antagonists digest, volume 2453076

Today's tally of antagonistic, off-topic, and non sequitur responses:

antagonist # today total aliases
-------------- ------- ----- -------
bartlo 85 Emmett Heinz Curley Bartlo, The Ice Cream Bandit, ,
kohl 5 60
cypherpunk 8 57 Frederick Shorts
mandic 16
phoenix 1 13 Phoenix, Master, Boss, Anna Konda, Klytus, Davie Tholen
nightingale 4 12
drpostman 1 11
fields 3 10
dizzy 2 6
fformby-smythe 5
gadfly 3
laura 3
osterwald 3
phillips 3
beck 2 2
chunder 1 2
freddy 2
penso 2
baldwin 1 1
ed 1
eshwarr 1
flonkenstein 1
ross 1
rhodes 1
stan 1
widdershins 1
xemblonsky 1
-------------- ------- -----
27 28 304

================================================== =============================

Dan Baldwin writes:

1 snipping much

1 What does your Hate List have to do with astrology, feckless dweeb?

You're erroneously presupposing that I have a "hate list", Baldwin.

1 Hail Ming, etc.

Non sequitur.

1 Hail the un-alive

Non sequitur.

================================================== =============================

Phoenix|Master|Boss|Anna Konda|Klytus|Davie Tholen writes:

77 Note: no response.

What does your unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have to do with
astronomy, Phoenix|Master|Boss|Anna Konda|Klytus|Davie Tholen?

================================================== =============================

Cardinal Chunder writes:

2 Nothing. Tholen is the ultimate bore and a hypocrite to boot.

What do your unsubstantiated and erroneous claims have to do with
astronomy, Chunder?

================================================== =============================

Jerry Kohl writes:

1979 Pontosan? Hát persze. Indul a légpárnás hajó.
1979 Electric? Only the chairs. Not the whole vehicle. ;-)

1979 "Légpárnás hajóm tele van angolnákkal."

1980 Hey! How come Nightingale keeps getting credit for other newsgroups
1980 and I don't? At least number 1974 went out to sci.astro, alt.astrology
1980 and alt.paranormal, and you have been asking for some while now what
1980 my posts might have to do with either classical musid or astronomy.
1980 Aren't you paying attention, or are you just suffering the usual reading
1980 comprehension problems that lead you to admit defeat but not realize
1980 you are doing so?

1980 Bingo.

1980 "Légpárnás hajóm tele van angolnákkal."

1981 Yes, I remember. It's just that, this time, I actually had the names of the
1981 other newgroups handy.

1981 "Légpárnás hajóm tele van angolnákkal."

1982 Shh! Don't let you-know-who hear you say that--you might give
1982 him apoplexy. Hmm. Come to think of it, maybe shout it from the
1982 rooftops!

1982 "Légpárnás hajóm tele van angolnákkal."

1983 That does not seem too much to ask. Is anyone willing to bet that
1983 Tholen will accept this generous offer? I'm willing to give exceedingly
1983 long odds against ;-)

1983 "Légpárnás hajóm tele van angolnákkal."

What does most of that have to do with classical music or astronomy, Kohl?

================================================== =============================

nightingale writes:

1531 If it really was a bot, I would expect better accuracy.

1531 I only had 2 items cross posted to sci.astro, why am I being listed with
1531 7 items?

1532 You should have received credit for other newsgroups long before now (
1532 and my total should be more than 4 other groups) for cross posts to
1532 alt.usenet.kooks & others. I remember we were trying to get him to fix
1532 this in the fall, but gave up.

1533 Just plonk him - he's never posted anything interesting.

1533 Why not start some music threads yourself instead of complaining about
1533 what others posts?

1534 How accurate is the movie?

What does most of that have to do with classical music or astronomy,
nightingale?

================================================== =============================

dizzy writes:

805 tholen's dementia is getting worse.

806 On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 21:37:27 GMT, tholen tholed:

How does one allegedly "thole" when posting, dizzy?

806 150 antagonists. My my.

806 Kook.

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

================================================== =============================

Cypherpunk writes:

476 Is this the best youz can do k000k?

476 Yippee! Number 3 with a bullet!

476 What's that Tholoputz? Lens got nothing to do with asstronomy? No wonder
476 youz have problems telling between assteroids and hemarhoids.

