A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

antagonist's digest, volume 2452854



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 2nd 03, 07:11 PM
dizzy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default antagonist's digest, volume 2452854

On Sat, 02 Aug 2003 15:38:55 GMT, tholen tholed:

dizzy writes:

432 *blush* Awww, shucks. You're too kind.


Note: No response.

432 I know it's too early for an acceptance speech, but I would like to
432 note some of my illustrious colleague's achievements.


Note: No response.

432 Cypherpunk, for some pretty funny trolls.


Note: No response.

432 Zwar, the newcomer who put forth an impressive effort in his
432 (inevitably) futile attempt to convince tholen that he was being
432 unfair.


Note: No response.

432 Carrie, for her wide-eyed innocence. She reminded us all of the shock
432 of first encountering tholen.


Note: No response.

432 Penso, for some of the most creative and on-target of the tholen
432 slams.


Note: No response.

432 And last, but certainly not least, the old guard. Fields, Wehrung,
432 Kolle, Porter, Beck, Daniels and Grantco. (Sorry if I missed
432 someone.) These guys have been in the trenches for years, performing
432 the thankless job of pointing-out tholen's hypocrisy, illogic, and
432 antagonism. We owe them all a round of applause.

What does any of that have to do with classical music, dizzy?
Indeed, what does any of that have to do with astronomy? After
all, you did add sci.astro to the distribution.


Answer my questions first, tholen.

433 How does my merely re-posting *your* response to Carrie, at her
433 request, allegedly constitute "antagonism", tholen? Classic
433 dishonesty.


Note: No response.

433 Some classical music is very weird, just like you, tholen.


Note: No response.

434 You're stuffing the ballot box, you cheat!

What does your ongoing antagonism have to do with classical music, dizzy?


How ironic.

Ads
  #2  
Old August 3rd 03, 04:07 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default antagonist's digest, volume 2452854

To: [ President, University of Hawaii ]
Cc:
[ General Counsel ]
[ All Tholen's peers at the Institute for Astronomy ]
Cc:
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , [email protected]
hawaii.edu
Cc:
, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Cc:
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Previously, Dr. David Tholen wrote on Fri, 01 Aug 2003:

The latest tally, bolstered by the imposter Cypherpunk, and by those
who were suckered into Fields' non sequitur follow-ups of a digest:

antagonist # today total
-------------- ------- -----
cypherpunk 7 104 including eight other newsgroups
dizzy 2 87 including eight other newsgroups
zwar 6 42 including one other newsgroup
fields 4 40 including three other newsgroups
wehrung 6 25 including one other newsgroup
carrie 8 24

[snippity-snip]
Cypherpunk writes:

154 Tholen is an Internet predator. A stalker of sorts.
155 Rabbits *really* like to chew things, including wood.
156 Slut.
157 Hopefully Tholen won't be back posting off-topic.
158 (The world does not revolve around Tholen.)
159 He _is_ lining them up correctly.
160 It has *exactly* the same to do with astronomy as your posts,



Regarding your false claim, I stated:

BWAWAWA!!!

Tholen has totally lost it, he is making up the numbers.

Show the seven antagonist "# today" posts, Tholen.

Ya can't, it didn't happen.

And why aren't you date-stamping your documentation
of "antagonistic" posts?

What's your purpose in posting to Usenet?

To show us you can't count?

To show us you fabricate data?

Do you fabricate data for published papers too, Tholen?



To which you replied:

What does your inability to read the seven cited postings...


WHOOOSH!

I said you are making up the numbers by claiming I made
seven posts in one day ("# today"), when in fact they
did not, they occurred over a number of days.

Gee, Dr. David Tholen, if you grade your students' papers as
badly as you tabulate the posts of people "antagonizing" you,
they'll never know what grade to expect.

There were not ~"seven posts today". It calls into question any
papers you might have published too. What are you going to do
next, claim Pluto has seven moons when it has only one? Claim
your penis is seven inches long, when...

Heh-heh-heh. You don't get it, do you Dr. Tholen?

You've been posting about people antagonizing you over and over.

Since you make yourself such a big fat target for ridicule by
making off-topic posts to whine that people are making off-topic
posts, they make even more off-topic posts.

Then you started posting individually-named "antagonist" digests
to cope with the increased ridicule. Naturally, your posts attracted
even more attention to your mental condition, and more people added
to the Tholen Ridicule Festival.

