False dilemma, straw man, AND complex question. I did not think it was
possible to cram so many fallacies into one sentence!

phony argument then keep up the good ignoring, it is making you look
extra sane.

With all due respect, I've not a CLUE what message you're trying to convey.

Did I forget to mention that you are just trolling or are you just too
stupid to understand what you read?

False dilemma. In case you were not aware, the burden of communication rests
with the messenger.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

And when the messenger is a liar with an agenda he gets labeled as a
troll .... so here we are. Keep on trolling eventually someone will
notice you.

Chris

2010-03-15 23:46:53 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Do you consider yourself imaginary or is this just another phony
argument for why you shouldn't have to support your children?

False dilemma, straw man, AND complex question. I did not think it was
possible to cram so many fallacies into one sentence!

phony argument then keep up the good ignoring, it is making you look
extra sane.

With all due respect, I've not a CLUE what message you're trying to convey.

Did I forget to mention that you are just trolling or are you just too
stupid to understand what you read?

False dilemma. In case you were not aware, the burden of communication rests
with the messenger.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

And when the messenger is a liar

**************

Whether or not you are a liar is irrelevant to the fact that the burden of
communication rests with the messenger.

**************

with an agenda he gets labeled as a
troll .... so here we are. Keep on trolling eventually someone will
notice you.

Phil #3

2010-02-22 19:54:57 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Like I said, it is amusing to read through your ape like attempts to
communicate your frustration

I'm not frustrated.

Then what is your excuse for this lame troll? Why are you so desperate to
get the attention of people who consider you a useless pile of shit? Are
you just lonely?

Post by x***@xxx.com
from time to time, nobody who spends his time ranting that he shouldn't
be responsible for his offspring

No one is proclaiming that "he shouldn't be responsible for his
offspring". The government people make it ILLEGAL for a man to "be
responsible" for his offspring!

You are proclaiming EXACTLY that. You are claiming that you should not be
responsible for your kids because it is not your choice. You are willing
to lie from one post to the next to try and make your silly point and you
wonder why you are not taken seriously. Tell us how you feel about paying
taxes, do you refuse to pay taxes because it isn't your choice which war
we waste the money on?

Post by x***@xxx.com
anything sensible to say.
Your question about where everyone went and why this group is completely
dead was answered in your first response.

You may just be on to something here. Quite possibly, most of the fools
finally realized the rest of us were telling the truth. Thus, no need to
argue against reality.

Nobody ever realized that, you all just seem desperate to convince people
that you are not irresponsible AND that you should have no legal
responsibility for your kids. Your reality is one where everyone has
cotton candy for brains.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Your attempt to troll up a fight is pathetic and sad, but funny enough
to jump in and make fun of you again.

Perhaps THAT'S why folks left, because people of your caliber come here
to make fun of others rather than address the facts. You might want to
try alt.mockothers for your purposes.

Nobody of my caliber spends much time here, this is a place for folks of
your moral fiber who don't want responsibility for their children. A very
small and much disrespected minority of society. If there was any sensible
advice dispensed here for people who actually want to support their
children, maybe there would be more than 1 post (from you or a cut and
paste from a dopey blog) per month. You begged for some attention in your
pathetic lonely post and I obliged, if you were a decent human being you
would have thanked me for my time and gone back to your job search.

Correct. People of your caliber realize that they are tilting at windmills
when they try to portray child support as anything other than forcing men to
pay women. The ONLY thing child support has to do with children is the name.
The money can be spent on ANYTHING, even mama's new boy-toy.
Phil #3

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-22 20:06:05 UTC

Post by Phil #3
Correct. People of your caliber realize that they are tilting at
windmills when they try to portray child support as anything other than
forcing men to pay women. The ONLY thing child support has to do with
children is the name. The money can be spent on ANYTHING, even mama's
new boy-toy.
Phil #3

Explain first how the claim "I shouldn't be responsible for the kids
because only the woman can make the choice to have them" is anything
more than troll bait.

Phil #3

2010-03-01 19:34:19 UTC

Explain first how the claim "I shouldn't be responsible for the kids
because only the woman can make the choice to have them" is anything more
than troll bait.

Nope, not part of the discussion. The subject is "child support".
Try to stay on topic for once and stop trying to bifurcate it into yet more
propaganda and rhetoric.
Phil #3

x***@xxx.com

2010-03-02 03:51:15 UTC

Post by Phil #3
Correct. People of your caliber realize that they are tilting at
windmills when they try to portray child support as anything other
than forcing men to pay women. The ONLY thing child support has to do
with children is the name. The money can be spent on ANYTHING, even
mama's new boy-toy.
Phil #3

Explain first how the claim "I shouldn't be responsible for the kids
because only the woman can make the choice to have them" is anything
more than troll bait.

Nope, not part of the discussion. The subject is "child support".
Try to stay on topic for once and stop trying to bifurcate it into yet
more propaganda and rhetoric.
Phil #3

The subject is an idiot trying to troll up an argument, and another
idiot who will lie like his life depended on it. He claimed he was not
trolling, I have clearly shown that he is. If I started a thread in this
dead group asking where all the illiterate deadbeat losers went, I'd be
trolling and you would all recognize it. Since he is one of the deadbeat
cabal, you can't understand. Not my fault that you are an uneducated moron.

Chris

2010-03-02 05:36:37 UTC

Explain first how the claim "I shouldn't be responsible for the kids
because only the woman can make the choice to have them" is anything
more than troll bait.

Nope, not part of the discussion. The subject is "child support".
Try to stay on topic for once and stop trying to bifurcate it into yet
more propaganda and rhetoric.
Phil #3

The subject is an idiot trying to troll up an argument, and another idiot
who will lie like his life depended on it. He claimed he was not trolling,
I have clearly shown that he is.

"Pointless posts made for the sole reason of getting people to argue with
you is trolling." Was neither pointless nor for such reason. Next.........

If I started a thread in this dead group asking where all the illiterate
deadbeat losers went, I'd be trolling and you would all recognize it.
Since he is one of the deadbeat cabal, you can't understand. Not my fault
that you are an uneducated moron.

x***@xxx.com

2010-03-02 14:24:50 UTC

Post by Chris
"Pointless posts made for the sole reason of getting people to argue
with you is trolling." Was neither pointless nor for such reason.
Next.........

Remember way back in the old days of this past weekend when you declared
that I just wasn't worth your valuable trolling time? Remember how you
felt (back in the day) that I wasn't worth responding to anymore? Those
were some funny posts, you trying to pretend you weren't trolling
because you were lonely and your favorite newsgroup was dead.

