🚀 go-pugleaf

Michael Baldwin, Bruce writes:

>>> Why do you sneck the next line,

>> Classic erroneous presupposition, and rather ironic, coming from
>> someone who snecked several lines below.

> I am well aware of your snecking of the line "Dickless Davie
> tholen@antispam.ham the irrelevant Ignoranus whined:" and
> alt.usenet.kooks form the crossposted distribution,

What does your alleged awareness have to do with colored text in
DeScribe, Bruce?

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> No need to remind me with another demonstration of your kookdancing.

What does your erroneous presupposition of "kookdancing" (which is
rather ironic) have to do with colored text in DeScribe, Bruce?

>>> Dickless?

>> Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> How ironic,

Where is the alleged irony, Bruce?  I see that you didn't answer the
question, Bruce.  No surprise there, really.

> Dickless!

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note:  no response.

>>>>>>>>>> Note:  no response.

>>>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>>>>>> Note:  no response.

>>>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>>>>>> Note:  no response.

>>>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note:  no response.

>>>>>>>>>> Note:  no response.

>>>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Note:  no response.

>>>>>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>>>>>> Note:  no response.

>>>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>>>>>>> Note:  no response.

>>>>>>>> Note:  still no response.

>>>>> "Clasic" repetition, Dickless, as to be expected of someone who evades
>>>>> answering questions.

>>>> Non sequitur.

>>> Note: still no response.

>> I'm well aware that you still haven't responded, Bruce.  No need
>> to tell me about it.

> "Clasic" evasion

I'm well aware that you still haven't responded, Bruce.  No need
to tell me about it.

> and note: still no response from Dickless.

Classic illogic; why would you expect a response from someone not
involved in the discussion, Bruce?

>>>> Glad you agree, Bruce.

>>> Yes,

>> So, what do you intend to do about your projection, Bruce?

> I will continue to watch you kookdancing

Classic erroneous presupposition of "kookdancing", which is rather
ironic, coming from someone engaging in "kookdancing".

> as you continue to evade my questions,

Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion.

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

>>> the projection was a "lassic" on your part.

>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, and a rather ironic
>> projection to boot.

> On your part,

Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

>>> Also "lassic" evasion of my questions.

>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

Note:  no response.

>>> No surprise there, really.

>> That you would make more unsubstantiated and erroneous claims is
>> indeed no surprise, Bruce.

> How evasive,

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, and rather ironic to
boot, coming from someone who hasn't been answering my questions.

> Dickless!

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> And poorly grammatical to boot!

What does your allegation have to do with colored text in DeScribe,
Bruce?

>>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

>>> On your part,

>> Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> On your part,

Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

>> That you would make more unsubstantiated and erroneous claims in
>> indeed no surprise, Bruce.

> Ditto!

Classic inappropriate response.

>>> Note: still no response.

>> I'm well aware that you still haven't responded, Bruce.  No need
>> to tell me about it.

> Shazam! More "lassic" evasion from Dickless to avoid answering my
> question. No surprise there, really.

Classic illogic, given that there is no person named "Dickless"
involved in the discussion.

>>>>> Evasion noted,

>>>> I'm well aware that your failure to answer my questions constitutes
>>>> evasion, Bruce.  No need to tell me about it.

>>> No need to remind me of the stunts you pull to evade my questions,

>> Classic erroneous presupposition, and a rather ironic case of
>> projection.

> "Clasic" "pontfication",

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> You would know that by now, had you better logical faculties.

Classic ambiguity.

>>> I'm well aware of your evasive tactics.

>> Classic hallucination.

> "Clasic" "pontfication",

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> Dickless,

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> and rather ironic coming from a
> kookdancer like you who fails to grasp the simplest of concepts.

Classic erroneous presupposition of "kookdancer", which is rather
ironci, coming from a "kookdancer".

>> Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> You should know,

Classic illogic, given that there is no person named "Dickless"
involved in the discussion.

> Dickless,

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> considering how I use your nickname frequently.

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> Suffering from schizophrenia now,

Classic erroneous presupposition.

> Dickless?

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> Or are you merely hallucinating again?

Classic erroneous presupposition.

>>> If you had better reading
>>> comprehension skills, you would have noticed the comma by now.

>> Classic erroneous presupposition.

> "Clasic" evasion,

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> I certainly do not expect you to answer the questions I put to you,

What you expect is irrelevant, Bruce.

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> Your cowardice is well known.

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> No need to remind us of it.

Classic erroneous presupposition.

>> That you would make yet another erroneous presupposition is indeed
>> no surprise, Bruce.

> Good to see you made a rather feeble attempt to correct your bad
> grammar,

What does your classic erroneous presupposition have to do with
colored text in DeScribe, Bruce?

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> Too late, however, as you left the mistakes you made
> above uncorrected.

What does your classic erroneous presupposition have to do with
colored text in DeScribe, Bruce?

>>> "lassic" evasion,

>> I'm well aware that you still haven't responded, which constitutes
>> evasion, Bruce.  No need to tell me about it.

