Mike... wrote:
Full Version: for Fred Doyle
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57
| QUOTE |
| in article [email protected], Poik at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 4:23 PM: "Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote in news:BCA062EF.F38D8% [Email Removed]: Too bad he is too afraid. Your projections are meaningless to me. Almost right... but you should have written: "You are projecting again..." ":^) |
Give him time. Poky is a slow learner.
:-)
Uni
| QUOTE |
in article [Email Removed], Jeremy Nixon - Supernews at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 5:20 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 5:20 PM:
| QUOTE |
| Mike... <[Email Removed]> wrote: You write that "the account" use to post the spam was blocked after the filter failed. So obviously your filter was not able to tell the difference between a fake message and a real "ArtistMike.com" message. No, that's not obvious. |
Filter failed to see the difference between real "Mike" message and a forged
one because I don't spam. I write a lot of messages with my signature in
there, but I don't spam. Your filter looks for spam, if it can't see the
difference between 1000 messages that are all the same, and my messages,
then it is a faulty filter.
| QUOTE |
| So you got rid of the account along with the spam, because you and your filter were not able to tell the difference. Wrong. |
Obviously correct. Your filter got fooled and so did you.
| QUOTE |
So because I am unpopular in newsgroups and have little crybabies running around spoofing my email address and you are not able to tell the difference, you delete an account based on faked messages. No. I said quite clearly the opposite. If there were faked messages, then the person who really posted them got blocked, not you. |
Obviously that is not true because I am blocked and the newsgroups are still
full of forged messages with my email address.
| QUOTE |
Mike was never a customer of ours. We have no way to identify him personally. That is crap and you know it. I have to sign on to your news server with an email and a password...so you know exactly who is posting. Wrong. The username and password you send are authenticated by your ISP, not by us. |
The news server requires a password and an email.
| QUOTE |
| You're blocking my account based upon faked messages. You put the block in place because of FAKED MESSAGES! If that is the case, then your account is not blocked. |
That does not make any sense, my account is blocked.
| QUOTE |
| We can only block the account the messages came from. |
You picked my account because of something, you used some sort of criteria
to pick my account from some other account. You seem to think that "my
account" is posting spam, or at least doing something that you don't like.
So you have the ability to single out one account from another.
At this point it is not my goal to be reinstated with your service, my goal
is to show that you and your service filter, block, censor, on decisions
based upon faulty filters, forged messages, and mistaken identity.
| QUOTE |
| Yes, that is correct! We blocked the account. |
Obviously. The criteria that you use to make your decisions is flawed.
Based upon faulty investigation, faulty filters, and forged messages that
you don't have the ability to know are forged.
| QUOTE |
But the facts are that there are many people that spoof my email address and post fake messages in Usenet with my email address as a return address. YOU know that to be a fact. They spam using my email address. Real spam, not just posting a message with a link in it. Okay, but that would not, and could not, lead to your account being blocked. |
Faked messages were posted in the newsgroup and touted as the reason for the
block. They were faked messages. You used faulty data to make a decision
on which account to block.
| QUOTE |
| We can't take "Artist Mike" and figure out what account at what ISP goes with it. We can only block the account used to post the messages. |
That is not true. You do have ways to choose which accounts get blocked.
You chose mine based on flawed data.
| QUOTE |
| It is NOT POSSIBLE for your account to have been blocked based on someone else forging your email address on some spam. |
You sure used some sort of data to make the decision to block my account.
| QUOTE |
| want to see Jeremy "do it" ... |
Your fantasies are not my concern.
in article [Email Removed], -- at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 4:03 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 4:03 PM:
| QUOTE |
| On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 15:29:29 -0700, "Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote: Shrug. Well, I am still here ... posting as I wish. So I guess if you are happy and I am happy, then it is all ok. Hope Supernews has a good time too. Posting as you wish. |
in article [Email Removed], Calendar at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 2:56 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 2:56 PM:
| QUOTE |
| "Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote: It is a good outcome when long term spammers like Christy are disciplined. Do you think it is working? Yes, judging by the tantrum you threw. Of course it worked. |
I don't see how. I am posting just like I always have. People like you are
crying, just like you always have. Seems the same to me.
