Has Guy Chapman ever posted as Lou Knee? Why will he not answer the question when he's been asked it by several different people (surely if he hadn't posted as Lou Knee, he would have just said "No" by now)? And why won't any of his fans answer the question "Why will he not answer the question?"? I think it's obvious to *everyone* that he *has* posted as Lou Knee, and I think we all know which post he made.
And so we turn to the question of why he made the Lou Knee post where he called another poster a "piece of shit". Why did he not just post as himself? Was he trying to make it seem like there was more support for his position than there actually was? I can't see any other logical reason for him pretending to be someone else when he made that post, although it is Chapman we're talking about, so logic may very well not come into it at all. (After all, it's not logical to hate motorists.)
It's time for him to stop evading the question. He seems to think he can please his "God" without having to be honest by simply refusing to say whether he posted as Lou Knee. Well, somehow, if "God" existed then I don't think he'd be as easily deceived: "He" would know that Chapman was still taking the soft option by not fessing up, and that whether or not he actually lied about it was more or less irrelevant, and he'd probably be more angry with Chapman for taking "Him" for a gullible fool (like Chapman does with *everyone*) than he would have been had Chapman just lied and denied making the post. So Chapman fails. Again. As always.
Let's see if he's learnt anything yet, shall we? Guy Chapman, here's your chance to redeem yourself: Did you make the Lou Knee post where you called another poster a "piece of shit"? You *must* answer.
> Has Guy Chapman ever posted as Lou Knee? Why will he not answer the > question when he's been asked it by several different people (surely if > he hadn't posted as Lou Knee, he would have just said "No" by now)? And > why won't any of his fans answer the question "Why will he not answer > the question?"? I think it's obvious to *everyone* that he *has* posted > as Lou Knee, and I think we all know which post he made.
> And so we turn to the question of why he made the Lou Knee post where he > called another poster a "piece of shit". Why did he not just post as > himself? Was he trying to make it seem like there was more support for > his position than there actually was? I can't see any other logical > reason for him pretending to be someone else when he made that post, > although it is Chapman we're talking about, so logic may very well not > come into it at all. (After all, it's not logical to hate motorists.)
> It's time for him to stop evading the question. He seems to think he > can please his "God" without having to be honest by simply refusing to > say whether he posted as Lou Knee. Well, somehow, if "God" existed then > I don't think he'd be as easily deceived: "He" would know that Chapman > was still taking the soft option by not fessing up, and that whether or > not he actually lied about it was more or less irrelevant, and he'd > probably be more angry with Chapman for taking "Him" for a gullible fool > (like Chapman does with *everyone*) than he would have been had Chapman > just lied and denied making the post. So Chapman fails. Again. As > always.
> Let's see if he's learnt anything yet, shall we? Guy Chapman, here's > your chance to redeem yourself: Did you make the Lou Knee post where you > called another poster a "piece of shit"? You *must* answer.
Go away, you piece of shit. This is tedious beyond belief now.
-- Mr. Nasty
If you can't beat them, arrange to have them beaten
In article <7lnnhtF3fgc7...@mid.individual.net>, h...@there.com says...
> Go away, you piece of shit. This is tedious beyond belief now.
Ha ha. If you really think it's tedious then the best way of stopping all discussion on it is to get Chapman to answer the question. But you're obviously too much of a grovelling, pathetic sycophant of his to do that (in fact you're clearly so embarrassed by being putty in his hands that you've tried to hide who you are).
Of course, you could be Chapman himself. Either way you're a fuckwit who contributes towards the problems on URC by being one of the braying morons who refuses to ever accept that Chapman's wrong about anything, no matter how obvious it is.
Nice one. Jumping to your car-hating messiah's defence once again I see. Do you take lessons from him on being a lying car-hating question- evading fuckwit after your daily worship sessions? (You did say you'd met him...presumably that's why?)
> Nice one. Jumping to your car-hating messiah's defence once again I > see. Do you take lessons from him on being a lying car-hating question- > evading fuckwit after your daily worship sessions? (You did say you'd > met him...presumably that's why?)
Well, Reverend Tom Nuxxy Crispinson. I did not see that as jumping to the defence as such. I just thought that I would point out the irony of someone asking if someone else has ever posted as someone else, when that person habitually posts as someone else IYSWIM.
And, no, I have never met Guy, though I'm sure we would have much to chat about :-)
> In article <hd68i9$t8...@aioe.org>, ha...@munday.com says... >> Dear Rev. >> You really need to get yourself a life. Seeing a Doctor might be a good >> first step. >> HTH. >> Happi
> You can talk. At least there's a proper reason why I post here. You > have none that I can see, you just enjoy complaining about *everyone's* > posts.
I think your OP shows your state of self-delusion.
