🚀 go-pugleaf

On the long hot summer day of Mon, 11 Aug 2008 12:54:17 -0700,
an_old_friend@roctetmail.com dribbled:
> On Jul 19, 11:07pm, Jayson Davis wrote:
>> Al Bundy wrote:
>> > On Jul 19, 11:39 am, stonej wrote:
>> >>http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/2008071...
>>
>> >> Daughter of Terry Denbow.
>>
>> >> Tongues are really wagging around the Lansing area over this as you
>> >> can imagine.
>>
>> >> Not mentioned in the article but several video tapes of the
>> >> encounters exist and are in police
>> >> hands.
>>
>> > I continue to wonder where all these kinds of women were when I was a
>> > kid. We lived for such an opportunity. Young people today don't have
>> > the same sense of discretion. They always tell later. They send
>> > pictures and create evidence. Of course the technology is new today,
>> > but that doesn't mean people have to be stupid with it.
>>
>> I feel the same way, because I had a few teachers that were just
>> incredibly hot. However, I'm sure that type of activity can cause
>> emotional damage to certain people, and that's part of the problem with
>> these relationships. Plus, they're a tad abusive since the teacher is
>> in a position of power over the student.
>>
>> However, as a parent, the emotional damage isn't what concerns me.
>> The part that bothers me is that these days, engaging in sex can
>> cause a multitude of problems like diseases that don't go away or can be
>> fatal. Or a complex situation like an unintended pregnancy. A 15
>> year old male is unable to make rational choices about all those issues,
>> and a 32 year old female should not be putting the kid in a position
>> where they need to be made, or worse, making them for him.
>>
>> Finally, whereas we'd all high-five the 15 year old boy for having sex
>> with his 32 year old female teacher, if it were a 15 year old female
>> with a 32 year old male teacher, or a male teacher with a male student,
>> the matter is entirely different. I'm unwilling to give high-fives to
>> anyone for the latter, which means logically the first instance should
>> be punished the same way. And it is, which is the way it should be.
>>
>> The teacher has apparently made a very poor choice and if this is true,
>> is unfit to teach. It's unfortunate, but no one has ever said that
>> doing what is right is also the easiest or most natural.
> 
> inded  at teh same happedend to me but insteed it was sumbodys son. but
> the hat mongers falled to rtealze thet teh he indeede love me an nothing
> else matter but teh bigots wont ecept it

Hey, Phony Mark, do you think you'll ever back that up with anything
remotely resembling proof? I'm taking bets that you'll froth and foam for
the rest of your life instead. Fifty to one odds, currency in quatloos.

-- 
________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! mhm 29x21; Usenet Ruiner #5; Official Chung Demon
The original "Henry Schmidt"; Top Asshole #3; Lits Slut #16
COOSN-029-06-71069; Most Hated Usenetizen of All Time #13
Gutter Chix0r #17; BowTie's Spuriously Accused Pedo Photographer #4
AUK Psycho & Felon #21; Parrot & Zombie #2
Anonymous Psycho Criminal #18
"Do not taunt the Happy Fun Ball. If Happy Fun Ball starts to smoke, run
away and take cover."

Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle
Trainer of PorchMonkey4Life
The PM4L FAQ: http://www.screedbomb.info/porchie/

================================================
Brad Jesness Memorial Kook Appraisal Test (KAT or KAT Index) v. 5.1 by
Cipher and the a.u.k crew

So, you think you've got a contender, eh? Hard to separate the Kooks
from the mere pains in the ass though. Hopefully this will help you.

Instructions :
In this section give your Prospective Kook ONE point for every YES
answer. Give your Prospective Kook additional points for multiple
occurrences.

Grading scale follows questions.