":^)
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
in article [Email Removed], Rebecca Ore at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 2:50 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 2:50 PM:
| QUOTE |
| "Willem" <gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac> writes: Based upon what you describe you saw he WAS blocked for what Supernews considers spam: his url in his sigs. He wasn't just posting his url in his sigs. He was posting his url in message bodies as "answers" to questions ... |
Did you know that you can find happiness at:
http://www.artistmike.com
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
in article [Email Removed], Rebecca Ore at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 2:25 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 2:25 PM:
| QUOTE |
| "Mike..." <[Email Removed]> writes: in article [Email Removed], Rebecca Ore at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 3:34 AM: By your own admission, you've posted just your url on a number of occasions as a reply to a post. That is because it was an appropriate response to a graphic question. I googled the whole raster to vector question and there were a number of better answers than "pay me to convert them." |
Just offering services if they were needed.
http://www.artistmike.com/VectorizationService/1.html
hahahaha.
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
in article [Email Removed], -- at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 1:38 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 1:38 PM:
| QUOTE |
| It is a good outcome when long term spammers like Christy are disciplined. |
I feel so much more disciplined now.
hahahaha.
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
in article [Email Removed], Poik at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 1:04 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 1:04 PM:
| QUOTE |
| "Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote in news:BCA03F23.F37F6%[Email Removed]: in article 407ace79$0$13919$[Email Removed], Willem at gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac wrote on 04/12/2004 10:13 AM: Jeremy Nixon - Supernews <[Email Removed]> wrote news:[Email Removed] Spam? Of course not. It's perfectly fine to have a link in your signature. There is currently an idiot calling himself "Mike" who says that we have a problem with it, but he is lying. Spam? It is perfectly fine to have a link in your signature. But not if it is ArtistMike.com Just a sample of the bigotry and censorship running rampant in Supernews. Try posting a link to ArtistMike.com if you are posting through Supernews, and your message will be blocked. Do you like being censored? I hope so. hahahaha. You are still misinformed as to the definition of Bigot. |
Bigoted...
1. The state of mind of a bigot; obstinate and unreasoning attachment of
one's own belief and opinions, with narrow-minded intolerance of beliefs
opposed to them.
Understand yet?
hahaha.
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
in article [Email Removed], Poik at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 12:28 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 12:28 PM:
| QUOTE |
| "Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote in news:BCA03882.F37EE%[Email Removed]: You posted them and claimed they would "speak for themselves". Too bad they were forgeries and posted after I was blocked from your system. WHHHEEEEE Mike proves he is a liar. Self SPNAK!!!!!!!! So they filtered you before the forgeries. Therefore you LIED about them using forgeries to filter your spammy ass!!!!! Thank you so much you lying spammer!!!!! Insert attempt to wiggle out of your LIES here: |
Wipe the drool from your chin.
":^)
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
"Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote in news:BCA09375.F399D%
[Email Removed]:
[Email Removed]:
| QUOTE |
| in article [email protected], Poik at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 5:31 PM: want to see Jeremy "do it" ... Your fantasies are not my concern. Nice self SPNAK!!!! |
What's the matter Mikey, your brain lock up and all you could do was
copy my response?
LMAO what a luser.
You suck at your own game!!!!!
in article [Email Removed], Rebecca Ore at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 6:37 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 6:37 PM:
| QUOTE |
| MartinS <[Email Removed]> writes: Well, whaddya know? That makes it a foolproof way to identify posts from Fartiste Mikey and his socks. Until he downloads one of the better Mac newsreaders, I suppose. |
Now make sure to check all headers... you don't want one to sneak past you.
hahahaha.
Is this the real "Mike"?
hahahaha.