To cope with that, you began to make even larger "antagonist digest"
postings composed of all the formerly individually posted paranoid
material.

And where has all this furious...

[Tholen to dizzy] You're on at least your 428th antagonistic posting.

....tabulating of your "antagonists" gotten you?

Nowhere.

You are accomplishing NOTHING positive.

And how do you respond to a reality check like the above?

Tholen: "It doesn't matter what you think. Only the facts matter."

Except that you are posting incorrect factoids ("seven posts today"),
and you haven't come to grips with the fact that you are accomplishing
nothing useful by posting "antagonist digests."

In other words, you're just another nutjob on the Internet, flaming
people (in your own style) endlessly, to no avail whatsoever.

You have a mental problem, and apparently you can't see that.

Ah well, let's see what else is in your paranoid post this time.

----

Dr. David Tholen wrote:
Lunchtime O'Boulez writes:

1 Dear Dr Tholen

1 As you see, this posting has nothing to do with classical music.

Incorrect, given that you just mentioned it.


So, what you are saying is, every time you post to ask what someone
else's post has to do with classic music (or astronomy), *your*
post is suddenly on-topic?

Wait a minute...

Dr. David Tholen wrote:
D. G. Porter wrote:

617 Now since my posat had to do with an "antagonist," mainly that copyist,
617 it was not non sequitur, and since it had to do with classical music,
617 it didn't meet the second of the three other requirements, and since
617 and since it had nothing to do with David Tholen, it was not insulting.

617 But Tholen on a BBQ spit will be served at tea-time! Yummy! Now
617 listening to a MIDI of Ives's Quartet while munching on roasted
617 Tholen!

What does your duplicated antagonism have to do with classical music,
Porter?


Oh, so now someone not only says "classical music", they also mention
"Ives's Quartet", yet you still demand to know what their post has
to do with classical music!

Dr. Tholen, why don't you just take a shotgun, aim it at your head,
pull the trigger, thus putting yourself out of misery?

It's not possible for anyone to post according to any known Tholen
ruleset to avoid being labeled an "antagonist" in your paranoid
fantasy game. Everything is a Catch-22. You're a stalker.

You get people to make posts, then you complain to their ISPs
that they made replies to you. The ISPs don't know, they see
an individual post out of context. Whala: you've wacked another
person after kooking them.

You're sick in the head.

----

Dr. David Tholen wrote:
Lunchtime O'Boulez writes:

1 I can also happily state that I believe you to be a sad,
1 pathetic individual, entirely lacking in a sense of humour
1 or irony,

What you believe is irrelevant; the facts are relevant.


What he stated *is* a fact, Tholen.

And since when is what everyone else in the newsgroup thinks irrelevant?

Go on, say it: the universe revolves around you.

1 I can also
1 mention that while I was walking along Prince Consort Road on Tuesday,
1 the word "Tholen" came into my head, causing me to laugh out loud.

Why would the name of a Dutch island do that?


So it's fine for *you* to make off-topic banter, but should anyone else
do it, they become part of your paranoid digests.

1 I feel therefore admirably qualified to be included in your list, and
1 look forward to my first appearance therein.

How you feel is also irrelevant.


Ah, so what everyone else in the group feels (in addition to 'thinks') is
irrelevant. Yep: Tholen is a self-centered Internet nutjob.

----

Tholen the Almighty continues:
Nicolai P. Zwar writes:

43 Where is the alleged antagonism in my postings concerning you, Dave?

Irrelevant, given that I never claimed that there is antagonism in
your postings, Zwar.


What alternate universe are you posting from, Dr. Tholen?

Here is the subject line you used:

Subject: antagonist's digest, volume 2452854

Here is the tabulation with column headers you stated:

antagonist # today total
-------------- ------- -----
zwar 6 42 including one other newsgroup


You've stated it's an "antagonist digest", you specifically column-labeled
Zwar as an antagonist, then when Zwar asked you why you've labeled him an
antagonist in this fashion, you stated you never claimed he was antagonizing
you.

Say what???

You are losing your grip on reality, Dr. Tholen.

What your Paranoid personalities posts, your other Denial personality
claims isn't happening, all within the same post.

Why don't you do all of us a favor and stand in front of the mirror
with two socks over your hands ("sock-puppets") and the three of you
can have a merry argument over who is antagonizing who, then write
it up in your Diary of a Madman.

