Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
Lovely poem, brilliant videowow...or "oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, my dear". What lines (I may get a few of these wrong)..."I am a bilingual illiterate." "I only get turned on by Jewish cowboys." "I wrote the song myself, but I can't read music, so I don't know what it says." "I'm going there, but I like it here, wherever it is." "Stop the car, I'm getting out, you are no longer here." > > From: Bob Price >To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" >Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 4:45 PM >Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in >quite some while > > > >Obba, > >Any man able to fog a mirror would know only a city as great as Manhattan >could contain >a woman of your qualities; TB is still upset about getting caught mood making >while >he was doing PUJA, if he had any class, he'd offer to buy you a new pair of >shoes: > >http://pinterest.com/priscill/outrageous-shoes/ > >“Love looks not with the >eyes, but with the mind, >And therefore is winged Cupid >painted blind.” > >-A Midsummer Night's Dream. > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WX2wybAIAHU > > >From: obbajeeba no_re...@yahoogroups.com> >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 4:41:18 PM >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite >some while > >Lipstick does not remove a dick. > >Unless the bitch licks with a strap on? > >(last I read, Barry appears to still be a man, regardless the shade he glamors >his lips with.) >LOL > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: >> >> If he had the lipstick on, wouldn't the roles be reversed, wrt the dog? I >> dunno -- Once you threw cross dressing and/or gender bending into the mix, >> it became weirder than a david lynch movie. >> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: >> > >> > Turq, >> > In a sexy way, I thought you were pretty smart, cute, etc. >> > Now, it is like I caught you putting lipstick on and fucking the dog. >> > hahaha. >> > Ex-Patiot >> > http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/why-the-ex-patriot-act-is-a-creepy-law/257368/ >> > >> > Number two: I do not live in Fairfield. Never have, never will. >> > >> > Number three: The "Jobs" or employers you mentioned. I would never apply >> > for, and if I was hired, it would be from headhunters begging me to come >> > and work for their clients. :) >> > >> > Social security will not exist by the time I get to "have it." >> > >> > Dear, you could send more private emails to me and we can share pictures, >> > then you won't say nothin. LOL >> > >> > Peace handsome >> > >> > -Obba >> > >> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: >> > > >> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Barry, I mean, Turq. No one cyberstalks on FFL. >> > > > It is fair exchange of knowledge and ignorance. >> > > > Knowledge, by which you ignore and play accusation games. >> > > > Judy is not a cyberstalker. You would fall in a minor >> > > > sort of that category by trying to claim any statements >> > > > on this board are attempting to derail a person's "cyber >> > > > history," for future employer's eyes. hahaha. Pointing >> > > > fingers all day long, month after month, year after year, >> > > > yawn, would bore any "employer." Any "employer," who >> > > > would base hiring on any of these posts would be someone, >> > > > no one should work for! LOL. What grant >> > > > department did they earn their business dollars LOL. >> > > > Any entrepreneur who develops their own company without >> > > > outside governmental aid, would see right past all the >> > > > bullshit. Any others, are not worthy the tax dollar >> > > > wasted supporting their authority? lol. >> > > >> > > I understand now why you live in Fairfield. You would >> > > never be able to survive in the real world. In recent >> > > studies, 80% of all employers
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
Obba, Any man able to fog a mirror would know only a city as great as Manhattan could contain a woman of your qualities; TB is still upset about getting caught mood making while he was doing PUJA, if he had any class, he'd offer to buy you a new pair of shoes: http://pinterest.com/priscill/outrageous-shoes/ “Love looks not with the eyes, but with the mind, And therefore is winged Cupid painted blind.” -A Midsummer Night's Dream. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WX2wybAIAHU From: obbajeeba To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 4:41:18 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while Lipstick does not remove a dick. Unless the bitch licks with a strap on? (last I read, Barry appears to still be a man, regardless the shade he glamors his lips with.) LOL --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: > > If he had the lipstick on, wouldn't the roles be reversed, wrt the dog? I > dunno -- Once you threw cross dressing and/or gender bending into the mix, it > became weirder than a david lynch movie. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: > > > > Turq, > > In a sexy way, I thought you were pretty smart, cute, etc. > > Now, it is like I caught you putting lipstick on and fucking the dog. > > hahaha. > > Ex-Patiot > > http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/why-the-ex-patriot-act-is-a-creepy-law/257368/ > > > > Number two: I do not live in Fairfield. Never have, never will. > > > > Number three: The "Jobs" or employers you mentioned. I would never apply > > for, and if I was hired, it would be from headhunters begging me to come > > and work for their clients. :) > > > > Social security will not exist by the time I get to "have it." > > > > Dear, you could send more private emails to me and we can share pictures, > > then you won't say nothin. LOL > > > > Peace handsome > > > > -Obba > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Barry, I mean, Turq. No one cyberstalks on FFL. > > > > It is fair exchange of knowledge and ignorance. > > > > Knowledge, by which you ignore and play accusation games. > > > > Judy is not a cyberstalker. You would fall in a minor > > > > sort of that category by trying to claim any statements > > > > on this board are attempting to derail a person's "cyber > > > > history," for future employer's eyes. hahaha. Pointing > > > > fingers all day long, month after month, year after year, > > > > yawn, would bore any "employer." Any "employer," who > > > > would base hiring on any of these posts would be someone, > > > > no one should work for! LOL. What grant > > > > department did they earn their business dollars LOL. > > > > Any entrepreneur who develops their own company without > > > > outside governmental aid, would see right past all the > > > > bullshit. Any others, are not worthy