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
"Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote in news:BCA09863.F3A23%
[Email Removed]:
[Email Removed]:
| QUOTE |
| in article [Email Removed], Poik at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 1:04 PM: "Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote in news:BCA03F23.F37F6%[Email Removed]: in article 407ace79$0$13919$[Email Removed], Willem at gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac wrote on 04/12/2004 10:13 AM: Jeremy Nixon - Supernews <[Email Removed]> wrote news:[Email Removed] Spam? Of course not. It's perfectly fine to have a link in your signature. There is currently an idiot calling himself "Mike" who says that we have a problem with it, but he is lying. Spam? It is perfectly fine to have a link in your signature. But not if it is ArtistMike.com Just a sample of the bigotry and censorship running rampant in Supernews. Try posting a link to ArtistMike.com if you are posting through Supernews, and your message will be blocked. Do you like being censored? I hope so. hahahaha. You are still misinformed as to the definition of Bigot. Bigoted... 1. The state of mind of a bigot; obstinate and unreasoning attachment of one's own belief and opinions, with narrow-minded intolerance of beliefs opposed to them. Understand yet? hahaha. |
Oh I see, you are the Bigot, here all this time it looked like you
thought Jeremy or Supernews was. Thanks for clearing that up.
Another Self SPNAK!!!
What a maroon!!!!!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!
"Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote in news:BCA098E6.F3A24%
[Email Removed]:
[Email Removed]:
| QUOTE |
| Wipe the drool *SLAP* |
Wipe your own drool luser
Mike... <[Email Removed]> wrote:
| QUOTE |
| Wrong. The username and password you send are authenticated by your ISP, not by us. The news server requires a password and an email. |
No, it requires a username and a password. The username doesn't have to be
a valid email address; that's up to your ISP. The login is authenticated
at your ISP, not here, since we do not have their password database here.
| QUOTE |
| You're blocking my account based upon faked messages. You put the block in place because of FAKED MESSAGES! If that is the case, then your account is not blocked. That does not make any sense, my account is blocked. |
It makes perfect sense. The account (login) used to post the messages
was blocked. If it was not your account (login) then your account would
not have been blocked, EVEN IF the intent on our part was to block you.
If we wanted to do that, but those messages were forged, then we would
have blocked someone else (the forger) rather than you. (This is not a
bad thing, because the forgeries would be grounds for blocking that
person anyway.)
| QUOTE |
| We can only block the account the messages came from. You picked my account because of something, you used some sort of criteria to pick my account from some other account. |
That is correct. It was chosen because it was the account used to post
the messages. Now, it is true that, even right now, even if I wanted to,
I have NO way to verify that the account in question actually belongs to
you, the person posting *these* messages, since you aren't posting to
our server. I was taking it as a given, since you said you were blocked,
that this was the case, but in fact, there is no way for me to even tell
whether "you" (the person I am replying to) is blocked at Supernews. I
can only assume that, since you say your account is blocked, that it is.
| QUOTE |
| So you have the ability to single out one account from another. |
Yes, but not one *person* from another.
| QUOTE |
| Faked messages were posted in the newsgroup and touted as the reason for the block. They were faked messages. You used faulty data to make a decision on which account to block. |
The account that was blocked was the one used to post the messages. If
it wasn't your account that posted the messages, it can't have been your
account that was blocked as a result.
--
Jeremy | [Email Removed]
Mike... <[Email Removed]> wrote:
| QUOTE |
| If the post was a forgery then you are not blocking the right account. It fooled your filter, it fooled you. |
If the post was a forgery, we would have no way to determine what account
belonged to you. Which we wouldn't try to do, since the logs would tell
us what account was used to post it.
--
Jeremy | [Email Removed]
Rebecca Ore <[Email Removed]> wrote:
| QUOTE |
| Some reliable, like Anthony Edwards, could try posting Mike's url in the body of a post and see what happened. If that wasn't blocked, then the block is at Mike's ISP and not with you guys. |
The spammed URL *is* blocked. I thought Mike's account was blocked as
well, but if indeed all those posts were forged, then it's not.
