Re: digest 2453183

From: Frederick Shorts (Cypherpunk_at_nyc.rr.com)
Date: 06/29/04 

Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 23:19:39 -0400

tholen@antispam.ham (mailto: tholen@hawaii.rr.com) wrote:
>
> Cypherpunk writes:
>
> 666> What does any of this *** of yours have to do with classical music, tholokook?
>
> 666> What does your bull*** have to do with classical music, Davie boy?
>
> 666> What does your crap have to do with classical music, Tholoputz?
>
> 666> What does your obvious dire need for a enema have to do with classical music,
> 666> Tholoretard?
>
> 666> What does your anal retention have to do with classical music, Thologoober?
>
> 666> What does your lits obsession have to do with classical music, Tholoass?
>
> 666> Non sequitur, Davie. There is no trick involved. Are youz still living in the
> 666> dark ages. Given that you use a crappy newsreader on OS/2 youz must be. There
> 666> is no trick in crossposting unless youz use such crappy software and have to
> 666> resort to voodoo and shamanistic practices. Is that how youz conduct yer
> 666> asstrology/asstronomy? No wonder youz are still a nobody in yer field. Youz
> 666> should have become a farmer. Then youz would have been outstanding in yer field.
>
> 666> Youz tell us first, tholoroid.
>
> 666> "do your erroneous presupposition"? Grammar, Tholens.
>
> 666> Why did youz ask anyway, Tholess? Is it your lack of credentials and credibility
> 666> that makes youz jealous of others? And since when is asstrology taught at universities?
> 666> Perhaps in Hawaii, where they seem to be backwards.
>
> 666> No retort, Tholobsesso? Youz could have said he was decomposing now.
>
> 666> OCD noted.
>
> 666> Youz left one of mine out.
>
> 666> Freddie '***' Shorts
>
> 666> I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
> 666> Another proud buttplug owner. Honk if yer horny!
> 666> I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Kerry sux!
>
> 666> Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!
>
> 667> Its like he's never been gone at all.
>
> 667> It depends on what sort of year youz are talking about. Tholokook seems to
> 667> think that there is more than one.
>
> 667> He will be gone shortly though, or my name isn't Shorts!
>
> 667> Freddie '***' Shorts
>
> 667> I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
> 667> Another proud buttplug owner. Honk if yer horny!
> 667> I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Kerry sux!
>
> 667> Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!
>
> 668> And he has no right to disrupt newsgroups with his trolling ***. When he
> 668> does that, he's a troll and should be dealt with accordingly.
>
> 668> And the retard is too thick to get the hint.
>
> 668> No he IS the kook. He's already received one KOTM award. He's pulled this
> 668> bull*** of his before.
>
> 668> *** he changed to a digest once he got lazy about replying. Also check
> 668> some of his replies to my posts where he takes out the target newsgroup
> 668> from the crosspost list. Typical troll behavior.
>
> 668> Yes, really.
>
> 668> Youz seem to have a problem picking up the venom, invective, snideness and
> 668> antogonism of his remarks.
>
> 668> I only suggested in this group that people write to him when he disappeared.
> 668> Besides, he shouldn't have emailed and complained from his regular account.
>
> 668> It may have escaped youz *** there was next to no replies to his digest ***
> 668> while he was gone. That speaks volumes to everyone except youz and, apparently,
> 668> Tholen.
>
> 668> He's the one in most dire need of an enema, though.
>
> 668> Freddie '***' Shorts
>
> 668> I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
> 668> Another proud buttplug owner. Honk if yer horny!
