In article <C44E64C2.B8E1A%usenet@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Snit <usenet@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "Tim Murray" <no-spam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> stated in post
> tA8Wj.11112$C8.6910@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
on 5/12/08 9:15 PM:
>
> > On Sun, 11 May 2008 23:56:28 -0400, Snit wrote:
> >>> You've been here long enough. You know it is.
> >>>
> >> Show me the proof. I am not saying you are wrong - I am merely
noting that
> >> if there is not proof (or, really, strong sup****t) then the
accusation
> >> should be dropped.
> >
> > Writing style, word usage, standard misspellings, phrasing, and
headers.
> >
> I accept there is room for suspicion. OK. So we have no really strong
> evidence just reasonable suspicion.
Correction: *You* opine that his evidence isn't "strong". That his
evidence doesn't prove anything for *you* doesn't mean others are not
'convinced' by it. Of course, being a sock puppet using troll yourself,
you have a vested interest in not seeing sock puppets exposed... so you
will pretend they aren't. Funny how evidence works as proof, isn't it?
(snip feeble trolling attempt by Snit)
--
"Apple is pu****ng how green this is - but it [Macbook Air] is
clearly disposable... when the battery dies you can pretty much
just throw it away". - Snit
|