I feel bad for you that your trolling only hooked me and I only joined
in to make fun of your trolling. No matter how desperate you were to
drum up an argument about your silly unimportant issue all you got was
ridicule for your lame attempt to troll.

What brings you back after all this time? Are you too drunk to remember
that you aren't speaking to me anymore? Are you so desperately lonely
for someone to argue with that you'll continue a discussion that made
you look so stupid you felt the need to run away from and pretend to
ignore it?

Another mark of a real troll is his inability to ignore any attention,
even my negative attention.

Chris

2010-03-02 20:49:32 UTC

Post by Chris
"Pointless posts made for the sole reason of getting people to argue with
you is trolling." Was neither pointless nor for such reason.
Next.........

Remember way back in the old days of this past weekend when you declared
that I just wasn't worth your valuable trolling time? Remember how you
felt (back in the day) that I wasn't worth responding to anymore? Those
were some funny posts, you trying to pretend you weren't trolling because
you were lonely and your favorite newsgroup was dead.
I feel bad for you that your trolling only hooked me and I only joined in
to make fun of your trolling. No matter how desperate you were to drum up
an argument about your silly unimportant issue all you got was ridicule
for your lame attempt to troll.
What brings you back after all this time? Are you too drunk to remember
that you aren't speaking to me anymore? Are you so desperately lonely for
someone to argue with that you'll continue a discussion that made you look
so stupid you felt the need to run away from and pretend to ignore it?
Another mark of a real troll is his inability to ignore any attention,
even my negative attention.

Feel better now?

x***@xxx.com

2010-03-02 21:48:31 UTC

Post by Chris
Feel better now?

Keep up the good work, not responding to me must be the toughest thing
you did all day.

Chris

2010-03-03 15:17:58 UTC

Post by Chris
Feel better now?

Keep up the good work,

Ok.

Post by x***@xxx.com
not responding to me must be the toughest thing you did all day.

Phil #3

2010-03-05 13:47:22 UTC

Explain first how the claim "I shouldn't be responsible for the kids
because only the woman can make the choice to have them" is anything
more than troll bait.

Nope, not part of the discussion. The subject is "child support".
Try to stay on topic for once and stop trying to bifurcate it into yet
more propaganda and rhetoric.
Phil #3

The subject is an idiot trying to troll up an argument, and another idiot
who will lie like his life depended on it. He claimed he was not trolling,
I have clearly shown that he is. If I started a thread in this dead group
asking where all the illiterate deadbeat losers went, I'd be trolling and
you would all recognize it. Since he is one of the deadbeat cabal, you
can't understand. Not my fault that you are an uneducated moron.

The only idiot currently here is you. You have never 'clearly' shown jack
shit nor answered any valid questions about your posts or insane beliefs,
especially when they show your anti-father prejudice.
Phil #3

x***@xxx.com

2010-03-08 19:33:17 UTC

Post by Phil #3
Correct. People of your caliber realize that they are tilting at
windmills when they try to portray child support as anything other
than forcing men to pay women. The ONLY thing child support has to
do with children is the name. The money can be spent on ANYTHING,
even mama's new boy-toy.
Phil #3

Explain first how the claim "I shouldn't be responsible for the kids
because only the woman can make the choice to have them" is anything
more than troll bait.

Nope, not part of the discussion. The subject is "child support".
Try to stay on topic for once and stop trying to bifurcate it into
yet more propaganda and rhetoric.
Phil #3

The subject is an idiot trying to troll up an argument, and another
idiot who will lie like his life depended on it. He claimed he was not
trolling, I have clearly shown that he is. If I started a thread in
this dead group asking where all the illiterate deadbeat losers went,
I'd be trolling and you would all recognize it. Since he is one of the
deadbeat cabal, you can't understand. Not my fault that you are an
uneducated moron.

The only idiot currently here is you. You have never 'clearly' shown
jack shit nor answered any valid questions about your posts or insane
beliefs, especially when they show your anti-father prejudice.
Phil #3

Are you claiming you aren't here?

The obvious fact is that Chris was trying to troll up an argument and
was pretty much ignored by everyone except me. Maybe you can show your
work and explain how your post is based in anything other than defensive
fantasy.

Phil #3

2010-02-22 19:50:33 UTC

Post by Chris
What happened to this group? Looks like all the "man must pay for
woman's choice" folks crawled back into their holes.

What's fair about legally forcing a man to pay for a choice that legally
he is incapable of making?

Post by news
There was also the rare female who stumbled upon the group asking about
how to collect child support from some absconding sperm donor, but they
got shot down fast.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a donation is a gift. Thus, once a
"donation" takes place, the recipient becomes the owner of such donation.
What the recipient chooses to do with the donation is their SOLE choice;
and along with the choice comes the sole RESPONSIBILITY for such choice.
Am I wrong?

Looks like you answered your own question, who in their right mind would
stick around to talk to a lowlife whose only ambition is to neglect his
kids and pretend he has no responsibility for them? Civilized folks have
evolved well beyond your way of thinking. The rest of you congregate here,
tell lies to each other and defend each other's lies to the death. There
are far better forums for real information about child support.

Civilized folks fund their own way. Feminists and professional baby-whelpers
demand others pay their bills.
Phil #3

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-22 20:03:07 UTC

Post by Chris
What happened to this group? Looks like all the "man must pay for
woman's choice" folks crawled back into their holes.

What's fair about legally forcing a man to pay for a choice that
legally he is incapable of making?

Post by news
There was also the rare female who stumbled upon the group asking
about how to collect child support from some absconding sperm donor,
but they got shot down fast.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a donation is a gift. Thus, once a
"donation" takes place, the recipient becomes the owner of such
donation. What the recipient chooses to do with the donation is their
SOLE choice; and along with the choice comes the sole RESPONSIBILITY
for such choice. Am I wrong?

Looks like you answered your own question, who in their right mind
would stick around to talk to a lowlife whose only ambition is to
neglect his kids and pretend he has no responsibility for them?
Civilized folks have evolved well beyond your way of thinking. The
rest of you congregate here, tell lies to each other and defend each
other's lies to the death. There are far better forums for real
information about child support.

Civilized folks fund their own way. Feminists and professional
baby-whelpers demand others pay their bills.
Phil #3

And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids. Hence the
dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up some interest in arguing
with him.

Chris

2010-02-23 04:10:17 UTC

Post by Chris
What happened to this group? Looks like all the "man must pay for
woman's choice" folks crawled back into their holes.

What's fair about legally forcing a man to pay for a choice that
legally he is incapable of making?