the tax dollar > > > > wasted supporting their authority? lol. > > > > > > I understand now why you live in Fairfield. You would > > > never be able to survive in the real world. In recent > > > studies, 80% of all employers surveyed said that they > > > perform Internet background searches on all potential > > > employees, examining their posts on Google, Facebook, > > > Yahoo, Twitter, etc. Many government jobs *require* > > > that such a search be performed. > > > > > > > Turq, one day there may be a requirement, to collect your > > > > social security, you have to be in living within the 50 > > > > US States, if you post on the internet on forums, in > > > > case we are all funding terrorists living abroad as > > > > ex patriots :) Just saying, dear. Love you. OXO > > > > > > Unlike you, I will never need to rely on American Social > > > Security. Nor, hopefully, ever need to live in your third > > > world bankrupt nation again. :-) > > > > > > BTW, the word is expatriate, not "ex patriot." I have > > > never been a patriot, and would sooner die than be > > > considered one. > > > > > > "If I had to choose between betraying my friend or my > > > country, I hope I'd have the guts to betray my country." > > > - E.M. Forster > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > > They can't hold their own, so they portray themselves as > > > > > > > victims. And they bring nothing but dishonor on themselves > > > > > > > by doing so--especially since they themselves are far more > > > > > > > guilty of the behavior they complain about than the folks > > > > > > > they claim are victimizing them. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am no
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
"Dear, you could send more private emails to me and we can share pictures, then you won't say nothin. LOL" LOL..Yes dear Obba Barry seriously needs a woman to set him straight. But seriously - if he does end up emailing you let the sharing be one way - from you, to him - don't want you to be traumatized :-). On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 12:19 PM, obbajeeba wrote: > ** > > > Turq, > In a sexy way, I thought you were pretty smart, cute, etc. > Now, it is like I caught you putting lipstick on and fucking the dog. > hahaha. > Ex-Patiot > http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/why-the-ex-patriot-act-is-a-creepy-law/257368/ > > Number two: I do not live in Fairfield. Never have, never will. > > Number three: The "Jobs" or employers you mentioned. I would never apply > for, and if I was hired, it would be from headhunters begging me to come > and work for their clients. :) > > Social security will not exist by the time I get to "have it." > > Dear, you could send more private emails to me and we can share pictures, > then you won't say nothin. LOL > > Peace handsome > > -Obba > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: > > > > > > > > > Barry, I mean, Turq. No one cyberstalks on FFL. > > > It is fair exchange of knowledge and ignorance. > > > Knowledge, by which you ignore and play accusation games. > > > Judy is not a cyberstalker. You would fall in a minor > > > sort of that category by trying to claim any statements > > > on this board are attempting to derail a person's "cyber > > > history," for future employer's eyes. hahaha. Pointing > > > fingers all day long, month after month, year after year, > > > yawn, would bore any "employer." Any "employer," who > > > would base hiring on any of these posts would be someone, > > > no one should work for! LOL. What grant > > > department did they earn their business dollars LOL. > > > Any entrepreneur who develops their own company without > > > outside governmental aid, would see right past all the > > > bullshit. Any others, are not worthy the tax dollar > > > wasted supporting their authority? lol. > > > > I understand now why you live in Fairfield. You would > > never be able to survive in the real world. In recent > > studies, 80% of all employers surveyed said that they > > perform Internet background searches on all potential > > employees, examining their posts on Google, Facebook, > > Yahoo, Twitter, etc. Many government jobs *require* > > that such a search be performed. > > > > > Turq, one day there may be a requirement, to collect your > > > social security, you have to be in living within the 50 > > > US States, if you post on the internet on forums, in > > > case we are all funding terrorists living abroad as > > > ex patriots :) Just saying, dear. Love you. OXO > > > > Unlike you, I will never need to rely on American Social > > Security. Nor, hopefully, ever need to live in your third > > world bankrupt nation again. :-) > > > > BTW, the word is expatriate, not "ex patriot." I have > > never been a patriot, and would sooner die than be > > considered one. > > > > "If I had to choose between betraying my friend or my > > country, I hope I'd have the guts to betray my country." > > - E.M. Forster > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > They can't hold their own, so they portray themselves as > > > > > > victims. And they bring nothing but dishonor on themselves > > > > > > by doing so--especially since they themselves are far more > > > > > > guilty of the behavior they complain about than the folks > > > > > > they claim are victimizing them. > > > > > > > > > > I am not so sure about that. I searched for the word victim > > > > > and victimized in Barry's posts to see how he applied the > > > > > word to himself, and he does not seem to have used the word > > > > > in reference to himself. There were some 400+ references to > > > > > the word 'victim' and some 41 for the word 'victimize'. As > > > > > I have a limited time, I chose the word 'victimized' and > > > > > read every paragraph where he used the word in an original > > > > > post. This provides a reasonable sample. > > > > > > > > > > In not one case does he refer to himself as having been > > > > > victimized. I really do not think he thinks of himself > > > > > that way. > > > > > > > > He does not. Thinking of the people one stalks AS > > > > victims is something that stalkers do. Their fantasies > > > > revolve around how strongly they are affecting the > > > > people they hate. > > > > > > > > In my considered opinion, the best thing one can do > > > > when faced with an Internet stalker is to allow them > > > > to fantasize about how strongly they are affec