Leave us the hell alone.

Hey, if you're going to continue to bug us, I see no reason
why others at the University of Hawaii should be spared.

You're one of theirs.

----

Tholen the Nutjob continues:
Nicolai P. Zwar writes:

43 But if you put a bit more actual classical music content in your
43 next digest, I'll pick up on it in my next reply.

You're erroneously presupposing that I want a reply from you, Zwar.


Say what???

You don't want a reply from people?

Then would you care to explain why *you* make replies to all the people
in your digests? Do you seriously expect to repeat posts people have
made, make your snide little remarks in reply to them, then not expect
them to reply in kind? You're really ****ed in the head, Dr. Tholen.

----

Dr. David Tholen wrote:
grantco writes:

1449 Lord knows though Tholen doesn't seem to comprehend that the
1449 existence and maintenence of this thread is what impells others
1449 to call him an idiot and a kook in the first place.....

I've comprehended that the existence of this thread is because somebody
has the emotional need to antagonize me in the first place, grantco.


Hello!? You've listed a total of 47 people as "antagonizing" you.

No, Tholen, it's not 47 people who have the "emotional need to antagonize"
out of the blue, but 47 people who are ridiculing you for being a NUTJOB.

----


Dr. David Tholen wrote:
Daniel Kolle writes:

21 Kook.

22 Kook.

23 Kook.

24 Kook.

25 Kook.

26 Kook.

27 Kookamus.

28 ....Kookamus Maximus.

29 Kookamus Maximus.

30 Kookamus Maximus.

31 Kookamus Maximus.

32 Kookamus Maximus.

33 Kookamus Maximus.

34 Kookamus Maximus.

34 Kookamus Maximus.

34 Kookamus Maximus.

34 Kookamus Maximus.

34 Kookamus Maximus.

34 Kookamus Maximus.

34 Kookamus Maximus.

34 Kookamus Maximus.

34 Kookamus Maximus.

34 Kookamus Maximus.

34 Kookamus Maximus.

34 See, I can copy and paste too Davy. But I do not see how you can do
34 400 lines worth of it.

What does your ongoing antagonism have to do with classical music, Kolle?


It doesn't, kook. It has everything to do with ridiculing a nutjob who just
won't shut up about how everyone is antagonizing him.

Maybe if you let yourself burst into tears, you'll feel better.

----

And now, a *brand new* antagonist joins the fray.

Welcome to the machine.

Congrats, Dr. Tholen, on attracting Monte Python-like ridicule
for your paranoid antagonist digests.


: From:
(Gordon T Gorgone)
: Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
: Date: 01 Aug 2003 20:12:54 GMT
: Subject: OT: Tholenite of the Year Award: The Race

Ladies and gentlemen,

Welcome to the annual race for the "Tholenite of the Year Award", held this
year once again in rec.music.classical. And what a wonderful arena this is, so
far it's been a great race, competition is fierce this season, and, as we will
see, there are some surprising turnarounds. Here is Gordon T. Gorgone, your
beloved host, and let me recap the stats as they are right now for you.

Running out of competition is:

cypherpunk 7 104 including eight other newsgroups

Cypherpunk had a great start, but has been disqualified by the committee
because of doping: some of his posts have been entered into the competition
under assumed identities! What a letdown for his fans. But otherwise he's
delivered a consistently strong performance, unmatched in quantity. If
Cypherpunk will ever manage to stay away from illegal tricks, he could be the
surefire betting tip next season.

Clearly the leader of this race and the hottest contender for the "Tholenite of
the Year Award" this year, 2003, is:

1. dizzy 2 87 including eight other newsgroups

Dizzy seems to be unstoppable now, leading the race by an enormous length. It
almost looks as if the winner of this race is already determined. No other
contender comes even close! Dizzy has an enormous lead (more than twice as many
postings as his closest rivals) and seems to be in top form this year. The odds
are in favor for Dizzy, and our offices in Vegas confirm that he's clearly the
betting favorite. But don't count your chickens before they are hatched, Dizzy,
keep it up, we have seen it all before, sometimes the lead can be lost in the
final round. Still, we should all keep our fingers crossed for this wonderful
candidate, who has delighted us with such spectacular entries this year as
"Tholen. Get professional help", "Jesus H Christ, you are one incredibly
pathetic twit, tholen" or, particularly powerful: "Shut up, tholen". The ease
with which Dizzy has taken and kept the lead should inspire generations of
future Tholenites, though few will be able to follow in the path of this giant.

