Ok, Teejay, you asked for it.
:: I didn't particularly want to get involved in this bit of nonsense, but Teejay, you're being your usual braindead self and I just can't resist tweaking you.
: See my earlier comments ( http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=23542&page=4&site=3 ) on what it means in a debate when one resorts to name calling. Usually this happens sometime after the debate has been going... seldom before it even starts. Wonder what your opening salvo of insults means, Alan!
Teejay, it is unnecessary to demonstrate time and again that which has been proved. You're a braindead, childish, troublemaking twit of a troll. You even managed to piss off our friend Dave, who in a couple of posts a few weeks ago finally saw your true character for himself. Believe me, it takes a lot to push Dave to the level you did. Note his comments:
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=20584&site=3&page=4
Re: What's the latest on "The Danni X-File... Feb 3, 2002 13:50http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=20584&site=3&page=5Are you happy now Teejay? You pissed me off! You should be damn proud of yourself. I'm not one to resort to calling people childish names but you have pushed me to it, Alan was right, you are a twit!
Re: What's the latest on "The Danni X-File... Feb 3, 2002 15:22No sense in further guilding the lilly.Teejay my boy!
I'm done with your game. Grow up!I will no longer comment to you or about you. Get a grip yourself. You can add me to your huge list of people who do not like you. As you have said before, you just don't care.
This is my last response to any self-serving nonsense you whine about!
I'm done with you.The end
:: From the get-go you've posted mainly things to deliberately stir up trouble.
: I'm presently engaged (via email) with one who made similar sweeping, generalized accusations of what I've said/haven't said here on JW.com. I eventually tired of their incessant harpings and asked for proof. I even provided the links to where I supposedly said "this and that." Silence.... then, "oh, I'm wrong. Conceded."
: Fortunately (for them), that one had to eat their words privately. You are not so lucky. You had to make such allegations publicly and will be forced to answer them in the same forum. I challenge you to make your case, Big Fella. With you, I will not provide the links. You must establish the evidence or stand on flimsy words. Deal? Cool.
I don't care if someone else isn't able to prove their allegations about your being a twit. I've done it; Dave Malone has done it; others have done it. Live with it.
:: Even people who once defended you realized this and told you this to your face.
: A link! A link! My kingdom for a link!! (and please do NOT use the only one I think you COULD use!! )
See above.
:: Whether you do this out of malice or simple stupidity is not objectively clear. Personally I think it's a combination of both.
: We'll see in due time, Alan. We'll see.
We have already seen. The future, I suspect, will only continue confirming what you've proved time and again: You're nothing but a troublemaking troller.
In conjunction with these thoughts, I should point out that my words are truly a tweaking of you in a certain sense. I don't actually think you're stupid intellectually -- I think you're stupid morally, in the same sense that the Watchtower Society teaches that when the Bible talks of a stupid man, it's talking about moral not intellectual stupidity. This is perfectly in line with the morals of a troll -- someone who gets his jollies from irritating other posters.
:: Kent understands very well what you're all about, and he doesn't want you on his board -- it's that simple. I'll play a violin for you if it'll make you feel better.
: I don't particularly like violin...
I don't play it, either.
:: It's obvious that Kent has declared that Teejay is an incorrigible spammer, and thus comes under the aegis of "spammers subject to immediate removal".
: Would you mind informing one with (reportedly) half a brain
Teejay, had you read carefully (or perhaps you can't do fractions) you'd have seen that I mentioned that putting your and Bigboi's brains together might add up to half a brain. I don't for a minute think that you have more than a quarter of one! Morally speaking, of course.
: what either "spam" or "a spammer" is?
A spammer fits the definition you posted below. Kent's native language is not English and, not being the most subtle of English speakers, he sometimes uses the wrong word. The correct word would have been "troll". In the most general sense a troll is one who posts mainly to stir up trouble. Fits you to a Tee. I will have to email Kent and correct his grievous error.
: I know I'm not nearly as smart as you-hell, everybody knows that!
Do tell.
: -but the best definition I could find, like the one at http://spam.abuse.net/overview/whatisspam.shtml, says:
- Spam is flooding the Internet with many copies
of the same message, in an attempt to force the
message on people who would not otherwise
choose to receive it. Most spam is commercial
advertising, often for dubious products, get-rich-quick
schemes, or quasi-legal services.
: Gee, either the entire Internet world knows what spam is or maybe only you and kent know. Gee... I wonder whose definition I'll accept. Decisions, decisions.
Wow. You've really got Kent on the run now. Fatty fatty two by four. Yawn.
:: I know it's difficult for you to understand this simple idea, but perhaps if you and Teejay put your heads together you'll discover half a head and be able to understand.
: Now there you go with the insults again...
What insults?
: No, it's not difficult to figure out what happened. I have never spammed anywhere since getting online almost ten years ago,
Ah, now you're into Watchtower mode. Focus on a minor error -- when you know perfectly well what the intent of the writer was -- and run with it. Again perfectly in line with a troller.
: and kent's (and YOUR)
I admit that Kent sometimes rubs off on me the wrong way. I repent in sackcloth and ashes and, as shown above, have corrected my grievous error in having toadied up to Kent. See: you're not a spammer, Teejay, but a troll.
: stretching a well-known expression to fit your small-minded viewpoint to justify a wrong doesn't do your reputation any favors, Alan.
Substitute "troll" for "spammer" and try repeating that.
: When he asked earlier today, I told your little friend er... ah.. gravedancer
I have no clue who this guy is. From his posts, though, I can see that he has a complete brain.
: that I was running a little test with kent. I even inferred that I was even booted from kent's site already even as I composed that comment.
So what? You already knew that Kent didn't want you on his board. All you demonstrated is the equivalent of showing that grass is green.
: Test is over. Thesis confirmed. Results follow:
: When the truth or (in the case of Simon and JW.com) a Man can handle criticism with style and tolerance-especially when he's the owner and holds all the cards-then it becomes clear to all what sort of Man he is: strong, secure, fair. By the same token, in the case of the truth that gracefully handles criticism and still stands, we know that it is really true - real.
: On the other hand, when a 'truth' or a 'man' in this case cannot, will not, must not handle criticism; when they must surround themselves with parroting sycophants who defend juvenile behavior, then... well... we know what kind of 'man' (and what sort of 'truth') that is. You know... a 'man' like kent and a 'truth' like what the Governing Body peddles.
Very fine words, Teejay. They demonstrate that you're not nearly as intellectually stupid as some have been led to believe by your overall conduct. But they also demonstrate -- as if such were necessary -- that you're intelligent enough (in contrast to your friend Bigboi) to know exactly what you're doing -- trolling. Therefore you're a total scumbag.
AlanF