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Ravi Chivukula wrote: > Deja vu and time to ignore Barry - we have lost him for a while, just give > him time, he's obsessing - I have lived with a person like him and trust me > it sounds very hard for normal people to understand, was hard for me to > understand but once these people drift off into paranoid, delusional > territory it's very hard for them to switch off - it's a mental disability, > so I totally understand. > Considering Barry is intelligent and creative it's such a shame he can't get some treatment for his mental disability. > > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Emily Reyn wrote: > >> ** >> >> >> Barry, this is like a deja vu moment. You've posted that website at >> least twice, maybe three times that I can recall. I find Judy's >> highlighted quotes on their face absolutely hilarious. I really do. This >> is so passe, as are your constant attempts to cite statistics that prove >> something. Obviously, the forum determined posting limits were a good idea >> - they were in place before I got here. I've been booted for a week more >> than most regular posters here for going over the limit, a few times by >> accident and also a few times on purpose. They work and I like them and >> that's the current reality. What are you trying to prove again? >> >> -- >> *From:* turquoiseb >> *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com >> *Sent:* Friday, January 25, 2013 9:47 AM >> >> *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read >> in quite some while >> >> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: >> > >> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: >> > > >> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > The article clearly explained that one of the tactics of >> > > > > the stalker was obsessive flooding with emails. This >> > > > > corresponds directly to some behavior here, as flooding >> > > > > with posts can occur here. >> > > > >> > > > Please, don't be ridiculous"flooding" up to 50? >> > > > Posts in a row is not "obsessive flooding." >> > > >> > > Emily, don't show your newbie ignorance. The very >> > > reason there is a posting limit is BECAUSE of Judy >> > > and a couple of other posters, who used to flood >> > > this forum with hundreds of posts per month. Between >> > > the three of them, they often accumulated over a >> > > third of all the posts made to FFL. When asked to >> > > stop, and voluntarily cut down on their excessive >> > > (and almost always obsessive, in that they were >> > > stalking one person or another) posting, they all >> > > refused. Rick wisely invented the posting limit, >> > > and that is the ONLY reason she posts as little >> > > as she does today. >> > >> > Just as a reminder of the "Bad Old Days," from >> > post #121696, back in November, 2006, before >> > the posting limits were imposed: >> > >> > > Total posts: 4672 >> > > >> > > shempmcgurk -- 541 (11.6%) >> > > sparaig -- 533 (11.4%) >> > > authfriend -- 482 (10.3%) >> > > new.morning -- 265 (5.7%) >> > > off_world_beings -- 253 (5.4%) >> > > turquoiseb -- 218 (4.7%) >> > > >> > > Again, the "top three" account for a third >> > > of all posts. And again, they'll take no >> > > notice of this. So far in November, they >> > > account for 47% of all posts made. >> > >> > Please note that my total was little more than >> > we would have today, with the 50-post-per-week >> > limit. >> > >> > Shemp has since left the forum, and when sparaig >> > posts, he clearly has his OCD under control now, >> > and posts only a reasonable number of comments >> > before disappearing again. >> > >> > Judy has made BY FAR more posts than any other >> > person to this forum, approximately 22,650 of >> > them, a cumulative average of 8 posts per day >> > for 7.7 years. Of those, 7574 (33.4%) mention >> > "Barry" OR "Turquoiseb," 2976 (13.1%) mention >> > "Vaj," and 2659 (11.7%) mention "Curtis." >> > >> > Nope, no stalking there. :-) >> > >> > 2279 of those posts (10%) contain the words "lie" >> > OR "liar" OR "lying". It's basically her mantra. :-) >> >> And let us not forget the "tribute" site created >> by one of her stalking victims over on alt. >> meditation.transcendental, before she came here >> to continue stalking people who had left that >> forum. Andrew Skolnick was a prize-winning journalist >> who didn't like TM very much, so that meant that Judy >> didn't like *him* very much. Andrew chose to reply >> to her stalking by preserving *her own words* and >> those of a few of her supporters on this website: >> >> http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/ >> >> Read through a few of her quotes from that pre-FFL >> era. See if you find any difference whatsoever >> between her tactics and language then, and now. >> >> >> >> >> > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Ravi Chivukula wrote: > Deja vu and time to ignore Barry - we have lost him for a while, just give > him time, he's obsessing - I have lived with a person like him and trust me > it sounds very hard for normal people to understand, was hard for me to > understand but once these people drift off into paranoid, delusional > territory it's very hard for them to switch off - it's a mental disability, > so I totally understand. > Considering Barry is intelligent and creative it's such a shame he can't get some treatment for his mental disability. If the person I lived with was as intelligent and creative as Barry I perhaps would have not dumped her. > > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Emily Reyn wrote: > >> ** >> >> >> Barry, this is like a deja vu moment. You've posted that website at >> least twice, maybe three times that I can recall. I find Judy's >> highlighted quotes on their face absolutely hilarious. I really do. This >> is so passe, as are your constant attempts to cite statistics that prove >> something. Obviously, the forum determined posting limits were a good idea >> - they were in place before I got here. I've been booted for a week more >> than most regular posters here for going over the limit, a few times by >> accident and also a few times on purpose. They work and I like them and >> that's the current reality. What are you trying to prove again? >> >> -- >> *From:* turquoiseb >> *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com >> *Sent:* Friday, January 25, 2013 9:47 AM >> >> *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read >> in quite some while >> >> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: >> > >> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: >> > > >> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > The article clearly explained that one of the tactics of >> > > > > the stalker was obsessive flooding with emails. This >> > > > > corresponds directly to some behavior here, as flooding >> > > > > with posts can occur here. >> > > > >> > > > Please, don't be ridiculous"flooding" up to 50? >> > > > Posts in a row is not "obsessive flooding." >> > > >> > > Emily, don't show your newbie ignorance. The very >> > > reason there is a posting limit is BECAUSE of Judy >> > > and a couple of other posters, who used to flood >> > > this forum with