Post by news
There was also the rare female who stumbled upon the group asking
about how to collect child support from some absconding sperm donor,
but they got shot down fast.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a donation is a gift. Thus, once a
"donation" takes place, the recipient becomes the owner of such
donation. What the recipient chooses to do with the donation is their
SOLE choice; and along with the choice comes the sole RESPONSIBILITY
for such choice. Am I wrong?

Civilized folks fund their own way. Feminists and professional
baby-whelpers demand others pay their bills.
Phil #3

And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids.

Only a fool believes that "child support" means supporting one's kids.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Hence the dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up

Per YOUR definition, I trolled up nothing. And by the way, it's "Chris'" Not
"Chris's".

Post by x***@xxx.com
some interest in arguing with him.

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-23 19:44:29 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids.

Only a fool believes that "child support" means supporting one's kids.

And only a deadbeat looks for reasons to avoid supporting his kids.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Hence the dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up

Per YOUR definition, I trolled up nothing. And by the way, it's "Chris'"
Not "Chris's".

You are wrong about everything as usual, you trolled up a little
argument, a lot less than you had hoped for but at least you quadrupled
the number of posts over this time last month.

Chris

2010-02-24 05:12:34 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids.

Only a fool believes that "child support" means supporting one's kids.

And only a deadbeat looks for reasons to avoid supporting his kids.

Just what is your definition of "supporting"?

Post by x***@xxx.com
Hence the dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up

Per YOUR definition, I trolled up nothing. And by the way, it's "Chris'"
Not "Chris's".

You are wrong about everything as usual,

I ought to know the possessive form of my OWN name! Learned it in second
grade, actually....

Post by x***@xxx.com
you trolled up

...exactly nothing.

Post by x***@xxx.com
a little argument, a lot less than you had hoped for

I did not hope.

Post by x***@xxx.com
but at least you quadrupled the number of posts over this time last month.

Not certain the relevance of your above claim.

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-24 13:00:27 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And only a deadbeat looks for reasons to avoid supporting his kids.

Just what is your definition of "supporting"?

What deadbeats are looking to avoid.

Post by x***@xxx.com
but at least you quadrupled the number of posts over this time last month.

Not certain the relevance of your above claim.

Since your goal was to troll up some interest in your dead newsgroup and
your attempts were rewarded with a few posts, you had a semi successful
troll.

Chris

2010-02-25 03:07:08 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And only a deadbeat looks for reasons to avoid supporting his kids.

Just what is your definition of "supporting"?

What deadbeats are looking to avoid.

Which is?

Post by x***@xxx.com
but at least you quadrupled the number of posts over this time last month.

Not certain the relevance of your above claim.

Since your goal was to troll

Sorry, false claim AND not the topic.

Post by x***@xxx.com
up some interest in your dead newsgroup and your attempts were rewarded
with a few posts, you had a semi successful troll.

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-25 03:33:02 UTC

Post by Chris
Just what is your definition of "supporting"?

What deadbeats are looking to avoid.

Which is?

Supporting.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Since your goal was to troll

Sorry, false claim AND not the topic.

Have you read any of your desperate for attention posts thus far? Weak
trolling but trolling nontheless. I guess it is the best trolling a guy
like you can muster so I won't make fun of the inferior quality of your
trolling.

Chris

2010-02-25 05:48:05 UTC

Post by Chris
Just what is your definition of "supporting"?

What deadbeats are looking to avoid.

Which is?

Supporting.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Since your goal was to troll

Sorry, false claim AND not the topic.

Your repetitive circular reasoning no longer merits a response. See ya.

x***@xxx.com

2010-02-25 19:53:46 UTC

Post by Chris
Just what is your definition of "supporting"?

What deadbeats are looking to avoid.

Which is?

Supporting.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Since your goal was to troll

Sorry, false claim AND not the topic.

Have you read any of your desperate for attention posts thus far? Weak
trolling but trolling nontheless. I guess it is the best trolling a
guy like you can muster so I won't make fun of the inferior quality of
your trolling.

Your repetitive circular reasoning no longer merits a response. See ya.

We'll see.

Phil #3

2010-03-01 19:34:47 UTC

Post by Chris
What happened to this group? Looks like all the "man must pay for
woman's choice" folks crawled back into their holes.

What's fair about legally forcing a man to pay for a choice that
legally he is incapable of making?

Post by news
There was also the rare female who stumbled upon the group asking
about how to collect child support from some absconding sperm donor,
but they got shot down fast.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a donation is a gift. Thus, once a
"donation" takes place, the recipient becomes the owner of such
donation. What the recipient chooses to do with the donation is their
SOLE choice; and along with the choice comes the sole RESPONSIBILITY
for such choice. Am I wrong?

Civilized folks fund their own way. Feminists and professional
baby-whelpers demand others pay their bills.
Phil #3

And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids. Hence the
dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up some interest in arguing with
him.

Wrong yet again.

Phil #3

x***@xxx.com

2010-03-02 03:54:37 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids. Hence
the dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up some interest in
arguing with him.

Wrong yet again.
Phil #3

I've proven my point. You've admitted to being a lowlife. Right or
wrong, being a lowlife isn't admirable. Explain to me how I am wrong
though, do you deny that deadbeats look for reasons to avoid their
obligations? Isn't that the definition of deadbeat? Do you scumbags have
your own dictionary?

Phil #3

2010-03-05 13:54:23 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids. Hence the
dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up some interest in arguing
with him.

Wrong yet again.
Phil #3

I've proven my point. You've admitted to being a lowlife. Right or wrong,
being a lowlife isn't admirable. Explain to me how I am wrong though, do
you deny that deadbeats look for reasons to avoid their obligations? Isn't
that the definition of deadbeat? Do you scumbags have your own dictionary?

You've proven nothing... ever. You're wrong on several points, not the least
of which is that you're talking about me, and others, as one of the
"deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids.", yet all my
children are grown and on their own. Since my not supporting another adult
(their mother) makes me a "deadbeat" in your eyes, you are just as much a
deadbeat because you don't either.
Phil #3

Chris

2010-03-06 14:52:00 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids. Hence
the dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up some interest in
arguing with him.

Wrong yet again.
Phil #3

I've proven my point. You've admitted to being a lowlife. Right or wrong,
being a lowlife isn't admirable. Explain to me how I am wrong though, do
you deny that deadbeats look for reasons to avoid their obligations?
Isn't that the definition of deadbeat? Do you scumbags have your own
dictionary?

