1  ...  19  20  21  22  23  24  ...  42  |   Order by default

Feb 7, 2001, 5:29am

You seem to have a difficult time in reading, Goober. Before you tell ME =
to shut up, perhaps you should take your own "advice".

[View Quote] > Ok, Eep. I think you've had enough. I'm going to type this nice and
> slowly so you can grasp it: "Shut... the... hell... up..."
>
> The man is making an EFFORT, here. He doesn't HAVE to post in these
> newsgroups. Hell, he doesn't even have to READ these newsgroups. Yet he=

> does, and he responds to post that are actually constructive and/or
> informative. Yours, on the other hand, are nothing more than pissing an=
d
> moaning about how you perceive that AWCI has "fucked up". Blaming Facte=
r
> for the acts of Rick and JP are absolutely unfounded. Facter does not
> own AWCI. Facter does not control AWCI. He is not responsible for the
> acts of his superiors, so lay off!

I don't recall ever blaming Facter for AWCI's problems (or the actions of=
Rick and JP, in particular). I DO think that Facter is taking on the "it=
's-not-my-fault" mentality of Rick and JP, however. He also skirts around=
issues like them.

> As for the whole newsgroup issue, if the only way to fix the newsgroup
> problems was to take them offline temporarily, then Facter did
> everything he could to explain the situation. Does it really make sense=

> to post a message on a newsgroup if he's just going to be taking down
> that same newsgroup? Besides, if *you* couldn't post anything, what
> makes you think Facter would have had any better luck? If the problem's=

> with posting, then *no one* can post, not even Facter. Whatever happene=
d
> to that whole "thinking" thing you're so fond of, anyway? :P

Dunno, are YOU thinking, Goober? Doesn't look like it considering the new=
sgroups never went DOWN to the point of not being able to READ them; just=
POSTING to them (and perhaps just "Community" since that's the only one =
I tried at the time) was down. Since Facter seemingly disabled the abilit=
y to POST to the newsgroups, he could have simply posted he was going to =
do this instead of simply disabling posting and putting up a VERY vague s=
ystem status message on AW's website. The POINT I'm trying to make is com=
munication. Facter, like AWCI, fails to communicate things to its users. =
Yes, it's gotten MARGINALLY better in recent months, but only through CON=
TINUED persistance by disgruntled users/customers. What does this say abo=
ut AWCI? To me it shows they STILL don't know how to communicate with its=
users/customers and are STILL incompetent in MANY areas (AW development/=
direction, marketing, PR, etc, etc).

> I understand COF has left a bad taste in your mouth. Quite frankly, if
> Rick or JP ever had the cohones to post in here, I'd probably have a fe=
w
> choice words for them as well. However, that shouldn't prevent you from=

> at least acting respectful towards those who aren't even involved in th=
e
> process.

Um, but Facter IS involved in the process--ALL AWCI employees are and I W=
ILL spout off to them WHENEVER I god damn feel like it. Respect is earned=
, and so far I don't feel AWCI has earned MY respect enough for me to giv=
e THEM respect.

> Would you start bitching at Young Shamus if he suddenly found
> the urge to post in here? If so, I find that sad.

Only if he played the same game Rick, JP, and now Facter do...but Shamus =
doesn't seem like that...Roland doesn't either...to an extent, but their =
INACTION makes them just as guilty as Rick and JP's actions. Shamus, Rola=
nd, HamFon, Flagg, etc, etc, HAVE the power to speak up against Rick and =
JP, but they don't seem to.

> I used to think you amusing. Sometimes you simply irritated me. But now=

> I just pity you. Please, for the sake of everyone here, and for your ow=
n
> integrity, (if you even have any left) grow up. But, if you feel the
> need to continue acting like a buffoon, then you can have the distinct
> pleasure of sucking MY filter... *flick*

<shrug> I won't give up what I believe in...and I believe Rick and JP do =
NOT deserve to be in charge of AW. They have CONTINUALLY proven over and =
over and, yes, over again that they do NOT know how to deal with their cu=
stomers and the public/media relations, etc. They have played sneaky corp=
orate games that have been outlined on my AW history page (http://tnlc.co=
m/eep/aw/history.html) ever since they went public. They will NEVER live =
this down while I am still around until the admit their mistakes and chan=
ge their ways--PERIOD. This is my mission in AW, as it stands currently, =
and until things change I will NEVER let up. Think of me what you will bu=
t if you do the research I believe you will understand and perhaps even a=
gree with me. The thing is most people don't really even CARE enough abou=
t AW to see things from my perspective or even understand them if they do=
=2E But that's fine...different people have different passions. Mine just=
happens to be AW and a few other select things--they keep me distracted;=
distractions are key to a healthy life, you know.

Feb 7, 2001, 5:31am

[View Quote] > I say...I say....well I'd say we coudl call this one big ole flame fury of
> fun!
>
> Some people *cough* need to take a chill pill and go to sleep. Goodnight,
> hope you in a better mood int he morning Eep.

Uh, I didn't start THIS thread. Try responding to the correct person next time, newbie.

> P.S. I'm sure you've heard htis enough, but don't get on Facter's case. He's
> probably the only known Cof member to respond to the citizens and act as if
> it was important.

Yea, THIS month. Soon he'll start ignoring us (the AW "community") just like all the other inept AWCIers (with a few exceptions, but they'll come around eventually I'm sure).

[View Quote]

Feb 7, 2001, 9:19pm

[View Quote] [View Quote]
t he

g and
acter
ot
he
s of Rick and JP, in particular). I DO think that Facter is taking on the=
"it's-not-my-fault" mentality of Rick and JP, however. He also skirts ar=
ound issues like them.
>
> The difference between Facter and Rick & JP is that it truly *isn't* hi=
s
> fault. His only responsibilities are AW tech support and web
> development. He cannot control what happens at other companies, (i.e.
> MPL.net) but he *can* work with those companies to help resolve the
> problem as quickly as possible, and that's what he's doing.