While Dizzy's leading position is unchallenged, there is a neck and neck race
for second place between this years newcomer:

2. zwar 6 42 including one other newsgroup

and veteran player:

3. fields 4 40 including three other newsgroups

No one dares to predict the outcome of this one. Zwar is the big surprise
candidate this season. This promising newcomer entered the contest against some
fierce competition, but managed to swiftly surpass many "surefire" bets with
his steadfast and enormously successful if redundant "I'm not an
antagonist"-technique. Still, despite the good show he has delivered, he is up
against more experienced contenders, and there is still plenty of playing time
left. Only time will tell if he has the breath to go the distance. We have seen
it often before that some hotshots entered into the contest boldly and with
enormous pace only to mentally break down and give up long before the end of
the contest. In some sad cases, such players never recover. However, so far
Zwar shows no signs of slowing down at all, he seems in top form and his
performance is remarkably self-assured and exceptionally well crafted. Will
Zwar be able to hold on to his second place?

Not if Fields has his way. Fields, a veteran and probably the most innovative
player on the field, sure gives him a run for his money. Fields, who has made a
name for himself with a number of ingenious entries, among them such superior
ones as: "Wow. That's really loud. Under what situation would you want to
listen to classical music with the volume set to 2452809?" (a studio favorite),
and the deceivingly simply: "Davey asked what Xenakis has to do with classical
music. You would think that he could do his own homework", remains one of the
hottest contenders. Many experts consider Fields the Pele of the Tholenites,
even though Fields has never actually won the contest. But his expert
technique, the ease with which he tackles even the most complicated attacks,
and the consistently high quality of his entries, often laced with irony, make
him a candidate to be reckoned with year after year. It should only be a matter
of time until Fields will have a "Tholenite of the Year Award" of his own.
Fields is a joy to watch and the ever increasing number of Fields fan-clubs,
Fields T-shirts, and Fields coffee mugs (most of them unlicensed) demonstrate
his popularity.

Next in line is:

4. wehrung 6 25 including one other newsgroup

Another strong veteran player. Betting odds originally saw him in third place,
behind Dizzy and Porter. Wehrung has the ability to strike swiftly and at any
given moment he could now decrease his distance to Fields. He has perfected a
varied technique and can play with the best. Among his entries is the
outstanding: "Incredible amount of time Dave spends on this, even doing
back-searches for missing comments. I wonder if he steals it from his sleep or
work time?", with which he managed to raise more than just one eyebrow. "Great,
how Wehrung always manages to involve your head as well as your heart" said one
die hard Wehrung fan to our reporter. We should keep an eye on Wehrung. In our
private studio betting charts two people have him come in in second place and
one even in first place.

Rounding off the top five is:

5. carrie 8 24

Another newcomer, her fresh and careless approach has brought her acclaim and a
considerable number of fans, but also some negative criticism. "She's clearly
an amateur" said one source, who wishes to remain unnamed. "Oh sure, she's in
fifth place now, and it looks good for her, but I just cannot see her holding
up under pressure." Indeed, Carrie's performance has been uneven, sometimes
with several entries in a single day, then laying low again for some time. But
who can forget her charming debut entry: "Strange, he didn't think it was so
funny when someone did exactly the same thing to him on the Bunny Newsgroup",
wonderfully original and captivating! Amateur or not, she has secured her spot
among the top five with seeming ease, and despite the unevenness of her
performance she should not be underestimated.

Next comes:

6. kolle 20

It will be seen if he can catch up to the leading pack. Kolle is always
somebody to be reckoned with in this contest, and he is ahead of:

7. porter 14

Along with Grantco the biggest disappointment this season. Porter was a betting
favorite early on, and almost everybody expected to see him among the top
three. But technical difficulties prevented this former champion and major
talent from devoting all his energies to the contest, and, considering Porter's
enormous potential, he has kept a fairly low profile and not lived up to
expectations. An unofficial spokesperson for Porter, who doesn't have anything
to do with him at all, told us in confidentiality: "It is tough for Porter to
see all those newcomers in higher positions, but technical reasons prevented
him from securing the lead early on, and now it's difficult for him to find his
rhythm. He'll be back in top form next year, though, and I tell you it
shouldn't surprise anyyone when he takes the Award back home then. And don't
count him out yet!"

