[FairfieldLife] Curtis the Compassionate (was Re: J gets another fact wrong and S apologizes to)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jason" wrote: (snip) > She is incredibly pedantic and didactic and to a little > extent tone-deaf as well. > > She simply lacks the "feel", the "touch" and the > intuition that one would expect from an intellectual > philosopher. You're welcome to your opinion. I don't believe I've ever claimed to be an "intellectual philosopher," however, and certainly don't consider myself to be one. > Anybody who had read Robin's post about Khomeni in UC would > know that he is plain nuts. Jason has apparently missed the fact that Robin himself acknowledged he was nuts when he wrote that (it was from a book he wrote 30 years ago). He's long since completely rejected it. (Somebody else posted the quote, BTW, hoping to embarrass him.) > Here, she is so obtuse that she "defends" him over and > over again as if her very survival depends on it. I'll defend anyone from what I consider unfair attacks, Jason, even you. In this case, though, you're the one making the unfair attack (although I assume it's out of ignorance, not deliberately).
[FairfieldLife] Curtis the Compassionate (was Re: J gets another fact wrong and S apologizes to)
> > > > --- "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > That's my 50th. I'll be back this evening. > > > > > > > --- turquoiseb wrote: > > > > With *another* 50 posts vilifying Share, Curtis, Steve, > > and your other enemies? Wow, what a surprise. > > > > Do you even *realize* that this is what you did this > > last week, and that you didn't post about anything > > *else* THAN trying to "get* the people you don't like? > > > > And do you realize that you did all of this under the > > pretense that you care about and are trying to "protect* > > a person who 1) never asked for your "protection," 2) > > doesn't need "protecting," 3) is probably embarrassed > > by your horseshit and wishes you'd shut up, and 4) knows > > better than anyone else that he has *nothing* to do > > with why you're doing it? > > > > You're acting like an insane, vindictive bitch because > > you ARE an insane, vindictive bitch. > > > > This is just what you DO -- stalk and torment the folks > > you don't like. And WHY? Because they won't bow to your > > supposed "authority" and your tendency to claim that you > > "know" things they do not, and that your "knowing" is > > always correct. > > > > There's a term for this. It's called narcissism. When > > this kind of behavior goes on for as long as it has > > in you (18+ YEARS), there's a term for what this means, > > psychologically speaking -- Narcissistic Personality > > Disorder, with a soupçon of malevolent Sociopathic > > Disorder thrown in to make it taste even worse. > > > > There is nothing anyone can do to stop you acting > > out your pathologies on this forum, but there IS > > something we can do to be affected by them as little > > as possible, and to reduce the signal-to-noise ratio. > > > > DON'T PARTICIPATE. > > > > By doing so -- by taking the bait and "defending > > yourself" when Judy tries to get you to do just that, > > you're becoming a co-dependent to her psychoses. You > > are, in fact, facilitating them and perpetuating them. > > > > For the love of God (if you believe in such silliness), > > STOP. > --- "Susan" wrote: > > This is, imo, a brilliant idea :-) From just scanning > things, there seems to be an awful lot of "he said, no no > he meant, you are a dishonest person if you don't > agree with me, that word really means, she said, what I > really really said, take an hour and review those posts > of 2 years ago, I have proof, blah blah blah." These > people have never met each other!!! Still, if you like > this sort of interaction, I guess you continue on. She is incredibly pedantic and didactic and to a little extent tone-deaf as well. She simply lacks the "feel", the "touch" and the intuition that one would expect from an intellectual philosopher. Anybody who had read Robin's post about Khomeni in UC would know that he is plain nuts. Here, she is so obtuse that she "defends" him over and over again as if her very survival depends on it. > > > > This advice will be wasted on Ravi and Ann and possibly > > Emily, who are all heavily invested IN perpetuating > > this psychosis. DrD is a