You've proven nothing... ever. You're wrong on several points, not the
least of which is that you're talking about me, and others, as one of the
"deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids.", yet all my
children are grown and on their own. Since my not supporting another adult
(their mother) makes me a "deadbeat" in your eyes, you are just as much a
deadbeat because you don't either.
Phil #3

This feminazi has SEVERAL hurddles to overcome, not the least being to
understand the definition of "deadbeat". Or at least to explain what they
mean by such term; which has not happened. Once past that step, there are
several others that need to take place before their wildly insane claims can
be established. But rather than seeking the truth by way of analytical
reasoning, they simply resort to repetitious word usage like "troll", and
name calling such as "liar, moron, lowlife, scumbags", etc. And somehow,
unbeknownst to me, such statements discredit their opponent's
claims..........

x***@xxx.com

2010-03-08 19:56:07 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids.
Hence the dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up some interest
in arguing with him.

Wrong yet again.
Phil #3

You've proven nothing... ever. You're wrong on several points, not the
least of which is that you're talking about me, and others, as one of
the "deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids.", yet
all my children are grown and on their own. Since my not supporting
another adult (their mother) makes me a "deadbeat" in your eyes, you
are just as much a deadbeat because you don't either.
Phil #3

This feminazi has SEVERAL hurddles to overcome, not the least being to
understand the definition of "deadbeat".

Is it or is it not a person who tries to avoid his bills? Do you really
have this much trouble with the language? There are online dictionaries
if you need help.

Or at least to explain what

Post by Chris
they mean by such term; which has not happened. Once past that step,
there are several others that need to take place before their wildly
insane claims can be established. But rather than seeking the truth by
way of analytical reasoning, they simply resort to repetitious word
usage like "troll", and name calling such as "liar, moron, lowlife,
scumbags", etc. And somehow, unbeknownst to me, such statements
discredit their opponent's claims..........

My use of the term troll was simply a description of your post. Just
like if I came in here and posted "Where have all the deadbeat losers
gone?" That would be a troll, except in that case you would all
recognize it as such. Since you guys are brainwashed into defending each
other and lying for each other you might not even realize how stupid and
weak your initial troll was. Luckily you have me here to introduce
reality from time to time and give this dead group its dead cat bounce
revival.

Chris

2010-03-09 23:44:14 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids. Hence
the dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up some interest in
arguing with him.

Wrong yet again.
Phil #3

You've proven nothing... ever. You're wrong on several points, not the
least of which is that you're talking about me, and others, as one of
the "deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids.", yet
all my children are grown and on their own. Since my not supporting
another adult (their mother) makes me a "deadbeat" in your eyes, you are
just as much a deadbeat because you don't either.
Phil #3

This feminazi has SEVERAL hurddles to overcome, not the least being to
understand the definition of "deadbeat".

Is it or is it not a person who tries to avoid his bills?

It is. But the bigger question is what does such term mean to YOU?

Post by x***@xxx.com
Do you really have this much trouble with the language? There are online
dictionaries if you need help.
Or at least to explain what

Post by Chris
they mean by such term; which has not happened. Once past that step,
there are several others that need to take place before their wildly
insane claims can be established. But rather than seeking the truth by
way of analytical reasoning, they simply resort to repetitious word usage
like "troll", and name calling such as "liar, moron, lowlife, scumbags",
etc. And somehow, unbeknownst to me, such statements discredit their
opponent's claims..........

My use of the term troll was simply a description of your post.

Not according to your FIRST definition.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Just like if I came in here and posted "Where have all the deadbeat losers
gone?" That would be a troll, except in that case you would all recognize
it as such. Since you guys are brainwashed into defending each other and
lying for each other you might not even realize how stupid and weak your
initial troll was. Luckily you have me here to introduce reality from time
to time and give this dead group its dead cat bounce revival.

Just saying something does not make it so. The burden of proof to support
your above claims rests with you.

x***@xxx.com

2010-03-10 02:19:56 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Is it or is it not a person who tries to avoid his bills?

It is. But the bigger question is what does such term mean to YOU?

So there you go, when you see someone who is trying to avoid their bills
the term applies. Unlike you, I don't parse and lie about everything so
when I say something I mean what I say in the most obvious way.

Post by x***@xxx.com
My use of the term troll was simply a description of your post.

Not according to your FIRST definition.

You really need to learn how to read if you want your trolling to get
the results you are desperate for. As it is, all you get is me making
fun of your trolling and a lying dungpile who would defend your right to
drive though crowded playgrounds because he is brainwashed into
defending every stupid thing that one of his cabal says.

Post by Chris
Just saying something does not make it so. The burden of proof to
support your above claims rests with you.

It was a troll, you are just trolling. It amuses me how you don't have
the willpower to ignore my posts even after your public declaration that
you intended to do so. Just like the alcoholic who swears he will quit
.... until he finds some Schlitz on sale. Who can resist? If you are
looking for someone to blame for your shambles of a personal life, you
might want to try introspection.

Chris

2010-03-10 06:00:33 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
Is it or is it not a person who tries to avoid his bills?

It is. But the bigger question is what does such term mean to YOU?

So there you go, when you see someone who is trying to avoid their bills
the term applies. Unlike you, I don't parse and lie about everything

Quote just ONE of these lies that you speak of.

Post by x***@xxx.com
so when I say something I mean what I say in the most obvious way.

Post by x***@xxx.com
My use of the term troll was simply a description of your post.

Not according to your FIRST definition.

You really need to learn how to read if you want your trolling to get the
results you are desperate for. As it is, all you get is me making fun of
your trolling and a lying dungpile who would defend your right to drive
though crowded playgrounds because he is brainwashed into defending every
stupid thing that one of his cabal says.

With all due respect, I have not a clue what you are attempting to convey in
your above message.

Post by Chris
Just saying something does not make it so. The burden of proof to support
your above claims rests with you.

It was a troll,

"Troll" or not, the burden STILL rests with you (the claimant).

Post by x***@xxx.com
you are just trolling. It amuses me how you don't have the willpower to
ignore my posts even after your public declaration that you intended to do
so.

Which posts are you referring to?

Post by x***@xxx.com
Just like the alcoholic who swears he will quit .... until he finds some
Schlitz on sale. Who can resist? If you are looking for someone to blame
for your shambles of a personal life, you might want to try introspection.

x***@xxx.com

2010-03-10 13:13:37 UTC

Post by Chris
Quote just ONE of these lies that you speak of.

Read the thread yourself. Start with "Where did all the feminazis go was
not an attempt to troll" and your claim that responding to my posts was
not worth your time and you were ignoring me from now on. Those are the
two most obvious.

Post by x***@xxx.com
You really need to learn how to read if you want your trolling to get
the results you are desperate for. As it is, all you get is me making
fun of your trolling and a lying dungpile who would defend your right
to drive though crowded playgrounds because he is brainwashed into
defending every stupid thing that one of his cabal says.

With all due respect, I have not a clue what you are attempting to
convey in your above message.