Then there is:

8. adam 3 12

A pretty good performance so far. Adam is sure getting the hang of this. He
lacks yet the consistency of the strongest contestants, but should still be
able to better his place by one or two numbers.

Next up:

9. grantco 5 12

Nothing Grantco has shown so far has been bad, but he is not living up to his
potential. He could and should be among the top five, but his performance this
year has been lackluster. Sure, ninth place is not bad at all, but for a major
talent like Grantco it's peanuts. Though it looks like Grantco is now catching
up, and he may surprise us yet. Stay tuned for more!

Followed by:

10. bloggs 1 11
11. beck 10
12. curtis 9 including one other newsgroup

Bloggs, Beck, and Curtis also have all proven in the past that they are capable
of more than what they are showing us this time. Strong contenders, yet we have
yet to see them working at full speed. They have quite a way to go if they want
to catch up to Zwar and Fields, not to mention Dizzy. But all of them could
give anybody a run for their money.

This applies also to:

13. penso 9

At this time in the contest, Penso seems to be quite content to stay in the
middle field. Maybe he's still coming up with some special trick, but don't
wait too long, Penso, time is, while not running out yet, getting shorter
nevertheless.


14. daniels 3 7 including one other newsgroup

Lackluster! Daniels is a major talent and semantically well skilled, he should
be among the leads, yet obviously he's not taking the contest seriously enough
to make a major difference. His performance is lacking in gusto and is too
sporadic.

15. porky 6

Has seen better days. Once a champion candidate, nowadays just going through
the moves. Perhaps it's time for a new trainer?

16. charles 5 including one other newsgroup

What has happened to the Charles who was once one of the leading antagonists
around? Has he run out of steam, or is he saving his energies and preparing for
the endgame? Another major player curiously just in the middle field at this
time. Perhaps he still worn out from the demanding and thrilling qualification
round, in which he came in first? In any case, it is evident that he's holding
back at this time.

17. bornfeld 4 4
18. briggs 4
19. wag 4 including three other newsgroups
20. drpostman 3 including one other newsgroup
21. harrington 1 3 including three other newsgroups

Of these, Harrington could have the potential of a champion, but as he is
boycotting the contest and has Tholen plonked, it will be very difficult for
him to catch up. A major talent, but also a difficult player and one
notoriously unwilling to formally recognize this contest as the official one.
We can only hope that his boycott will not last forever, because he has proven
himself a spirited opponent who could tholenize with the best of them.

Further contestants, still in the race though far behind, a

22. haslam 3
23. kennedy 3 including three other newsgroups
24. seriff 3 including three other newsgroups

Seriff showed promising talent, but is at this point far behind in the race and
has yet to make any significant impact this season.

The rest of the field:

25. ananoeslachica 3
26. lockhart 3
27. flugelburger 3
28. jaakko 2
29. highwood 2
30. ladasky 2 including one other newsgroup
31. archer 1
32. booker 1
33. gorgone 1
34. hall 1
35. jasons 1
36. karttunen 1
37. kohl 1
38. malloy 1
39. n'vok 1 including one other newsgroup
40. o'boulez 1
41. oisk17 1
42. root 1
43. ross 1
44. schlyter 1 including one other newsgroup
45. sullivan 1
46. wood 1
47. yes 1


Will somebody of these lower places manage to climb up? There is still plenty
of time left, and nothing's over until it's over. We look forward to the
continuation of this gripping event, and wish everybody a happy Tholenite
season 2003! Stay tuned for more information, we'll be back after these
messages from our sponsor.

----
Gordon T. Gorgone, "Tholenite of the Year Award" sports reporter



Various replies.


: From: dizzy
: Newsgroups: rec.music.classical,alt.usenet.kooks,sci.astro
: Subject: OT: Tholenite of the Year Award: The Race
: Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 23:55:39 GMT

On 01 Aug 2003 20:12:54 GMT, Gordon T Gorgone wrote:

The ease
with which Dizzy has taken and kept the lead should inspire generations of
future Tholenites, though few will be able to follow in the path of this giant.


*blush* Awww, shucks. You're too kind.

I know it's too early for an acceptance speech, but I would like to
note some of my illustrious colleague's achievements.

Cypherpunk, for some pretty funny trolls.

Zwar, the newcomer who put forth an impressive effort in his
(inevitably) futile attempt to convince tholen that he was being
unfair.