non-entity, having taken him- > > self out of the equation in his usual...ahem... > > enlightened fashion. > > > > But Curtis? You know better than to allow this shit to > > perpetuate itself. Steve? You do, too. And above all, > > SHARE? *You* are as guilty as anyone else here of > > bringing up this tired old shit again every time it > > dies down. > > > > Ferchrissakes, STOP. > > > > Let Judy and her few remaining minions be the only ones > > who post about this non-issue next week. Let them embar- > > rass themselves BY continuing to beat this very dead, > > very smelly horse carcass again next week. They are > > beyond hope. > > > > But there's still hope for the co-dependent participants > > in this embarrassing, seemingly eternal soap opera. You > > don't have to participate unless you actually enjoy it. > > > > If you DO participate, I for one have to assume that > > you are making a statement that you DO enjoy it, and that > > you hope it continues. > > >
[FairfieldLife] Curtis the Compassionate (was Re: J gets another fact wrong and S apologizes to)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37" wrote: > > The "online reputation" thing is a bit of a red > herring in this case, I think. You would only > search on RC's name + the offending term if you > already knew there was some issue regarding it. > Just searching on "Robin Carlsen," as I just did, > produced a lot of interesting references but none > (at least in the first few pages, which is all I > looked at) to the offending term. Thank you, feste, of course you are absolutely correct. The only folks who are likely to run into the accusation are those who search *FFL* for posts by and/or about Robin--and it'll be obvious to them that Robin had more defenders than accusers, and that (sorry, feste) the accuser was a slice short of a sandwich and couldn't (or wouldn't) explain why she made the accusation in the first place. Curtis knows all this perfectly well. He isn't stupid. His red herring was calculated to intimidate us to stop calling Share to account (and to stir up trouble between me and Robin, the way he tried to do last year--to no effect except to damage his own reputation). Oh, yes, and of course nobody would be doing a search on Google or Yahoo for "MaskedZebra" *at all* unless they'd already found Robin on FFL. Either that little detail escaped Curtis entirely when he posted his "statistics," or he thought nobody would be smart enough to notice that it ground his red herring into little tiny bits. There are even more reasons why Curtis's "statistics" are thoroughly bogus, but these two are more than sufficient.
[FairfieldLife] Curtis the Compassionate (was Re: J gets another fact wrong and S apologizes to)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: (snip) > > For the love of God (if you believe in such silliness), > > STOP. > > This is, imo, a brilliant idea :-) Unfortunately, Susan, as it happens I'm in full accord with Barry on this (although perhaps not for the reason he states; see my post to him earlier). > From just scanning things, there seems to be an awful > lot of "he said, no no he meant, you are a dishonest > person if you don't agree with me, No, I don't think even Share said that, Susan. Would be kind of foolish, no? > that word really means, she said, what I really really > said, take an hour and review those posts of 2 years ago, Don't think anyone said that either. But some controversies are very complex, and you can't have a clear idea of what's involved without reading a good hunk of the backstory in past posts. If you aren't willing to do that--which is surely understandable--it's probably best not to comment at all, either on the substance of the controversy or on what you believe you've gleaned from "just scanning things." > I have proof, blah blah blah." > These people have never met each other!!! Well, you know, that's why some of us find it quite mysterious that Share would have accused Robin of "psychological rape." On an Internet forum? Really? > Still, if you like this sort of interaction, I guess > you continue on. Actually, we'd like her to stop repeating the accusation. It's incredibly ugly and deeply hurtful to Robin. We wish she'd *retract* it, because there doesn't seem to be any basis for it and there's no way of knowing what she even means by it, since she won't tell us.