hundreds of posts per month. Between >> > > the three of them, they often accumulated over a >> > > third of all the posts made to FFL. When asked to >> > > stop, and voluntarily cut down on their excessive >> > > (and almost always obsessive, in that they were >> > > stalking one person or another) posting, they all >> > > refused. Rick wisely invented the posting limit, >> > > and that is the ONLY reason she posts as little >> > > as she does today. >> > >> > Just as a reminder of the "Bad Old Days," from >> > post #121696, back in November, 2006, before >> > the posting limits were imposed: >> > >> > > Total posts: 4672 >> > > >> > > shempmcgurk -- 541 (11.6%) >> > > sparaig -- 533 (11.4%) >> > > authfriend -- 482 (10.3%) >> > > new.morning -- 265 (5.7%) >> > > off_world_beings -- 253 (5.4%) >> > > turquoiseb -- 218 (4.7%) >> > > >> > > Again, the "top three" account for a third >> > > of all posts. And again, they'll take no >> > > notice of this. So far in November, they >> > > account for 47% of all posts made. >> > >> > Please note that my total was little more than >> > we would have today, with the 50-post-per-week >> > limit. >> > >> > Shemp has since left the forum, and when sparaig >> > posts, he clearly has his OCD under control now, >> > and posts only a reasonable number of comments >> > before disappearing again. >> > >> > Judy has made BY FAR more posts than any other >> > person to this forum, approximately 22,650 of >> > them, a cumulative average of 8 posts per day >> > for 7.7 years. Of those, 7574 (33.4%) mention >> > "Barry" OR "Turquoiseb," 2976 (13.1%) mention >> > "Vaj," and 2659 (11.7%) mention "Curtis." >> > >> > Nope, no stalking there. :-) >> > >> > 2279 of those posts (10%) contain the words "lie" >> > OR "liar" OR "lying". It's basically her mantra. :-) >> >> And let us not forget the "tribute" site created >> by one of her stalking victims over on alt. >> meditation.transcendental, before she came here >> to continue stalking people who had left that >> forum. Andrew Skolnick was a prize-winning journalist >> who didn't like TM very much, so that meant that Judy >> didn't like *him* very much. Andrew chose to reply >> to her stalking by preserving *her own words* and >> those of a few of her supporters on this website: >> >> http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/ >> >> Read through a few of her quotes from that pre-FFL >> era. See if you find any difference whatsoever >> between her tactics and language then, and now. >> >> >> >> >> > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
Deja vu and time to ignore Barry - we have lost him for a while, just give him time, he's obsessing - I have lived with a person like him and trust me it sounds very hard for normal people to understand, was hard for me to understand but once these people drift off into paranoid, delusional territory it's very hard for them to switch off - it's a mental disability, so I totally understand. On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Emily Reyn wrote: > ** > > > Barry, this is like a deja vu moment. You've posted that website at least > twice, maybe three times that I can recall. I find Judy's highlighted > quotes on their face absolutely hilarious. I really do. This is so passe, > as are your constant attempts to cite statistics that prove something. > Obviously, the forum determined posting limits were a good idea - they > were in place before I got here. I've been booted for a week more than > most regular posters here for going over the limit, a few times by accident > and also a few times on purpose. They work and I like them and that's the > current reality. What are you trying to prove again? > > -- > *From:* turquoiseb > *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > *Sent:* Friday, January 25, 2013 9:47 AM > > *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in > quite some while > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: > > > > > > > > > The article clearly explained that one of the tactics of > > > > > the stalker was obsessive flooding with emails. This > > > > > corresponds directly to some behavior here, as flooding > > > > > with posts can occur here. > > > > > > > > Please, don't be ridiculous"flooding" up to 50? > > > > Posts in a row is not "obsessive flooding." > > > > > > Emily, don't show your newbie ignorance. The very > > > reason there is a posting limit is BECAUSE of Judy > > > and a couple of other posters, who used to flood > > > this forum with hundreds of posts per month. Between > > > the three of them, they often accumulated over a > > > third of all the posts made to FFL. When asked to > > > stop, and voluntarily cut down on their excessive > > > (and almost always obsessive, in that they were > > > stalking one person or another) posting, they all > > > refused. Rick wisely invented the posting limit, > > > and that is the ONLY reason she posts as little > > > as she does today. > > > > Just as a reminder of the "Bad Old Days," from > > post #121696, back in November, 2006, before > > the posting limits were imposed: > > > > > Total posts: 4672 > > > > > > shempmcgurk -- 541 (11.6%) > > > sparaig -- 533 (11.4%) > > > authfriend -- 482 (10.3%) > > > new.morning -- 265 (5.7%) > > > off_world_beings -- 253 (5.4%) > > > turquoiseb -- 218 (4.7%) > > > > > > Again, the "top three" account for a third > > > of all posts. And again, they'll take no > > > notice of this. So far in November, they > > > account for 47% of all posts made. > > > > Please note that my total was little more than > > we would have today, with the 50-post-per-week > > limit. > > > > Shemp has since left the forum, and when sparaig > > posts, he clearly has his OCD under control now, > > and posts only a reasonable number of comments > > before disappearing again. > > > > Judy has made BY FAR more posts than any other > > person to this forum, approximately 22,650 of > > them, a cumulative average of 8 posts per day > > for 7.7 years. Of those, 7574 (33.4%) mention > > "Barry" OR "Turquoiseb," 2976 (13.1%) mention > > "Vaj," and 2659 (11.7%) mention "Curtis." > > > > Nope, no stalking there. :-) > > > > 2279 of those posts (10%) contain the words "lie" > > OR "liar" OR "lying". It's basically her mantra. :-) > > And let us not forget the "tribute" site created > by one of her stalking victims over on alt. > meditation.transcendental, before she came here > to continue stalking people who had left that > forum. Andrew Skolnick was a prize-winning journalist > who didn't like TM very much, so that meant that Judy > didn't like *him* very much. Andrew chose to reply > to her stalking by preserving *her own words* and > those of a few of her supporters on this website: > > http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/ > > Read through a few of her quotes from that pre-FFL > era. See if you find any difference whatsoever > between her tactics and language then, and now. > > > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