476 Freddie 'fag' Shorts

476 I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
476 I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Go Kerry!

476 Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!

477 Like Yoda youz sound now.

477 Freddie 'fag' Shorts

477 I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
477 I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Go Kerry!

477 Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!

478 Cheapskate!

478 Not really! Simple angles really.

478 Not quite. Since the light from the flash reaches it at an angle, most
478 of the light gets reflected away and upwards. Butt some comes back and
478 this is evident from the flare. You can also see it to a lesser extent
478 with the picture rail above the sign.

478 I had considered the glass topped table. It should reflect some light too
478 butt I could see no evidence for this in the photo.

478 Generally, they only do one pre-flash. Its still a problem because the
478 iris only closes so much. So all you get its a smaller red dot in the
478 eye. Its not really a good solution.

478 Freddie 'fag' Shorts

478 I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
478 I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Go Kerry!

478 Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!

479 Yes, most of them are like that nowdays. They would still attract some dust
479 while open.

479 It might also be an idea to open the cover and look at the lens or rather
479 look at it at an angle to get a reflection off its surface. You'll notice
479 that it is usually an orange-red color - this is from the multicoating.

479 Freddie 'fag' Shorts

479 I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
479 I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Go Kerry!

479 Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!

480 I think this is wrong. If it were the spectacles, then there would be
480 2 spots and not one. I don't see another one near it so I can't see how
480 it could be the spectacles. The angle doesn't see right and the shape of
480 the spot is too round.

480 It also doesn't account for the reddish orange color of the spot. Going
480 from the flash directly to the glass-topped table and then thru the
480 spectacles shouldn't cause a change in color. It should remain white.
480 Bouncing off the front lens of the camera would explain that color though.

480 Freddie 'fag' Shorts

480 I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
480 I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Go Kerry!

480 Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!

481 This sounds suspiciously like plugger or Davie boy (AKA Tholoputz).

481 Freddie 'fag' Shorts

481 I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
481 I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Go Kerry!

481 Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!

482 Nope, incorrect. You are erroneously presupposing that the flash is from the
482 left. Look a little closer. The flash is coming from the right. Look at the
482 shadow cast by the box on the bottom right. The format of the image also helps
482 here. Its clear that the camera was rotate 90 degrees to take a vertical
482 image and thus moving the position of the flash. The glasses aren't blocked
482 by the cassette from the perspective of the flash.

482 Also notice the shadow of the glasses on the shirt just behind it. Its clear
482 that the glasses are close to the edge of the table. They cast a clear shadow
482 on the shirt. Both of the lenses do this.

482 His hand is already well lit by the flash. If there was more white light,
482 the hand would just be brighter and not changed in color. If you have an
482 image viewer, download the image and zoom in on that spot. Notice the
482 cross pattern around the spot? Its whitish in color and runs up and down
482 and across (butt partially obscured by the beard and phone cord).
482 This is starburst pattern and well known to photographers.

482 Freddie 'fag' Shorts

482 I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
482 I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Go Kerry!

482 Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!

483 At least I'm still in the lead with the number of crosspoasted newsfroups.
483 Well over 30. Butt Tholoputz can't be bothered counting them properly. He
483 obviously doen't comprehend 5/4 time. Some asstronomer he is.

483 Freddie 'fag' Shorts

483 I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
483 I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Go Kerry!

483 Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!

What does most of that have to do with astronomy or classical music,
Cypherpunk?

================================================== =============================

Matthew H. Fields writes:

817 nope, the cassette in the foreground blocks one of 'em, and the
817 table is huge and mostly not in the frame.

817 Trying to salvage your complex solution, but this is indoors, mainly
817 lit by the flash, and that's just the color of his hand.

818 Wrong. I have the camera so I know.

818 Presupposition on your part.

818 All presupposition on your part, and your theory of a bounce off
818 the camera lens still doesn't work because the camera lens is
818 still the wrong shape.

818 What do you mean by changed in color? I still don't see it.

818 I still don't see any of those details and conclude you're having
818 a field day making stuff up.

819 John Nash just suffered a disease which made the boundaries between
819 thoughts and experiences blurry to his perceptions. He's still alive
819 today and much more functional than most politicians!

What does any of that have to do with classical music or astronomy,
Fields?

