David <***@home.now> news:_GFAF.2$***@fx04.dcg Mon, 18 Nov 2019
23:20:26 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
[snip]
Post by DavidPerhaps you are referring to Richard, a retired airline pilot, who
was pissed off about making bad decisions with regards to his
pension arrangements. I was a professional pensions adviser and he
called my expertise into doubt. Is that what you are thinking
about?
How many more times will I have to remind you that I will not give up
any of my source(s) that know you in real life? I'd like those lines
of communication to remain open; and they can't very well do that if
you go and annoy the fuck out of them, as I'm sure you would, if you
knew who was talking about you. :) I'm getting a real kick out of you
not beng able to tell who's been sharing your dirty laundry with me.
And the more you call me a liar, yet, forget having tried to defend
yourself with an explanation, the funnier this gets. Not only for me,
but for others who are reading these posts. We ALL know I got you,
dead to rights, and you have been LYING about not being a drunkard
since I exposed you, a few years ago, for being exactly that.
It's even worse when you refuse to answer a very simple question that
I've asked you several times now. That question is, how in the fuck
would I know anything about a lost friendship/relationship/business
dealing relationship that you haven't as far as I know (prior to my
bringing up the fact you're a real life, drunk!) discussed on usenet
and at no time did you ever mention it to me via email; remember,
asshat, our entire email correspondence has been shared online. Even
the remailing coward read some of it. So, how did I find out about
this issue you had with an individual, if one or more people who are
in your inner circle didn't tell me about it? And, provide specific
details concerning it.
Three times now, I've reminded you, this is a relationship you lost
due to your smart mouth, which gets worse when you've been hitting
the bottle. You have tried, AND FAILED, to re-establish this
relationship, multiple times now. So please, save your lies, quit
trying to pass this particular relationship off as the
insurance/airline pilot/whatever story you've tried to peddle twice.
This is someone you actually give a shit about, an individual who
provides an opinion you actually consider. Not a failed business
relationship. As I told you, the first time I disclosed knowledge of
this, that I couldn't possibly have, if I was lying about knowing
people in your inner circle.
David, since the cats already out of the bag and there's no fucking
way you can put it back, I'll tell you straight up; YOU (not me)
confirmed my claims of your drinking when you tried to defend
yourself going so far as to give your side of the lost relationship
story. INSTEAD OF DOING ANY OF THAT, you should have stuck with what
you do best and lied your fucking ass off by saying you didn't have a
clue about what I was writing about, not a bit of a clue.
Instead, evidently not realizing what you were doing at the time (too
worried about defending your own reputation? <G>), you go and provide
your own version of the events that I described, along with accusing
me of hacking into one or more of your computers and taking
information which gave me the information I shared on usenet about
your drinking problem.
YOU CONFIRMED WHAT I WROTE ABOUT YOUR DRINKING PROBLEM, yourself, all
of your own doing, Prior to you responding with that, I couldn't have
actually supported anything i'd written without giving up source(s);
which I wasn't (and still haven't) about to do. I took a chance and
it worked out, instead of deny deny deny as you typically do, because
you only saw the attack on your fine character, you went into defend
defend defend, and that boyo, got your ass. :-)
Yes, David, read it again, slowly this time. YOU CONFIRMED that what
I wrote about your drinking and it resulting in the loss of a
friendship by taking what I wrote as a personal attack (I figured you
would, I worded it a specific way rofl) and going into defend mode,
instead of what you should have done, deny.
Upto that point, had you been smart, even for a second, and played
dumb, I'd have looked like an asshat; I really couldn't prove
anything I'd written about your excessive drinking without you being
able to track my source(s) and swifty deal with them for exposing
you. I knew you were a drunk, no doubt about it, I suspected it when
you were emailing me; you had/still have some tell tales about you.
Anyone who's had to interact with a drunkard (or live/s) with one,
knows them; you really are all the same with that particular drug of
choice. The email archive between us is a preserved copy of those
tells, visible to anyone who's been around someone like you. Dead
give aways.
So, when Mike Easter proclaims there's no proof you're a drunkard,
he's exposing the fact he has little to no 1st hand knowledge of the
specimen or subject; and that's not the first time he's dug himself a
hole with you, either. There's all kinds of it. It's in your posts,
it's in your known online activities. He's just an ignorant shit
concerning that subject too. Just as ignorant as he was when he wrote
this nonsense:
Message-ID: <***@mid.individual.net>
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=155278479000
OUAT onceuponatime BD mistreated/used various public personae,
then/now Diesel bullies BD (and others), now various mail2news
anonymizer/s bully Diesel.
**** end snippit
He has a unique definition to bully and stalking just as you do to
truth. It's very convenient for the two of you, but makes interaction
and getting on the same page with either of you, a task for the poor
soul wishing to do so.
--
Bumper sticker: "Help! She's farted and I can't get out."