I forgot how stupid you are. What I am saying is that you lie and your
nitwit newsgroup friend will swear to it and add his own lies to defend
your lies.

Post by x***@xxx.com
It was a troll,

"Troll" or not, the burden STILL rests with you (the claimant).

No burden at all, just like anyone else begging for an argument in a
dead newsgroup, you attempted to troll but failed.

Post by x***@xxx.com
you are just trolling. It amuses me how you don't have the willpower
to ignore my posts even after your public declaration that you
intended to do so.

Which posts are you referring to?

The one where you claimed you wouldn't respond to me anymore because it
wasn't worth your time and all that. You can try to lie but the post is
still there.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Just like the alcoholic who swears he will quit .... until he finds
some Schlitz on sale. Who can resist? If you are looking for someone
to blame for your shambles of a personal life, you might want to try
introspection.

Chris

2010-03-11 02:50:00 UTC

Post by Chris
Quote just ONE of these lies that you speak of.

Read the thread yourself. Start with "Where did all the feminazis go was
not an attempt to troll"

Just one problem, I NEVER said that. Care to try again?

Post by x***@xxx.com
and your claim that responding to my posts was not worth your time and you
were ignoring me from now on. Those are the two most obvious.

Post by x***@xxx.com
You really need to learn how to read if you want your trolling to get
the results you are desperate for. As it is, all you get is me making
fun of your trolling and a lying dungpile who would defend your right to
drive though crowded playgrounds because he is brainwashed into
defending every stupid thing that one of his cabal says.

With all due respect, I have not a clue what you are attempting to convey
in your above message.

I forgot how stupid you are. What I am saying is that you lie

Quote this alleged lie.

Post by x***@xxx.com
and your nitwit newsgroup friend will swear to it and add his own lies to
defend your lies.

Post by x***@xxx.com
It was a troll,

"Troll" or not, the burden STILL rests with you (the claimant).

No burden at all,

Seems you're using the term "burden" in a different context than I.

Post by x***@xxx.com
just like anyone else begging for an argument in a dead newsgroup, you
attempted to troll but failed.

Post by x***@xxx.com
you are just trolling. It amuses me how you don't have the willpower to
ignore my posts even after your public declaration that you intended to
do so.

Which posts are you referring to?

The one where you claimed you wouldn't respond to me anymore

Never have I made such claim.

Post by x***@xxx.com
because it wasn't worth your time and all that. You can try to lie but the
post is still there.

Post by x***@xxx.com
Just like the alcoholic who swears he will quit .... until he finds some
Schlitz on sale. Who can resist? If you are looking for someone to
blame for your shambles of a personal life, you might want to try
introspection.

x***@xxx.com

2010-03-08 19:50:55 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids. Hence
the dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up some interest in
arguing with him.

Wrong yet again.
Phil #3

Sorry stupid, I was just defining terms. Deadbeas DO in fact try to
avoid their obligations, that is the definition of deadbeat.

Post by Phil #3
yet
all my children are grown and on their own. Since my not supporting

Yet here you are changing the subject to yourself so you can whine about
whatever it is you are whining about. Whereas Chris was trying to steer
the conversation towards how he should not be responsible for his kids
because he didn't get a chance to abort them. The point of his troll was
to get an argument going about it, instead he just started lying and
pretending that he wasn't trolling. Just like my example, if I came here
and started a thread out of the blue "Where are all the deadbeat losers
nowadays" you would recognize that as a troll, but the exact thing from
your fellow retard and you can't see the obvious.

Post by Phil #3
another adult (their mother) makes me a "deadbeat" in your eyes, you are
just as much a deadbeat because you don't either.
Phil #3

Nice job missing the point so you could whine some more about your life.
Trying to steal the "obvious troll" title from Chris?

Chris

2010-03-09 16:45:19 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids. Hence
the dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up some interest in
arguing with him.

Wrong yet again.
Phil #3

Sorry stupid, I was just defining terms. Deadbeas DO in fact try to avoid
their obligations, that is the definition of deadbeat.

Post by Phil #3
yet all my children are grown and on their own. Since my not supporting

Why don't you share with EVERYBODY quotes of me saying this?

The point of his troll was to get an argument going about it, instead he
just started lying and pretending that he wasn't trolling. Just like my
example, if I came here and started a thread out of the blue "Where are
all the deadbeat losers nowadays" you would recognize that as a troll, but
the exact thing from your fellow retard and you can't see the obvious.

Post by Phil #3
another adult (their mother) makes me a "deadbeat" in your eyes, you are
just as much a deadbeat because you don't either.
Phil #3

Nice job missing the point so you could whine some more about your life.
Trying to steal the "obvious troll" title from Chris?

pnyikos

2010-03-16 13:06:19 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids. Hence
the dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up some interest in
arguing with him.

Wrong yet again.
Phil #3

Sorry stupid, I was just defining terms. Deadbeas DO in fact try to avoid
their obligations, that is the definition of deadbeat.

Post by Phil #3
yet all my children are grown and on their own. Since my not supporting

Why don't you share with EVERYBODY quotes of me saying this?

Well, I've shared this thread, so to speak, with alt.abortion, but
much more importantly, with alt.abortion.inequity which was originally
set up for discussing EXACTLY what your opponent is accusing you of
saying here:

"he should not be responsible for his kids
because he didn't get a chance to abort them."

That newsgroup has fallen upon hard times, probably because, as time
went by, most people had no clue as to what "inequity" in the
newsgroup name referred to. I wonder whether there is anyone reading
this who is interested in discussing this fairly significant issue.

Believe me, the people who set up alt.abortion.inequity were very
serious about it. They were incensed over the way women have life and
death control over their offspring while men are forced to pay child
support even if they wanted the child to be aborted.

Post by Phil #3
another adult (their mother) makes me a "deadbeat" in your eyes, you are
just as much a deadbeat because you don't either.
Phil #3

Nice job missing the point so you could whine some more about your life.
Trying to steal the "obvious troll" title from Chris?

Why is Chris any more an obvious troll than Keegan, Fischer, Humphrey,
elizabeth, Hekhuis, and IAAH? These people dominate talk.abortion
with an indispensible assist from part-time troll "Spartakus" and yet
they almost never discuss abortion, and never in any depth. Their
forte is character assassination, and "Spartakus" is all too willing
to assist them in that. His on-topic posts form such a contrast that
I have long suspected that he is a mere conduit for article after
article ghost-written by people afraid to get into the hurly-burly of
that newsgroup.

Peter Nyikos

The Chief Instigator

2010-03-16 20:49:38 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids. Hence
the dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up some interest in
arguing with him.