> 668> I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Kerry sux!
>
> 668> Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!
>
> 669> Unfortunately, not not.
>
> 669> Its a problem with el cheapo newsservers of the type RoadRunner use. For
> 669> example, I saw the second one (this thread) but not the first.
>
> 669> Chances are we'll never see them. Part of the problem might stem from the
> 669> fact that the kook chooses to reply to an existing reply and change the
> 669> subject line etc. He should start a new post.
>
> 669> I'd be happy to fill in for youz if youz'd like.
>
> 669> Freddie '***' Shorts
>
> 669> I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
> 669> Another proud buttplug owner. Honk if yer horny!
> 669> I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Kerry sux!
>
> 669> Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!
>
> 670> Given the way he craps on about asstrology, I thought it was an asstrological rule.
>
> 670> Clearly, asstronomical proportions are bigger than biblical proportions.
>
> 670> Yep, Tholen's that sort of kook.
>
> 670> Its more of a black hole.
>
> 670> Typical OCD behavior. Which means he's also anal retentive.
>
> 670> Tholen lives to antagonize people. Youz can detect it in his reply remarks.
> 670> Not only does he enjoy it *** he has this deep-seated need for it since it
> 670> help quell his inadequacies (typical small man syndrome).
>
> 670> Probably *** Tholen would have antagonized them well and truly by now.
>
> 670> Freddie '***' Shorts
>
> 670> I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
> 670> Another proud buttplug owner. Honk if yer horny!
> 670> I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Kerry sux!
>
> 670> Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!
>
> 671> Hmmmm ... yes, youz have a point. I could set up a cancelbot to cancel all of
> 671> Tholen's poasts.
>
> 671> Freddie '***' Shorts
>
> 671> I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
> 671> Another proud buttplug owner. Honk if yer horny!
> 671> I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Kerry sux!
>
> 671> Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!
>
> 672> LOL!!! I can just see Tholen going to Star Trek conventions! Naturally,
> 672> he'll fantasize that he's a Vulcan. He'll have problems with Klingons when
> 672> he goes to the can and, after Scotty beams him up, his molecules evaporate
> 672> in another mysterious transporter accident. Either that or Kirk shoves him
> 672> out an airlock while the Enterprise is orbiting Venus.
>
> 672> Freddie '***' Shorts
>
> 672> I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
> 672> Another proud buttplug owner. Honk if yer horny!
> 672> I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Kerry sux!
>
> 672> Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!
>
> 673> I'd seriously doubt that Tholen would have the wherewithal to check out the
> 673> curvature of her space/time.
>
> 673> Freddie '***' Shorts
>
> 673> I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
> 673> Another proud buttplug owner. Honk if yer horny!
> 673> I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Kerry sux!
>
> 673> Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!
>
> 674> Yo, Tholen, listen up dude. We're not interested in yer porn spam.
> 674> We all know youz don't have a girlfriend cos yer an onanist. So take
> 674> yer spam and shove it back up Uranus.
>
> 674> Freddie D. '***' Shorts
>
> 674> I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
> 674> Another proud buttplug owner. Honk if yer horny!
> 674> I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Kerry sux!
>
> 674> Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!
>
> I see that you're still up to your cross-posting habits, Cypherpunk.