Well now you're confusing 2 different problems: newsgroups and AW's downt=
ime. Get the facts straight before you continue to reply to my posts and =
look even MORE foolish, Goober. Facter claimed he took down the newsgroup=
s because of some "problem" he STILL hasn't explained. Hence, him taking =
down the newsgroups WAS his fault, just as most other things that happen =
to AW and its users are Rick and/or JP's fault.

oup
ense
wn

em's
pened
newsgroups never went DOWN to the point of not being able to READ them; =
just POSTING to them (and perhaps just "Community" since that's the only =
one I tried at the time) was down. Since Facter seemingly disabled the ab=
ility to POST to the newsgroups, he could have simply posted he was going=
to do this instead of simply disabling posting and putting up a VERY vag=
ue system status message on AW's website. The POINT I'm trying to make is=
communication. Facter, like AWCI, fails to communicate things to its use=
rs. Yes, it's gotten MARGINALLY better in recent months, but only through=
CONTINUED persistance by disgruntled users/customers. What does this say=
about AWCI? To me it shows they STILL don't know how to communicate with=
its users/customers and are STILL incompetent in MANY areas (AW developm=
ent/direction, marketing, PR, etc, etc).
>
> Well, I must have missed this "incident", because I don't recall the
> community NG ever being in such a state where you could read posts, but=

> not post in them. (As Facter said, it was only for a couple hours)
> Usually, when someone tells me that the newsgroups "went down", that
> means "went offline completely". Perhaps a little more clarity next
> time?

Perhaps you need to read more carefully because as *I* experienced it I C=
OULD read the newsgroups but could NOT post to them (at least this one si=
nce that's the only one I tried). Then I emailed Facter and he replied wi=
th a link to AW's system status page (which didn't explain ANYTHING excep=
t give yet another bullshit statement). Perhaps the newsgroups THEN becam=
e unreadable for a couple hours, as you claim, but I never experienced th=
at. Hence, my original point stands.

> As for communication issues, I'd like to think it's gotten SIGNIFICANTL=
Y
> better. And I don't think it's solely because of "disgruntled users",
> (of which, I think, there are but a few truly "disgruntled" users) it's=

> because of the "fresh blood" that COF has acquired in the likes of
> Facter and others. New employees bring new ideas, which help to make th=
e
> company better as a whole.

I haven't noticed much of a difference. Idiots are still in charge and ma=
king stupid decisions.

if
a few
from
n the
I WILL spout off to them WHENEVER I god damn feel like it. Respect is ea=
rned, and so far I don't feel AWCI has earned MY respect enough for me to=
give THEM respect.
>
> Tell me, when you were doing QA, did you ever come up to your boss and
> say "I don't think our company should be using the services of this
> company." or "Don't invest in this company because they're idiots."? I
> doubt it. Your job was simply to make sure that your company's products=

> were of the highest quality they could be. You were in no position to
> question the actions of your superiors. Such as it is with Facter.

> And there's a difference between "acting respectful towards" and
> "respecting" the company. You can act respectful and still disagree wit=
h
> someone else, even if you hate their guts. (Such as I am now doing here=

> *grin*) It's called "common courtesy" or "politeness". Try it sometime;=

> you might be surprised how much more receptive AWCI (especially the new=

> people) would be towards your ideas and arguments.

Actually, yes, my first QA contract job at Logitech involved me testing M=
ovieMan, a video capture card. I KNEW it would NOT succeed in stores beca=
use of its bugs, odd design (the circuit board was physically taller than=
most, if not all, boards I'd EVER seen on systems at the time--early 199=
0s). I was perhaps the 3rd or 4th tester brought on the project but I was=
the LAST one there after 6 months. And, guess what? MovieMan flopped, ju=
st like I said it would. I only EVER saw ONE (1) returned (and reshrinkwr=
apped) box at a local computer store. So, yes, if you believe in somethin=
g you SHOULD state your opinion, regardless of the outcome. I wasn't hars=
h when I told my manager I didn't think MovieMan would make it because sh=
e nor Logitech had done anything to spite me. However, AWCI has and you c=
an read about the NUMEROUS accounts on my AW history page if you need pro=
of. I seriously doubt you've followed MY AW history closely enough to und=
erstand or even accept my opinions about AWCI and how AW is run. Do the r=
esearch before you reply because I tire of dealing with you, Goober. Pers=
ist and you'll simply be filtered.

mus doesn't seem like that...Roland doesn't either...to an extent, but th=
eir INACTION makes them just as guilty as Rick and JP's actions. Shamus, =
Roland, HamFon, Flagg, etc, etc, HAVE the power to speak up against Rick =
and JP, but they don't seem to.
>
> How do you know they aren't taking action? Perhaps every time there's a=

> meeting, the employees bring up all sorts of ideas, but Rick and/or JP
> shoot them down. It could be all Rick & JP's doing that AW's going
> nowhere and the rest of AWCI just gives up and follows along because
> they need the paycheck. And again, most aren't in a position to be able=

> to "stand up" to what Rick & JP tell them. What does a tech support
> person know about marketing? What does a marketing person know about
> accounting? etc, etc.

Just because someone works in one department doesn't mean they don't know=
anything about another department. Regardless, you've explained exactly =
what is happening with AW: Rick and JP shoot down ideas and proceed with =
their own narrow-minded "vision" of what AW should be. It's quite patheti=
c.

now
r own
e
nct
do NOT deserve to be in charge of AW. They have CONTINUALLY proven over =
and over and, yes, over again that they do NOT know how to deal with thei=
r customers and the public/media relations, etc. They have played sneaky =
corporate games that have been outlined on my AW history page (http://tnl=
c.com/eep/aw/history.html) ever since they went public. They will NEVER l=
ive this down while I am still around until the admit their mistakes and =
change their ways--PERIOD. This is my mission in AW, as it stands current=
ly, and until things change I will NEVER let up. Think of me what you wil=
l but if you do the research I believe you will understand and perhaps ev=
en agree with me. The thing is most people don't really even CARE enough =
about AW to see things from my perspective or even understand them if the=
y do. But that's fine...different people have different passions. Mine ju=
st happens to be AW and a few other select
fe, you know.
>
> Trust me, I know exactly where you're coming from. I wasn't suggesting
> you give up your cause. Hell, I support it 100%. It's the delivery that=

> needs work. I have yet to see a single post from you that involves both=

> politeness and AWCI. You've thrown around this bitter attitude for
> years, and where has it gotten you? Hardly anywhere, as far as AW
> development goes. Perhaps if you tried forming constructive ideas and
> cohesive arguments in a respectful way, (not to be confused with
> respectING) then you might actually get somewhere.

Obviously you DON'T know where I'm coming from or you would KNOW that I'v=
e already TRIED the "polite" approach and it got me NOWHERE. AWCI doesn't=
give a shit. But they seem to take notice MORE when I'm to-the-point wit=
h no bullshit beating around the bush. Why do you think JP emailed me tha=
t fake lawsuit after I posted the TRUTH about AW on various stock trading=
forums? AWCI simply can't handle the truth, which is why they've pulled =
NUMEROUS scams in the past regarding their company, press releases, etc. =
Open your eyes, Goober; get a fucking clue. I'd say my delivery is pretty=
god damn effective in getting people to listen. Just look at how much ef=
fort YOU are giving in response. Look into the mirror, sport.