================================================== =============================

Coby Beck writes:

236 WooHooo! Thanks for that, I will put it on the mantle in my new place on
236 Asteroid 3255 (that is if I can ever get the property deed sent by Tholen's
236 IVR system...all those "if you're an antagonist, press any key, if your not,
236 press a different key" menus are really giving me the run-around)

237 Personally I don't think Mr Shorts is serious, but... a reflection from the
237 lens of the camera would not focus the light to that spot, it would difuse
237 it because it is a convex surface anyway.

What does that have to do with classical music or astronomy, Beck?

================================================== =============================

DrPostman writes:

117 He cried to RoadRunner that those posts where I
117 repeated lines thousands of times was a form of
117 bulk spam. They took no action after I told them
117 what a kook he is.

What does your unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have to do with
astronomy, DrPostman?

# Newsgroups: rec.music.classical,sci.astro,alt.pets.rabbits

Dr.Matt wrote:

nope, the cassette in the foreground blocks one of 'em, and the
table is huge and mostly not in the frame.

Dr. Matt, the kook doesn't really care about talking to youz.

It cares about adding in 'alt.pets.rabbits' to kook that group.

As long as the kook adds that group in, you should refuse
to talk to it.

It's confusing to the rabbits. ;-)

Anthony Mandic wrote:

# Newsgroups: rec.music.classical,sci.astro,alt.pets.rabbits

Dr.Matt wrote:

nope, the cassette in the foreground blocks one of 'em, and the
table is huge and mostly not in the frame.

Dr. Matt, the kook doesn't really care about talking to youz.

It cares about adding in 'alt.pets.rabbits' to kook that group.

As long as the kook adds that group in, you should refuse
to talk to it.

It's confusing to the rabbits. ;-)

duck season!

"Dr.Matt" wrote:

In article ,
Frederick Shorts wrote:
"Dr.Matt" wrote:

In article ,
Frederick Shorts wrote:
"Dr.Matt" wrote:

In article ,
Coby Beck wrote:

"Dr.Matt" wrote in message
news In article ,
And the conjuror is reportedly a fan of well-played Tchaikowsky,
Holst, and Mahler. Here he is in an unretouched photo I took.
Three brownie points to the first person who correctly explains the
ghostly glow which illuminates his right hand.

http://personal.www.umich.edu/~fields/amzng.jpg

I would say it is the light from the flash bulb, reflected off of the glass
desktop, refracted by the eye-glasses. It may be possible to support a
further supposition as to wether it is the main-part of the lens or the
bi-focal part, but I don't want to think that hard at the moment.


Finally! 3 brownie points to Coby. The award has been sent to you
via telekinesis.


I think this is wrong. If it were the spectacles, then there would be
2 spots and not one. I don't see another one near it so I can't see how
it could be the spectacles. The angle doesn't see right and the shape of
the spot is too round.

nope, the cassette in the foreground blocks one of 'em, and the
table is huge and mostly not in the frame.


Nope, incorrect. You are erroneously presupposing that the flash is from the
left. Look a little closer. The flash is coming from the right. Look at the

Wrong. I have the camera so I know.


Having the camera is one thing. Knows how it works or how to use it is another.
Now what is wrong? The position of the flash? Then please explain why all the
shadows cast are on the left? Look at the box at the lower right. Look at the
glasses. Look at the shadow on the left of the subject's head.

Are you still saying that the flash wasn't to the right of the camera's axis?


shadow cast by the box on the bottom right. The format of the image also helps
here. Its clear that the camera was rotate 90 degrees to take a vertical
image and thus moving the position of the flash. The glasses aren't blocked
by the cassette from the perspective of the flash.

Presupposition on your part.


Erroneous conclusion on your part. My assessment is correct.


Also notice the shadow of the glasses on the shirt just behind it. Its clear
that the glasses are close to the edge of the table. They cast a clear shadow
on the shirt. Both of the lenses do this.

All presupposition on your part, and your theory of a bounce off
the camera lens still doesn't work because the camera lens is
still the wrong shape.


Are you now claiming that the front lens of your camera isn't circular?



It also doesn't account for the reddish orange color of the spot. Going
from the flash directly to the glass-topped table and then thru the
spectacles shouldn't cause a change in color. It should remain white.
Bouncing off the front lens of the camera would explain that color though.