I see youz are still avoiding answering the questions? Why is that, troll?

> What do your ongoing antagonism and your unsubstantiated and erroneous
> claims have to do with any of the newsgroups to which you've posted
> them, Cypherpunk?

And what does yer *** have to do with classical music or any of the other
newsgroups I've crosspoasted to, Tholokook?

>
> ===========================================================================
>
> dizzy writes:
>
> 873> On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 04:39:18 GMT, tholen tholed:
>
> How does one allegedly "thole" when posting, dizzy?
>
> 873> Kook
>
> What does your ongoing antagonism have to do with classical music,
> dizzy?
>
> ===========================================================================
>
> Marcello Penso writes:
>
> 203> <snipped the useless harddrive hogging postathloopampest>
>
> 203> Thloopsyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy! This is great. Now I can continue
> 203> enriching the tholovocabulary.
>
> 203> Shall we start with:
>
> 203> oompathloompa-wabadweeby-bloortbo-xwooogla-blothtrun-swinkyniddle-
> 203> blathperrallanoxi-squaglomunchyrot-ickthyloopsakooka-dudarooter-ronomy?
>
> How ironic that you would post your own off-topic crap, Penso. But
> what does your off-topic crap have to do with classical music, Penso?
>
> ===========================================================================
>
> Fred Bloggs writes:
>
> 215> Welcome back, kook.
>
> 215> Last year? Year ending...31st December? Or does the year end in June
> 215> where you come from, Tholen?
>
> 215> Good to see you back, though. Well..no, not good. Interesting.
>
> What does your ongoing antagonism have to do with classical music,
> Bloggs?
>
> 216> I'd assumed he'd stopped as some sort of experiment - to see who would
> 216> post messages to/about him and who wouldn't, so that he could start
> 216> again with a much smaller set of `antagonists` in an attempt to make
> 216> them appear more irrational than he.
>
> What does your assumption have to do with classical music, Bloggs?
>
> 216> I guess he couldn't resist trolling again.
>
> What does your erroneous presupposition of "trolling" have to do with
> classical music, Bloggs?

Why don't youz prove that its not trolling, Tholotroll?

>
> 216> How many times he typed up a digest, his finger over
> 216> the mouse which in turn was hovering over the `post message` button,
> 216> only to click `cancel` at the last minute.
>
> What does that have to do with classical music, Bloggs?
>
> 216> Eventually he just couldn't stand to not post for any longer.
>
> How ironic, coming from someone who couldn't stand to not post any longer.
> And for the two hundred sixteenth time, no less.
>
> 216> I don't think he'll be satisfied until everyone stops replying to his
> 216> antagonistic posts.
>
> What does your erroneous presupposition of "antagonistic posts" from
> me have to do with classical music, Bloggs?
>
> 216> Perhaps even that won't be enough, and there'll
> 216> instead be a daily post containing the tally and `Note: No apology.`.
>
> What does your prediction have to do with classical music, Bloggs?
>
> ===========================================================================
>
> nightingale writes:
>
> 1676> Good morning Don :-)
>
> 1676> I just skimmed the list you were kind enough to quote for me, and he's
> 1676> right: most (perhaps even all, hard to tell on some of them when he
> 1676> doesn't give any context) of it was off topic.
>
> 1676> No comment on what he quoted of your posts?
>
> 1677> He has the same right as any of us to post what he wants, including
> 1677> comments and/or complaints about what we post.
>
> 1677> I agree, and have told him so before.
>
> Irrelevant, given that the digest isn't restricted to antagonistic
> postings, nightingale. Of course, I've said that before. Multiple
> times.

Like when, Tholotroll? Let's see some references instead of yer usual avoidance.