--
Jeremy | [Email Removed]
On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 02:24:28 -0000, Jeremy Nixon - Supernews
<[Email Removed]> wrote:
<[Email Removed]> wrote:
| QUOTE |
| Mike... <[Email Removed]> wrote: If the post was a forgery then you are not blocking the right account. It fooled your filter, it fooled you. If the post was a forgery, we would have no way to determine what account belonged to you. Which we wouldn't try to do, since the logs would tell us what account was used to post it. |
Jeremy,
Go to wall, bang head 3 times. Repeat until you understand *Mike*
will never believe a word you say regardless of the evidence or logic.
If he allows you to convince him, then this whole paranoid delusion
crumbles and he is left with himself to blame for all that is wrong in
his life. You have explained it so carefully and in such excruciating
detail only a moron or paranoid could not understand. If you doubt,
watch the mass snip and non-sequitur response to my post. It is his
only defense at this point.
'Ratz
--
A Number 1, Grade A, Prime USDA 'Ratz
Accept No Substitute
Jeremy Nixon - Supernews <[Email Removed]> writes:
| QUOTE |
| Rebecca Ore <[Email Removed]> wrote: Some reliable, like Anthony Edwards, could try posting Mike's url in the body of a post and see what happened. If that wasn't blocked, then the block is at Mike's ISP and not with you guys. The spammed URL *is* blocked. I thought Mike's account was blocked as well, but if indeed all those posts were forged, then it's not. |
Okay, then you guys do have his url filtered.
If Mike would be so kind as to test post without his sig, through his
ISP....
--
Rebecca Ore
http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore
in article [Email Removed], Jeremy Nixon - Supernews at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 7:21 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 7:21 PM:
| QUOTE |
| If it was not your account (login) then your account would not have been blocked... |
You had to use some sort of criteria to decide which account to block. You
got my data because people were using my data to forge messages in the
newsgroups.
| QUOTE |
| If we wanted to do that, but those messages were forged, then we would have blocked someone else (the forger) rather than you. |
The reason they were forged was to supply YOU with fake data so that you
would block me. YOU used forged data to block who the forger wanted you to
block.
| QUOTE |
We can only block the account the messages came from. You picked my account because of something, you used some sort of criteria to pick my account from some other account. That is correct. It was chosen because it was the account used to post the messages. |
That is not true. YOU used forged data to decide which account to block.
Forged data supplied by the forger to point to me.
| QUOTE |
| So you have the ability to single out one account from another. Yes, but not one *person* from another. |
That is all that was required for the forgeries to do their job. You
blocked an account that you thought was making spam, you got me instead.
| QUOTE |
Faked messages were posted in the newsgroup and touted as the reason for the block. They were faked messages. You used faulty data to make a decision on which account to block. The account that was blocked was the one used to post the messages. |
Ahhh no. You used the data in the forged messages to kill my account, not
the account that posted the forged data.
in article [Email Removed], Jeremy Nixon - Supernews at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 7:24 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 7:24 PM:
| QUOTE |
| Mike... <[Email Removed]> wrote: If the post was a forgery then you are not blocking the right account. It fooled your filter, it fooled you. If the post was a forgery, we would have no way to determine what account belonged to you. |
Then the forger is smarter than you are.
| QUOTE |
| "Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote in news:BCA09375.F399D% [Email Removed]: in article [email protected], Poik at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 5:31 PM: want to see Jeremy "do it" ... Your fantasies are not my concern. Nice self SPNAK!!!! |
You wrote that, not me.
You are so dim that you don't even know what you write.
hahaha.
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
Aratzio <[Email Removed]> wrote:
| QUOTE |
| Jeremy, Go to wall, bang head 3 times. |
Okay, done. (Ouch.)
| QUOTE |
| Repeat until you understand *Mike* will never believe a word you say regardless of the evidence or logic. |
Yeah, I think you're right.