Wrong yet again.
Phil #3

Sorry stupid, I was just defining terms. Deadbeas DO in fact try to avoid
their obligations, that is the definition of deadbeat.

Post by Phil #3
yet all my children are grown and on their own. Since my not supporting

Why don't you share with EVERYBODY quotes of me saying this?

Well, I've shared this thread, so to speak, with alt.abortion, but
much more importantly, with alt.abortion.inequity which was originally
set up for discussing EXACTLY what your opponent is accusing you of
"he should not be responsible for his kids
because he didn't get a chance to abort them."
That newsgroup has fallen upon hard times, probably because, as time
went by, most people had no clue as to what "inequity" in the
newsgroup name referred to. I wonder whether there is anyone reading
this who is interested in discussing this fairly significant issue.

Post by Phil #3
another adult (their mother) makes me a "deadbeat" in your eyes, you are
just as much a deadbeat because you don't either.
Phil #3

Nice job missing the point so you could whine some more about your life.
Trying to steal the "obvious troll" title from Chris?

For someone acting as a professor, you ignore the reality that I don't
bother to troll. I'm more than a bit more honest than your exhibited
whining. That's the way I am, in reality.

--
Patrick L. "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (***@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.io.com/~patrick/aeros.php (TCI's 2009-10 Houston Aeros) AA#2273
LAST GAME: Rockford 3, Houston 2 (SO, March 14)
NEXT GAME: Saturday, March 20 vs. Milwaukee, 7:35

pnyikos

2010-03-17 02:25:38 UTC

Post by The Chief Instigator

Post by x***@xxx.com
And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids. Hence
the dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up some interest in
arguing with him.

Wrong yet again.
Phil #3

Sorry stupid, I was just defining terms. Deadbeas DO in fact try to avoid
their obligations, that is the definition of deadbeat.

Post by Phil #3
yet all my children are grown and on their own. Since my not supporting

Why don't you share with EVERYBODY quotes of me saying this?

Well, I've shared this thread, so to speak, with alt.abortion, but
much more importantly, with alt.abortion.inequity which was originally
set up for discussing EXACTLY what your opponent is accusing you of
"he should not be responsible for his kids
because he didn't get a chance to abort them."
That newsgroup has fallen upon hard times, probably because, as time
went by, most people had no clue as to what "inequity" in the
newsgroup name referred to. I wonder whether there is anyone reading
this who is interested in discussing this fairly significant issue.

Post by Phil #3
another adult (their mother) makes me a "deadbeat" in your eyes, you are
just as much a deadbeat because you don't either.
Phil #3

Nice job missing the point so you could whine some more about your life.
Trying to steal the "obvious troll" title from Chris?

For someone acting as a professor, you ignore the reality that I don't
bother to troll.

You troll, whether you admit it or not: you post utter garbage about
me and act surprised that I pay attention enough to call you on it.

By the way, do you still believe W.T.S. never trolls? he came on
awfully strong in a recent post, you know, even more bizarre than when
he said he wants the human race to go extinct.

Peter Nyikos

Peter Nyikos

pnyikos

2010-03-17 02:21:01 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids. Hence
the dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up some interest in
arguing with him.

Wrong yet again.
Phil #3

Sorry stupid, I was just defining terms. Deadbeas DO in fact try to avoid
their obligations, that is the definition of deadbeat.

Post by Phil #3
yet all my children are grown and on their own. Since my not supporting

Why don't you share with EVERYBODY quotes of me saying this?

[...]

Post by pnyikos
Well, I've shared this thread, so to speak, with alt.abortion, but
much more importantly, with alt.abortion.inequity
which was originally
set up for discussing EXACTLY what your opponent is accusing you of
"he should not be responsible for his kids
because he didn't get a chance to abort them."

Any pregnant man can abort,

Don't be daft. Go and read some posts from the olden days, and see
how the issue is that since the man had no say-so in whether his SO
(or former SO-- these issues can really tear a relationship apart)
aborts or not, he should not have to pay for the consequences of HER
choice.

I already schooled Oopsey on the fact that
a fetus doesn't get child support and both parents must support any
children.

Yeah, but it's HER choice to have the child in the first place.

I'd prefer to make the babydaddy do all the actual care and
make the woman work to pay support . .. men would happily get
vasectomized because paying a few bucks is a lot easier than actually
doing the real child care.

Do you realize you've just handed a compliment to stay-at-home moms?
And here I thought you might be the perfect answer to "Where'd all the
feminazis go?"

Post by pnyikos
That newsgroup has fallen upon hard times,

Never had any good times,

The good times were before you ever showed up. Maybe Fischer can tell
you about them. He and Darcy made strange bedfellows over there for a
time.

just a couple of fucktard C4M who
crossposted to it.

You mean like Margolis and Keegan in the 1993-1994 Mother of All
Flamewars? [That was before your time, but Keegan may have filled you
in on it.] It could well be that after that, people just crossposted
any old abortion related post over there, swamping the participants
who were in it for the original charter purposes.

Post by pnyikos
probably because, as time
went by, most people had no clue as to what "inequity" in the
newsgroup name referred to. I wonder whether there is anyone reading
this who is interested in discussing this fairly significant issue.

Go find out if any of the C4M trolls are still about. Don't you
regularly crosspost to soc.men?

Not regularly; usually, it's when I see a crosspost to there in one
post or another of the thread.

Oh, please . .. .

Do you realize you were addressing someone else, an opponent of Chris?

Post by pnyikos
Believe me, the people who set up alt.abortion.inequity were very
serious about it.

And you know this because . . ..

I was involved in a bit of it in 1992. I didn't take any sides, just
wanted to see the lay of the land, so to speak.

you can read minds, just like Oopsey
said he could?

You mean you and your allies put that spin on some things he said,
no?

Post by pnyikos
They were incensed over the way women have life and
death control over their offspring while men are forced to pay child
support even if they wanted the child to be aborted.

Get a vasectomy,

etc.etc. But in some cases, the man WANTS the child and doesn't want
the woman to abort, and she aborts anyway, sometimes because she
changed her mind about what they originally agreed on; that's the flip
side of the inequity, just as much one as the other, and some of the
a.a.i. participants were in it for that reason too.

[unsavory details deleted here]

Post by Phil #3
another adult (their mother) makes me a "deadbeat" in your eyes, you are
just as much a deadbeat because you don't either.
Phil #3

Nice job missing the point so you could whine some more about your life.
Trying to steal the "obvious troll" title from Chris?

Why is Chris any more an obvious troll than Keegan, Fischer, Humphrey,
elizabeth, Hekhuis, and IAAH?