Feb 8, 2001, 4:14am

Facter never said posting wasn't possible--in fact, he has yet to explain what exactly happened with the news server to CAUSE him to disable posting... Regardless, the logic is sound. Keep trying...and improve Preston instead of wasting your precious brain cells on logic you can't quite grasp, eh?

[View Quote] > "eep" <eep at tnlc.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:3A80A0DE.E211ABB3 at tnlc.com...
> to READ the newsgroups; the problem was in POSTING to them. Had there been
> a message from you or some other clueless AWCIer about the newsgroup
> POSTING problem, I would not have had to email AWCI "support".
>
> What irony.. .besides the bad manners and lack of knowledge.... even logic
> seems to be absent. I could not resist to point this out. If posting to a
> news server is not possible you cannot post a message to it that posting is
> not possible. You have to fix the server first, and have to use another
> channel of communication such as the web. Its simple logic. Must be
> difficult to see while trying to shoot down your enemies.
>
> But nevertheless, you seem to have a fan out there in the universe. After
> all, imitation is the highest form of admiration and appreciation, right,
> I.A. ?

Feb 8, 2001, 4:15am

Too bad it missed...

[View Quote] > OUCH!!...LOL.. nice shot faber...
>
[View Quote]

Feb 8, 2001, 4:21am

You claim you want to "help" yet you STILL have not answered as to WHY the newsgroups were taken down. If you don't want to be labeled as an AWCI clone who gives people the runaround (i.e. bullshit), stop acting like it, Faber--it's that simple; it takes two to tango.

And if you want respect, give ME respect; talking to and about someone in the 3rd person is rude, too. Don't be such a hypocrit and perhaps you'll actually GET the respect you so desperately seem to need. Look into the mirror, "mate"...

[View Quote] > I hate censorship as much as anyone - I dont moderate these groups and I
> have no wish to. Yes, he does give some good points, but unfortunatly he is
> rude, impolite arrogant and unthoughtful in his manner here - there is
> absolutly no need for it at all. I have absolutly NO wish *whatsoever* to
> remove or filter him from the group, and the whole thing is in his hands
> *entirely*, please make no mistake there. I, unlike many, understand his
> value to this community and his insights into many of the problems here -
> and have agreed with him more times than not.
>
> BUT - I wont put up with personal attacks, they are un-necessary and very
> rude. And, if someone cant be polite and refraim from saying things like
> "you fu&*ed it up, you inept bs artist", then that is derogatory, and
> impolite - its about time there was so kind of civility around here, I dont
> think thats too much to ask from *anyone*.
>
> Eep, i'm sure your most capable of being polite in your attitude, instead of
> insulting, and as I said, if you treat others with the same respect you
> yourself demand, and there will be no problem whatsoever.
>
> He can start being polite in his manner towards others, or there can be a
> choice. I will stop posting in here, and he can continue - I just will not
> put up with rude individuals in my personal time no matter what their
> opinion is, and no matter how jaded they are - I have better things to do. I
> think Eep needs to realise that I do not set policy around here, and that
> the reason I post in here is to *help* you guys in the first place - geez,
> why is that so hard for him to grasp ? Is it such a strange notion that
> someone here actually wants to merely help out the community? Maybe to some,
> but I have been here long enough to know that a presence in here is needed
> sometimes. My skin is thick, but I am here on my own violition to help out,
> not be abused.
>
> I do *not* set policy people - I post in here to *inform* and *help* -
> nothing more.
>
> Disagree with me sure, debate with me - i'd love that, but dont swear at me
> or accuse me of just spouting bullshit in such a rude manner - I speak the
> facts as I know them, why I would fabricate things about circumstances here
> is *totally* beyond me.
>
> So what do you say Eep ? Not too hard to be polite is it ? Wouldnt you
> prefer someone from AWCI posting in here to them *not* posting in here -
> like it has been for the past year?
>
> Up to you mate =)
>
> oh - one more note, I would really prefer it if you did not swear at me or
> accuse me of spouting bullshit Eep, thanks.

Feb 8, 2001, 4:30am

[View Quote] >
> Exactly, I dont ask anyone to respect the company, but I do ask to be
> respected for my efforts here - you dont have to like me, but at least give
> me that.

Had you not given me such a vague "reason" (if you can even call it that considering there was NO explanation whatsoever) about why you took down the newsgroups I might've had more respect for you. But, no, you decided to play the AWCI card and brush me off and, well, you know the rest. I'm still waiting for that explanation, too...just think, you MIGHT be able to salvage some of that desperately-needed respect you want by simply telling me what I asked...it's THAT simple, Facter.

> doesn't seem like that...Roland
>
> What game ?? Posting here and helping people is a game ??
>
> *confused*

The runaround game, Facter--surely Rick and JP have given it to you already; they have everyone else... Don't know what the runaround is? Ask someone else.

> NOT deserve to be in charge of AW. They have CONTINUALLY proven over and
> over and, yes, over again that they do NOT know how to deal with their
> customers and the public/media relations, etc.
>
> Am I dealing wrong with the customers by doing something nobody has done for
> well over a year? By acknowledging that support in these newsgroups is
> needed, and of my own initiative posting in them ? Is this wrong mate ? Is
> helping out wrong ? If so, I do apologise. And who are you to say who should
> be in charge? You have *no* idea what goes on in this office - it is pure
> speculation, nor do you know the people themselves. Things are alot
> different here than you make them out to be, as I found out when I came to
> work here - and you know my stance on certain things before I came to work
> here, I do not pretend that I was not anti-COF int he past (actually, I sat
> ont he fence more than anything else) - and you *know* that I am a smart,
> rational person so my change of opinion must be based on something, correct
> ?

Yea, bias. You work for the company so why would you put them down?

> I could be working anywhere else in the world I want - but I choose to work
> here. I gave up a loving relationship, my family *and* my country to do so -
> why?

Because you have no life?

> Because I love helping people, and because I love AW. And that is all that
> motivates me to post in here, not for anything "sneaky". I hope that by
> being a little personal here, and making you understand how hard things
> have been for me in moving my entire life to give a little back to the
> community, that you will see that I am an honest, genuine person with no
> external motivation for being here.