>
> 1677> He seems to be some kind of kook magnet. I wonder what happened to make
> 1677> trolls like Shorts & DrPostman go after him the way they do. I took a
> 1677> brief look in on sci.astro when they were crossposting to here a while
> 1677> back, and what a mess - he was replying individually to all the
> 1677> antagonistic posts (and there were a lot of them from people whose only
> 1677> apparent purpose in being there was to bother him) & the threads got
> 1677> quite huge. That's what made me change my mind about calling his digest
> 1677> silly, btw. If he must reply to all the nonsense, this is better than
> 1677> what I saw on sci.astro.
>
> 1677> Really? I'm probably lacking some history on this little war, but it
> 1677> seems like some of the reaction he gets is out of proportion to anything
> 1677> he posts. For example, did he really ask for Shorts to posts his email
> 1677> address to several groups & suggest people write to him, or for somebody
> 1677> (I forget who now) to come back after a long absence and call him
> 1677> slightly demented, or for you to keep adding comments about Barnes to
> 1677> threads that had nothing to do with him? Not that I think he's perfect
> 1677> or anything, but he's not the only one being confrontational at the
> 1677> moment.
>
> 1678> He does seem to want the last word - no harm in giving it to him
> 1678> sometimes, especially in a case like that where it was a pretty
> 1678> pointless argument to start with.
>
> What seems to you is both irrelevant and erroneous, nightingale.
>
> 1678> LOL! Do you think he would actually listen to me?
>
> 1679> There have only been 2 digests since his return.
>
> 1679> LOL!
>
> 1679> You'll have to do better than that if you want to reclaim top spot.
>
> 1680> He usually skips numbers if he misses some days, and he did not start at
> 1680> volume 1. I wonder if he is somehow computing the digest numbers from
> 1680> the date.
>
> 1680> It was meant as a joke. I haven't even checked what the current scores are.
>
> 1680> Or perhaps it was non sequitur? I don't remember either, but I do
> 1680> remember that your first entry, unlike mine, was a non-antagonistic post.
>
> 1681> I finally remember what it is - he's using the Julian Date as his digest
> 1681> number. There's a converter here
>
> 1681> I think that he is one of a kind, on or off the net.
>
> 1682> But will she have any space on her calendar for him?
>
> 1683> LOL!
>
> 1684> How do you do that? I thought you could only cancel your own posts.
>
> 1685> It was a course assignment. The student didn't get a very good mark.
>
> 1686> onanist?
>
> 1686> LOL! Poor guy.
>
> 1687> LOL!
>
> 1687> Google found me that, as well as references to a type of generator and
> 1687> an observatory.
>
> 1687> Thanks Matt.
>
> What does any of that have to do with classical music, nightingale?
>
> ===========================================================================
>
> Matthew H. Fields writes:
>
> 876> Or perhaps it is taking the Fields/Watkins route around
> 876> the Internet.
>
> 877> Ya never know when some guy is gonna wanna date Julie Ann.
>
> 878> If it escapes the net, will it pop up suddenly as a meme or urban myth?
>
> 879> If not space, then maybe time.
>
> 880> Thought it was spam, it was neither Tholen nor porn. It was malicious
> 880> software attempting to spread itself.
>
> 881> Look up Onan (not The Barbarian) in the index. You may find references
> 881> to spilled seed, which was a big nono back in the day of fertility rites.
>
> 882> Reminder to folks running Windows: .scr files are executables.
>
> What does any of that have to do with classical music, Fields?
>
> I see that you still haven't answered the questions about your
> credentials.

I see that youz are still avoiding answering the questions put to youz?
Why is that, Tholotroll? Are yer credentials suspect? I thought so.

>
> ===========================================================================
>
> Brendan R. Wehrung writes:
>
> 459> Some modification to the above is needed. Dave has appointed himself as
> 459> Final Arbiter of what is or is not applicable to him, and he generally
> 459> (with very rare exceptions) does not stray from his initial choices. He
> 459> fials to involve himself in most topics, but as pointed out is such a
> 459> magnet for commentry that "his" topics tend to swamp others.
>
> 459> For instance, a topic like "Sousa's Most 'Classical' march" would draw his
> 459> attention but not become a topic of a digest unless we speculated on which
> 459> one Dave might choose--of which he'd then deny that choise (never telling
> 459> us which he would select).
>
> 460> Do we want to (ever) see them, really?
>
> 461> Trollishness has its uses. Take Dr. David Tholen, who has now firmly
> 461> fixed in the minds of about 200 people a minor band music composer
> 461> (Barnes)
>
> On what basis do you call him a minor band music composer, Wehrung?

Prove that he's not, troll.