Mr. Nasty wrote: > On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 03:01:03 +0000, The Reverend Tom Crispinson said:
>> Let's see if he's learnt anything yet, shall we? Guy Chapman, here's >> your chance to redeem yourself: Did you make the Lou Knee post where you >> called another poster a "piece of shit"? You *must* answer.
> Go away, you piece of shit. This is tedious beyond belief now.
May I have your attention please? May I have your attention please? Will the real Lou Knee please stand up? I repeat, will the real Lou Knee please stand up? We're gonna have a problem here..
'Cause I'm Lou Knee, yes I'm the real Knee All you other Lou Knees are just imitating So won't the real Lou Knee please stand up, please stand up, please stand up? . . .
And every single person is a Lou Knee lurkin . . .
Guess there's a Lou Knee in all of us Fuck it, let's all stand up
> In article <hd68i9$t8...@aioe.org>, ha...@munday.com says... >> Dear Rev. >> You really need to get yourself a life. Seeing a Doctor might be a good >> first step. >> HTH. >> Happi
> You can talk. At least there's a proper reason why I post here. You > have none that I can see, you just enjoy complaining about *everyone's* > posts.
Ah, go on -- tell us the 'proper' reason.
Then tell us who you are instead of being a big chicken.
> In article <hd5tgp$g2...@news.eternal-september.org>, > milebur...@btinternet.com says... >> "The Reverend Tom Crispinson" <guy.chap...@hates.motorists> wrote in message >> news:MPG.256044ce4ad65fdf98969a@news.zen.co.uk...
>>> Has Guy Chapman ever posted as Lou Knee? >> Has Nuxxy ever posted as Guy Chapman?
> Nice one. Jumping to your car-hating messiah's defence once again I > see. Do you take lessons from him on being a lying car-hating question- > evading fuckwit after your daily worship sessions? (You did say you'd > met him...presumably that's why?)
On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 14:05:41 +0000, The Reverend Tom Crispinson said:
> In article <7lnnhtF3fgc7...@mid.individual.net>, h...@there.com says...
>> Go away, you piece of shit. This is tedious beyond belief now.
> Ha ha. If you really think it's tedious then the best way of stopping > all discussion on it is to get Chapman to answer the question. But > you're obviously too much of a grovelling, pathetic sycophant of his to > do that (in fact you're clearly so embarrassed by being putty in his > hands that you've tried to hide who you are)
Wrong. I couldn't care less whether Chapman, or anyone else for that matter, called someone a "piece of shit" on usenet. It's usenet. It happens. You clearly aren't mature enough to cope with this simple fact.
-- Mr. Nasty
If you can't beat them, arrange to have them beaten
Keitht wrote: > Mr. Nasty wrote: >> On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 03:01:03 +0000, The Reverend Tom Crispinson said:
>>> Let's see if he's learnt anything yet, shall we? Guy Chapman, here's >>> your chance to redeem yourself: Did you make the Lou Knee post where you >>> called another poster a "piece of shit"? You *must* answer.
>> Go away, you piece of shit. This is tedious beyond belief now.
> May I have your attention please? > May I have your attention please? > Will the real Lou Knee please stand up? > I repeat, will the real Lou Knee please stand up? > We're gonna have a problem here..
> 'Cause I'm Lou Knee, yes I'm the real Knee > All you other Lou Knees are just imitating > So won't the real Lou Knee please stand up, > please stand up, please stand up? . . .
> And every single person is a Lou Knee lurkin . . .
> Guess there's a Lou Knee in all of us > Fuck it, let's all stand up
> apols to Mr Mathers
I think he's getting to you - either that or you're another who needs to see a doctor tomorrow. Happi.
Happi Monday wrote: > Keitht wrote: >> Mr. Nasty wrote: >>> On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 03:01:03 +0000, The Reverend Tom Crispinson said:
>>>> Let's see if he's learnt anything yet, shall we? Guy Chapman, here's >>>> your chance to redeem yourself: Did you make the Lou Knee post where >>>> you >>>> called another poster a "piece of shit"? You *must* answer.
>>> Go away, you piece of shit. This is tedious beyond belief now.
>> May I have your attention please? >> May I have your attention please? >> Will the real Lou Knee please stand up? >> I repeat, will the real Lou Knee please stand up? >> We're gonna have a problem here..
>> 'Cause I'm Lou Knee, yes I'm the real Knee >> All you other Lou Knees are just imitating >> So won't the real Lou Knee please stand up, >> please stand up, please stand up? . . .
>> And every single person is a Lou Knee lurkin . . .
>> Guess there's a Lou Knee in all of us >> Fuck it, let's all stand up
>> apols to Mr Mathers
> I think he's getting to you - either that or you're another who needs to > see a doctor tomorrow. > Happi.
Nah, it's just another version of the 'Spartacus' thang a few weeks back
|