Oh, you need external gratification then, eh? Makes sense...and falls in-line with your need for respect you keep spouting off about. Might want to think about why you need to help people so much in order to feel worthwhile...a trip to a shrink might help.

> history page >>(http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/history.html) ever since they went
> public. >They will NEVER live this down while I am still around until the
> AW, as it stands currently, and until things change I will >NEVER let up.
>
> Nothing to do with me, was before I worked here, even if there was anything
> "sneaky" going on - so, where are your attacks on me relevant here ? I'm not
> asking you to let up, I *am* asking for some personal *respect* for my
> efforts here.
>
> My mission is to help.

See above.

>
> And neither am I suggesting. Do you *really* want to know one of the real
> reasons I started posting in here Eep?
>
> Because you, along with others like you, had alot of good points.

Super; now pass those points onto the idiots in charge and perhaps AW will actually develop into something worthwhile.

> You dont realise that you have won a part of your battle, do you?

I didn't realize I was IN a battle.

Feb 8, 2001, 4:34am

:o <hide>

[View Quote] > You've gots to be kidding me. I am eep's official fan. I wanna get on that
> FANatic show or what ever on MTV and drive to eep's house in a limo.
>
[View Quote]

Feb 8, 2001, 10:37am

<yawn> Now you're being hypocritical considering you wrote in a reply to someone else in this thread that you had NO power in these newsgroups. You're funny, Facter. Better lay off them drugs, man... You say you don't want censorship yet you're willing to censor me right out of the newsgroups. More hypocracy; keep it up, superchamp wonder twinkie-zippy.

Now, there, there, don't cry over my little pet names for you; you're nothing special.

[View Quote] > Eep - I have no more to say to you, I shant be replying to any of your posts
> in here from this point onwards - if I decide that you are warranted to even
> remain in these groups for any longer amount of time - and, if I see that
> any of your post are in any way offensive to me, or anyone else in here,
> then action will be taken against you.
>
> I am *very*, very offended by your derogatory remarks. You have personally
> and publicly attacked myself with remarks that are rude, offensive,
> derogatory and spiteful, and if you were *any* kind of decent person, you
> would apologise immediately.
>
> I help people because I enjoy doing it - why do you tihnk people become
> police officers, or doctors, or nurses - because they have emotional
> problems? They do it because some people are happy, helpful individuals who
> have a lot of love and giving to provide - perhaps this whole idea is alien
> to you Eep
>
> You have *no* right to sit there and tell me to go and see a shrink - you
> stepped over a line Eep. No, you jumped over a line. I gave you plenty of
> opportunity to conduct yourself with respect and dignity - and this is what
> you do and how you respond ? After this, your opinion's and "ideas" means
> absolutley squat to me.
>
> How dare you insinuate that kind of thing against me or anyone else, in any
> way ?
>
> You just have no idea where not to cross the line do you?
>
> You are hereby notified that if you engage in any more derogatory,
> offensive, or slanderous remarks within these newsgroups, that you will be
> blocked and prevented from posting herein for the forseeable future.

Feb 8, 2001, 10:40am

Gee, sure took a good ass-whipping to get it out of you, Facter. Next time don't be such a putz, putz, and answer me when I initially ask you instead of giving me the runaround--you could have saved yourself a lot of self-induced aggravation. Don't cry beacuse of that either--I just don't know if I can take the guilt of knowing your fragile ego was shattered because of me. Oh...the horror. <blink>

[View Quote] > To the group -
>
> The posting was disabled because I was working on the server, and did not
> want anything being posted until I could fix the problem I was working on.
> It was down for approximately four hours or so, and it was a minor
> disruption. The problem was fixed (which was a problem with our customised
> newsgroup software).
>
> There is no conspiracry, I just didnt see the need to explain things in such
> down to down detail when there was no reason to - nobody else was concerned
> about the issue except Eep, who emailed me right after I brought the groups
> down.
>
> And Eep, this is the first, and last, explaination for *anything* _you_
> will ever recieve from me in this newsgroup.
>
[View Quote]

Feb 8, 2001, 7:27pm

God damn you are so fucking full of yourself, Facter...and hypocritical! First you say you don't LIKE censorship in ANY way, then you censor me. Then you make an ultimatum of "either me or him". Is your self-esteem SO pathetically low that you honestly have to act THIS pathetic in order to make yourself feel bigger? Good god, Facter, take a look into the fucking mirror already.

[View Quote] > Everyone listen very clearly.
>
> I am *not* going to spend me personal time, in here, when I am under no
> obligation to do so, and watch myself, and other people in this newsgroup be
> personally attacked - As I have said, as long as he apologises to the group,
> and refraims from being so derogatory in the future, then there is a choice
> you can all make, and it can be very democratic.
>
> There are two different ways this can be done.
>
> He is to apologise -
>
> OR
>
> If he does not apologise, then the matter will be put to a vote of the users
> of the newsgroups - in a very democratic way. You guys can all take a vote,
> on whether he is to remain here, or not - if the vote says he is to stay,
> then I will no longer be posting to this newsgroup, and you guys get to keep
> him - but, you will also lose any correspondance from me here, and this
> group will go back to the way they were before I started posting in here -
> apathetic and mainly used for everyone to have a good old bitch about the
> company I work for, when they have little or no facts on which to base their
> bitching.
>
> So, there are several outcomes here, and this is how it is going to be -
> democratic, wise and I am telling you right now, I am being very nice in
> even giving these options, because the amount of people around here at the
> office, and also citizens who have just said "throw him out" has been vast.
>
> So it can be an apology and a respectful stance from Eep, or a vote. It cant
> get any fairer than that.
>
> An apology would be the easiest, most rational course I would think, but I
> want to be democratic about this also - I'm not going to decide this issue
> for everyone, as Lara nicely pointed out.
>
> Thankyou, btw.
>
[View Quote]

Feb 8, 2001, 7:40pm

[View Quote] > sorry but I disagree.
>
> Its so easy now to use the word censorship as a veiled threat, along with
> moderated etc etc, and sure many will scream civil liberties etc etc.. but
> in a newsgroup there are similarities to real life, even if people believe
> that because its on the net and theres no personal presence they are immune
> to real world realities.
>
> If someone walked up to a kid in the street (lets say a 12 year old exchange
> student) and said hey f**kwit, learn to speak english before you open your
> mouth a**h**e... then that person would likely be looking at a court
> appearance, or a smack in the mouth depending on who heard them. Well its
> happened to people in this newsgroup, its immature, bigoted, stupid and
> unneeded, and anyone operating at that level should be restrained for the
> benefit of the community.
>
> If someone says in the newsgroup.. suck filter f**kwit its the equivalent
> of verbally walking up and hitting someone. In real life.. possible court
> appearance or smack in the mouth back depending on who said to.
>
> Currently this newsgroup is censored and moderated, its moderated by eep,
> who if you dont agree with him, you get personal attacks ad infinitum until
> you leave.