>
> 461> and a minor, early work by a major composer (Transit of Venus
> 461> march).
>
> On what basis do you call it a minor work, Wehrung?
>
> 461> Who wuu'da thunk it?
>
> 462> No, he's been leaving us relatively alone, unlike thyself.
>
> Unlike yourself, Wehrung. How ironic.
>
> 463> Shorts is software?
>
> What does your ongoing antagonism have to do with classical music,
> Wehrung?
>
> ===========================================================================
>
> Sigmond Freud writes:
>
> 49> That stupid troll Tholen is at it again!
>
> What do your erroneous presupposition and your ongoing
> antagonism have to do with classical music, Freud?
>
> ===========================================================================
>
> grantco writes:
>
> 1666> Soooo predictable...
>
> What does your predictability have to do with classical music, grantco?
>
> 1667> How typical that you record my response yet forget to respond to it.
> 1667> Perhaps you are out of practice, Tholen?
>
> What does your ongoing antagonism have to do with classical music,
> grantco?
>
> ===========================================================================
>
> Risto Karttunen writes:
>
> 109> CB? Salieri? James Barnes?
>
> Non sequitur.
>
> ===========================================================================
>
> Donald C. Patterson writes:
>
> 149> :-)
>
> 150> It doesn't matter whether it was on topic or off topic. He has appointed
> 150> himself the all-seeing, all-knowing moderator of this NG and he has no right
> 150> to do so.
>
> What does your unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have to do with
> classical music, Patterson?
>
> 150> He sees antagonism where there is none.
>
> What does your unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have to do with
> classical music, Patterson?
>
> 150> He's a kook,
>
> What does your ongoing antagonism have to do with classical music,
> Patterson?
>
> 150> and he's a magnet for the kind of posts he's getting.
>
> What does your rationalization for your antagonistic behavior have to
> do with classical music, Patterson?
>
> 150> In short, through his
> 150> confrontational (confrontational even to those who are cordial to him)
> 150> attitude, he's asking for it.
>
> What does your unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have to do with
> classical music, Patterson?
>
> 151> BTW, due to your scolding, I let him have his last word. Hope he enjoyed it
> 151> as he seems to need that.
>
> What does your hallucination have to do with classical music, Patterson?
>
> 151> Perhaps you should scold him as well.
>
> Perhaps she should scold you for your antagonistic postings, Patterson.
>
> 152> They are "star dates".
>
> 153> Thank goodness. I like him better off the net.
>
> What does your preference have to do with classical music, Patterson?
>
> 153> (Oops...there's one more for the digress, uh, I mean digest)
>
> 154> You misspelled his name. It's "Trollen".
>
> 154> :-)
>
> "Came back a few weeks ago to have a little fun."
> --Donald C. Patterson
>
> What does your puerile emotional need to have a little fun have to do
> with classical music, Patterson?

What does yer digest have to do with classical music, Tholokook?

>
> ===========================================================================
>
> Nicolai P. Zwar writes:
>
> 413> Dr. David J. Tholen wrote:
>
> Where did the referenced item say anything about "Dr. David J. Tholen",
> Zwar?
>
> 413> Deja vu. We have already discussed this Dave. Last year. Remember?
>
> Impossible, given that the posting of yours to which I referred
> happened only recently, Zwar.
>
> 413> Classic invective, as expected from somebody who's envisioning
> 413> antagonists where there are none and who's unable to concede his own
> 413> shortcomings.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> 413> This appears also in your very own posting, Dave. That doesn't imply you
> 413> are the author.
>
> Non sequitur.
>
> 413> None of this was written by me, take it up with whoever originated it.
>
> Irrelevant, given that I never said it was written by you, Zwar.
>
> 413> Such as?
>
> The fact that the antagonism hasn't stopped, Zwar.
>
> 413> If you still don't know, there's no use explaining it to you again.
>
> Classic evasion.
>
> 413> About as much as your digest, Dave.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> ===========================================================================
>
> Michael Lockhart writes:
>
> 73> As you did not phrase it that way, one must wonder what would prompt your
> 73> moronic statement of the obvious.
>
> You're erroneously presupposing that I made a "moronic statement",
> Lockhart. What does your classic antagonism have to do with
> classical music, Lockhart?
>
> 73> Many of the posts did come within a few days of your last digest. Mine, for
> 73> example.
>
> Meanwhile, many did not, Lockhart. Indeed, there were entirely new,
> antagonistic threads started during that time. But what does that
> have to do with classical music, Lockhart?
>
> 73> It shows they are ten times less frequent. "Standing up to antagonists"
> 73> actually makes the "antagonism" ten times as bad.
>
> You're certainly posting more, Lockhart, even though you claimed that I
> deserved no more replies. Why is that? Addicted to antagonism, Lockhart?
>
> 73> Your data; not mine. If
> 73> you were actually interested in having the smallest possible amount of
> 73> "antagonism" in the newsgroup, the obvious choice is 4 per day, not 35 per
> 73> day.
>
> What I am interested in is irrelevant, Lockhart; the fact remains that
> the antagonism did not stop, contrary to the prediction that some have
> made here.