> "Clasic" evasion

I'm well aware that you still haven't responded, which constitutes
evasion, Bruce.  No need to tell me about it.

> and rather ironic,

Where is the alleged irony, Bruce?

> Dickless,

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> as you feebly attempt to
> deflect your evasion  with a pathetic attempt at "pontfication".

Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion, which is rather ironic,
coming from someone who has engaged in evasion.

>>> No surprise there, really, as I am well versed in your evasive tactics,

>> Classic erroneous presupposition.

> On your part,

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> You would know I am well versed in your evasive
> tactics by now if you had better reading and "comprehenion" skills.

Classic erroneous presupposition of evasive tactics, which is rather
ironic, coming from someone who has engaged in evasive tactics.

>>>> Classic erroneous presupposition of an erroneous presupposition laced
>>>> with invective.

>>> "Clasic" gibberish

>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.  Still suffering from
>> reading comprehension problems, Bruce?

> Still suffering from logical sentence structure problems,

Classic erroneous presupposition.  I see that you didn't answer the
question, Bruce.  No surprise there, really.

> Dickless?

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> Go read your previous sentence and prove it is not gibberish.

What does your illogical request have to do with colored text in
DeScribe, Bruce?

>>> as to be expected from someone who continually
>>> evades my questions,

>> Classic erroneous presupposition, but an interesting case of
>> projection.

> "Clasic" "pontfication",

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> Dickless,

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> and rather ironic.

Where is the alleged irony, Bruce?

>>> No surprise there, really.

>> That you would fail to answer my questions is indeed no surprise,
>> Bruce.

> What is unsurprising is your continual evasion of my questions,

Classic erroneous presupposition.

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

>>> What does that have to do with classical music,

>> You should know, Bruce, considering how you added the newsgroup to
>> the distribution.  Having memory problems, Bruce?

> "lassic" evasion,

I'm well aware that you still haven't answered my question, which
constitutes evasion, Bruce.  No need to tell me about it.

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> Which comes as no surprise, really, since
> you continually evade my questions.

Classic erroneous presupposition.

> What have you to fear,

What does your question have to do with colored text in DeScribe, Bruce?

> Dickless?

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

>>>>> while you continue to evade the questions I put to you.

>>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, and rather ironic, coming
>>>> from someone who continues to evade the questions put to him.

>>> I'm well aware that your failure to answer the questions represents
>>> classic evasion,

>> Classic erroneous presupposition, and an interesting case of
>> projection to boot.

> "Clasic" "pontfication",

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> You should know by now that I won't
> tollerate your "lassic" evasion, if you had better reading
> "comprehenion" skills.

Classic erroneous presupposition of evasion.  How does one
"tollerate" something, Bruce?

>>>>> Who is Bruce,

>>>> You should know, Bruce, considering how you use the name in your
>>>> attribution.  Suffering from schizophrenia now, Bruce?

> Classic erroneous presupposition, and an interesting case of projection
> to boot,

Non sequitur.

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

>>> "Clasic" evasive tactic,

>> I'm well aware that you didn't answer the question, Bruce, which
>> represents an evasive tactic.  No need to tell me about it.

> Another attempted evasion on your part,

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, and rather ironic, coming
from someone who didn't answer the question.

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> No surprise there, really.

Your ongoing failure to answer my questions is indeed no surprise,
Bruce.

>>> So are you suffering from schizophrenia now,

>> An illogical question, given that I haven't questioned my use of my
>> name, Bruce, unlike you.

> Another evasive resonse,

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> Dickless,

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> and another example of your typical poor grammar.

What does your allegation have to do with colored text in DeScribe,
Bruce?

> What does "I haven't question my" mean,

What does your question have to do with colored text in DeScribe,
Bruce?

> Dickless?

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> Note, I know not to expect a response from Dickless since he
> continually evades my questions.

Classic illogic; why would you expect a response from someone not
involved in the discussion, Bruce?

>>>>> All the while you evade my questions,

>>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

>>> On your part,

>> Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> On your part,

Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> Show me one question you have answered.

] Message-ID: <5S_Wf.16494$WK1.540@tornado.socal.rr.com>
]
] > Who is "dizzy",
]
] The person who wrote the item to which I responded, Bruce.  Still
] suffering from reading comprehension problems?

Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Bruce?

>>> You are yet to answer any of my questions.

>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> Prove you have answered any of my questions,

Been there, done that.

> Dickless,

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> if you think you can.

What I think is irrelevant, Bruce; what I have already done is
relevant.

>>> "lassic" evasion,

>> I'm well aware that you didn't answer the question, Bruce, which
>> represents evasion.  No need to tell me about it.

> "Clasic" evasion,

I'm well aware that you didn't answer the question, Bruce, which
represents evasion.  No need to tell me about it.

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> Which comes as no surprise, really, since
> you continually evade my questions.

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, and rather ironic, coming
from someone evading my questions.

>>>>>>> On your part,

>>>>>> Non sequitur.

>>>>> On your part,

>>>> Also non sequitur.