How am I censoring? I'm not deleting posts or removing the ability for some people to post here, Moria. I'm simply speaking (typing) my opinion about how people act, like you are now. But you don't see me all going off in a big tif and whining about how I want apologies from all the people who have insulted me over the years, do you? Nope. Why? Because I can take it. Facter obviously can't; he obviously lives in a happy perfect little box where all the people around him throw flower petals at his feet and kiss up to him. Sorry, but the real world don't work that way.

Most people don't like off-line as they do on-line--this includes me, but it also includes all the idiotic kids who post about their lame "organizations"/groups/gangs/clicques/whatever else they're trying to do to find identity; newbies who obnoxiously quote entire threads and sigs when replying, or who repeatedly post in HTML (combined with the former can make for some big message sizes), or who attach files; etc, etc, etc.

> Why do you think most long term users dont post here anymore??

Because AW died LONG ago and most users moved on to bigger and better things.

> Why do you think AWCI personnel stopped posting in here??

Because they can't face the truth or questions about their actions, the company, and AW. Just look at how Facter is taking it...it's quite pathetic.

> Everyone puts up with the distorted reality of a person whos only object is
> verbal terrorism in a war they have decided to take to everyone else.. its
> little short of cyber terrorism.
>
> Like any terrorist with a real or imagined war to fight, the casualties are
> the innocent, and those who have no real interest.. they have two
> choices... accept the fact by implication and just cringe when it happens,
> and hope it doesn't happen to them, or make a stand, and until people make a
> stand it will continue.
>
> This is a community, and needs some form of control. Currently that control
> is provided by eep, and that is more wrong than factor asking politely for
> what any normal person has a right to expect.
>
> I agree that from time to time eep makes a good point, but then so do many
> serious repeat offenders convicted of real world crime and locked up:)

Oh oh, now I'm analgous to a "serious repeat offender convicted of real world crime and locked up". That's classic, Moria. I suppose I'll next be likened to, oh, perhaps Satan or Hitler? Zeig heil! <stomp> Give me a fucking break.

> The fact that someones opinion is valid, invalid or whatever is no cause for
> removal from a community, either in real life by conviction, or in a
> newsgroup by banning, but when someone does not have the ability to act in
> a manner acceptable to common decency, or is bigoted, racist or violent,
> physically or verbally, then censorship has no part in the decision, it is
> protection of the community.

What community?

> Before we shout censorship, lets look at the censorship that exists here
> already.

Yes, by Facter...

[View Quote]

Feb 8, 2001, 7:42pm

Exactly...this is yet another bad move by AWCI. Censorship is censorship--PERIOD. It's already been tried in these newsgroups before, Facter, and didn't work. Think about it...

[View Quote] > Facter, I think you're a bit too into this Survivor thing. But I'll go along
> with it as the decision to remove someone is NOT to be left up to one person
> in power in my opinion (on a long term basis). No recounts should be allowed
> either. Now for a quick word. If Eep goes, who's next? Could this be the
> beginning of the end for any peace in these groups? Stay tuned...
>
[View Quote]

Feb 8, 2001, 7:43pm

Ah, yes, Facter is LETTING me apologize. How KIND of him to be SO gracious. Gee, I suppose he'll NEXT let me kiss his ass, too? Golly gee, I sure can't wait! Facter is weak since he can't handle the truth.

[View Quote] > Wing, Facter is letting Eep apologize, if he does, he can stay. Facter is
> not just banning everyone without notice. He also said we could take a vote,
> which I'd rather not, I've made that bad choice way to many times.
> Apologizing is simple and if Eep is so strong, he should be able to do it.
> So lets just wait and see.

Feb 8, 2001, 10:13pm

[View Quote] [View Quote] Uh, I SERIOUSLY doubt that. Show me proof.

> Denegration (putting down or insulting) of any person due to their colour,
> home culture, home language or home beliefs because of that same colour,
> culture, language or beliefs is racism as defined in the courts. Gets a bit
> tricky if they were born in a country and now live in another, but it
> usually refers back to country of birth.

If someone is going to attempt to use a language they don't know very well to communicate with, the had better learn it better. The people I usually insult (and usually after they have insulted me) because of this is VERY few. You're just trying to find more reasons to ban me.

Feb 8, 2001, 10:41pm

[View Quote] [View Quote] Uh, since when is antisocial behavior illegal? Stop smoking crack, Holistic.

>
> "typica" ? what the hell is that eep. If you can't spell don't post newbe.

"newbe"

>
> Where does it say that you have the "right" to the newsgroups eep. Show us or shut up.

Uh, only AW citizens can post in AW newsgroups, zippy. Think about it.

>
> Don't give yourself so much credit eep... Most of the time you're not worth responding to.

Then don't respond--it's that simple.

>
> Incompetence is relative. Move on.

AWCI are relatively incompetent.

>
> Eep, gads you're slow... AWCI isn't any of those things..

Well, they are relatively. Regardless, YOU are slow if you can't see the irony in what you said. I am not a criminal, a bully, or whatever else Moria has likened me too...absolutely anyway. You getting it yet, zippy?

> They are the owners of a business..How they run that business is their concern not your... Unless, of course you own stock in AWLD... Do you? I thought not.. Next...

Why would I own stock in a company that can barely run itself? Seen AWLD stock price recently?

>
> Yeah, right. No eep, you come here to get your rocks off trying to belittle others. I have been looking at the last months posts from you and guess what. Not a one is aimed at answering a question in a decent manner. Not one is an inquiry as in asking a question. Except ofcourse for the flames shot at other people or AW. twit.
>
>
> You are correct here eep. Not everyone needs to listen to your rants either. But, that is the only gratification you get, so I guess we (the poor pathetic vast majority of "civilized" posters) will have to get along without you.. Now you get over it.

<shrug> You obviously haven't learned how to use your newsreader's filtering capabilities. However, I have. Buh-bye now.

Feb 8, 2001, 11:02pm

[View Quote] > Greets eep:)
>
> Ive cut out all the bits you didnt reply to, am trying to get these posts
> back to a manageable size:)

OH BOY OH BOY YIPPY SKIPPY!