Barry, this is like a deja vu moment. You've posted that website at least twice, maybe three times that I can recall. I find Judy's highlighted quotes on their face absolutely hilarious. I really do. This is so passe, as are your constant attempts to cite statistics that prove something. Obviously, the forum determined posting limits were a good idea - they were in place before I got here. I've been booted for a week more than most regular posters here for going over the limit, a few times by accident and also a few times on purpose. They work and I like them and that's the current reality. What are you trying to prove again? > > From: turquoiseb >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 9:47 AM >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite >some while > > > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: >> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: >> > >> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: >> > > >> > > > The article clearly explained that one of the tactics of >> > > > the stalker was obsessive flooding with emails. This >> > > > corresponds directly to some behavior here, as flooding >> > > > with posts can occur here. >> > > >> > > Please, don't be ridiculous"flooding" up to 50? >> > > Posts in a row is not "obsessive flooding." >> > >> > Emily, don't show your newbie ignorance. The very >> > reason there is a posting limit is BECAUSE of Judy >> > and a couple of other posters, who used to flood >> > this forum with hundreds of posts per month. Between >> > the three of them, they often accumulated over a >> > third of all the posts made to FFL. When asked to >> > stop, and voluntarily cut down on their excessive >> > (and almost always obsessive, in that they were >> > stalking one person or another) posting, they all >> > refused. Rick wisely invented the posting limit, >> > and that is the ONLY reason she posts as little >> > as she does today. >> >> Just as a reminder of the "Bad Old Days," from >> post #121696, back in November, 2006, before >> the posting limits were imposed: >> >> > Total posts: 4672 >> > >> > shempmcgurk -- 541 (11.6%) >> > sparaig -- 533 (11.4%) >> > authfriend -- 482 (10.3%) >> > new.morning -- 265 (5.7%) >> > off_world_beings -- 253 (5.4%) >> > turquoiseb -- 218 (4.7%) >> > >> > Again, the "top three" account for a third >> > of all posts. And again, they'll take no >> > notice of this. So far in November, they >> > account for 47% of all posts made. >> >> Please note that my total was little more than >> we would have today, with the 50-post-per-week >> limit. >> >> Shemp has since left the forum, and when sparaig >> posts, he clearly has his OCD under control now, >> and posts only a reasonable number of comments >> before disappearing again. >> >> Judy has made BY FAR more posts than any other >> person to this forum, approximately 22,650 of >> them, a cumulative average of 8 posts per day >> for 7.7 years. Of those, 7574 (33.4%) mention >> "Barry" OR "Turquoiseb," 2976 (13.1%) mention >> "Vaj," and 2659 (11.7%) mention "Curtis." >> >> Nope, no stalking there. :-) >> >> 2279 of those posts (10%) contain the words "lie" >> OR "liar" OR "lying". It's basically her mantra. :-) > >And let us not forget the "tribute" site created >by one of her stalking victims over on alt. >meditation.transcendental, before she came here >to continue stalking people who had left that >forum. Andrew Skolnick was a prize-winning journalist >who didn't like TM very much, so that meant that Judy >didn't like *him* very much. Andrew chose to reply >to her stalking by preserving *her own words* and >those of a few of her supporters on this website: > >http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/ > >Read through a few of her quotes from that pre-FFL >era. See if you find any difference whatsoever >between her tactics and language then, and now. > > > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
Oh no Barry baby - you have started talking to yourself again..LOL.. - that's when we sane folks start losing you and know you have drifted in to your paranoid, delusional fantasy la-la-land. On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:47 AM, turquoiseb wrote: > ** > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: > > > > > > > > > The article clearly explained that one of the tactics of > > > > > the stalker was obsessive flooding with emails. This > > > > > corresponds directly to some behavior here, as flooding > > > > > with posts can occur here. > > > > > > > > Please, don't be ridiculous"flooding" up to 50? > > > > Posts in a row is not "obsessive flooding." > > > > > > Emily, don't show your newbie ignorance. The very > > > reason there is a posting limit is BECAUSE of Judy > > > and a couple of other posters, who used to flood > > > this forum with hundreds of posts per month. Between > > > the three of them, they often accumulated over a > > > third of all the posts made to FFL. When asked to > > > stop, and voluntarily cut down on their excessive > > > (and almost always obsessive, in that they were > > > stalking one person or another) posting, they all > > > refused. Rick wisely invented the posting limit, > > > and that is the ONLY reason she posts as little > > > as she does today. > > > > Just as a reminder of the "Bad Old Days," from > > post #121696, back in November, 2006, before > > the posting limits were imposed: > > > > > Total posts: 4672 > > > > > > shempmcgurk -- 541 (11.6%) > > > sparaig -- 533 (11.4%) > > > authfriend -- 482 (10.3%) > > > new.morning -- 265 (5.7%) > > > off_world_beings -- 253 (5.4%) > > > turquoiseb -- 218 (4.7%) > > > > > > Again, the "top three" account for a third > > > of all posts. And again, they'll take no > > > notice of this. So far in November, they > > > account for 47% of all posts made. > > > > Please note that my total was little more than > > we would have today, with the 50-post-per-week > > limit. > > > > Shemp has since left the forum, and when sparaig > > posts, he clearly has his OCD under control now, > > and posts only a reasonable number of comments > > before disappearing again. > > > > Judy has made BY FAR more posts than any other > > person to this forum, approximately 22,650 of > > them, a cumulative average of 8 posts per day > > for 7.7 years. Of those, 7574 (33.4%) mention > > "Barry" OR "Turquoiseb," 2976 (13.1%) mention > > "Vaj," and 2659 (11.7%) mention "Curtis." > > > > Nope, no stalking there. :-) > > > > 2279 of those posts (10%) contain the words "lie" > > OR "liar" OR "lying". It's basically her mantra. :-) > > And let us not forget the "tribute" site created > by one of her stalking victims over on alt. > meditation.transcendental, before she came here > to continue stalking people who had left that > forum. Andrew Skolnick was a prize-winning journalist > who didn't like TM very much, so that meant that Judy > didn't like *him* very much. Andrew chose to reply > to her stalking by preserving *her own words* and > those of a few of her supporters on this website: > > http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/ > > Read through a few of her quotes from that pre-FFL > era. See if you find any difference whatsoever > between her tactics and language then, and now. > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