Have they ever :

1. Been the first to go ad-hominem in a newsgroup debate.

2. Accused someone of breaking a non-existent Federal Law.

3. Called a properly formatted cancel of a BI>20 article a *forged
cancel*

4. Ranted about *Free Speech* when a moderator rejected their article.
Two points if it's spelled "FREE SPEACH".

5. Tried to censor others, yet scream when others suggest that they
killfile them or create a moderated newsgroup.

6. Complained to someone's ISP when they got spanked in a flame war.

7. Been complained about to their ISP deservedly.

8. Flamed someone from an anonymous account.

9. Made a spelling flame. (*)

10. Used RANT-CAPS & manic punctuation.

11. Claimed to be qualified to make a legal determination or medical
diagnosis with no justification - bonus points if the kook is obviously
projecting her/his *own* condition/behavior. (**)

12. Claimed an academic or professional degree they obviously do not
have.

13. Claimed that because of a degree or research topic, another poster
cannot know anything about any other subject.

In this section give your Prospective Kook TWO points for every YES
answer. Give your Prospective Kook additional points for multiple
occurrences.

1. Called someone a pedophile or drug pusher without proof.

2. Bonus if they called anyone a "Republican Nazi Pedophile"

3. Ranted about *Free Speech* when an anti-spammer canceled their
article.

4. Posted to a newsgroup via sock-puppet.

5. Thought about becoming a Freedom Knight.

6. Voted via sock-puppet in a Big Eight vote.

7. Defended a well known kook.

8. Been Nominated for a Kook award.

9. Invented Usenet 'rules' & 'laws', particularly coming up with
creative definitions for what constitutes spam & spamming.

10. Implied that she/he has powerful allies who will deal with his/her
enemies, due to having affiliations with Microsoft, the CIA or some
other powerful organization - no matter how flimsy the association.

11. Claimed an academic or professional degree after having stated they
are a high school dropout or otherwise indicated their actual level of
achievement, or claim multiple PhD's, MD's, etc.

12. 'Removed' an academic or professional degree or title from another
more clueful poster. (Includes scare quotes such as 'Esq.', or 'Dr.')

13. Claimed one of the well known regulars of AUK is using a remailer to
impersonate them, when all kook sign points to them.

In this section give your Prospective Kook THREE points for every YES
answer. Give your Prospective Kook additional points for multiple
occurrences.

1. Threatened to kill or cause bodily harm to another via mail or post.

2. Told someone they have caused the kook to harm himself.

3. Stalked/harassed an opponent off-line.

4. Mail-bombed anyone.

5. Spammed a newsgroup.

6. Posted a forged or altered newsgroup article.

7. Lost an account due to abuse.

8. Won a kook award.

9. Threatened a groundless lawsuit via mail or post. LA Law bonus:
Additional point if a TV lawyer is used.)

(Grubor bonus: If they claim John Grubor/Law Systems Institoot as
counsel)

10. Threatened to have their "agents" come after someone.

11. Had a FAQ posted about their kookiness.

12. Pretended to be a sysadmin or ISP owner.

13. CC'ed emailed complaints to irrelevant or non-existent organizations
email addresses, such as the DOJ, AG, CIA, FBI etc.

14. Been TOSsed and then claimed to have canceled it, her/it/himself?

(*) PalmJob Exception Rule. Cannot be applied to a mere troll's points.

(**) Brad Jesness Factor. Not applicable to BJ, it is expected.

Scale/Rank :
1 - 10 points : Kook Wannabe. Needs to read Grubor's posting history on
dejanews. Your Prospective Kook has much to learn. They may have just
screwed up once or twice.

11 - 25 points : Journeyman Kook. Needs to Continue to mimic the real
kooks. Your Prospective Kook could be a contender.

26 - 36 points : Kook First Class. Still a lesser light, but Your
Prospective Kook HAS arrived! People killfile him/her.

36 - 50 points : Kook cum Laude. Someone is considering writing a FAQ
about your Prospective Kook. Has been nominated for at least one a.u.k
award.

51 + points : Kook Magna cum Laude. Your Prospective Kook has a FAQ.
Your Prospective Kook will eventually win all the big awards. Your
Prospective Kook can leap tall newbies with a single bound.