Now increase your line length so your quoted text doesn't get all screwed up:

> whether I
> who is
> acts,
> not
> withdrawal of
> located and of which I am a citizen.
>
> Racism and biggotism is not a criminal offence in the USA? you do surprise
> me:) Is it a civil offence then??

Racism in extreme cases; biggotry I've never heard of being illegal. Anything can be a civil offense. Boo. Don't be offended.

> continue.
> goes
> giving me the typica AWCI brushoff... <shrug>
>
> Hey I am not saying you were right or Facter was right, what I am saying is
> that whatever you felt, you could have done it without degenerating to
> flames and name calling.. you could have discussed. If you took the
> blinkers off, and stopped assuming that everyone who is connected with AW or
> has been is out to get you, then that paranoid resort to flaming may take a
> little more to ignite:)

Facter (and you) assume I am that paranoid, but I'm not. <shrug> Perhaps you (AWCI) are doing things that WOULD make us (the users) paranoid?

> ago
> wont
> removed,
>
> correction noted, thank you:)
>
> citizen and citizens have the RIGHT to post in these newsgroups--PERIOD) IS
> banning me from posting. Duh.
>
> No citizens have the privilege (see I learned) to post here, the AW pages
> say that to post to these newsgroups you must be a citizen.. it doesnt say
> that every citizen has the right to post to them. For someone as keen on
> semantics as you, I would have thought you would have picked up on that
> one:)

Uh, and where does it say that citizens DON'T have a right to post here, Moria? Gee, I would've thought you'd've picked up on that one...guess not.

> post. If anything, it's about self-esteem. Many people I flame have it
> coming, which is why they eventually shut up and move on.
>
> This is where we primarily disagree:)) You believe (I think) that its up
> to peoples own self esteem as to whether they post or not, please correct me
> if I am wrong, whereas I say I agree with that in principle, but I don't
> believe anyone has the right to belittle that self esteem deliberately by
> using offensive language and deliberate belittling remarks:)

Believe what you want (I don't give 2 shits and a piss). If people don't post because they're "afraid" of my response, too fucking bad. Life's tough; get a fucking helmet. Perhaps evolution has other plans for such people...

> on-topic. A LOT of idiots I flame are because they post off-topic or act
> incompetent. Don't act like a twit and I won't flame you; act like a twit
> and I WILL flame you--it's that simple. Don't like it? Filter me. It's still
> that simple.
>
> Hey don't get me wrong, I agree that staying on topic, and acting
> incompetent is annoying, but why flame, why not ignore?

Because I CAN, Moria, and I have a high enough self-esteem to. Gee, why post off-topic in the first place? Why not stay on-topic? Wee...

> Theres flame and flame, and usually the person who flames first is flaming
> because they have no rational ability to discuss, which I know is not true
> in your case:)

Then what is your point in arguing against my flaming? <blink> Note, that's a rhetorical question.

> me, when I've read numerous discussions about how it was actually AWCI's
> ineptness in dealing with AW's users that caused people to leave. Might want
> to get your facts straight, Moria.
>
> Don't worry eep, all my facts are straight:)

A bent mind has no straight facts.

> It's just in my case they are not always remembered in a way to back up my own argument:))

uh huh

> Theres at least one other poster here from that period whos mentioned it
> too,

Facter doesn't count.

> and along with another reason which was moderation of the newsgroup,
> and we all know why it had to be moderated don't we:)) In fact, this is
> very similar to what happened then:))

Yea, it went to shit and hardly anyone posted.

> say,
> think
> That
> you've heard of before: AWCI is Big Brother. AWCI is a dictator.
>
> Yep good analogies, have no problem with those :))
>
> simply because of how *I* post, then their self-esteems are so low their
> posts probably wouldn't have much useful content anyway.
>
> Thats a huge generalisation and its your opinion.. nothing wrong with that,
> but in that case, if you dont want to hear them because they are beneath you
> in your opinion filter them, dont insult them. Posting a flame doesnt
> increase your self esteem (I hope) all it does is bully the person, hence
> my analogy.

It hopefully bullies the idiot into not doing it in the future, which is the POINT of my flame in the first place. Duh.

> go somewhere else. I didn't come to these newsgroups for lessons in social
> etiquette but to get information and to discuss AW issues.
>
> Discuss and flame are two mutually exclusive options. By all means discuss,
> just dont assume that anyone who disagrees with you is wrong.

Ah but they ARE wrong, relative to me. Wee...

> They may be
> wrong in your opinion, but your opinion is all you can give, you can't
> enforce your opinion on others, certainly not by flaming them, if you do
> its you who appears weak, to me at any rate:)

<shrug> your opinion

> support and/or acceptance. Not everyone has such a low self-esteem. Not
> everyone needs such external gratification. In short, Moria, Facter, and
> anyone else, not everyone is like you. Now get over it.
>
> I have nothing to get over, I am just stating my opinion, and it is a
> personal opinion, no need to bring Facter back into this:)
>
> I believe, and I said it in the post before you could be very good for AW,
> you have some good points and great ideas, but your manner of approach will
> negate all of the good and drive it underground and people onto the
> defensive.

Blah blah blah, yea, yea, heard/read it all before, but it's just not true. <shrug>

> You didnt come here for social ettiquette, I agree, it would be presumptious
> of me to try and teach it to you.. you have to live with what youve got,
> but don't blame others if thats lacking:)) Live with it and get over it:)))

I think I'll just filter YOU instead since you obviously can't stop abusing smileys or know when to shut up. Buh-bye now, twit.

Feb 8, 2001, 11:15pm

[View Quote] > censorship - n. The act, process, or practice of censoring.
> censor - v. To examine and expurgate.
> expurgate - v. To remove material that is perceived as erroneous,
> vulgar, obscene, or otherwise objectionable. (from a book, for example)
>
> Now explain to me how this does NOT apply to Eep's situation. (The
> "material" here being Eep and his opinions)
>
[View Quote] It wouldn't since I don't THRIVE on attention. In fact, I don't even usually WANT attention, but it's just that my apparently strong opinions seem to warrant it--whatever. People that KNOW me know that I'm anti-social (but can be social if I have to) and recluse and that I have little patience for incompetent/inept people--just ask Lara and Mauz who probably know me best (in AW anyway).