>>> Also on your part,

>> Still non sequitur.

> Still on your part,

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

>>>>> Who is Bruce,

>>>> You should know, Bruce, considering how you use the name in your
>>>> attribution.  Suffering from schizophrenia now, Bruce?

>>> "Clasic" evasion,

>> I'm well aware that you didn't answer the question, Bruce, which
>> represents evasion.  No need to tell me about it.

> Further "lassic" evasion on your part,

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> Which comes as no surprise, really.

That you would make yet another classic unsubstantiated and erroneous
claim does indeed not come as any surprise, Bruce.

>>> and another diversionary tactic employed by
>>> you to evade answering my question.

>> Classic erroneous presupposition, but an interesting case of
>> projection, Bruce.

> "Clasic" "pontfication",

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> Dickless,

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> to be expected of someone who continually evades my questions.

Classic erroneous presupposition, and rather ironic, coming from
someone who continually evades my questions.

>>> No surprise there, really.

>> What is "ther",

> Are you hallucinating again,

Classic erroneous presupposition.

> Dickless?

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

>> Bruce?

> Who is "Bruce",

You should know, Bruce, considering how you use the name in your
attribution.  Suffering from schizophrenia now, Bruce?

> Dickless?

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> Having attribution problems again?

What does your classic erroneous presupposition have to do with
colored text in DeScribe, Bruce?

>>>>> Note, I expect nothing but an evasive response from Dickless.

>>>> Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still hallucinating about such an entity
>>>> being involved in this discussion?

>>> Evasive response noted.

>> I'm well aware that you didn't answer the question, Bruce, which
>> represents evasion.  No need to tell me about it.

> What does your question have to do with colored text in DeScribe,

Classic erroneous presupposition that I asked a question, Bruce.
Still suffering from reading comprehension problems?

> Dickless?

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

>>> Just as I predicted.

>> Predicting your own behavior isn't much of a prediction, Bruce.

> Who is "Bruce",

You should know, Bruce, considering how you use the name in your
attribution.  Suffering from schizophrenia now, Bruce?

> Dickless?

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> Hallucinating again or having attribution problems?

What does your classic erroneous presupposition have to do with
colored text in DeScribe, Bruce?

>>>>> What does that have to do with classical music,

>>>> I see that you didn't answer the question, Bruce.  No surprise
>>>> there really.  Having trouble keeping track of the original
>>>> newsgroup and the subject line, Bruce?

>>> "lassic" evasion,

>> I'm well aware that you didn't answer the question, Bruce, which
>> represents evasion.  No need to tell me about it.

> What does that have to do with classical music,

You should know, Bruce, considering how you added the newsgroup to
the distribution.  Having memory problems, Bruce?

> Dickless?

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

>>> No surprise there, really.

>> As opposed to "ther", Bruce?

> What is "ther",

You should know, Bruce, considering that you wrote it earlier.

> Dickless?

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> Another one of your famous "mispellings", no doubt.

Classic hallucination, and rather ironic to boot.

>>> Not that I expect a logical response from
>>> you as I know you'll employ you usual evasive tactic of asking who is
>>> Dickless rather than answering the question.

>> Illogical, given that I'm the one who asked the question above, Bruce,
>> thus it is you who hasn't answered the question.  Classic projection.

> "Clasic" "pontfication",

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> Dickless,

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> and ironic to boot since you once
> again evaded answering the question.

Illogical, given that I'm the one who asked the question above, Bruce,
thus it is you who hasn't answered the question.  Classic projection.

>>>>> On your part,

>>>> Non sequitur.

>>> Shazam!

>> What does that have to do with colored text in DeScribe, Bruce?

> That you would engage in projection is indeed no surprise,

Non sequitur.

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> Now, what does your evasive projection have to do with classical music,

Classic erroneous presupposition.

> Dickless?

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

>>>>> If you had better reading comprehension skills,
>>>>> you would know that by now.

>>>> Classic erroneous presupposition, and rather ironic, coming from
>>>> someone with ongoing attribution problems.

>>> I see that you didn't answer the question,

>> Illogical, given that I'm the one who asked the question above, Bruce,
>> thus it is you who hasn't answered the question.  Classic projection.

> "Clasic" evasion,

I'm well aware that your failure to answer my question constitutes
evasion, Bruce.  No need to tell me about it.

> Dickless.

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> I am the one asking question.

What does your question have to do with colored text in DeScribe,
Bruce?

> You are the one evading them.

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, and rather ironic, coming
from someone evading my questions.

> You would know that by now had you better logical reasoning skills.

Classic erroneous presupposition.

>>> Having trouble keeping track of my original question,

>> How ironic, coming from the person who is having trouble keeping
>> track of the names of the people involved in this exchange.

> On what basis do you make that k'lame,

What is a "k'lame", Bruce?

> Dickless?

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?

> Now, what does your ongoing antagonism have to do with coloured text in
> DeScribe,

Classic erroneous presupposition of antagonism.

> Dickless?

Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?