Carrie, for her wide-eyed innocence. She reminded us all of the shock
of first encountering tholen.

Penso, for some of the most creative and on-target of the tholen
slams.

And last, but certainly not least, the old guard. Fields, Wehrung,
Kolle, Porter, Beck, Daniels and Grantco. (Sorry if I missed
someone.) These guys have been in the trenches for years, performing
the thankless job of pointing-out tholen's hypocrisy, illogic, and
antagonism. We owe them all a round of applause.




: From:
(D.G. Porter)
: Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
: Subject: OT: Tholenite of the Year Award: The Race
: Date: 1 Aug 2003 18:26:34 -0700

Dear Mr. Gorgone:

As you noted above, I have experienced severe technical difficulties
that prevent me from truly participating in full form. As I write
this is it 3:22 PM my time, but in Google, my only medium of access
since Tholen complained to my ISP and they cut me off (after all, they
told me, even if a complaint has no merit, a complaint is a complaint
and I have reached my maximum total of three, covering the last 6.5
years, and that is that), there is a three-hour-plus delay in posts'
appearances, and you own post will not appear on Google until another
hour or so, so I must save this message until your message shows in
order to reply to it. Such impediments make it very difficult to keep
up, and as it is, I have thoroughly spanked Tholen as it is.

There is one thing I am, if I'm nothing else I am frank. I make a
specialty of frankness. I am frank from 9:30 A.M. to 6:15 P.M. daily,
9 to 12 Saturdays and Sundays. Now in my antagonizing and spanking
Tholen, it isn't (as might be slightly inferred from your poem) that I
have no interest in keeping up it's simply that I don't find it
expedient to antagonize and spank regularly through Google and
Google's three-hour delay, and then only 'moderate.'

You see, when I thoroughly spanked Tholen it was that I wrote about an
"antagonist," hence it was on-topic for this thread, and that the
"antagonist" was a particularly bad music copyist employed by Charles
Ives in 1904, hence it was on-topic for this group. And although I
had to piggy-back my post on one by Penso, it had nothing to do with
Penso, or Penso's words, or Tholen as well, although Tholen still
insists that since I used Penso's post then it must de facto have to
with what Penso wrote and Pesno wrote about Tholen, but we all know
Tholen's logic is quite flawed and by his own words in the same post
he acknowledges that a "response" to something by dizzy or grantco had
nothing to do with whoever the other person was or what they wrote,
and so his own "logic" was not even employed in his own response! Now
to meet the criteria of his counting "antagonism" in this thread, a
post must be about him AND be either of three other things: a non
sequitur, or having nothing to do with classical music, or be
insulting to David Tholen. Now since my posat had to do with an
"antagonist," mainly that copyist, it was not non sequitur, and since
it had to do with classical music, it didn't meet the second of the
three other requirements, and since it had nothing to do with David
Tholen, it was not insulting. In fact, the fact that it had nothing
to do with Tholen excluded it from his criteria for including it in
his list, hence he failed to meet his own requirments, and therefore
he demonstrated that all he is doing is looking for antagonism to be
antagonized by! My demonstrating this is the spank he so richly
deserved, and most if not all future posstings by me in these threads
seems somewhat superfluous and redundant.

Yours frankly,
DGP




: From:
(Brendan R. Wehrung)
: Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
: Subject: OT: Tholenite of the Year Award: The Race
: Date: 2 Aug 2003 06:24:34 GMT

Gordon T Gorgone ) writes:
Ladies and gentlemen,

welcome to the annual race for the "Tholenite of the Year Award", held this

[snip]

Very interesting material, but Tholenite is an intractable mineral, hard,
dense and rumored to be what Dave's head is made of. How about
"Tholenizer of the Year"?



: From: Michael Lockhart
: Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
: Subject: antagonist's digest, volume 2452854
: Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 20:40:09 -0400

wrote:
The latest tally, bolstered by the imposter Cypherpunk, by those
who were suckered into Fields' non sequitur follow-ups of a digest,
and by Gorgone's ridiculous race:

antagonist # today total
-------------- ------- -----

snip
47 46 533


Good Heavens! Forty-seven antagonists. You must feel really special.
But of course, how you feel isn't relevant, it's your insanity that's
relevant.

