Path: utzoo!hoptoad!ihnp4!chinet!rhonda
From: rhonda@chinet.UUCP (Rhonda Scribner)
Newsgroups: alt.flame
Subject: Re: The Difference It Makes . . .
Message-ID: <2208@chinet.UUCP>
Date: 5 Feb 88 00:24:04 GMT
References: <22620@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <2333@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <2142@chinet.UUCP> <22775@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <2184@chinet.UUCP> <6823@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Reply-To: rhonda@chinet.UUCP (Rhonda Scribner)
Organization: Chinet - Public Access Unix
Lines: 44

In article <6823@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> era@killer.UUCP (Mark Ethan Smith) writes:
>In article <2184@chinet.UUCP> rhonda@chinet.UUCP (The Rhonda Scribner Manifestation) writes:
>
>C'mon.  I'm only human.
>I've been wrong before.  I could be wrong this time.  You've had a
>year to prove me wrong, and haven't bothered to do so.

Let me see if I've got this.  You form an opinion about me based not on any
FACT but on your personal belief that because I disagree with you I must be
some man attacking you (a claim you seem to make about everyone who flames
you and calls you on your most ridiculous proclamations).  I haven't proven
this outlandish opinion wrong.  Therefore it must be true.  Is that it?

Are you in that rhetoric class with Mike Robinson that Skyler is supposedly
teaching?  The method of reasoning is phenomenally similar to what Mike has
"learned" in that class.  Please look in the mirror again and check: are you
sure you're not the same person?  Is it more than just narcissism when you
make references to Mike Robinson being such a "cute guy?"  Such remarks seem
strangely out of place coming from a Mark Ethan Smith.  Or were they just
forgeries?

>Of course, if you *are* Bill Vajk, you aren't going to prove me wrong
>because you can't.

Well I suppose that's true.  If I was Bill Vajk (what kind of a name is Vajk
anyway?) then you'd have me, wouldn't you?  But then again, I couldn't prove
to you that you're wrong no matter what, could I?  If I produced myself in
flesh and blood, you would respond that I'm just some shill whose name Bill
Vajk is using, so it didn't matter, and you'd continue being as obnoxious as
ever, true?  You make up your own reality as you go along.  Your opinion
formation process is exactly the same as Mike's, you base an opinion on some
personal prejudice of yours and lacking anything to DISPROVE this opinion you
claim that it's true.  Now is this a disease that has become a rampant
epidemic affecting the minds of everyone in Berkeley, or just a select few? 
Or just a select one?

One day you're "an old Jewish woman on social security," and the next you're
a spring chicken lusting after "cute guys" like Mike Robinson supposedly is.
Maybe I've got it backwards.  Maybe there are several Mark Ethan Smiths.
Maybe each of the accounts spread across the country represents the mind of
a different but like-thinking and like-writing Smith-entity, all of whom meet
regularly to discuss what they're going to say and who they're going to attack
next.  Can I be a Mark Ethan Smith too? :-)
								--Rhonda