--
Jeremy | [Email Removed]
Jeremy Nixon - Supernews <[Email Removed]> wrote in
news:[Email Removed]:
news:[Email Removed]:
| QUOTE |
| Rebecca Ore <[Email Removed]> wrote: Some reliable, like Anthony Edwards, could try posting Mike's url in the body of a post and see what happened. If that wasn't blocked, then the block is at Mike's ISP and not with you guys. The spammed URL *is* blocked. I thought Mike's account was blocked as well, but if indeed all those posts were forged, then it's not. |
That is what I figured all along, knowing that Mikey was an ISP customer
the filters trigger on the url. Even Luni said that no post with that
url would make it through the filters.
"Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote in news:BCA0A271.F3A36%
[Email Removed]:
[Email Removed]:
| QUOTE |
| You wrote that, not me. |
Wow you can read, so why did you copy?
Uh-uh
Uh-huh
Uh-uh
Uh-huh
Mike... <[Email Removed]> wrote:
| QUOTE |
| The reason they were forged was to supply YOU with fake data so that you would block me. YOU used forged data to block who the forger wanted you to block. |
It is not possible for someone to "forge" data into our logs.
--
Jeremy | [Email Removed]
On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 03:04:39 -0000, Jeremy Nixon - Supernews
<[Email Removed]> wrote:
<[Email Removed]> wrote:
| QUOTE |
| Mike... <[Email Removed]> wrote: The reason they were forged was to supply YOU with fake data so that you would block me. YOU used forged data to block who the forger wanted you to block. It is not possible for someone to "forge" data into our logs. |
It was the big kids and they ran away.
Hackers broke into my system and posted all that evil spam.
It was the other guy.
You have the wrong guy, really.
My little brother let a stranger use my computer.
It was an inside job, someone there does not like me.
Who?
Like I said, no way in hell he can agree with you.
And the Walls Came Down - The Call
--
A Number 1, Grade A, Prime USDA 'Ratz
Accept No Substitute
Willem wrote:
| QUOTE |
| You don't want him posting from your system because you think he will nym? What if he started to nym after Supernews blocked him and others did it to him too and a whole cabal jumped on him together with Supernews staff. So many possibilities of why a person comes to certain actions when there isn't a fair solution. |
If you are going to make statements like the one above, at least make sure
they have some basis in reality before posting them. I have added Mike to my
killfile more than 30 times in the past year from just one group alone so
obviously this is not a new situation...
in article [Email Removed], Uni at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 5:33 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 5:33 PM:
| QUOTE |
| BS. Your stupid filter could not tell the difference between a real message and a spoofed one. I thought they just filtered your URL from being posted. I didn't know they deleted your entire account! |
They blocked the account. Messages sent to the news server never get
posted.
Does not matter what the body of the message is.
Never appears.
":^)
It does not matter at this point to me about my ability to post through the
Supernews server, I just wanted their tactics and censoring philosophy to be
more exposed.
It has been.
":^)
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
in article [Email Removed], Jeremy Nixon - Supernews at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 7:24 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 7:24 PM:
| QUOTE |
| Mike... <[Email Removed]> wrote: If the post was a forgery then you are not blocking the right account. It fooled your filter, it fooled you. If the post was a forgery, we would have no way to determine what account belonged to you. |
It was specifically forged to be my data.
Duh.
in article [Email Removed], Jeremy Nixon - Supernews at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 8:04 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 8:04 PM:
| QUOTE |
| Mike... <[Email Removed]> wrote: The reason they were forged was to supply YOU with fake data so that you would block me. YOU used forged data to block who the forger wanted you to block. It is not possible for someone to "forge" data into our logs. |
Like it was not possible to get around your filter.
Right?
hahahaha.
