Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!hoptoad!ihnp4!chinet!rhonda From: rhonda@chinet.UUCP Newsgroups: alt.flame Subject: Re: Wienerology 101 Message-ID: <1757@chinet.UUCP> Date: Thu, 22-Oct-87 14:46:28 EDT Article-I.D.: chinet.1757 Posted: Thu Oct 22 14:46:28 1987 Date-Received: Sat, 24-Oct-87 15:48:15 EDT References: <378d6016.b8ab@apollo.uucp> <5261@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> Reply-To: rhonda@chinet.UUCP (Rhonda Scribner) Organization: Chinet - Public Access Unix Lines: 92 In article <8710200519.AA23982@violet.berkeley.edu> weemba@violet.berkeley.edu (Obnoxious Math Grad Student) writes: >I'm not surprised that Timbo expresses his greatest thanks to Rhonda. I'll >mention some of the things that I called FACTS, and which ticks her off and >that she just goes on about how they are nothing but personal opinions, were >clarifications about who posted a certain proposal, who was in e-mail with >the backbone about the accidental loss of moderation in a newsgroup during >the name changeover, the great difficulty it took to convince the backbone >to form said newsgroup in the first place. The Timzaroney approach all >right. If anyone reading this has trouble understanding what Matthew is saying, don't worry, I found it unintelligible, too, and I was involved in what he was talking about! Suffice to say that during several months of continued harrassing letters from Matthew typical of the sort of foulmouthed rudeness he offers up so often, he kept talking about how I didn't know the "FACTS." (Matthew's frequent capitalization) I asked him what the difference was between FACTS and facts, and all I could glean was that FACTS were things that Matthew considered to be facts (in the general sense that you and I understand the word "facts") that were supported only by his personal opinion. In response, he told me this was the way I understood this only because my intelligence was limited. Although he kept using more colorful terms like "moron twit" and "stupid idiot." This is the "craft" and "artfulness" for which he is known and respected. ?? >And her threat to SUE Mark Ethan Smith over the latter's suggest- >ing that she and Bill Vajk are the same person. That's right--SUE. A real >Timmy crybaby approach to handling net.problems. A real schoolyard bully approach to someone seeking recourse. Call it "crybabying." Mock the person seeking recourse against some vicious slander by poking fun and refering to the person as a crybaby. It's clear Matthew wants (or thinks he has) the right to slander, insult, degrade, and harrass anybody he feels like, anyone he considers a moron for disagreeing with him. Therefore we see him promote the idea that seeking just recourse against that kind of harrassment is "crybabying." That's the bully's way. >I mean ol' Richie mixed >Gene and I up long ago, really throwing us for some interesting loops, but >it never occurred to us that such was grounds for a LAWSUIT. Whoo-ee, a real >Timbo soul-mate. First of all, claiming that I was actually another person wasn't the root of the issue. Claiming that I was actually another person who was male (making me out to be a sexual imposter in soc.women) was actually libelous, because it made me out to be a liar, caused several other people to accuse me of being a "pseudo" (Mark's word for a man taking on a pseudonym to pose as a woman), and thus damaged my credibility as a poster in soc.women. Mark had no basis whatsoever for making these claims, but made them anyway in a repeated malicious manner. (I have to wonder why all the arrows are shot at Larry Lippman when Mark is far more deserving based on her repeated harrassment of a number of people. But like the Brahms Gang, apparently she has a fan club, too.) With regard to you and Gene being mixed up, I think there's a good reason it never occured to you to sue. In saying that you and Gene were the same person, which one of you was defamed? Both of you? Could the two of you have sued for defamation of character because he accused each of you of being the other? Well, maybe I have something there. :-) >Truly amusing are some other Timbo statements. He accused Gene of lying >--one of his favorite accusations-- That's interesting, it was one of your favorite accusations sprinkled throughout all your letters. I guess there is something to my noticing how you and Tim are two of a kind. > --about how "Captain Carnage" was what >set him off. Gene and I only know what Laura told us: namely that you >fucking EXPLODED when I called you that. And you want to know why? Be- >cause it describes you to the T. I nailed you. Well, I guess that means all the things I noticed and concluded about you based on your letters must have described you to the T also, judging from the way you EXPLODED when I mentioned them to you in my replies. It's nice to see that you aren't above doing "amateur psychoanalysis" on other people like you accused me of doing. As I recall, you found that behavior silly and stupid. I guess it's different when you do it. >| I'm usually not very fond of obnoxio's napalming of the known universe, >| but since I have read Tim Maroney's article (and suffered minor burns) >| I actually fond obnoxio witty and to the point. >| Yngve Larsson UUCP: {seismo, mcvax}!enea!liuida!yla Measles may seem a far better fate in comparison to leprosy, but that doesn't mean you start to appreciate measles. Tim has said some jerky and downright stupid things, ranging from dumb political statements to complaints about not giving permission to re-post already posted articles to pompous self-aggrandizing remarks about his intelligence (something the Brahms Gang have done their share of, too). This doesn't cause Tim to forfeit his right to seek recourse against obnoxious harrassment and repeated taunts coming from a level somewhere between an obscene phone caller and a third grader. --Rhonda