[FairfieldLife] Curtis the Compassionate (was Re: J gets another fact wrong and S apologizes to)
-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > That's my 50th. I'll be back this evening. > > With *another* 50 posts vilifying Share, Curtis, Steve, > and your other enemies? Wow, what a surprise. > > Do you even *realize* that this is what you did this > last week, and that you didn't post about anything > *else* THAN trying to "get* the people you don't like? Well, no, I didn't "realize" this, I guess because (surprise!) it isn't true. I made a bunch of posts that had nothing to do with "getting" anybody. (Also because many of the rest of my posts were defending myself from people who don't like me who were trying to "get" me, such as yourself, for example.) See what happens when you don't read my posts? You make REEELY REEELY STOOPID mistakes and give me a golden opportunity to "get" you *again*. > And do you realize that you did all of this under the > pretense that you care about and are trying to "protect* > a person who 1) never asked for your "protection," 2) > doesn't need "protecting," 3) is probably embarrassed > by your horseshit and wishes you'd shut up, and 4) knows > better than anyone else that he has *nothing* to do > with why you're doing it? You know, Barry, for you, your cluelessness is bliss. For me, it's a belly laugh. > You're acting like an insane, vindictive bitch because > you ARE an insane, vindictive bitch. Gee, I'm just emulating you, Barry. Except that I'm keeping it fair and honest. (snip) > There's a term for this. It's called narcissism. When > this kind of behavior goes on for as long as it has > in you (18+ YEARS), there's a term for what this means, > psychologically speaking -- Narcissistic Personality > Disorder, with a soupçon of malevolent Sociopathic > Disorder thrown in to make it taste even worse. Yes, Doctor. Where did you say you got your training in psychiatric diagnosis via Internet forum again? > There is nothing anyone can do to stop you acting > out your pathologies on this forum, but there IS > something we can do to be affected by them as little > as possible, and to reduce the signal-to-noise ratio. > > DON'T PARTICIPATE. Barry has been trying to get people to ignore me for *years*. He's been really successful, hasn't he? > By doing so -- by taking the bait and "defending > yourself" when Judy tries to get you to do just that, > you're becoming a co-dependent to her psychoses. You > are, in fact, facilitating them and perpetuating them. > > For the love of God (if you believe in such silliness), > STOP. By all means, STOP. I absolutely agree with Barry here. If you don't try to defend yourselves, I don't have to waste my time refuting your defense or defending myself from your counterattacks, and whatever I've said about you will stand unchallenged. Then I'll have the time and the posts to partake in more rewarding discussions. I've explained this to Barry many, many times before, but for some reason he has terrible difficulty understanding it. (snip) > But Curtis? You know better than to allow this shit to > perpetuate itself. Steve? You do, too. And above all, > SHARE? *You* are as guilty as anyone else here of > bringing up this tired old shit again every time it > dies down. Actually, she's the *only* one who brings it up. If she'd shut up about it and stick to her orgasmic platitudes, we'd leave her alone. > Ferchrissakes, STOP. > > Let Judy and her few remaining minions be the only ones > who post about this non-issue next week. Let them embar- > rass themselves BY continuing to beat this very dead, > very smelly horse carcass again next week. They are > beyond hope. Again, if folks behave like decent human beings and turn to other topics, you won't see any posts from us about this.
[FairfieldLife] Curtis the Compassionate (was Re: J gets another fact wrong and S apologizes to)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: (snip) > > BTW, many if not most of my posts that will come > > up for someone doing a search (using appropriate > > terms) will be from last fall, when Robin was still > > posting to FFL and could easily have asked me and > > his other defenders to shut up about Share's > > accusation if that's what he wanted. > > > > For that matter, now that he's not posting, if he's > > reading FFL he most likely could figure out a way > > to let me and/or others know he wishes we'd leave > > it all lay. After all, he would no doubt be reading > > Curtis's posts along with the rest, so he would be > > well informed about the terrible damage we were doing > > to his online reputation. > > > > And if Robin isn't reading FFL, surely Curtis, out > > of his deep concern for Robin's welfare, would shoot > > him a private email warning him of the shredding of > > his image at our hands. > > > > (inappropriate horselaugh) > > > > And also by the way, Curtis old sock, Share deserves > > everything she's getting and more. You're a smart > > fella, you know what kind of person she is--both low- > > down mean and irrational, willfully disconnected from > > reality. How compassionate of you to enable her in her > > sickness. Of course, it's just purely coincidental > > that her rabid hatefulness is directed at your worst > > FFL enemy and his supporters. Curtis, gloat? Not a > > chance. > > > > That's my 50th. I'll be back this evening. > > Consider that a warning you nasty, evil, lying, rabid, spiteful > and sick individuals. You better believe it. > Erm...whoever you are I know, sometimes I lose track myself. There are so *many* of them, and THEY'RE ALL AGAINST ME!!!