Very, very Oopsey there, imagining a cabal of people who

...you identified with "everyone" when you accused me of calling
"everyone" liars. You completely ignored more than half of even the
abortion rights regulars of the time when you made that benighted
remark. People outside this "imaginary" cabal didn't even register in
your consciousness, eh?

...and who just HAPPEN to agree on everything pertaining to me,
Osprey, J, duke, Dr. Mancini, etc. yeah, sure. The one exception is
Denise Noe--I think the abortion rights men in the abortion newsgroup
are afraid to bear down too hard on her, lest they come across as not
being pro-woman all the way. Then too, they might be embarrassed over
the way you keep beating on her while she keeps turning the other
cheek. But other than that, it's all for one and one for all, as we

Post by pnyikos
These people dominate talk.abortion
with an indispensible assist from part-time troll "Spartakus" and yet
they almost never discuss abortion, and never in any depth.

So we never discuss abortion, eh>? Oh, really?

Yes, even you fall back on broken record routines when I show you
things like the authoritative sources that legitimize the use of
"baby" and "child" for fetuses.

[Remaining idiocies, including a hint that elizabeth still may suspect
me of being a sock puppet for Osprey, deleted.]

Peter Nyikos

Chris

2010-03-17 20:53:55 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids. Hence
the dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up some interest in
arguing with him.

Wrong yet again.
Phil #3

Sorry stupid, I was just defining terms. Deadbeas DO in fact try to avoid
their obligations, that is the definition of deadbeat.

Post by Phil #3
yet all my children are grown and on their own. Since my not supporting

Why don't you share with EVERYBODY quotes of me saying this?

[...]

Any pregnant man can abort,

I already schooled Oopsey on the fact that
a fetus doesn't get child support and both parents must support any
children.

Yeah, but it's HER choice to have the child in the first place.

****************
But we don't talk about THAT, you see.....

*************

Uhuh, that's why women are waiting in line to pay a "few bucks".........

******************

Do you realize you've just handed a compliment to stay-at-home moms?
And here I thought you might be the perfect answer to "Where'd all the
feminazis go?"

Post by pnyikos
That newsgroup has fallen upon hard times,

Never had any good times,

The good times were before you ever showed up. Maybe Fischer can tell
you about them. He and Darcy made strange bedfellows over there for a
time.

just a couple of fucktard C4M who
crossposted to it.

Go find out if any of the C4M trolls are still about. Don't you
regularly crosspost to soc.men?

Not regularly; usually, it's when I see a crosspost to there in one
post or another of the thread.

Oh, please . .. .

Do you realize you were addressing someone else, an opponent of Chris?

Post by pnyikos
Believe me, the people who set up alt.abortion.inequity were very
serious about it.

And you know this because . . ..

I was involved in a bit of it in 1992. I didn't take any sides, just
wanted to see the lay of the land, so to speak.

you can read minds, just like Oopsey
said he could?

You mean you and your allies put that spin on some things he said,
no?

Post by pnyikos
They were incensed over the way women have life and
death control over their offspring while men are forced to pay child
support even if they wanted the child to be aborted.

Get a vasectomy,

Post by Phil #3
another adult (their mother) makes me a "deadbeat" in your eyes, you are
just as much a deadbeat because you don't either.
Phil #3

Nice job missing the point so you could whine some more about your life.
Trying to steal the "obvious troll" title from Chris?

Why is Chris any more an obvious troll than Keegan, Fischer, Humphrey,
elizabeth, Hekhuis, and IAAH?

Very, very Oopsey there, imagining a cabal of people who

Post by pnyikos
These people dominate talk.abortion
with an indispensible assist from part-time troll "Spartakus" and yet
they almost never discuss abortion, and never in any depth.

So we never discuss abortion, eh>? Oh, really?

Lefty

2010-03-23 02:55:53 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids. Hence
the dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up some interest in
arguing with him.

Wrong yet again.
Phil #3

Sorry stupid, I was just defining terms. Deadbeas DO in fact try to avoid
their obligations, that is the definition of deadbeat.

Post by Phil #3
yet all my children are grown and on their own. Since my not supporting

Why don't you share with EVERYBODY quotes of me saying this?

[...]

Any pregnant man can abort,

I already schooled Oopsey on the fact that
a fetus doesn't get child support and both parents must support any
children.

Yeah, but it's HER choice to have the child in the first place.

So? How does that change the fact that a child, once born, is a person
and has the right to financial support from both parents?

Bob W

2010-03-23 16:15:06 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids.
Hence
the dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up some interest in
arguing with him.

Wrong yet again.
Phil #3

Sorry stupid, I was just defining terms. Deadbeas DO in fact try to avoid
their obligations, that is the definition of deadbeat.

Post by Phil #3
yet all my children are grown and on their own. Since my not supporting

Why don't you share with EVERYBODY quotes of me saying this?

[...]

Any pregnant man can abort,

If so, it's a silly non-issue that few people care about. I suppose
that's because most people accept that a born child is a person with
rights and needs, not just a "consequence". I just love the irony when
pro-lifers, who claim that a fetus is "a child, not a choice", insist
that a born child is merely a "consequence" and can be airily
dismissed and abandoned by the father. Your hypocrisy is showing, Sir.

******
Child birth is not a choice made by the father. In fact, the laws are clear
on this issue. Child birth is a unilateral decision made by women. The law
goes so far as to describe her decision as her right. No man can interfere
with her right to carry a pregnancy to full term.

The problem fathers face is if they are unmarried, or later become subjected
to a unilateral divorce decision by the mother, the fathers are told by the
nanny state it is their responsibility to provide the mother with money to
support a child's lifestyle as if they were still together. The child
support responsibility is placed upon the father despite the legal argument
he has no right to say whether the child is born or whether the divorce is
approved. Men are therefore put in the position of paying for women's
unilateral decisions. This is responsibility without rights.

******

I already schooled Oopsey on the fact that
a fetus doesn't get child support and both parents must support any
children.

Yeah, but it's HER choice to have the child in the first place.

So? How does that change the fact that a child, once born, is a person
and has the right to financial support from both parents?

******

Here is where that argument falls apart. If the child has a right to
financial support from both parents why are the fathers payments the only
financial contributions monitored? Why aren't mother's financial support
contributions also monitored? And why are mothers receiving public benefit
support exempted from the requirement to provide any financial support for
their child? And why doesn't the nanay state monitor how the CS money
received is actually spent on the child?

The playing field is not as level as you have attempted to make it appear.

Rob Par

2010-03-23 18:00:20 UTC

Post by Lefty

Post by pnyikos
Yeah, but it's HER choice to have the child in the first place.