Trying to salvage your complex solution, but this is indoors, mainly
lit by the flash, and that's just the color of his hand.


His hand is already well lit by the flash. If there was more white light,
the hand would just be brighter and not changed in color. If you have an

What do you mean by changed in color? I still don't see it.


Zoom in with an image viewer if you have one. Making it larger should
make the color difference clearer. Its not just a gamma shift but an
entirely different hue. This means some color was added by some reflection
somewhere along the line.

One other thing to note is that a camera flash illuminates more that just
the field viewable by the camera. There may well have been something outside
the frame visible to the camera that the flash illuminated. This, of course,
would have to have been reflective.


image viewer, download the image and zoom in on that spot. Notice the
cross pattern around the spot? Its whitish in color and runs up and down
and across (butt partially obscured by the beard and phone cord).
This is starburst pattern and well known to photographers.

I still don't see any of those details and conclude you're having
a field day making stuff up.


I can see it as plain as day. Try looking at the things I am referring to
more closely and note the shadows and patterns.


Also open up your camera and look at the lens. Try looking at it from an
angle with some other light source reflecting off its surface. What color
do you see? Has it a greenish tinge or an orange-redish tinge?



--
Matthew H. Fields http://personal.www.umich.edu/~fields
Music: Splendor in Sound
"Hey, don't knock Placebo, its the only thing effective for my hypochondria."
Brights have a naturalistic world-view. http://www.the-brights.net/


--
Freddie 'fag' Shorts

I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Go Kerry!

Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!
Contact me by email ) or mail me at
FS Newssite Inc.
101 West 23rd St. Suite 2237, New York, NY, 10011

Check out my current web sites -
http://www.orwellian.org
http://www.miscstuff.org
http://home.nyc.rr.com/cypherpunk/


--
Matthew H. Fields http://personal.www.umich.edu/~fields
Music: Splendor in Sound
"Hey, don't knock Placebo, its the only thing effective for my hypochondria."
Brights have a naturalistic world-view. http://www.the-brights.net/


--
Freddie 'fag' Shorts

I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Go Kerry!

Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!
Contact me by email ) or mail me at
FS Newssite Inc.
101 West 23rd St. Suite 2237, New York, NY, 10011

Check out my current web sites -
http://www.orwellian.org
http://www.miscstuff.org
http://home.nyc.rr.com/cypherpunk/

Look, would-be show-off, the front of the lens is NOT circular, it's
spherical and disperses anything which bounces off of it rather than
concentrating it. The "familiar photographic effect" you're referring
to is of reflections from INSIDE the camera, which take on the shape
of the aperture whether circular, hexagonal, octagonal, etc.--it's
also familiar to anybody who has had their eyes examined and it does
not cast light on anything in the scene. The flash remained, as you
originally supposed, so close to the aperture that any rotation of the
camera didn't matter. Now please don't dig yourself in any deeper.
--
Matthew H. Fields http://personal.www.umich.edu/~fields
Music: Splendor in Sound
"Hey, don't knock Placebo, its the only thing effective for my hypochondria."
Brights have a naturalistic world-view. http://www.the-brights.net/

"Donald C. Patterson" wrote:

in article , gadfly-x at
wrote on 3/16/04 10:15 PM:

Anthony Mandic wrote:

# Newsgroups: rec.music.classical,sci.astro,alt.pets.rabbits

Dr.Matt wrote:

nope, the cassette in the foreground blocks one of 'em, and the
table is huge and mostly not in the frame.

Dr. Matt, the kook doesn't really care about talking to youz.

It cares about adding in 'alt.pets.rabbits' to kook that group.

As long as the kook adds that group in, you should refuse
to talk to it.

It's confusing to the rabbits. ;-)

duck season!

OK, I'll bite.

WABBIT SEASON!

Don


ITS DUCK SEASON! Leave the wabbits alone!

--
Freddie 'fag' Shorts

I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Go Kerry!

Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!
Contact me by email ) or mail me at
FS Newssite Inc.
101 West 23rd St. Suite 2237, New York, NY, 10011

Check out my current web sites -
http://www.orwellian.org
http://www.miscstuff.org
http://home.nyc.rr.com/cypherpunk/