[FairfieldLife] Curtis the Compassionate (was Re: J gets another fact wrong and S apologizes to)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > Gee Judy, then just continue to "help" Robin by > making sure that his name continues to be > associated with that term (Curtis means to say, by making sure that Robin's name continues to be associated with a very vigorous rejection of an irrational accusation made by an individual with mental problems.) > while pretending to be "helping" him by doing so. One more time (is this tune beginning to sound familiar?): Curtis has no inhibitions whatsoever about telling others what their own thought processes are, but he shrieks with hypocritical outrage when anyone does it to him. > I pointed out the crazy logic and you doubled down. Well, what I actually did was explain why your logic doesn't hold up under examination. Oddly enough, you've had no substantive response to my analysis; all you've done is reiterated your own illogical premises as if I hadn't said a word. I do believe that's what "doubling down" is. Curtis legislates reality. > If he doesn't care neither do I. You need me to explain > what that stat means? As I recall, I already covered that in the very post to which you're responding: > > This is fun. Curtis hasn't the foggiest idea what this > > statistic might *mean*, but he hasn't got anything else, > > and he figures the difference in the numbers in and of > > itself might look as if it were somehow significant > > support for his claim that I'm doing Robin dirt because > > I don't give a shit about him. > > > > He will decline to respond if I ask him, but if someone > > else does, it'll be quite a treat to watch him try to > > come up with some explanation as to what the statistics > > prove. > > > > And if someone can get him to do that, I'll trot out a > > few of the more obvious reasons why he's speaking via > > his nether regions as he tries to claw his way out of > > the hole he's dug for himself. > But the illusion that you are "helping" him has > been blown for those who are not committed to the > fantasy that you are. Translation: "Blown" for those whom Curtis has convinced that his word is law and who therefore don't bother to test what he decrees against reality. (He's already determined what the reality is and has carefully designed his pronouncements specifically to preempt it.) So much bullshit, Curtis. > I know what this is really about. You've found an online > emotional punching bag and you are not gunna let a small > thing like throwing Robin under the bus deter you from > your twisted pleasure. He chose this alliance with > stupidity, so carry on, now transparently. Yeah, right. One more time (is this tune beginning to sound familiar?): Curtis has no inhibitions whatsoever about telling others what their own thought processes are, but he shrieks like a scalded cat when anyone does it to him. Double standards, anyone? Hardly the first instance in Curtis's case. Yes, Curtis, you're fun to punch. Your opinion of yourself is so inflated you go all wobbly and clutch your pearls when someone stands up to you; it's quite entertaining. Now hear this: It was Share who threw Robin under the bus, with your kind assistance. Some of us think he got a raw deal and are pulling him out. You're not going to shove him back under again, so go fuck with somebody else. > It does make me laugh though. I guess my concern that the > person who made another poster feel the need to use such a > term was getting off lighter than the one who used it (Translation: I tried my best to make the guy who had been unjustly accused of "psychological rape" by a crazy person into the villain of the piece. And would you believe it, not everyone thought that made perfect sense. My God, am I losing my touch?) You know what, Curtis? I hereby accuse you of being a sociopathic pervert. What?? You're protesting? Your allies are up in arms? How come you're getting off so lightly and folks are all upset with *me*? Why is nobody concerned about what you've done that made me feel the need to use such a term? DIG yourself, Curtis. >, has been karmically corrected now. Yes, and if you still have any functioning synapses, you'll do your best not to incur any more of that there bad karma. > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > wrote: > > > > > > Ignoring all the Judy blather on this topic, > > > > Translation: Well, gee, she caught me in another > > batch of lies. I mean, what else can I do? > > > > > I will just put it this way: > > > > > > Search yahoo for the combination of references to PS > > > > > > Maskedzebra 24 > > > > > > Authfriend 81 > > > > This is fun. Curtis hasn't the foggiest idea what this > > statistic might *mean*, but he hasn't got anything else, > > and he figures the difference in the numbers in and of > > itself might look as if it were somehow significant > > support for his claim