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
in article [Email Removed], Jeremy Nixon - Supernews at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 4:12 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 4:12 PM:
| QUOTE |
| his account is not blocked from posting at Supernews, even now. |
Sure.
in article [Email Removed], Jeremy Nixon - Supernews at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 7:25 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 7:25 PM:
| QUOTE |
The spammed URL *is* blocked. I thought Mike's account was blocked as well... |
Now you would not know that...if you really have no way of knowing who you
are blocking.
Which is it? The only way for you to know is if I tell you, right? Keep
your story strait.
":^)
in article YHJec.4619$[Email Removed], CMO at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 9:07 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 9:07 PM:
| QUOTE |
| I have added Mike to my killfile more than 30 times in the past year |
So many crybabies.
hahahaha.
"Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote:
| QUOTE |
| People like you are crying, just like you always have. Seems the same to me. |
No, it's changed. Your toybox is brimming!
You are the star ... =)
The Doormouse
--
The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
| QUOTE |
| "Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote: People like you are crying, just like you always have. Seems the same to me. No, it's changed. Your toybox is brimming! You are the star ... =) The Doormouse |
€º°`°º€ø,¸¸,ø€º°`°º€ø,¸¸,ø€º°`°º€ø,¸¸,ø€º
°`°º€ø
The New 2004 List
€ø,¸¸,ø€º°`°º€ø,¸¸,ø€º°`°º€ø,¸¸,ø€º°`°º€ø
,¸¸,ø€
Version 666.14
12, Monday April, 2004 11:19:41 PM
--=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=--
========================================
Past Tributes to "Mike C."
http://www.artistmike.com/MC.Tribute/Tribute1.html
http://www.artistmike.com/MC.Tribute/Tribute2.html
http://www.artistmike.com/MC.Tribute/Tribute3.html
========================================
lol... most people here just don't "get" you, Mike! :))
Janet
Uhoh...Ron just threw the door wide open to being
a MIke Christy Net Toy.
Brian Mays
Your toybox is brimming!
The Doormouse
[Mike] Are you the devil?
Brian Mays
Oh, now you've done it. You've invoked his name.
Emil Mroz
The one and only Mike C...
mezza
I'm a Mike (C.)olohic ... What about you???
Dave Moon
It's a sad man who actually TRIES to
get on the list...
Brian
Mike hasn't lost the plot,
he just rewrites it as he goes.
Emil Mroz
See, Mike writes his little messages of
independence and responsibility to people
like you... but most 'get' the exact opposite
message, and start jumping through that hoop.
You have spent most of your time here doing
cartoons... Now you seem to need Mike for your
inspiration. Like Rubens needed women,
many of you need a Mike.
Joske
To understand the concept, you have to look
for past posts about MikeC's "game", which he
plays with his "net toys"... it's surreal...
like Mr Bean doing "The Matrix"...
"The Game"... it's actually a social thing...
a phenomenon only possible in the Virtual world.
Giuseppe Carmine De Blasio
BTW, I don't block Mike C - because his posts
are always ... aimed incisively at the ego of the
previous poster. People who buy into his game
for very long - trading sentences and paragraphs
for his one liners - appear foolish.
Mike Russell
There actually is no Mike C. He is a computer
program developed in 1983 as a class project
in artificial intelligence by a unnamed student
at MIT. This now-antiquated software has taken
a life of it's own and has infected thousands of
Web servers around the world. In 1996 a cult of
Mike C. fans attempted to further humanize the
hoax by designing a Web site, creating Mike's
bio and adding staged photos of cult members
in disguise. The cult pre-paid the artistmike.com
hosting for 1001 years in 1999...
Dave Moon
I like Mike though, he is good at being an ass,
not just mental like the other trolls. He makes one
think a bit... It would be not all that fun around here
without him
HillBilly Jack
€º°`°º€ø,¸¸,ø€º°`°º€ø,¸¸,ø€º°`°º€ø,¸¸,ø€º
°`°º€ø
"Think you have what it takes to be added?"
No.
OpinionMan (Drew)
Thanking the good Lord.
