🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sat, 10 May 2003 17:58:07 GMT, "Kingfish"
<spam_trap_void@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>"No One" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>news:Eeava.1428$Ly2.191893@cletus.bright.net...
>| "Juan Jimenez" <b_d-5_n-o_s-p_a-m@b_d_5.com> wrote in message
>| news:au1va.553322$Zo.119640@sccrnsc03...
>| > Well, I checked with giganews and this idiot Uncle Samuel (Chrissie?) is
>a
>| > troll, most likely from under some rock in a Colorado landfill. Into the
>| > twit list "it" goes.
>| >
>| >
>|
>| http://groups.google.com/groups?&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&th=264d0e36d8cc97fd
>| A hallmark of our troller, Uncle "Psycho" Samuel <stars@bars> has been his
>| use of multiple posting
>| personalities. Who could forget the thousands of loveable and abusive
>| postings under the names of
>| "Chris", "Tony Clifton", "Patrick Fitzpatrick", "Anonymous", "Capicorn-1",
>| "Tranquility"  and many
>| others, with dozens of reply addresses such as
>| anonymous@anonymous.anonymous, me@here.now,
>| my@net.not.yours, running@dog.net, and man@moon.org.
>|
>| Not to be unreasonably critical as it temporarily serves my purposes to
>also
>| post under a Nom de
>| Plume, our Chrissie "Uncle Samuel" has gone to great lengths to avoid
>Google
>| archive searches of his
>| history by constantly changing posting handles, posting services, and
>email
>| addresses, using dozens
>| of them.
>|
>| But where is the dividing line between a legitimate interest in privacy
>and
>| a psychotic abuse of the
>| internet?
>|
>| In early 2002, an individual posting under the name of "Kingfish"
>| <nospam@attbi.com>  appeared on
>| the local posting scene; "Kingfish" jumped in to local discussion as a
>| long-time participant might,
>| referencing postings and threads on co.general and boulder.general that
>| occurred prior to his
>| arrival.
>|
>| "Kingfish" was mostly an agreeable chap, but for some reason, a majority
>of
>| his postings were
>| replies or comments in agreement with postings by Chrissie AKA "Uncle
>| Samuel"  who in those days was
>| "Capicorn-1". It's interesting that the newbie "Kingfish" wasn't so green
>as
>| to eschew the use of
>| the anonymizing Randori.com as a posting host from the beginning to this
>| very day.
>|
>| Forward to the present and we note a psychotic need by our "Uncle Samuel"
>to
>| indignantly or
>| abusively respond to any post critical of the war or the Bush regime.
>| Lately, that urgent need to
>| defend the policies of the president and his own opinions has taken on an
>| almost hysterical tone.
>| "Uncle Samuel" appears to be losing it.
>|
>| I couldn't avoid notice that over the last week, "Kingfish" and our "Uncle
>| Samuel" have been
>| on-line, immediately downloading and replying to each 'other's ' postings,
>| within minutes.. Timing
>| is everything, we all know.
>|
>| 3-11 Kingfish @ 9:54, Uncle Samuel replies in agreement @ 10:17.
>| 3-11 Kingfish @ 9:42, Uncle Samuel replies at 10:17.
>| 3-26 Uncle Samuel @ 8:29, Kingfish adds agreement at 9:44.
>| 3-26 Kingfish posts @ 9:41; Uncle Samuel agrees within minutes at 9:52.
>| Ad nauseum.
>|
>| Not unexpectedly, "Kingfish" and "Uncle Samuel" are the only two personas
>| that replied to my post of
>| 3/26 poking fun at Uncle Sammy on b.g.
>|
>| A glance at "Kingfish's" recent postings on Google shows that 80% of a
>| representative sample are
>| replies in agreement to "Uncle Samuel" postings, or vice versa.  No one
>| else.
>| Wow! The same as the "Kingfish" replies to Capicorn-1's postings at the
>| beginning. What an amazing
>| coincidence.
>|
>| It's one thing to be the perpetual anonymous troll, Chrissie, but you
>| slipped under pressure. You
>| would have to be a psycho to pay for the multiple USENET posting hosts
>that
>| you have only for the
>| purpose of publicly validating your own opinion. And yet you have.
>|
>| You have demonstrated that you don't have a pito, so you do it publicly on
>| USENET instead.
>| Observe the truth in the cartoon, get a life and see a shrink.
>| *************************************************
>| in the same thread:
>| I've been thinking recently that it's a bot.  Who would really have the
>| time to spend so many hours a day on USENET, and enough pent up anger to
>| always come off as a dog barking at the end of its chain?  Plus, the
>| posts are incredibly predictable***.  I think it's a Perl script some CU
>| grad student wrote for his master's paper on modern Turing machines.
>|
>|
>
>nice conspiracy theory, but not the case.
>
>I'm conservative, libertarian leaning, and on the computer all the time.
>Generally, Sam and I agree because we both have similar political beliefs.
>We have disagreed on certain issues - immigration in particular.  Sam seems
>to lean towards isolationism while I tend to believe free and open boarders
>are an essential element to freedom.  Also, if I cared to do so I could post
>from many different email addresses via Randori, but I don't.  There are
>also many other recognizable style differences between Sam and I, but hey -
>if you want to believe we are one in the same, more power to you lol.  I am
>however a long time participant of co.general and found it to be a good idea
>to be anonymous.  Maybe I am every anonymous poster on co.general besides
>you.  It's all a giant conspiracy, you know or Maybe I'm really the
>conservative side of Donald/aozotorp lol.
>
>Think what you like, but sorry: "you missed."  Better luck next time.
>
>The bot theory is perhaps the most intriguing, but that would be a hell of a
>perl script......<G>
>
>Kingfish
>
 
Am I replying to my own post?

Who can say...

Only The Shadow knows!