[FairfieldLife] Curtis the Compassionate (was Re: J gets another fact wrong and S apologizes to)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > That's my 50th. I'll be back this evening. > > With *another* 50 posts vilifying Share, Curtis, Steve, > and your other enemies? Wow, what a surprise. > > Do you even *realize* that this is what you did this > last week, and that you didn't post about anything > *else* THAN trying to "get* the people you don't like? > > And do you realize that you did all of this under the > pretense that you care about and are trying to "protect* > a person who 1) never asked for your "protection," 2) > doesn't need "protecting," 3) is probably embarrassed > by your horseshit and wishes you'd shut up, and 4) knows > better than anyone else that he has *nothing* to do > with why you're doing it? > > You're acting like an insane, vindictive bitch because > you ARE an insane, vindictive bitch. > > This is just what you DO -- stalk and torment the folks > you don't like. And WHY? Because they won't bow to your > supposed "authority" and your tendency to claim that you > "know" things they do not, and that your "knowing" is > always correct. > > There's a term for this. It's called narcissism. When > this kind of behavior goes on for as long as it has > in you (18+ YEARS), there's a term for what this means, > psychologically speaking -- Narcissistic Personality > Disorder, with a soupçon of malevolent Sociopathic > Disorder thrown in to make it taste even worse. > > There is nothing anyone can do to stop you acting > out your pathologies on this forum, but there IS > something we can do to be affected by them as little > as possible, and to reduce the signal-to-noise ratio. > > DON'T PARTICIPATE. > > By doing so -- by taking the bait and "defending > yourself" when Judy tries to get you to do just that, > you're becoming a co-dependent to her psychoses. You > are, in fact, facilitating them and perpetuating them. > > For the love of God (if you believe in such silliness), > STOP. This is, imo, a brilliant idea :-) From just scanning things, there seems to be an awful lot of "he said, no no he meant, you are a dishonest person if you don't agree with me, that word really means, she said, what I really really said, take an hour and review those posts of 2 years ago, I have proof, blah blah blah." These people have never met each other!!! Still, if you like this sort of interaction, I guess you continue on. > > This advice will be wasted on Ravi and Ann and possibly > Emily, who are all heavily invested IN perpetuating > this psychosis. DrD is a non-entity, having taken him- > self out of the equation in his usual...ahem... > enlightened fashion. > > But Curtis? You know better than to allow this shit to > perpetuate itself. Steve? You do, too. And above all, > SHARE? *You* are as guilty as anyone else here of > bringing up this tired old shit again every time it > dies down. > > Ferchrissakes, STOP. > > Let Judy and her few remaining minions be the only ones > who post about this non-issue next week. Let them embar- > rass themselves BY continuing to beat this very dead, > very smelly horse carcass again next week. They are > beyond hope. > > But there's still hope for the co-dependent participants > in this embarrassing, seemingly eternal soap opera. You > don't have to participate unless you actually enjoy it. > > If you DO participate, I for one have to assume that > you are making a statement that you DO enjoy it, and that > you hope it continues. >
[FairfieldLife] Curtis the Compassionate (was Re: J gets another fact wrong and S apologizes to)
The "online reputation" thing is a bit of a red herring in this case, I think. You would only search on RC's name + the offending term if you already knew there was some issue regarding it. Just searching on "Robin Carlsen," as I just did, produced a lot of interesting references but none (at least in the first few pages, which is all I looked at) to the offending term. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > Gee Judy, then just continue to "help" Robin by making sure that his name > continues to be associated with that term while pretending to be "helping" > him by doing so. > > I pointed out the crazy logic and you doubled down. If he doesn't care > neither do I. You need me to explain what that stat means? > > But the illusion that you are "helping" him has been blown for those who are > not committed to the fantasy that you are. > > I know what this is really about. You've found an online emotional punching > bag and you are not gunna let a small thing like throwing Robin under the bus > deter you from your twisted pleasure. He chose this alliance with stupidity, > so carry on, now transparently. > > > It does make me laugh though. I guess my concern that the person who made > another poster feel the need to use such a term was getting off lighter than > the one who used it, has been karmically corrected now. > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > wrote: > > > > > > Ignoring all the Judy blather on this topic, > > > > Translation: Well, gee, she caught me in another > > batch of lies. I mean, what else can I do? > > > > > I will just put it this way: > > > > > > Search yahoo for the combination of references to PS > > > > > > Maskedzebra 24 > > > > > > Authfriend 81 > > > > This is fun. Curtis hasn't the foggiest idea what this > > statistic might *mean*, but he hasn't got anything else, > > and he figures the difference in the numbers in and of > > itself might look as if it