€ø,¸¸,ø€º°`°º€ø,¸¸,ø€º°`°º€ø,¸¸,ø€º°`°º€ø
,¸¸,ø€
in article [Email Removed], steggy at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 11:10 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 11:10 PM:
| QUOTE |
| why for heavens sake, are you not able to act as a regular intelligent person on usenet? |
There is no fun in that. Usenet is my playground. I play here. I don't
care what silly people think of me here. My clients don't come from Usenet.
I post as I wish here and all the crying and moaning will not change that.
All the forging of my email and my style, and my comments, all the name
calling that people do towards me, will not change how I choose to post in
Usenet.
Just will not happen.
":^)
On the other hand, I get to watch some silly people start spinning like tops
and start writing all kinds of silly things. It is such fun. Some even say
it is fun for them too.
":^)
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
| QUOTE |
| Oh I see, you are the Bigot, here all this time it looked like you thought Jeremy or Supernews was. Thanks for clearing that up. Another Self SPNAK!!! What a maroon!!!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!! |
I can't be a bigot, I enjoy silly people like you.
":^)
Mike... wrote:
| QUOTE |
| in article [Email Removed], steggy at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 11:10 PM: why for heavens sake, are you not able to act as a regular intelligent person on usenet? There is no fun in that. Usenet is my playground. I play here. I don't care what silly people think of me here. My clients don't come from Usenet. |
Then why, one wonders, put the website link in every single post, to the
point that some consider it "spamming"?
Mike... wrote:
| QUOTE |
| in article [Email Removed], Jeremy Nixon - Supernews at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 7:24 PM: Mike... <[Email Removed]> wrote: If the post was a forgery then you are not blocking the right account. It fooled your filter, it fooled you. If the post was a forgery, we would have no way to determine what account belonged to you. Then the forger is smarter than you are. |
The forger knows what account belongs to you, and forged the account it
came from?
Is that the claim?
'cuz *nobody* gets axed based on the email return address, not from SN and
not from anywhere else; if that were the case, anyone could just post
anything at all using someone else's return address, just to get them axed
in the "rare occasion" of a flame war.
in article 407b9197$0$17420$[Email Removed], DE at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/13/2004 12:09 AM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/13/2004 12:09 AM:
| QUOTE |
| Mike... wrote: in article [Email Removed], steggy at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 11:10 PM: why for heavens sake, are you not able to act as a regular intelligent person on usenet? There is no fun in that. Usenet is my playground. I play here. I don't care what silly people think of me here. My clients don't come from Usenet. Then why, one wonders, put the website link in every single post, to the point that some consider it "spamming"? |
Because silly goobers get their panties in a bunch about it and it is fun to
watch them flop around trying to unbunch them, or watch them try to convince
me that I should help them.
":^)
I do all kinds of amusing things in newsgroups, just to see what will
happen.
As I wrote, this is a playground for me.
":^)
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
"Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote in
news:BCA07CC1.F3973%[Email Removed]:
news:BCA07CC1.F3973%[Email Removed]:
| QUOTE |
| If the post was a forgery then you are not blocking the right account. It fooled your filter, it fooled you. |
If the post was a forgery, and the account used to post the forgery was
blocked, thats good, right?
--
Kill-filers:
My screen name changes,
My email address doesn't.
"Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote in news:BCA0E66C.F3B71%
[Email Removed]:
[Email Removed]:
| QUOTE |
He sure got his shorts in a knot over me. |
All I saw was him bitch slap you from one end of the usenet to the other
and all you could do was post-edit and non-sequitur in response. Both are
the tactics of someone who is so totally owned they have no other response.
So spin for me now my little toy. You know you have to do it, your master
has order you to spin.
