From: Dudley Hanks on

"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
news:200911011232107826-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom...
> On 2009-11-01 12:15:59 -0800, John McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> said:
>
>> Neil Harrington wrote:
>>> "John McWilliams" <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
>>> news:hckmcb$r80$2(a)news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> Neil Harrington wrote:
>>>>> "Bob Larter" <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:4aed04c1$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>>>>> Curiouser and Curiouser wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:30:03 +1000, Bob Larter
>>>>>>> <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Curiouser and Curiouser wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I'm a well accomplished professional. 50,000 photos on some years
>>>>>>>>> is not
>>>>>>>>> out of the question, >75% of that being of marketable quality.
>>>>>>>> And yet you can't show us a single one of them. Imagine that.
>>>>>>> On checking my "Scrapshots that beat DSLRs" folder, I find 14 images
>>>>>>> that I
>>>>>>> posted this year
>>>>>> ROTFL! - I saw most of those images, & they weren't all that good for
>>>>>> P&S shots, much less DSLR shots.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> PS: No, screwing with the follow-ups line won't work on me.
>>>>> I'm glad you pointed that out. I tend not to notice that sort of
>>>>> sleazy trick. This jerk seems determined to be as much of a pest as he
>>>>> can, in every way he can.
>>>> IAE, FWIW: Until youse guys stop replying to and talking about the
>>>> pest, he'll continue.
>>>
>>> "IAE"?
>>>
>>>> Same with replying to Navas when he's in troll mode.
>>>> Anyway, GWG.
>>>
>>> Dunno that one either. "Go with God"?
>>
>> Bingo! You got the tougher one. In any event,
>> iVaya con Dios!
>
> ...and here I was thinking it was "Giggling With Glee" or perhaps more
> appropriate to NG's and off topic stuff, "Group Within Group"??
> --
> Regards,
>
> Savageduck
>
God! What Garbage?
Grinning Wide Grin?


From: Savageduck on
On 2009-11-01 13:02:22 -0800, "Dudley Hanks" <dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> said:

>
> "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
> news:200911011232107826-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom...
>> On 2009-11-01 12:15:59 -0800, John McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> said:
>>
>>> Neil Harrington wrote:
>>>> "John McWilliams" <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:hckmcb$r80$2(a)news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>> Neil Harrington wrote:
>>>>>> "Bob Larter" <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:4aed04c1$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>>>>>> Curiouser and Curiouser wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:30:03 +1000, Bob Larter
>>>>>>>> <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Curiouser and Curiouser wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I'm a well accomplished professional. 50,000 photos on some years
>>>>>>>>>> is not
>>>>>>>>>> out of the question, >75% of that being of marketable quality.
>>>>>>>>> And yet you can't show us a single one of them. Imagine that.
>>>>>>>> On checking my "Scrapshots that beat DSLRs" folder, I find 14 images
>>>>>>>> that I
>>>>>>>> posted this year
>>>>>>> ROTFL! - I saw most of those images, & they weren't all that good for
>>>>>>> P&S shots, much less DSLR shots.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> PS: No, screwing with the follow-ups line won't work on me.
>>>>>> I'm glad you pointed that out. I tend not to notice that sort of
>>>>>> sleazy trick. This jerk seems determined to be as much of a pest as he
>>>>>> can, in every way he can.
>>>>> IAE, FWIW: Until youse guys stop replying to and talking about the
>>>>> pest, he'll continue.
>>>>
>>>> "IAE"?
>>>>
>>>>> Same with replying to Navas when he's in troll mode.
>>>>> Anyway, GWG.
>>>>
>>>> Dunno that one either. "Go with God"?
>>>
>>> Bingo! You got the tougher one. In any event,
>>> iVaya con Dios!
>>
>> ...and here I was thinking it was "Giggling With Glee" or perhaps more
>> appropriate to NG's and off topic stuff, "Group Within Group"??
>> --
>> Regards,
>>
>> Savageduck
>>
> God! What Garbage?
> Grinning Wide Grin?

All look good to me.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

From: Bob Larter on
Neil Harrington wrote:
> "Bob Larter" <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:4aed04c1$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>> Curiouser and Curiouser wrote:
>>> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:30:03 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Curiouser and Curiouser wrote:
>>>>> I'm a well accomplished professional. 50,000 photos on some years is
>>>>> not
>>>>> out of the question, >75% of that being of marketable quality.
>>>> And yet you can't show us a single one of them. Imagine that.
>>> On checking my "Scrapshots that beat DSLRs" folder, I find 14 images that
>>> I
>>> posted this year
>> ROTFL! - I saw most of those images, & they weren't all that good for P&S
>> shots, much less DSLR shots.
>>
>> PS: No, screwing with the follow-ups line won't work on me.
>
> I'm glad you pointed that out. I tend not to notice that sort of sleazy
> trick. This jerk seems determined to be as much of a pest as he can, in
> every way he can.

That trick is very common with net-kooks. The P&S troll is a classic
net-kook.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bob Larter is Lionel Lauer - Look it up. on
On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 13:54:04 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com>
wrote:

>Neil Harrington wrote:
>> "Bob Larter" <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:4aed04c1$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>> Curiouser and Curiouser wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:30:03 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Curiouser and Curiouser wrote:
>>>>>> I'm a well accomplished professional. 50,000 photos on some years is
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> out of the question, >75% of that being of marketable quality.
>>>>> And yet you can't show us a single one of them. Imagine that.
>>>> On checking my "Scrapshots that beat DSLRs" folder, I find 14 images that
>>>> I
>>>> posted this year
>>> ROTFL! - I saw most of those images, & they weren't all that good for P&S
>>> shots, much less DSLR shots.
>>>
>>> PS: No, screwing with the follow-ups line won't work on me.
>>
>> I'm glad you pointed that out. I tend not to notice that sort of sleazy
>> trick. This jerk seems determined to be as much of a pest as he can, in
>> every way he can.
>
>That trick is very common with net-kooks. The P&S troll is a classic
>net-kook.



Bob Larter's legal name: Lionel Lauer
Home news-group, an actual group in the "troll-tracker" hierarchy:
alt.kook.lionel-lauer (established on, or before, 2005)
Registered Description: the "owner of several troll domains" needs a group where he'll stay on topic.
From: Bob Larter on
Bob Larter is Lionel Lauer - Look it up. wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 13:01:31 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Neil Harrington wrote:
>>> -hh wrote:
>>>> On Oct 29, 3:19 pm, Curiouser and Curiouser <question...(a)anyisp.net>
>> [...]
>>>> That's about all you'd ever be good for..." absolutely must explicitly
>>>> mean that you have extensive first-hand experience with male strangers
>>>> giving you blowjobs.
>>> Or vice versa, of course.
>>>
>>>> In actuality, the answer to the OP's question is quite simple, and it
>>>> has actually already been provided elsewhere. Apparently you've
>>>> overlooked it, which isn't anyone's fault other than your own.
>>> I think he has overloaded and burned out. I'm not reading his posts any
>>> more, but the last ones I glanced at seemed to be just the same fatuous
>>> drivel pasted in over and over.
>> It is. In fact, he's spamming. I'll be interested to see what his NSP
>> has to say about it.
>
> Are you aware that you and others of your ilk have now proved yourselves
[snip]

I see that you had to switch NSPs to repost your spam, eh kook? ;^)

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------