were somehow significant > > support for his claim that I'm doing Robin dirt because > > I don't give a shit about him. > > > > He will decline to respond if I ask him, but if someone > > else does, it'll be quite a treat to watch him try to > > come up with some explanation as to what the statistics > > prove. > > > > And if someone can get him to do that, I'll trot out a > > few of the more obvious reasons why he's speaking via > > his nether regions as he tries to claw his way out of > > the hole he's dug for himself. > > > > > To all Judy's enemies: enjoy your luck. This is how she > > > treats the person she sheds "tears" over just thinking > > > about badly other people have treated him. > > > > Right, by standing up for him (along with a number > > of others). How insensitive of us. > > > > And not "other people," just Curtis, because Curtis > > meant so much to Robin. (Hey, Curtis, you left out > > a word there. A little jittery, are ya?) > > > > BTW, many if not most of my posts that will come > > up for someone doing a search (using appropriate > > terms) will be from last fall, when Robin was still > > posting to FFL and could easily have asked me and > > his other defenders to shut up about Share's > > accusation if that's what he wanted. > > > > For that matter, now that he's not posting, if he's > > reading FFL he most likely could figure out a way > > to let me and/or others know he wishes we'd leave > > it all lay. After all, he would no doubt be reading > > Curtis's posts along with the rest, so he would be > > well informed about the terrible damage we were doing > > to his online reputation. > > > > And if Robin isn't reading FFL, surely Curtis, out > > of his deep concern for Robin's welfare, would shoot > > him a private email warning him of the shredding of > > his image at our hands. > > > > (inappropriate horselaugh) > > > > And also by the way, Curtis old sock, Share deserves > > everything she's getting and more. You're a smart > > fella, you know what kind of person she is--both low- > > down mean and irrational, willfully disconnected from > > reality. How compassionate of you to enable her in her > > sickness. Of course, it's just purely coincidental > > that her rabid hatefulness is directed at your worst > > FFL enemy and his supporters. Curtis, gloat? Not a > > chance. > > > > > > That's my 50th. I'll be back this evening. > > > > > > > > > > > Fortunately I caught their unnatural bond on film. I love the part > > > where Judy pets Robin's eyes. He looks like he is really enjoying this: > > > > > > http://www.wimp.com/slothcuddles/ > > >
[FairfieldLife] Curtis the Compassionate (was Re: J gets another fact wrong and S apologizes to)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > wrote: > > > > Ignoring all the Judy blather on this topic, > > Translation: Well, gee, she caught me in another > batch of lies. I mean, what else can I do? > > > I will just put it this way: > > > > Search yahoo for the combination of references to PS > > > > Maskedzebra 24 > > > > Authfriend 81 > > This is fun. Curtis hasn't the foggiest idea what this > statistic might *mean*, but he hasn't got anything else, > and he figures the difference in the numbers in and of > itself might look as if it were somehow significant > support for his claim that I'm doing Robin dirt because > I don't give a shit about him. > > He will decline to respond if I ask him, but if someone > else does, it'll be quite a treat to watch him try to > come up with some explanation as to what the statistics > prove. > > And if someone can get him to do that, I'll trot out a > few of the more obvious reasons why he's speaking via > his nether regions as he tries to claw his way out of > the hole he's dug for himself. > > > To all Judy's enemies: enjoy your luck. This is how she > > treats the person she sheds "tears" over just thinking > > about badly other people have treated him. > > Right, by standing up for him (along with a number > of others). How insensitive of us. > > And not "other people," just Curtis, because Curtis > meant so much to Robin. (Hey, Curtis, you left out > a word there. A little jittery, are ya?) > > BTW, many if not most of my posts that will come > up for someone doing a search (using appropriate > terms) will be from last fall, when Robin was still > posting to FFL and could easily have asked me and > his other defenders to shut up about Share's > accusation if that's what he wanted. > > For that matter, now that he's not posting, if he's > reading FFL he most likely could figure out a way > to let me and/or others know he wishes we'd leave > it all lay. After all, he would no doubt be reading > Curtis's posts along with the rest, so he would be > well informed about the terrible damage we were doing > to his online reputation. > > And if Robin isn't reading FFL, surely Curtis, out > of his deep concern for Robin's welfare, would shoot > him a private email warning him of the shredding of > his image at our hands. > > (inappropriate horselaugh) > > And also by the way, Curtis old sock, Share deserves > everything she's getting and more. You're a smart > fella, you know what kind of person she is--both low- > down mean and irrational, willfully disconnected from > reality. How compassionate of you to enable her in her > sickness. Of course, it's just purely coincidental > that her rabid hatefulness is directed at your worst > FFL enemy and his supporters. Curtis, gloat? Not a > chance. > > > That's my 50th. I'll be back this evening. Consider that a warning you nasty, evil, lying, rabid, spiteful and sick individuals. Erm...whoever you are > > > Fortunately I caught their unnatural bond on film. I love the part where > > Judy pets Robin's eyes. He looks like he is really enjoying this: > > > > http://www.wimp.com/slothcuddles/ >