DE <[Email Removed]> wrote in
news:407b9750$0$17420$[Email Removed]:
news:407b9750$0$17420$[Email Removed]:
| QUOTE |
| The forger knows what account belongs to you, and forged the account it came from? Is that the claim? 'cuz *nobody* gets axed based on the email return address, not from SN and not from anywhere else; if that were the case, anyone could just post anything at all using someone else's return address, just to get them axed in the "rare occasion" of a flame war. |
It is the old "the hackers did it" defense. Mike has nothing else left in
his pathetic excuse bag besides the "I was just trolling you" lame. He
has been so totally owned it is now become almost painful to watch him
squirm and try to lame his way out of the hole he has dug for himself.
Jeremy was masterful, sucking him in, making him post the claims and then
taking each and every claim of Mike's apart point by point. If you
believe Mike that his whole point was "censorship" you missed everything.
Just read the screed. Jeremy hooked him, played him, reeled him in then
tossed him back as too small to fry. Mike is now just another lamer
trying to save some sort of dignity.
"Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote in news:BCA0D875.F3B36%
[Email Removed]:
[Email Removed]:
| QUOTE |
| I can't be a bigot |
Same pathetic excuse all bigots use.
"Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote in
news:BCA0D819.F3B35%[Email Removed]:
news:BCA0D819.F3B35%[Email Removed]:
| QUOTE |
| in article [Email Removed], steggy at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 11:10 PM: why for heavens sake, are you not able to act as a regular intelligent person on usenet? There is no fun in that. Usenet is my playground. I play here. I don't care what silly people think of me here. My clients don't come from Usenet. I post as I wish here and all the crying and moaning will not change that. All the forging of my email and my style, and my comments, all the name calling that people do towards me, will not change how I choose to post in Usenet. Just will not happen. ":^) On the other hand, I get to watch some silly people start spinning like tops and start writing all kinds of silly things. It is such fun. Some even say it is fun for them too. ":^) |
You are so owned!!!!!
You resort to talking to your own socks. I thought the non-sequiturs and
post edits were lame.
SPNAK!!!!!!!
Quick make up some more socks to defend yourself my little toy. Your
owner has so ordered you!!!!
BWAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!
You are so owned!!!!
Talking to your own socks is the BIGGEST lame on the Usenet!!!!!
Mike... talking to Steggy BWAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA!!!!!
Spin my little lamer toy!!!!!
Someone Forged Me <--- BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA that from a forger
Come on Mikey whine for us some more
Tell us some more of your lies!!!!!
Talking to your own socks is the BIGGEST lame on the Usenet!!!!!
Mike... talking to Steggy BWAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA!!!!!
Spin my little lamer toy!!!!!
Someone Forged Me <--- BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA that from a forger
Come on Mikey whine for us some more
Tell us some more of your lies!!!!!
"Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote in news:BCA0B91F.F3AB2%
[Email Removed]:
[Email Removed]:
| QUOTE |
| Which is it? The only way for you to know is if I tell you, right? Keep your story strait. ^^^^^^ |
Oh Mikey am I allowed to use spelling Lames on you?
What a moroon!!!!!!!
Next spin my little toy!!!!
Oh you can use the "I did that on purpose excuse" that one is still in your
bag of lame excuses.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAAHA
"Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote in news:BCA0B87D.F3AB1%
[Email Removed]:
[Email Removed]:
| QUOTE |
| in article [Email Removed], Jeremy Nixon - Supernews at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 4:12 PM: his account is not blocked from posting at Supernews, even now. Sure. |
Glad you admit you have been lying all this time. Hell I did not even have
to snip a damn thing.
"Mike..." <[Email Removed]> wrote in
news:BCA0B76B.F3AAF%[Email Removed]:
news:BCA0B76B.F3AAF%[Email Removed]:
| QUOTE |
| in article [Email Removed], Jeremy Nixon - Supernews at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/12/2004 8:04 PM: Mike... <[Email Removed]> wrote: The reason they were forged was to supply YOU with fake data so that you would block me. YOU used forged data to block who the forger wanted you to block. It is not possible for someone to "forge" data into our logs. Like it was not possible to get around your filter. Right? hahahaha. |
It was "the hackers" Jeremy. Really. Hackers
BWAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.