Michael Lockhart writes:
10 His proffered definition of "antagonist" means basically nothing. If
10 ever contesting one point with someone makes one an antagonist, who
10 isn't an antagonist? If everyone is an antagonist, why is he compiling
10 lists of them? Of course, his monumental egotism is the reason for
10 that, but it doesn't explain why anyone would be interested in that
10 list,
10 nor does it explain how disagreeing with him somehow is an affront
10 to r.m.classical.


Irrelevant, given that that I never claimed that disagreeing with me
is an affront to r.m.classical, Lockhart.


Indeed, you couldn't. Disagreeing with you is almost a necessity for
rec.music.classical. You act as if disagreement with you is somehow
inherently bad, but everyone knows that isn't the case. That said, if
you admit there is nothing wrong with disagreeing with you in r.m.c.,
why on Earth do you compile ridiculous lists of who allegedly has done so?

10 He should start his own newsgroup, alt.th*len*antagonists, and every
10 post could be about him.
What you think I should do is irrelevant, Lockhart.


No.

I'm not the one
who has an emotional need to post, therefore I have no need to start
such a hypothetical newsgroup.


Hmm, what was that you said? "What you think ... is irrelevant"? Or
what was that about not inputing motive to postings? Or mind reading?
Your continued hypocrisy doesn't surprise me in the slightest. My point
stands. You should start your own newsgroup, alt.tholen.antagonists,
and every post could be about you. As that is all you seem interested
in, you should be happy. As you would be not posting your 2452855th
digest of moronic, solipsistic junk here, we would be happy. Of course,
that would never happen because you have an emotional need for attention.

Why don't you start it so you can
take your antagonism out of this newsgroup? Maybe you can convince
the other antagonists to do likewise?


I'm sure r.m.c. is groaning under the weight of my "antagonistic"
postings. Yep. I notice the number you anally place before my lines is
a "10" (now a "12"), not a "2452854". Who do you think the public
considers the worse offender?

10 Then, at least, we could read r.m.c. in peace.
Only if you and the other antagonists were to stop posting your
antagonism here, Lockhart.


As had happened for almost two weeks (yet again) until you came back
from wherever it is you went and immediately posted all your accumulated
junk. You actually shamelessly said that it was ok to list the postings
under your heading "today", even though some were almost two weeks old,
because you had *read* them that day. Amazing. Also, until that post I
had not posted anything about you or to you since the day you started
this new thread digest. I thought it might finally shut you up, mostly.
It lessened the number of postings. Finally, there was nothing for
almost two weeks. Then, the return. Sigh.

10 Interesting idea. I never saw that post.
10 And David, if you are reading this, I am not going to answer you when
10 and if you ask what this has to do with classical music.
Obviously because you can't justify posting your off-topic antagonism
to tihs newsgroup, Lockhart.


How could I justify something which requires no justification? Why
would I justify it? This is not a moderated newsgroup, and you are not
the moderator. This is not a courtroom, and you are not an objecting
attorney. Whyever you post your effluvia, they contribute nothing to
this newsgroup. I wouldn't complain about that (unlike you) if you
weren't so horribly prolific in posting your spawn. It is the sheer
volume that is irritating, not so much the content.

Ironic how you suggested creating a
newsgroup for such postings.


Not in the slightest. You wouldn't know irony if it hit you in the
face. Irony is being the worst off-topic offender in history while
complaining every step of the way that other people are off-topic offenders.




Info on our mostest favorite kookamus maximus, Dr. David J. Tholen.

http://tinyurl.com/iv09


  #3  
Old August 3rd 03, 11:52 PM
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default antagonist's digest, volume 2452854

dizzy writes:

435 Note: No response.

435 Note: No response.

435 Note: No response.

435 Note: No response.

435 Note: No response.

435 Note: No response.

435 Answer my questions first, tholen.

435 Note: No response.

435 Note: No response.

435 How ironic.

436 Kook.

436 47 antagonists. My my.

What does your ongoing antagonism have to do with astronomy, dizzy?

  #5  
Old August 7th 03, 01:02 AM
dizzy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Kook's digest, volume 2452854

On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 17:58:30 GMT, tholen tholed:

What does your ongoing antagonism have to do with astronomy, dizzy?


You're a kook, tholen.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
antagonist's digest, volume 2452836 [email protected] Astronomy Misc 0 July 26th 03 07:32 PM
antagonist's digest, volume 2452828 dizzzy Astronomy Misc 0 July 8th 03 03:24 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.