>
> You seem to be confused about the difference between "personal"
> censorship and "communal" censorship. Personal censorship means deciding
> for yourself what you (and ONLY you) should see/read/hear. Communal
> censorship is when a person/persons who are in charge of the community
> decide for everyone in the community what should be seen/read/heard.
> Personal censorship affects no one else other than yourself and the
> thing being censored. Communal censorship means that whoever is in
> charge of the community forces everyone to believe what he/she/they
> believe by removing anything that doesn't agree with them. And this is
> what Facter is trying to do. He is removing Eep simply because he
> disagreed and insulted him. Did he insult the entire community? No. Then
> why should he be removed from the entire community? Facter needs to take
> responsibility for himself and take Eep out of his own personal
> equation, instead of forcing his feelings upon the rest of us.

Facter is trying to show that my attacks against other people (hardly near the ENTIRE AW or even newsgroup community) ARE against the AW newsgroup community, when they're not. I don't just randomly attack people. Perhaps if I wrote a disseration on my attack mentality I might be understood better, but I don't feel like wasting time on it.

>
> Then you would be just as guilty as Facter. In fact, you would be
> instituting the very "terrorism" you claim that Eep is causing. In that
> situation, people would be afraid to disagree with AWCI or it's actions
> because they might be banned from the NGs if they ever said a
> discouraging word about AWCI. Frankly, I'd rather "fear" Eep.

It's a shame Moria and Facter can't simply look into the mirror I'm holding up for them. Some people just don't get it...

>
> How can Eep say he's won the fight if no one fights him? If no one
> replies to his posts and simply ignores him, how can Eep claim victory?
> Do you really think Eep would continue to post if he knew no one was
> listening to him? I would think not... In fact, banning him would
> probably be Eep's greatest victory ever, because it would prove all of
> his ranting about AWCI and their tactics RIGHT! Now, do you really want
> to prove Eep right? ;)

Even if I am NOT banned by points about AWCI has already been proven NUMEROUS times. This is simply their latest example of their continued, ongoing incompetence. http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/history.html to read MANY more accounts.

>
> Once again, if you don't engage him, you don't have to back off. Think
> of Eep as the raving lunatic you might encounter on a street corner. Do
> you stop and try to counter his nonsensical arguments, or do you simply
> keep on walking. I would hope (for your sanity's sake) you would choose
> the latter. The only way Eep can "win" an arguement is if someone
> actually argues with him. It's the other person that makes a conscious
> decision to "awaken the beast", if you will. If people would take it
> upon themselves to decide for themselves what's best for them, perhaps
> Eep would realize that his actions alienate everyone around him, and
> change his attitude. But as long as people continue to respond to it,
> then, to him, it's still an effective form of communication.

I only alienate those I wish not to have to deal with. It's quite effective. :) Sometimes TOO effective...

>
> And here you contradict everything you have just stated previously. Are
> you giving Eep his fair say by banning him? Certainly not. By banning a
> person, you are giving that person NO say in anything, and that, by your
> own (correct) definition of "community", is wrong. I know I will not
> tolerate such actions in any community I participate in, and it's clear
> that I am not the only one who thinks this way. If Facter goes through
> with banning Eep (or even goes through with this voting process, thereby
> making it a "him or me" scenario) then I will have no choice but to
> submit to Facter's "terrorism" and leave these newsgroups. Because that
> is exactly what this is: Terrorism. Intimidation. Control. By making the
> community have to choose between one person or another, simply because
> one of those people can't assume responsibility for his own beliefs,
> then you have effectively divided the community that you are so
> desperate to hold together in an attempt to make them believe what you
> believe. (In this case, that Eep does not belong here)
>
> The fate of the community rests in Facter's hands... not Eep's. I pray
> that Facter will use that power wisely, or not at all...

Exactly...Facter started all of this; he must finish it. He hasn't learned to control his inability to handle the power he has been granted by his equally inept bosses, Rick and JP.

Feb 8, 2001, 11:38pm

Uh, the Cy award was for my RW site, you twit.

[View Quote] > Ah, gotta love Eep. I gotta say, even though eep might flame everyone, who
> cares, I get a kick outta reading it. The best is when he argues the topic
> and proves everything wrong. It's to great..you can't ban eep, hes like that
> person that everyone loves and hates at the same time! He even won a CY
> Award for it! Geezuz.

Feb 9, 2001, 4:54am

Wrong again, fucktwat. You never said they were taken down for MAINTENANCE. You simply said you were working on them and took them down...for NO EXPLAINED REASON. "Oh, gee, let's see if I can fuck with things today--oops." My guess is you fucked something up and had to take them down to fix your stupid mistake. Newsgroups shouldn't need to be taken down for "maintenance". You're simply the latest incompetent AWCI employee to fuck things up and tried to weasle yourself out of it. Well too fucking bad--I called your bluff and now you're sore so then you figured it's time to ban me. WRONG AGAIN! Keep digging that grave, idiot.

You only stated the TRUE reason after I had to ask NUMEROUS times in between your ravings about how "mean and nasty" I am towards you. Boo hoo...cry for me, Facter...cry me a fucking river and see if I give 2 shits and a piss about you. You play games with me and you're gonna lose EVERY time. I don't stand for that shit and you should know that by now but obviously you don't so now you're gonna learn the hard way.

[View Quote] > I told oyu exactly what was up with the newsgroups Eep - STOP making it out
> to be that I was concealing information - they were taken down for
> maintenance, how *many* times must that be said ?
>
> I said that straight away, when it happened, I say it now.

Feb 9, 2001, 9:22am

Stop confusing AWCI with a REAL company, Andras. AWCI is no ISP, Yahoo!, or AltaVista. Because AW is a VERY small company relative to any of these, they have an obligation to offer more personal customer/tech support. I asked Facter a simple question yet it took a good beating for him to finally spit out the full response. He needs better training in SUPPORT, which IS one of his jobs. Perhaps he has too MANY jobs at AWCI and he should just focus on one.

[View Quote] > My 10 million dollar question:
> Since when is it your or Eep's business ?
> Do you ask your ISP or Yahoo or AltaVista if they are down what was the problem?
> Do you get detailed answers?
> Do you ask your cable TV operator what was wrong when they have interruption in their services?
>
> c'mon folks - it's only lame excuse by a lame eep.
>
[View Quote]

Feb 9, 2001, 12:07pm

As soon as people start paying me for my website I'll treat such questions about its design more professionally. Until then, I can do whatever the FUCK I want with the site. Think, Andras...

[View Quote] > Remember how many ppl objected about your website background color? I bet you do. Do you remember your response to their complaint? I bet you don't. You said it is MY website! I like it as it is! Don't even ask me to change it! <of course not so politely than I interpreted here>. You are not even a small company yet you still just brushed off all those ppl. You would have even a higher obligation to answer to those question if I read your comparison correctly. Why do you think ANYONE would give you an explanation about a simple ng maintenance issue? Your reply is even more lame than my confusion :)
>
[View Quote]

Feb 9, 2001, 2:05pm

I DO pay for AW, just not monetarily. Think, Andras.

