dizzy <***@nospam.invalid> writes:
1476> Newsgroups: alt.usenet.kooks,comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.
2600,misc.consumers.house.homeowner-assn,alt.checkmate
1476> tholen tholed:
What was allegedly endured while writing, dizzy?
1476> Only a kook would think that re-quoting that phrase helps his
case,
1476> tholen.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> You are a kook, tholen!
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> Only a kook would claim that the issue was "posting on Christmas
1476> day", tholen.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> You are a kook, tholen!
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> Anybody can see that you're wrong,
What does your classic hallucination have to do with OS/2, dizzy?
1476> and that you are a kook, tholen.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> The fact that you kook-out when you are proven wrong spreaks for
1476> itself, tholen.
What does your classic erroneous presupposition that I've been
proven wrong have to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, you're
the one who was proven wrong via the substantiation that I
provided, and you've been kooking out by trying to claim that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> I know it's ironic that you're reading comprehension is so poor,
1476> tholen. You don't need to tell me.
What does your classic hallucination have to do with OS/2, dizzy?
1476> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
On your part, dizzy.
1476> Unlike me, you are a kook, tholen.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> Only a kook would think that re-quoting that phrase helps his
case,
1476> tholen.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> You are a kook, tholen!
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> Only a kook would claim that the issue was "posting on Christmas
1476> day", tholen.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> You are a kook, tholen!
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> Anybody can see that you're wrong,
What does your classic hallucination have to do with OS/2, dizzy?
1476> and that you are a kook, tholen.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> The fact that you kook-out when you are proven wrong spreaks for
1476> itself, tholen.
What does your classic erroneous presupposition that I've been
proven wrong have to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, you're
the one who was proven wrong via the substantiation that I
provided, and you've been kooking out by trying to claim that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> I know it's ironic that you're reading comprehension is so poor,
1476> tholen. You don't need to tell me.
What does your classic hallucination have to do with OS/2, dizzy?
1476> Only a kook would think that re-quoting that phrase helps his
case,
1476> tholen.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> You are a kook, tholen!
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> Classic erroneous presupposition.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy?
1476> Only a kook would think that re-quoting that phrase helps his
case,
1476> tholen.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> You are a kook, tholen!
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> Only a kook would claim that the issue was "posting on Christmas
1476> day", tholen.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> You are a kook, tholen!
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> Anybody can see that you're wrong,
What does your classic hallucination have to do with OS/2, dizzy?
1476> and that you are a kook, tholen.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> The fact that you kook-out when you are proven wrong spreaks for
1476> itself, tholen.
What does your classic erroneous presupposition that I've been
proven wrong have to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, you're
the one who was proven wrong via the substantiation that I
provided, and you've been kooking out by trying to claim that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> I know it's ironic that you're reading comprehension is so poor,
1476> tholen. You don't need to tell me.
What does your classic hallucination have to do with OS/2, dizzy?
1476> Only a kook would think that re-quoting that phrase helps his
case,
1476> tholen.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> You are a kook, tholen!
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> Only a kook would claim that the issue was "posting on Christmas
1476> day", tholen.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> You are a kook, tholen!
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> Anybody can see that you're wrong,
What does your classic hallucination have to do with OS/2, dizzy?
1476> and that you are a kook, tholen.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> The fact that you kook-out when you are proven wrong spreaks for
1476> itself, tholen.
What does your classic erroneous presupposition that I've been
proven wrong have to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, you're
the one who was proven wrong via the substantiation that I
provided, and you've been kooking out by trying to claim that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> I know it's ironic that you're reading comprehension is so poor,
1476> tholen. You don't need to tell me.
What does your classic hallucination have to do with OS/2, dizzy?
1476> Anybody with decent reading comprehension skills can see that it
was
1476> your attitude, your method, that was at issue, tholen.
What does your classic hallucination have to do with OS/2, dizzy?
If that was at issue, dizzy, the issue could have been raised on
any day of the year. But instead, Robert James said nothing about
attitude or method and only wanted the discussion to be interrupted
for Christmas Day.
1476> I didn't see you, or anyone else, being admonished for merely
1476> "posting" on Christmas day.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have to
do with OS/2, dizzy? The fact that you did see me being admonished
for merely "posting" on Christams day is evidenced by the vast
number of times you criticized me for reproducing the quotation.
1476> To put it bluntly, the issue was your kooky tholing, tholen.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have to
do with OS/2, dizzy? Not once did Robert James mention what I
endure when reading your and your kook friend's postings, dizzy.
1476> I know it's ironic that you're reading comprehension is so poor,
1476> tholen. You don't need to tell me.
What does your classic hallucination have to do with OS/2, dizzy?
1476> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, tholen?
What does your classic erroneous and ironic presupposition have to
do with OS/2, dizzy?
1476> Only a kook would think that re-quoting that phrase helps his
case,
1476> tholen.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> You are a kook, tholen!
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> Only a kook would claim that the issue was "posting on Christmas
1476> day", tholen.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> You are a kook, tholen!
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> Anybody can see that you're wrong,
What does your classic hallucination have to do with OS/2, dizzy?
1476> and that you are a kook, tholen.
What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, only a kook would think that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> The fact that you kook-out when you are proven wrong spreaks for
1476> itself, tholen.
What does your classic erroneous presupposition that I've been
proven wrong have to do with OS/2, dizzy? Ironically, you're
the one who was proven wrong via the substantiation that I
provided, and you've been kooking out by trying to claim that
substantiation isn't substantiation.
1476> I know it's ironic that you're reading comprehension is so poor,
1476> tholen. You don't need to tell me.
What does your classic hallucination have to do with OS/2, dizzy?