6049awj02 at sneakemail.com
Fri May 13 08:15:17 PDT 2005
Alex Small alex_small2002-at-yahoo.com |EMlist| wrote:
> Am I the only person who sees the irony in awarding another poster an
> award for posts with personal attacks, and naming the award after a
I have apologized for my personal attacks on Mike. I realize that
calling him names was wrong and only degraded my own reputation here on
EM. So be it.
Having said that, I think I have the right to point out what Mike has
said in the past and has never apologized for. Indeed, I see that even
within the last few hours he has posted another message justifying his
routine disrespectful replies to several participants here, including
me. What is becoming abundantly clear is that Mike honestly believes
that his own intellectual "superiority" justifies or excuses his
appalling arogance and rudeness.
Suppose you were walking down the street minding your own business and
you were assualted. You fight back, then the police come along and see
two people fighting. What can they do but break it up and take your word
against the other guy's as to who started it. But what if the other guy
has a track record of assaulting others and you don't. Well, Mike
clearly has a track record of routinely insulting others here, but I
have never deliberately insulted anyone here on EM other than Mike.
Mike has posted lie after lie about me. Then he accuses me of posting
lies about him, which I have never done. A few weeks ago he was caught
red-handed in a bald-faced lie claiming that I had tried to falsely take
credit for originating DMC/RAV. The archive shows clearly that he was
completely wrong. Did he apologize? Of course not. He claimed it was
jutst an "honest" mistake. Ya, right.
He's still claiming that I'm "hurt" because he "forced" me to remove his
material from my website. That's two lies rolled into one. First, he had
no right to demand that I remove anything from the site (not to mention
that he has absolutely no way to "force" me to remove anything, of
course). Second, I voluntarily removed most of his stuff because a lot
of it was wrong, unimportant, or poorly explained (his bogus definition
of CC is a classic example).
So my little mock award was an attempt to make a point. I insulted Mike
by simply posting a sample of his arrogant garbage. What does it tell
you when you can insult someone by simply quoting him?
More information about the Election-Methods