[View Quote] [View Quote]

Feb 8, 2001, 10:42am

Might want to see a shrink about your depression. Ever heard the expression "laughter is the best medicine"? If you laugh more often than most people, and because you said if you don't laugh you'll cry, you might be suffering from depression or something. Get better control over your emotions and you won't be ruled by them so easily. It's time to grow up.

[View Quote] > OMG now I can't even say lol or rotfl without someone being nitpicky?
> Sheesh.FIRST I get told I use the damn ! too much, NOW I get told that it's
> annoying to say lol or rotfl! WHAT gives here? When I post lol or rotfl that
> means I am really laughing. WHAT is wrong with that may I ask??? I enjoy
> laughing it keeps my spirits up and helps me cope with everyday problems
> because if I don't laugh, I'll cry. Besides, I am well known for my humor in
> AW. I make lots of people laugh. By not posting lol or rotfl makes one a
> boring person. Makes one look like they don't have a sense of humor or like
> to laugh. My advise to you is TRY it sometime you just might like it. Who
> knows. Laughing makes me feel good inside and I will NOT stop posting lol or
> rotfl because ONE or TWO people are annoyed by it. you don't like it, don't
> read what I have to say. lol and rotfl simply means that what I am being
> told or am saying I think is funny. Sheesh if lol and rotfl annoys you, I'd
> really hate to see what your personal life is like. *mumbles under me
> breath......ALWAYS one or 2 in EVERY crowd that has to ruin something good
> for someone else.......sigh* This is so petty. Why not get annoyed over
> something WORTH getting annoyed over, like someone being harrassed or
> something? i'm NOT hurting ANYONE by posting lol or rotfl so get a life.
>
> And NO I am not a newbie to AW. As a matter of fact, I have been with AW for
> over a year now, I know the rules, in fact, I was a T.A. (teachers aide)
> for the school until I got my own world and was unable to continue teaching,
> i'm just new to the ng's and outlook express. Sheesh ya'll are way too
> nitpicky for me which really saddens me. :o( hmmmm maybe I better not put a
> nose on my face because it might "annoy" someone! *sigh*...HELL i'm gonna do
> it anyways! :o(
>
> SPECIAL POST..............................
>
> lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol
> lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol
> lol lol lol lol
>
> Am I annoying you yet? Gawd I hope not! lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol
> lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol
>
> rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl
> rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl
> rotfl rotfl rotfl
>
> How bout now??
>
> lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol
> rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl
> lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol
> rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl
> lol rotfl lol rotfl lol rotfl
>
> YET??
> hehehehee Gawd it's true, I am a BRAT rotfl
> Sowwy I couldn't resist.

Feb 8, 2001, 10:24pm

What's to respond to? I have j b e l l filtered. :)

[View Quote] > Your post brought up a thought. Has Eep EVER caused anyone to leave the
> newsgroup?
>
> I'm just wondering. :) usually, I see people fighting to the bitter end with
> Eep. He does stir up some rousing and unusual thoughts and actions from all
> of us, good and bad. :)
>
> And WHY hasn't Eep posted to this yet? I'm sure he's ready to retaliate.
>
[View Quote]

Feb 8, 2001, 10:30pm

It's gotten to the point where I just don't care anymore. So many "attacks" are so petty they aren't even WORTH responding to. I, unlike many people it seems, have control over my emotions well enough to not be affected by such idiocy. Seems Facter's weaker in that regard and wants to make up for it by getting a publically-supported ban against me posting here. Quite pathetic...

[View Quote] > Actually, I've noticed whenever Eep is being attacked in a new thread, he
> doesn't defend himself. At least that's how I remember it. Strange, huh?
>
[View Quote]

Feb 8, 2001, 10:35pm

[View Quote] > first of all, if eep is voted to stay, does that mean you leave? you never
> said that in this post, and if that is what it means, then, well thats
> stupid, you shouldn't make us choose you or him

Yes, that's the conditions he made: Facter or me. Isn't that silly? That just proves it's a contest for him while to me it's all quite pathetic and just shows he truly needs external gratification in order to surfive. Pathetic...

> also, shouldnt you have waited for eep to make a response? I havent seen a
> post from him since the decision of the vote...

I've posted but haven't apologized. Facter doesn't want an apology; he wants me to suck up to him (or perhaps suck him off?) to show he has more power than I do. It's an ego thing, see. Facter wants to make a statement to Rick and JP that he can stand up to the big bad Eep (that's me) because they cannot. Facter is like (oo, analogy time!) the little knight going out to slay the dragon (that's me again) for his oppressive kings Rick and JP (the Wonder Twinky Kings).

> 302202- stay
>
[View Quote]

Feb 8, 2001, 11:03pm

More hypocracy...

[View Quote] > wait wait wait, if he's actually BROKEN the charter, then why would you guys
> need support from voting? His fate should be 100% in your hands, not ours.

Feb 8, 2001, 11:21pm

[View Quote] [View Quote] Then perhaps you shouldn't. You try too hard, Facter. Don't be such an asskisser. Let the "community" regulate itself. AWCI tried moderation before and it didn't work. Perhaps if you knew your AW newsgroup history better you'd've realized that before ever thinking about attempting to ban me. You made a mistake and are now simply trying to brush it off (something you seem to be getting better at) onto the newsgroup posters, when most, if not all, don't give a shit whether I stay or go, or your little power trip and low self-esteem.

> Anyways, as I said - if the vote goes in Eeps favor,t hen I have no problem
> with that.
>
> It is the *communities* decision.

Feb 8, 2001, 11:26pm

God damn, not only are you a hypocrit, Facter, but a moron as well. Must I continue to rip you to shreds by your own incompetence?

From news://news.activeworlds.com/3a82f3df%241%40server1.Activeworlds.com :

"You guys can all take a vote, on whether he is to remain here, or not - if the vote says he is to stay, then I will no longer be posting to this newsgroup, and you guys get to keep him - but, you will also lose any correspondance from me here, and this group will go back to the way they were before I started posting in here - apathetic and mainly used for everyone to have a good old bitch about the company I work for, when they have little or no facts on which to base their bitching."

Certainly sounds like a you-or-me scenario to me!

[View Quote] [View Quote]

1  ...  19  20  21  22  23  24  ...  42  |   Order by default