So? How does that change the fact that a child, once born, is a person
and has the right to financial support from both parents?
******
Here is where that argument falls apart. If the child has a right to
financial support from both parents why are the fathers payments the only
financial contributions monitored? Why aren't mother's financial support
contributions also monitored? And why are mothers receiving public benefit
support exempted from the requirement to provide any financial support for
their child? And why doesn't the nanay state monitor how the CS money
received is actually spent on the child?
The playing field is not as level as you have attempted to make it appear.

Only because you are so very, very stupid. First off man can not be
raped, he has to have a boner, and that can not be forced. Condoms are
cheap and readily available, in men's rest rooms, and drug store.
Spermicide also readily available, condom with a spermacide jelly
prevents pregnancy and catching a STD. A vasectomy will permantly
prevent a pregnancy, but no protection from STDS. Any yahoo dumb
enough to knock up a bimbo deserves any thing that happens to him.
Best bet don't have sex with a woman you would not want for a mother
for your child. Not ready, to be a father? Get her birth control.

Chris

2010-03-26 06:56:16 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids.
Hence
the dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up some interest in
arguing with him.

Wrong yet again.
Phil #3

Sorry stupid, I was just defining terms. Deadbeas DO in fact try to avoid
their obligations, that is the definition of deadbeat.

Post by Phil #3
yet all my children are grown and on their own. Since my not supporting

Why don't you share with EVERYBODY quotes of me saying this?

[...]

Any pregnant man can abort,

I already schooled Oopsey on the fact that
a fetus doesn't get child support and both parents must support any
children.

Yeah, but it's HER choice to have the child in the first place.

So? How does that change the fact that a child, once born, is a person
and has the right to financial support from both parents?

**************
Just what do you mean by your term "financial support"?

Lefty

2010-03-23 02:47:16 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids. Hence
the dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up some interest in
arguing with him.

Wrong yet again.
Phil #3

Sorry stupid, I was just defining terms. Deadbeas DO in fact try to avoid
their obligations, that is the definition of deadbeat.

Post by Phil #3
yet all my children are grown and on their own. Since my not supporting

Why don't you share with EVERYBODY quotes of me saying this?

Well, I've shared this thread, so to speak, with alt.abortion, but
much more importantly, with alt.abortion.inequity which was originally
set up for discussing EXACTLY what your opponent is accusing you of
"he should not be responsible for his kids
because he didn't get a chance to abort them."
That newsgroup has fallen upon hard times, probably because, as time
went by, most people had no clue as to what "inequity" in the
newsgroup name referred to. I wonder whether there is anyone reading
this who is interested in discussing this fairly significant issue.

Post by Phil #3
another adult (their mother) makes me a "deadbeat" in your eyes, you are
just as much a deadbeat because you don't either.
Phil #3

Nice job missing the point so you could whine some more about your life.
Trying to steal the "obvious troll" title from Chris?

Why is Chris any more an obvious troll than Keegan, Fischer, Humphrey,
elizabeth, Hekhuis, and IAAH?

Hmmm....because he's a moron and an asshole? That's not my definition
of a troll, but it might be for others.

Post by pnyikos
These people dominate talk.abortion
with an indispensible assist from part-time troll "Spartakus" and yet
they almost never discuss abortion, and never in any depth.

The same applies to you. Most of your posts are personal feuding and
related pissing contests. Surely you realize that. If that's your
definition of a troll, you'll have to admit to being one yourself.
Personally, I define a troll as somebody who enters a group for the
sole purpose of disrupting it and garnering attention with posts
designed to anger, shock and outrage people. A typical example would
be the person who posts as "George Orwell", among other nyms. He
travels to and fro to different groups, trying to stir up ire with
sickening racism. He never engages in an actual discussion. The
posters you have mentioned all engage in discussion (it need not
always be about abortion) and they don't invade other groups and try
to anger people. So I wouldn't consider you a troll nor any of the
others mentioned.

Just my two cents, probably unwanted, but oh well.....

Chris

2010-03-26 07:21:33 UTC

Post by x***@xxx.com
And deadbeats look for reasons to avoid supporting their kids. Hence
the dead newsgroup and Chris's need to troll up some interest in
arguing with him.

Wrong yet again.
Phil #3

Sorry stupid, I was just defining terms. Deadbeas DO in fact try to avoid
their obligations, that is the definition of deadbeat.

Post by Phil #3
yet all my children are grown and on their own. Since my not supporting

Why don't you share with EVERYBODY quotes of me saying this?

Well, I've shared this thread, so to speak, with alt.abortion, but
much more importantly, with alt.abortion.inequity which was originally
set up for discussing EXACTLY what your opponent is accusing you of
"he should not be responsible for his kids
because he didn't get a chance to abort them."
That newsgroup has fallen upon hard times, probably because, as time
went by, most people had no clue as to what "inequity" in the
newsgroup name referred to. I wonder whether there is anyone reading
this who is interested in discussing this fairly significant issue.

Post by Phil #3
another adult (their mother) makes me a "deadbeat" in your eyes, you are
just as much a deadbeat because you don't either.
Phil #3

Nice job missing the point so you could whine some more about your life.
Trying to steal the "obvious troll" title from Chris?

Why is Chris any more an obvious troll than Keegan, Fischer, Humphrey,
elizabeth, Hekhuis, and IAAH?

Hmmm....because he's a moron and an asshole? That's not my definition
of a troll, but it might be for others.

Post by pnyikos
These people dominate talk.abortion
with an indispensible assist from part-time troll "Spartakus" and yet
they almost never discuss abortion, and never in any depth.

The same applies to you. Most of your posts are personal feuding and
related pissing contests. Surely you realize that. If that's your
definition of a troll, you'll have to admit to being one yourself.
Personally, I define a troll as somebody who enters a group for the
sole purpose of disrupting it and garnering attention with posts
designed to anger, shock and outrage people. A typical example would
be the person who posts as "George Orwell", among other nyms. He
travels to and fro to different groups, trying to stir up ire with
sickening racism.

************
Does this also hold true for those who consistently try to stir up ire with
sickening obscenities?
*************

He never engages in an actual discussion. The
posters you have mentioned all engage in discussion (it need not
always be about abortion) and they don't invade other groups and try
to anger people. So I wouldn't consider you a troll nor any of the
others mentioned.

Just my two cents, probably unwanted, but oh well.....

Phil #3

2010-02-22 19:52:30 UTC

Post by Chris
What happened to this group? Looks like all the "man must pay for woman's
choice" folks crawled back into their holes.

Nope but good try. This group has always been about the unfairness and
unconstitutionality of "child support", which has NOTHING to do with
supporting children but is in fact, forcing men to pay women.
Phil #3

Dusty

2010-02-15 13:25:38 UTC