Nuxx:D74640e0-a640-484e-a23c-a78f0f93f984@k38g2000vbn.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!k38g2000vbn.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.net.news.moderation Subject: Re: URCM Moderator Moderated Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 14:28:00 -0800 (PST) References:   <7tKdncOIfPe-MsLQnZ2dnUVZ7rGdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>     <64a7cfa2-1d24-488f-aad5-c2b48f8082e6@i39g2000prd.googlegroups.com>  Lines: 56 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 1298586480 26683 127.0.0.1 (24 Feb 2011 22:28:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 22:28:00 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: k38g2000vbn.googlegroups.com; posting-host=82.71.49.124; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13,gzip(gfe) Bytes: 4888 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.net.news.moderation:37914

On Feb 24, 8:58=A0am, Nobby Anderson  wrote: > Nuxx Bar  wrote: > > [lots and lots of stuff ...] > > Hooray, Nuxxy, you're back to your usual form. =A0I have to admit I've be= en > despairing that you'd lost interest in me because I'd not been on the > end of your wit for quite some time. =A0Sorry it took me so long to affir= m > your expectations of my reply, I've not been here but I wouldn't want you > to think I don't care! =A0Well I don't, but I wouldn't want you to think > that. =A0Must be so frustrating for you that you can't get the answer > you want from me about Lou Knee, but you've had the only answer you're > going to get, I'm afraid, because I'm not really given to speculate on > things I have no knoiwledge about, I'll leave that to others. =A0Not sure > what you mean by St Chapman, but if you're accusing me of posting as > someone else then I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken, I've never felt the > need, not something you can say, eh? =A0I like the way you hint that you > really are taking legal action against Chapman, though, that was a good > one. =A0Not that I believe you, of course.

And there we have it in black and white: Nob is a sore loser. If you just want to wind him up then fair enough, but clearly there is no point in trying to engage him in logical debate or argument, because the moment you start to get the upper hand, he just hits the eject button. We've just seen how he will do anything to avoid answering a question which he doesn't want to answer because the truth is inconvenient to him (as a fellow car-hater, he must show complete loyalty to Chapman at all costs). There have been other examples of him refusing to reply when he's demonstrably wrong (e.g. saying something's "crap" when it's objectively correct, then being pulled up on it and asked to explain how it's crap...then slinking off into the night). Every time he starts to lose an argument, without exception, he uses the same old evasive tactics.

If he had the guts and common decency to admit when he'd got it wrong, as we all do from time to time, then his pompous, patronising and pretentious pronouncements might actually be taken to mean something, but since he behaves in exactly the same way whether he's right or not, you can't take anything he says at face value. He is the boy who cried wolf: when the truth's on his side, you can't tell, because he acts in the same way as when it isn't.

It's no wonder at all that someone who sweeps inconvenient truths under the carpet in such a way is one of URCM's staunchest defenders, given that Jackson's whole reason for setting up the group was to do exactly the same kind of sweeping (and isn't he getting hot under the collar, now that his servant moderators have started refusing the toe the line regarding Matt B and his irritating and inconsiderate adherence to the truth no matter who finds it inconvenient?)

Thanks, Nobby, for leaving us in no doubt as to what your dubious tactics are. I'm sure that any further reply you deign to make will be full of sarcastic bluster which carefully continues to avoid addressing any substantive points.