Nuxx:97e4266d-229f-4f7a-840f-bdab0cd6ae46@a8g2000pri.googlegroups.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!a8g2000pri.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <97e4266d-229f-4f7a-840f-bdab0cd6ae46@a8g2000pri.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.net.news.moderation Subject: Re: OT : A little bet with Wm Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 04:01:17 -0800 (PST) References:        <0vsnk65eub55807b2qa6kn4mivirkuld99@4ax.com> <5a97860d-4987-4d00-b4d5-6c3f772d534d@w7g2000pre.googlegroups.com>   Lines: 48 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.71.49.124 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1296907278 30712 127.0.0.1 (5 Feb 2011 12:01:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 12:01:18 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: a8g2000pri.googlegroups.com; posting-host=82.71.49.124; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Opera/9.80 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.5.8; U; en) Presto/2.7.62 Version/11.01,gzip(gfe) Bytes: 3641 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.net.news.moderation:36863

On Feb 4, 8:10=A0pm, Judith  wrote: > On Fri, 4 Feb 2011 19:04:22 +0000 (UTC), Percy Picacity > > > > > >  wrote: > >Nuxx Bar  wrote in > >news:5a97860d-4987-4d00-b4d5-6c3f772d534d@w7g2000pre.googlegroups.com > >: > > >> Alternatively, of course, Chapman could just admit making the > >> post. =A0I very much doubt anyone truly believes that he didn't, so > >> who does he think he's fooling? =A0It's just pure stubbornness for > >> the sake of it; he will never, ever concede, no matter how > >> beneficial it would be to him and others, > > >What possible benefit could result to anyone or anything from Guy > >Chapman admitting he made a semi-anonymised post? =A0Answer, in case you > >were thinking of giving another one, none. It certainly wouldn't reduce > >the frequency with which it is mentioned by tiresome people. > > It would of course prove that he was a liar after he was originally > caught out. > > (But he is a christian don't you know.) > > The only reason that "semi-anonymised" is appropriate is that the IT > expert and "thought leader" =A0used an IP address which he had > previously used in his own name. > > What a tosser.

As above. And it most certainly would be mentioned less if Chapman admitted it. It's the way he plays the "good guy" (excuse the pun) while simultaneously being so bloody deceitful which gets my goat. In this case he tried to imply that he didn't make the post without actually saying it. If he admitted it (even now) then he'd go up (or less far down) in my estimation, definitely.

Dear old criticising Percy can always killfile or ignore any post which contains "Lou Knee" if he doesn't like it. And yes, it's OT for this newsgroup, but so are many things discussed here (pretty much everything except the continued lambasting of URCM's "moderation" in fact). And anyway I started this thread. So there.

At least Percy seems to see Chapman for who he is.