[FairfieldLife] Curtis the Compassionate (was Re: J gets another fact wrong and S apologizes to)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > That's my 50th. I'll be back this evening. With *another* 50 posts vilifying Share, Curtis, Steve, and your other enemies? Wow, what a surprise. Do you even *realize* that this is what you did this last week, and that you didn't post about anything *else* THAN trying to "get* the people you don't like? And do you realize that you did all of this under the pretense that you care about and are trying to "protect* a person who 1) never asked for your "protection," 2) doesn't need "protecting," 3) is probably embarrassed by your horseshit and wishes you'd shut up, and 4) knows better than anyone else that he has *nothing* to do with why you're doing it? You're acting like an insane, vindictive bitch because you ARE an insane, vindictive bitch. This is just what you DO -- stalk and torment the folks you don't like. And WHY? Because they won't bow to your supposed "authority" and your tendency to claim that you "know" things they do not, and that your "knowing" is always correct. There's a term for this. It's called narcissism. When this kind of behavior goes on for as long as it has in you (18+ YEARS), there's a term for what this means, psychologically speaking -- Narcissistic Personality Disorder, with a soupçon of malevolent Sociopathic Disorder thrown in to make it taste even worse. There is nothing anyone can do to stop you acting out your pathologies on this forum, but there IS something we can do to be affected by them as little as possible, and to reduce the signal-to-noise ratio. DON'T PARTICIPATE. By doing so -- by taking the bait and "defending yourself" when Judy tries to get you to do just that, you're becoming a co-dependent to her psychoses. You are, in fact, facilitating them and perpetuating them. For the love of God (if you believe in such silliness), STOP. This advice will be wasted on Ravi and Ann and possibly Emily, who are all heavily invested IN perpetuating this psychosis. DrD is a non-entity, having taken him- self out of the equation in his usual...ahem... enlightened fashion. But Curtis? You know better than to allow this shit to perpetuate itself. Steve? You do, too. And above all, SHARE? *You* are as guilty as anyone else here of bringing up this tired old shit again every time it dies down. Ferchrissakes, STOP. Let Judy and her few remaining minions be the only ones who post about this non-issue next week. Let them embar- rass themselves BY continuing to beat this very dead, very smelly horse carcass again next week. They are beyond hope. But there's still hope for the co-dependent participants in this embarrassing, seemingly eternal soap opera. You don't have to participate unless you actually enjoy it. If you DO participate, I for one have to assume that you are making a statement that you DO enjoy it, and that you hope it continues.
[FairfieldLife] Curtis the Compassionate (was Re: J gets another fact wrong and S apologizes to)
Gee Judy, then just continue to "help" Robin by making sure that his name continues to be associated with that term while pretending to be "helping" him by doing so. I pointed out the crazy logic and you doubled down. If he doesn't care neither do I. You need me to explain what that stat means? But the illusion that you are "helping" him has been blown for those who are not committed to the fantasy that you are. I know what this is really about. You've found an online emotional punching bag and you are not gunna let a small thing like throwing Robin under the bus deter you from your twisted pleasure. He chose this alliance with stupidity, so carry on, now transparently. It does make me laugh though. I guess my concern that the person who made another poster feel the need to use such a term was getting off lighter than the one who used it, has been karmically corrected now. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > wrote: > > > > Ignoring all the Judy blather on this topic, > > Translation: Well, gee, she caught me in another > batch of lies. I mean, what else can I do? > > > I will just put it this way: > > > > Search yahoo for the combination of references to PS > > > > Maskedzebra 24 > > > > Authfriend 81 > > This is fun. Curtis hasn't the foggiest idea what this > statistic might *mean*, but he hasn't got anything else, > and he figures the difference in the numbers in and of > itself might look as if it were somehow significant > support for his claim that I'm doing Robin dirt because > I don't give a shit about him. > > He will decline to respond if I ask him, but if someone > else does, it'll be quite a treat to watch him try to > come up with some explanation as to what the statistics > prove. > > And if someone can get him to do that, I'll trot out a > few of the more obvious reasons why he's speaking via > his nether regions as he tries to claw his way out of > the hole he's dug for himself. > > > To all Judy's enemies: enjoy your luck. This is how she > > treats the person she sheds "tears" over just thinking > > about badly other people have treated him. > > Right, by standing up for him (along with a number > of others). How insensitive of us. > > And not "other people," just Curtis, because Curtis > meant so much to Robin. (Hey, Curtis, you left out > a word there. A little jittery, are ya?) > > BTW, many if not most of my posts that will come > up for someone doing a search (using appropriate > terms) will be from last fall, when Robin was still > posting to FFL and could easily have asked me and > his other defenders to shut up about Share's > accusation if that's what he wanted. > > For that matter, now that he's not posting, if he's > reading FFL he most likely could figure out a way > to let me and/or others know he wishes we'd leave > it all lay. After all, he would no doubt be reading > Curtis's posts along with the rest, so he would be > well informed about the terrible damage we were doing > to his online reputation. > > And if Robin isn't reading FFL, surely Curtis, out > of his deep concern for Robin's welfare, would shoot > him a private email warning him of the shredding of > his image at our hands. > > (inappropriate horselaugh) > > And also by the way, Curtis old sock, Share deserves > everything she's getting and more. You're a smart > fella, you know what kind of person she is--both low- > down mean and irrational, willfully disconnected from > reality. How compassionate of you to enable her in her > sickness. Of course, it's just purely coincidental > that her rabid hatefulness is directed at your worst > FFL enemy and his supporters. Curtis, gloat? Not a > chance. > > > That's my 50th. I'll be back this evening. > > > > > > Fortunately I caught their unnatural bond on film. I love the part where > > Judy pets Robin's eyes. He looks like he is really enjoying this: > > > > http://www.wimp.com/slothcuddles/ >
[FairfieldLife] Curtis the Compassionate (was Re: J gets another fact wrong and S apologizes to)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > Ignoring all the Judy blather on this topic, Translation: Well, gee, she caught me in another batch of lies. I mean, what else can I do? > I will just put it this way: > > Search yahoo for the combination of references to PS > > Maskedzebra 24 > > Authfriend 81 This is fun. Curtis hasn't the foggiest idea what this statistic might *mean*, but he hasn't got anything else, and he figures the difference in the numbers in and of itself might look as if it were somehow significant support for his claim that I'm doing Robin dirt because I don't give a shit about him. He will decline to respond if I ask him, but if someone else does, it'll be quite a treat to watch him try to come up with some explanation as to what the statistics prove. And if someone can get him to do that, I'll trot out a few of the more obvious reasons why he's speaking via his nether regions as he tries to claw his way out of the hole he's dug for himself. > To all Judy's enemies: enjoy your luck. This is how she > treats the person she sheds "tears" over just thinking > about badly other people have treated him. Right, by standing up for him (along with a number of others). How insensitive of us. And not "other people," just Curtis, because Curtis meant so much to Robin. (Hey, Curtis, you left out a word there. A little jittery, are ya?) BTW, many if not most of my posts that will come up for someone doing a search (using appropriate terms) will be from last fall, when Robin was still posting to FFL and could easily have asked me and his other defenders to shut up about Share's accusation if that's what he wanted. For that matter, now that he's not posting, if he's reading FFL he most likely could figure out a way to let me and/or others know he wishes we'd leave it all lay. After all, he would no doubt be reading Curtis's posts along with the rest, so he would be well informed about the terrible damage we were doing to his online reputation. And if Robin isn't reading FFL, surely Curtis, out of his deep concern for Robin's welfare, would shoot him a private email warning him of the shredding of his image at our hands. (inappropriate horselaugh) And also by the way, Curtis old sock, Share deserves everything she's getting and more. You're a smart fella, you know what kind of person she is--both low- down mean and irrational, willfully disconnected from reality. How compassionate of you to enable her in her sickness. Of course, it's just purely coincidental that her rabid hatefulness is directed at your worst FFL enemy and his supporters. Curtis, gloat? Not a chance. That's my 50th. I'll be back this evening. > Fortunately I caught their unnatural bond on film. I love the part where > Judy pets Robin's eyes. He looks like he is really enjoying this: > > http://www.wimp.com/slothcuddles/