Youz are interested in the irrlevant, Tholoputz? No wonder yer such a kook.
And what does yer interest in the irrelevant have to do with classical
music, Tholotroll?

>
> 73> Also, getting 4 per day takes no effort whatsoever on your part, while
> 73> 35 comes at the cost of compiling your digests.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. But what does that have
> to do with classical music, Lockhart?
>
> 73> No sane person would work
> 73> every day compiling a list which would make a problem ten times worse. Will
> 73> you take the hint?
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. However, I could just as
> easily say that no sane person would keep replying to someone who he
> declared as not being deserving of more replies, Lockhart. Will you
> take the hint?
>
> 73> My three posts which you listed would not bump the average for the newsgroup
> 73> over a two month period.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. But what does that have
> to do with classical music, Lockhart?
>
> 73> How many posts did your post engender?
>
> Once again you're evading the central point, Lockhart, namely that
> without posting anything, the antagonists kept at it, even starting
> new, antagonistic threads.
>
> 73> Looking
> 73> below, we see there were 140 such posts in the five days since your digest.
> 73> That's 28 a day, of which my three posts constitute a mere 2%.
>
> No sane person would keep replying to someone who he declared as not being
> deserving of more replies, Lockhart. Will you take the hint?
>
> 73> As I said,
> 73> now that you're back, the rate is significantly higher, as anyone could have
> 73> guessed.
>
> Irrelevant, Lockhart; the fact remains that the antagonism did not stop,
> contrary to the prediction that some have made here.
>
> 73> "Almost" to cease.
>
> Ah, so you admit that they did *not* cease, contrary to the prediction
> that some have made here.
>
> 73> Your acceptance of my point is noted.
>
> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Lockhart? There
> was no acceptance of your point on my part. Meanwhile, you've noted
> that the antagonism did not stop, which agrees with the point I made.
>
> 73> Your absence makes the prevalence of
> 73> posts ten times better than your presence does.
>
> Ah, so you admit that they did *not* cease, contrary to the prediction
> that some have made here.
>
> 73> How do you allege they were a blight on the newsgroup?
>
> What do they have to do with classical music, Lockhart?
>
> 73> As I don't really care, I'll grant that one did have something to do with
> 73> you. That's one, not 45.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. But what does that have
> to do with classical music, Lockhart?
>
> 73> As Nikolai's signatire file was not a blight on the newsgroup,
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. But what does that have
> to do with classical music, Lockhart?
>
> 73> nightingale
> 73> becomes "worst offender" in your list. Or, if you prefer, "I'd say it's
> 73> hypocritical and disingenuous to write ':-(' and express surprise when you,
> 73> yourself, were the second-worst offender".
>
> What does that have to do with classical music, Lockhart?
>
> 73> You, yourself, proved the rate is almost ten times less--even when you
> 73> average in the posts which came immediately in response to your last post.
>
> Ah, so you admit that they did *not* cease, contrary to the prediction
> that some have made here.
>
> 73> The true rate, absent you, would be lower still, but ten times is a nice,
> 73> round number.
>
> Ah, so you admit that they did *not* cease, contrary to the prediction
> that some have made here.
>
> 73> Ironic that you'd say that, isn't it? In short, as you proved the rate of
> 73> "antagonistic" posts drops by a factor of ten in the absence of your
> 73> digests, will you now cease compiling them?
>