With the intention of what? Don't be ridiculous - you are reinventing reality again. > > From: Ravi Chivukula >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 9:09 AM >Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in >quite some while > > > >"You mean the way that Ravi was booted off of the >forum after *he* began stalking Curtis, with the >intention of destroying his online reputation and >jeopardizing his ability to find work as an educator?" > > >Are you going through another episode of your paranoid, delusional narcissism >today Barry baby? > >On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:01 AM, turquoiseb wrote: > > >> >>--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: >>> >>> > The article clearly explained that one of the tactics of >>> > the stalker was obsessive flooding with emails. This >>> > corresponds directly to some behavior here, as flooding >>> > with posts can occur here. >>> >>> Please, don't be ridiculous"flooding" up to 50? >>> Posts in a row is not "obsessive flooding." >> >> Emily, don't show your newbie ignorance. The very >>reason there is a posting limit is BECAUSE of Judy >>and a couple of other posters, who used to flood >>this forum with hundreds of posts per month. Between >>the three of them, they often accumulated over a >>third of all the posts made to FFL. When asked to >>stop, and voluntarily cut down on their excessive >>(and almost always obsessive, in that they were >>stalking one person or another) posting, they all >>refused. Rick wisely invented the posting limit, >>and that is the ONLY reason she posts as little >>as she does today. >> >> >>> "Stalking?" - again, don't be ridiculous. If there >>> were anything akin to "stalking" going on here - they'd >>> be booted. >> >> You mean the way that Ravi was booted off of the >>forum after *he* began stalking Curtis, with the >>intention of destroying his online reputation and >>jeopardizing his ability to find work as an educator? >> >>Or the many times that Judy and others have openly >>declared their intention to drive people they don't >>like off of this forum? >> >>How about the times one or more posters on this forum >>have accused people of crimes such as tax evasion, >>or accused them of being drunks or drug addicts? That >>stuff stays on the Internet forever, and can be found >>by any potential employer. >> >>> Drama, drama, drama. >> >>And drama queens, drama queens, drama queens. If it >>weren't for people like you and Ann, who actually seem >>to be *impressed* by Jr. High School Mean Girl behavior >>and both look up to and try to emulate Judy's tactics, >>nobody would be paying any attention to her at all. >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > >>> > From: navashok >> >>> >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com >>> >Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 8:14 AM >>> >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in >>> >quite some while >>> > >>> > >> > >Â >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >> >> > > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
You and Barry might consider starting your day with a Bubble Bliss Footbath. http://www.ambientweather.com/psfb50.html > > From: navashok >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 9:09 AM >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite >some while > > > > > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: >> >>  The article clearly explained that one of the tactics of the stalker was >> obsessive flooding with emails. This corresponds directly to some behavior >> here, as flooding with posts can occur here. >> >> Please, don't be ridiculous"flooding" up to 50? > >Why 50? There is more than just one poster here > >> Posts in a row is not "obsessive flooding."  "Stalking?" - again, don't be >> ridiculous. > >It's not ridiculous at all. Harassment and bullying do occur. If, whenever you >start posting, a majority jumps at you, and immediately starts to pull >anything you say into negativity, you will think if it's worthwhile to >continue. And if there is a conscious intent behind it, you could very well >call it a form of stalking. > >>  If there were anything akin to "stalking" going on here - they'd be >> booted.  Drama, drama, drama.  > >Not necessarily. And in the case of Ravi, it has already happened, so you >actually prove my point. > >> > >> > From: navashok >> >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com >> >Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 8:14 AM >> >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in >> >quite some while >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
On Jan 25, 2013, at 9:15 AM, Ravi Chivukula wrote: > "Not necessarily. And in the case of Ravi, it has already happened, so you > actually prove my point." > > No - that's what is known as pimp slap. Oops..that is Kali's Pimp pimp slapping his hoes. > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:09 AM, navashok wrote: >> >> >> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: >> > >> >  The article clearly explained that one of the tactics of the stalker was >> > obsessive flooding with emails. This corresponds directly to some behavior >> > here, as flooding with posts can occur here. >> >> > >> > Please, don't be ridiculous"flooding" up to 50? >> >> Why 50? There is more than just one poster here >> >> > Posts in a row is not "obsessive flooding."  "Stalking?" - again, don't >> > be ridiculous. >> >> It's not ridiculous at all. Harassment and bullying do occur. If, whenever >> you start posting, a majority jumps at you, and immediately starts to pull >> anything you say into negativity, you will think if it's worthwhile to >> continue. And if there is a conscious intent behind it, you could very well >> call it a form of stalking. >> >> >  If there were anything akin to "stalking" going on here - they'd be >> > booted.  Drama, drama, drama.  >> >> Not necessarily. And in the case of Ravi, it has already happened, so you >> actually prove my point. >> >> > > >> > > From: navashok >> > >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com >> > >Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 8:14 AM >> > >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in >> > >quite some while >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> >> >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