> Will you now cease with your off-topic and antagonistic replies,
> Lockhart?
>
> 74> He numbers them after some astronomical rule. Fitting, as he's written
> 74> astronomically many bad posts.
>
> What does that have to do with classical music, Lockhart?
>
> 74> Pretty much everybody has some reason how they got sucked into the Tholen
> 74> vortex.
>
> You're erroneously presupposing the existence of some "Tholen vortex",
> Lockhart.
>
> 74> I was complaining for ages about his spamming the newsgroup with
> 74> innumerable posts to say things like "Note: no response" hundreds of times.
>
> You're erroneously presupposing the existence of some "spam" from me,
> Lockhart.
>
> 74> When he made his inaugural digest (I don't remember whether it was
> 74> "antagonist's digest" back then), I immediately stopped.
>
> You have a peculiar notion of stopping, Lockhart.
>
> 74> I considered that
> 74> such an improvement that I'd stop complaining. That lasted for several
> 74> months, but the posts just kept coming.
>
> The antagonists just kept posting, Lockhart.
>
> 74> Instead of having many exchanges
> 74> between him and dizzy, like there were in the old days, it was as though
> 74> he'd declared war on the whole newsgroup.
>
> What does your hallucination have to do with classical music, Lockhart?
>
> 74> Nicolai Zwai, for example, was
> 74> thrown into the digest.
>
> What does that have to do with classical music, Lockhart?
>
> 74> When he complained that he had said nothing that
> 74> could be considered antagonistic, Tholen said he was disagreeing with him,
> 74> so therefore he was being antagonistic.
>
> What does your unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have to do with
> classical music, Lockhart?
>
> 74> Voila! Insta-antagonist. Of
> 74> course that condenses probably hundreds of posts between those two.
>
> What does that have to do with classical music, Lockhart?
>
> 74> Has there ever been anyone like David Tholen on the net?
>
> Has there been anyone like Michael Lockhart on the net?
>
> "You deserve no more replies."
> --Michael Lockhart
>
> What does your demonstration of your ongoing obsession have to do with
> classical music, Lockhart?
>
> ===========================================================================
>
> Jerry Kohl writes:
>
> 2247> Hey, guys, guess what? I see from your various posts that Tholen has
> 2247> barfed up at least one more hairball since last Thursday (since you
> 2247> people are quoting digest posts after 2453166), but not a one of them
> 2247> has shown up on my server yet. I think their spam filter has finally gotten
> 2247> him! (Bliss!) Anyway, since I am unable for the moment to read any
> 2247> of his drivel, let us just take it as read that I have made 50 replies to
> 2247> each of his digests, and let it go at that. It should save us all a lot of
> 2247> time, and keep him busy into the bargain.
>
> 2247> "Légpárnás hajóm tele van angolnákkal."
>
> 2248> LOL! We can all look forward eagerly to that day!
>
> 2248> "Légpárnás hajóm tele van angolnákkal."
>
> 2249> With a little luck it may achieve escape velocity!
>
> 2249> "Légpárnás hajóm tele van angolnákkal."
>
> 2250> Typical that he should number them 2453166 and 2453171, the little
> 2250> cheat! But only the first has shown up here so far, despite the many
> 2250> rejoinders to the second.
>
> What does any of that have to do with classical music, Kohl?
>
> 2250> D'you know what? I really don't care. I never belonged on his
> 2250> bleeding list in the first place--I got hijacked when he saw a post
> 2250> I had made querying the attribution of Haydn's Trumpet Concerto,
> 2250> and he either claimed it was antagonistic to him (he was not the
> 2250> person who had claimed Haydn wrote the thing), or declared it was
> 2250> off-topic for a classical-music newsgroup--I can't remember which,
> 2250> and I refuse to look it up.
>
> 2250> "Légpárnás hajóm tele van angolnákkal."
>
> What does your unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have to do with
> classical music, Kohl?
>
> ===========================================================================
>
> Coby Beck writes:
>
> 241> I did not know this. I shudder when I think how close I came to not ever
> 241> seeing this post...how long would I have remain ignorant!?
>
> 241> This is graduate level Tholenology gold!
>
> 241> Much obliged!
>
> What does that have to do with classical music, Beck?
>
> ===========================================================================
>
> bisectional2004@yahoo.ca writes:
>
> 1> You're just praying that he is still single, because you want him for yourself.
>
> 1> Tholen & Freddie sitting in a tree ...
>
> 2> Please do not reply to the replies to the replies to the spam.
>
> 2> Funny thing - the thread appears to start with Freddy's message.
> 2> Perhaps there wasn't really any spam at all, and it was just his way
> 2> of telling the world how much he misses his playmate.
>
> What does any of that have to do with classical music, bisectional?
>
> ===========================================================================
>
> Prai Jei writes:
>
> 12> Because Freddy replied on another group to a message with ten million ng's
> 12> in the followup field. There certainly was spam - the number at the end of
> 12> the subject line is sufficient to identify the original message as such.
> 12> See my plea elsewhere.
>
> What does any of that have to do with classical music, Jei?
>
> ===========================================================================
>
> Robert Marshall writes:
>
> 1> Intolleranza BC?
>
> What does that have to do with classical music, Marshall?
>
> ===========================================================================
>
> Balaam's Miracle writes:
>
> 1> Please do not reply to spam.
>
> What does your reply to Frederick Shorts' spam have to do with classical
> music, Balaam?
>
> ===========================================================================
>
> Aaron Lawrence writesL
>
> 1> *plonk*
>
> What does your plonking of Frederick Shorts have to do with classical
> music, Lawrence?
>
> ===========================================================================
>
> alias # today total last year
> -------------- ------- ----- ---------
> nightingale 12 74 1613
> zwar 1 66 348
> kohl 4 58 2192
> cypherpunk 9 38 578
> fields 7 37 678
> patterson 6 19 135
> wehrung 5 18 262
> haslam 16 675
> daniels 15 165
> penso 1 8 172
> dizzy 1 7 522
> charlie 6 0
> lockhart 2 6 60
> bloggs 2 5 200
> freud 1 5 44
> hucker 4 2
> karttunen 1 4 97
> grantco 2 3 229
> jazz guy 3 3
> adam 2 13
> beck 1 2 239
> bisectional 2 2 0
> harrington 2 64
> wiser 2 3
> andrews 1 1
> antagonismo 1 90
> balaam 1 1 0
> catroo 1 108
> cohen 1 0
> creevey 1 69
> girouard 1 2
> granzeau 1 0
> homie 1 1
> jaakko 1 99
> kolle 1 264
> lawrence 1 1 1
> marshall 1 1 0
> monkey 1 1
> ploni 1 4
> porky 1 16
> prai jei 1 1 11
> rice 1 0
> voege 1 0
> -------------- ------- ----- ---------
> 43 61 421 10033

What does this list have to do with classical music, Davie Kook? 

--
Freddie D. '***' Shorts
I'm loud and I'm proud. I'm gay and I like it that way!
Another proud buttplug owner. Honk if yer horny!
I support Gay Pride! The Ramrod rocks! Kerry sux!
Wanna hire me for web site development? I'm way under-employed!
Contact me by email (mailto:cypherpunk@nyc.rr.com) or mail me at
FS Newssite Inc.
101 West 23rd St. Suite 2237, New York, NY, 10011
On second thoughts, don't bother. Just sign me up for subscriptions.
I like to steal copyrighted material.
Check out my current web sites -
http://www.orwellian.org
http://www.miscstuff.org
http://home.nyc.rr.com/cypherpunk/
I'm really proud of this -
http://Frederick.Shorts.swellserver.com/news/top_stories/worldrecord.php
http://www.plugger.info
http://www.pluggers.com/daily/