50 per person...according to you, you stated "the stalker" - singular. Many responses from many people to a thread does not constitute "obsessive flooding." We are all adults here - *real* "harassment" and "bullying" are very different things than what goes on here. I say this as an American woman - perhaps our disagreement on the meaning of the words and the context for them here are partly a cultural thing. > > From: navashok >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 9:09 AM >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite >some while > > > > > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: >> >>  The article clearly explained that one of the tactics of the stalker was >> obsessive flooding with emails. This corresponds directly to some behavior >> here, as flooding with posts can occur here. >> >> Please, don't be ridiculous"flooding" up to 50? > >Why 50? There is more than just one poster here > >> Posts in a row is not "obsessive flooding."  "Stalking?" - again, don't be >> ridiculous. > >It's not ridiculous at all. Harassment and bullying do occur. If, whenever you >start posting, a majority jumps at you, and immediately starts to pull >anything you say into negativity, you will think if it's worthwhile to >continue. And if there is a conscious intent behind it, you could very well >call it a form of stalking. > >>  If there were anything akin to "stalking" going on here - they'd be >> booted.  Drama, drama, drama.  > >Not necessarily. And in the case of Ravi, it has already happened, so you >actually prove my point. > >> > >> > From: navashok >> >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com >> >Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 8:14 AM >> >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in >> >quite some while >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
"Not necessarily. And in the case of Ravi, it has already happened, so you actually prove my point." No - that's what is known as pimp slap. On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:09 AM, navashok wrote: > ** > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: > > > >  The article clearly explained that one of the tactics of the stalker > was obsessive flooding with emails. This corresponds directly to some > behavior here, as flooding with posts can occur here. > > > > > Please, don't be ridiculous"flooding" up to 50? > > Why 50? There is more than just one poster here > > > Posts in a row is not "obsessive flooding."  "Stalking?" - again, don't > be ridiculous. > > It's not ridiculous at all. Harassment and bullying do occur. If, whenever > you start posting, a majority jumps at you, and immediately starts to pull > anything you say into negativity, you will think if it's worthwhile to > continue. And if there is a conscious intent behind it, you could very well > call it a form of stalking. > > >  If there were anything akin to "stalking" going on here - they'd be > booted.  Drama, drama, drama.  > > Not necessarily. And in the case of Ravi, it has already happened, so you > actually prove my point. > > > > > > > From: navashok > > >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > >Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 8:14 AM > > >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in > quite some while > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
"You mean the way that Ravi was booted off of the forum after *he* began stalking Curtis, with the intention of destroying his online reputation and jeopardizing his ability to find work as an educator?" Are you going through another episode of your paranoid, delusional narcissism today Barry baby? On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:01 AM, turquoiseb wrote: > ** > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: > > > > > The article clearly explained that one of the tactics of > > > the stalker was obsessive flooding with emails. This > > > corresponds directly to some behavior here, as flooding > > > with posts can occur here. > > > > Please, don't be ridiculous"flooding" up to 50? > > Posts in a row is not "obsessive flooding." > > Emily, don't show your newbie ignorance. The very > reason there is a posting limit is BECAUSE of Judy > and a couple of other posters, who used to flood > this forum with hundreds of posts per month. Between > the three of them, they often accumulated over a > third of all the posts made to FFL. When asked to > stop, and voluntarily cut down on their excessive > (and almost always obsessive, in that they were > stalking one person or another) posting, they all > refused. Rick wisely invented the posting limit, > and that is the ONLY reason she posts as little > as she does today. > > > "Stalking?" - again, don't be ridiculous. If there > > were anything akin to "stalking" going on here - they'd > > be booted. > > You mean the way that Ravi was booted off of the > forum after *he* began stalking Curtis, with the > intention of destroying his online reputation and > jeopardizing his ability to find work as an educator? > > Or the many times that Judy and others have openly > declared their intention to drive people they don't > like off of this forum? > > How about the times one or more posters on this forum > have accused people of crimes such as tax evasion, > or accused them of being drunks or drug addicts? That > stuff stays on the Internet forever, and can be found > by any potential employer. > > > Drama, drama, drama. > > And drama queens, drama queens, drama queens. If it > weren't for people like you and Ann, who actually seem > to be *impressed* by Jr. High School Mean Girl behavior > and both look up to and try to emulate Judy's tactics, > nobody would be paying any attention to her at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: navashok > > >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > >Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 8:14 AM > > >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in > quite some while > > > > > > > > >Â > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
First of all, I don't "emulate" anyone. I speak for myself. Secondly, I don't have the past info, nor do I care. "Obsessive posting" and "cyberstalking" are not happening now. > > From: turquoiseb >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 9:01 AM >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite >some while > > > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: >> >> > The article clearly explained that one of the tactics of >> > the stalker was obsessive flooding with emails. This >> > corresponds directly to some behavior here, as flooding >> > with posts can occur here. >> >> Please, don't be ridiculous"flooding" up to 50? >> Posts in a row is not "obsessive flooding." > >Emily, don't show your newbie ignorance. The very >reason there is a posting limit is BECAUSE of Judy >and a couple of other posters, who used to flood >this forum with hundreds of posts per month. Between >the three of them, they often accumulated over a >third of all the posts made to FFL. When asked to >stop, and voluntarily cut down on their excessive >(and almost always obsessive, in that they were >stalking one person or another) posting, they all >refused. Rick wisely invented the posting limit, >and that is the ONLY reason she posts as little >as she does today. > >> "Stalking?" - again, don't be ridiculous. If there >> were anything akin to "stalking" going on here - they'd >> be booted. > >You mean the way that Ravi was booted off of the >forum after *he* began stalking Curtis, with the >intention of destroying his online reputation and >jeopardizing his ability to find work as an educator? > >Or the many times that Judy and others have openly >declared their intention to drive people they don't >like off of this forum? > >How about the times one or more posters on this forum >have accused people of crimes such as tax evasion, >or accused them of being drunks or drug addicts? That >stuff stays on the Internet forever, and can be found >by any potential employer. > >> Drama, drama, drama. > >And drama queens, drama queens, drama queens. If it >weren't for people like you and Ann, who actually seem >to be *impressed* by Jr. High School Mean Girl behavior >and both look up to and try to emulate Judy's tactics, >nobody would be paying any attention to her at all. > >> >> >> >> >> > >> > From: navashok >> >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com >> >Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 8:14 AM >> >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in >> >quite some while >> > >> > >> >Â >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
The article clearly explained that one of the tactics of the stalker was obsessive flooding with emails. This corresponds directly to some behavior here, as flooding with posts can occur here. Please, don't be ridiculous"flooding" up to 50? Posts in a row is not "obsessive flooding." "Stalking?" - again, don't be ridiculous. If there were anything akin to "stalking" going on here - they'd be booted. Drama, drama, drama. > > From: navashok >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 8:14 AM >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite >some while > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 8:32 AM, Ravi Chivukula wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 8:29 AM, navashok wrote: > >> ** >> >> >> >> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: >> > >> > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 8:14 AM, navashok wrote: >> > >> > > ** >> >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: >> > > > >> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > Barry, just to let you know, I clearly appreciate your input >> > > > > on this, WHILE IT WAS GOING ON, so as I perceive this post >> > > > > being directed to me, I feel your concern in a very positive >> > > > > way. >> > > > >> > > > As I said, navashok is lacking in integrity, to put it mildly. >> > > >> > > Because I agree with Barry? That's all the criterion you ever have >> right? >> > > And it's wrong, because I know what Barry INTENTS to say, and >> appreciate >> > > him for his ATTITUDE. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > No because both of you get your buttons pushed by Judy and you both end >> up >> > being dishonest and lacking in integrity when you go after her. Very >> > pathetic. >> > >> So disagreeing with Judy means being dishonest and lacking in integrity, >> because she is the proclaimer of truth? Grow up. >> > > Judy's right - you indeed have a problem with your English > comprehension..LOL > For you navashok, even Steve - http://www.englishclub.com/esl-exams/levels-test-wc.htm. Happy New Year !!! >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 8:29 AM, navashok wrote: > ** > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 8:14 AM, navashok wrote: > > > > > ** > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Barry, just to let you know, I clearly appreciate your input > > > > > on this, WHILE IT WAS GOING ON, so as I perceive this post > > > > > being directed to me, I feel your concern in a very positive > > > > > way. > > > > > > > > As I said, navashok is lacking in integrity, to put it mildly. > > > > > > Because I agree with Barry? That's all the criterion you ever have > right? > > > And it's wrong, because I know what Barry INTENTS to say, and > appreciate > > > him for his ATTITUDE. > > > > > > > > > > > No because both of you get your buttons pushed by Judy and you both end > up > > being dishonest and lacking in integrity when you go after her. Very > > pathetic. > > > So disagreeing with Judy means being dishonest and lacking in integrity, > because she is the proclaimer of truth? Grow up. > Judy's right - you indeed have a problem with your English comprehension..LOL > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 8:14 AM, navashok wrote: > ** > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: > > > > > > Barry, just to let you know, I clearly appreciate your input > > > on this, WHILE IT WAS GOING ON, so as I perceive this post > > > being directed to me, I feel your concern in a very positive > > > way. > > > > As I said, navashok is lacking in integrity, to put it mildly. > > Because I agree with Barry? That's all the criterion you ever have right? > And it's wrong, because I know what Barry INTENTS to say, and appreciate > him for his ATTITUDE. > > > No because both of you get your buttons pushed by Judy and you both end up being dishonest and lacking in integrity when you go after her. Very pathetic.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite some while
I feel the same about merudanda. P.S. Ann, I love this. The nighttime fairies are so great; the twinkly stars. Will you read me a bedtime story? Pleeaase? > > From: Ann >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 8:03 PM >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite >some while > > > > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: >> >> with immense gratitude to the one who often reveals a window or door where >> heretofore I could see only a picture of a wall (-: >> thank you also for offerings about placebo and to Judy for the rich article >> on same >> >> nighty night and sweet dreams > > > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > > >
