RE--BUTTLICKER

If you're going to accuse someone of violating TOU, then present the facts.

You have to copy and past the violated TOU guidelines. Don't just pull manure pallets out of your ass. Or is it easier for you to accuse someone of violating TOU instead of proving it?

I'd say that you're full of it. You know that if you tried to "prove" your point, I'd hand you your ass. I'd prove you wrong using the very TOU sections you claimed I violated.

I didn't violate TOU, I know that for a fact.

Reposting something because you abused software to remove it doesn't constitute spam or overpost. Spam is an attempt to make money. Overpost is an attempt to post something that's a duplicate of what's still active.

You like to "invoke" TOU when you lose control of the situation, yet you encourage its violation when it suites your purposes.

My posts don't violate TOU, but triple "X" pictures do. If you're big on TOU, you wouldn't encourage people to post triple "X" pictures.

Also understand that you can't control other people's actions. If you don't want to read what someone wrote, resist the urge to click on the link to their post. Quit acting like other people control your actions.

They don't.

Realizing that you have control of your own actions, including the ability to ignore a post and move on, is a liberating thought.

You spewed:

Did you report that blowhard Not Fooled as well? If anyone abused TOU it was him.

Besides, I'd much rather look at pictures of an ass than have to read the things one wrote.

Booyaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh

RE--Don't Recall Lending You the Book

That's the typical response from someone that felt the joke's sting... but was unable to fire back with another joke. People like you are out there. They have no sense of humor and they always want their way. When they become the butt of a joke that hits them in the jugular, they act like it didn't have an affect.

I don't need someone to write my material for me. You, however, need someone to start thinking for you in the future. If you keep your stupidity up, your brain will leave you to seek employment.

You spewed:

That was SO not funny. In your quest to be a comedian..please don't quit your day job, and it might be a good idea to get someone else to write your material in the future.

Maybe Bubba can help as it seems he is not fulfilled in his current employment.

Flagger Becomes Unhinged When She Can't Control Me

Yes, it's me.

Why even ask the question?

You asked:

Is that you Not Fooled?

Someone Has Anger and Control Issues

The flagger, one of my debate opponents?

The only people that have thrown the, "are you never wrong?" or "you have a need to be right," or "you think you're never wrong," complaint at me are the same people that think they're always right.

It's usually the people that I argue against, or those that support them.

The "other" people that you talk about are trying to dismiss my argument as nothing but opinion.

I've backed my argument with facts, logic, and a reasoned argument. Show me where, in my posts or reposts, I say that my entire post is pure facts, and you'll have an argument. I'm going to tell you the same thing I've told the "others."

Anybody could express an opinion. I'm not arguing against that. I'm arguing against the "other" people's intent with dismissing my argument as "opinion." When they do that, they dismiss my argument's facts, logics, and reasoning.

It's a feeble attempt to say, "Either one of us could be right, either one of us could be wrong."

It's an attempt to put equal validity to both our posts. By doing this, they relieve themselves of defending their argument, or trying to prove my argument "wrong." They failed to do the latter.

In order for them to let me know that I'm "wrong," they have to use a reasoned argument with facts to prove that. They've consistently failed to do so. I've used logics, facts, and reason to counter their statements.

This isn't a case of "never" being wrong.

Like I indicated in the post you replied to, I don't start debates, or jump into debates, where other people know more than me. One requirement for me to jump into a debate is that I know a lot more than the people that I'm debating with.

I've used many of these same arguments on other boards. I've used many of my arguments over the years. I could do that because my arguments have solid ground. The other side is left with throwing the, "It's just your opinion," comment out because their argument doesn't have factual or logical basis.

Going back to the same post you addressed, here's what I said about opinions versus fact:

1.  "Facts and opinions aren't just mere semantics. The statement, 1 +1 = 2, is a factual statement. It's not an opinion. Any attempt to describe a reasoned argument as, "just an opinion," is an attempt to trivialize that strong argument."

On my arguing till I have the last word, what I said in the post that you responded to:

1. "I don't measure victory by who has the last word. I base that on how well the combatants use the facts, logics, and reason to back their arguments. As other posters have indicated, nobody has been able to do that against me here. I'm winning these debates."

2. However, it's needed if I'm to accomplish my objectives. You people have tried to destroy my credibility, and paint me as a person that I'm not. My having the last word on that is important as it sets the record straight. This contributes to people looking at my posts objectively.

3. "My continuing to argue until I fire the last shot has more to do with principle, and objective, than it does what you assumed. For instance, what right would I have to argue that the United States should continue fighting in Iraq until we accomplish our objectives... if I can't even do that on an online debate?" - Not Fooled

On your statement about my liking to argue, from the same post you addressed:

1. "Debating is one of my past times." - Not Fooled

2. "No, my debating ad infinitum doesn't "prove" that this is "all" I have. Far from it. This is one of my pastimes." - Not Fooled

If it's one of my past times, then obviously, I like to debate. But I don't debate just about anything. Go back and see the criteria I have for jumping into a debate.

On your statement about how I'd argue with Jesus' claims if he were to come down here. From the post that you read:

1.  "A prerequisite for me to jump into an argument is that I know more about the argument topic than the person that I'm arguing with."

So, if Jesus actually came down here and claimed to be such, I wouldn't argue against that. This isn't about me arguing for arguments sake, or to argue just about anything. I pick my arguments, and I argue with a purpose.


You spewed:

What is it with you? Is it that you are never wrong? Several posters have accused you of confusing opinion and fact. In your opinion, everyone but you is wrong about that. Or, is it that you are driven by some need to always have the last word? You said, 'IF these people truly wanted me to stop, they'd do the common sense thing to do and not reply to me.' Or, is it that you just like to argue? I swear, Jesus himself could appear in a bright fuzzy hat with a neon sign that said 'I'm the son of god' and you would argue with him about it. You get the last word on this one.

I've got that Book in My Library...(It's Time for Our Afternoon Tea...)

Don't recall lending you the book

Nope, still in my library. I don't recall letting you borrow it. I recommend you hide your Hustler collection elsewhere. If your parents are surfing this forum, they'd know to check your corner of the basement. Try not to hide things under the straw mess on the floor that you call your bed.

You spewed:

right next to my Hustler collection.

RE--Not Getting It, Also Known as Not Fooled

Someone has anger and control issues

This isn't a case where I "don't" get it. Because I do.

What you're really saying is that you're getting frustrated with my refusal to let your posts stand unchallenged. I see right through your laughable attempts to get me to NOT reply to you. Where's "out looking on" when you need him/her?

Oh, wait, I've got the next best thing, funny how what (out looking on) said actually applies this time:

"Because the person or people they are trying to communicate with did not agree then they somehow have come to the conclusion that the person or people being spoken or written to, were not listening, when in fact, the opposite is true. Not only did we hear or read it, but we understood what you were saying, but actually DISAGREE with what was said. You must accept that as a fact of life or you will be constantly plagued by the feeling of being misunderstood." - (out looking on)

I could tell by reading your posts that you simply don't get it.

You obviously want me to stop, but you're not doing what's required for me to stop. I've been doing this for about two weeks. By now, you should see a cause and effect. I've even told you what I intend to do.

Cause, people reply to me, people attack me, and people remove my posts. Effect, I reply back, I counter attack them, and I repost the removed post.

Like everybody else, you're trying to deal with the effect, while ignoring the cause. I've posted here enough for you to realize that the cause ALWAYS leads to the effect. The fact that you're addressing the effect, and not the cause, shows that you don't get it. Not me.

Or, should I say you're simply ignoring where I tell you my intentions? You have an agenda by constantly giving me those messages. I know, you were addressing a wider crowd, but you're specifically directing that to me.

I've stated my intentions, and what it takes for me to stop. The onus is on those that don't want me to do this to deal with the CAUSE and not the effect.

I know my history. I know enough about that period to know that it isn't applicable to what I'm doing. As I've previously stated, I'm not here to change my opponent's mind. I'm not here to change my mind. What I previously said:

1.  "Changing people's minds isn't my intent. But there are people who are sitting on the fence who could go either way. So, when I rebut a political post that I disagree with, I'm not aiming to change that person's mind. I'm balancing what I see is a media fueled statement on certain issues. I've talked to a lot of people who were willing to change their positions--once they saw the facts behind certain topics. I've done that on other message boards, I'm doing that here." - Not Fooled.

2.  "The people I rebut aren't going to change their minds. The people that come on here pretending to be Republicans, pretending to be in the middle, complaining about my posts, etc, aren't going to change their minds. Most, probably all, of these people lean left. But there are people that are willing to change their position once they see things in proper perspective." - Not Fooled

3. "I've never changed my mind because of what my opponent said. And changing my opponent's mind isn't my intention." - Not Fooled

But, I'm glad that you brought that analogy up, because it's very applicable to people like you, and others, who have issues with me making my posts. Commenting about my posts, rebutting my posts, and flagging my posts, while bitching about me constantly replying?

Now that's what you call bully tactics. Especially after I've told these posters what they could do that'd make me leave.

IF these people truly wanted me to stop, they'd do the common sense thing to do and not reply to me.

They'd do the common sense thing to do and refrain from removing my posts. If these guys truly wanted to be a part of the "solution," they wouldn't give me the incentive to keep coming back.

It's simple.

Ignore my posts, and I stop arguing. They could do that easily. But they don't. They'd rather attack me or remove my posts. That's precisely what any sane person would label as bullying tactics. They're all designed to try to drive me away from Hampton Roads Rants and Raves. But, like you said:

"Bullying tactics seldom work" - You. They never work with me.

"Having the last word does not always mean you have won." - You

I don't measure victory by who has the last word. I base that on how well the combatants use the facts, logics, and reason to back their arguments. As other posters have indicated, nobody has been able to do that against me here.

I'm winning these debates.

However, it's needed if I'm to accomplish my objectives. You people have tried to destroy my credibility, and paint me as a person that I'm not. My having the last word on that is important as it sets the record straight. This contributes to people looking at my posts objectively.

"Usually it means the other party is just tired of arguing and chooses to tune out the constant buzzing in their ears of redundant thoughts." - You

I have no idea of what being tired or arguing is like. :-)

But, thought I'd bring up my prior statements to prove that you got it wrong:

1. "My continuing to argue until I fire the last shot has more to do with principle, and objective, than it does what you assumed. For instance, what right would I have to argue that the United States should continue fighting in Iraq until we accomplish our objectives... if I can't even do that on an online debate?" - Not Fooled

Notice how I stop addressing their particular argument when they tune out the "constant buzzing" in their ears?

You complain about me doing what I'm doing here. Yet, you do the very thing that causes me to come back and generate a reply. You're part of the "problem" that you're complaining about.

As for your statements about the internet being the "focal point" in my life. It isn't.

Any critical thinking person would look at my posting times before making that comment. I come on here one part of the day, then post my replies in batches. Then I come back the next day. Reposting doesn't take long.

Debating is one of my past times. But I don't spend all day on the internet doing it. Anybody with a lick of common sense would see that just by looking at all the posts here.

Facts and opinions aren't just mere semantics.

The statement, 1 +1 = 2, is a factual statement. It's not an opinion. Any attempt to describe a reasoned argument as, "just an opinion," is an attempt to trivialize that strong argument.

And speaking of trivializing, you seem to have issues with my trivializing your attacks against me. Not only do I trivialize them, I discredit them. I have a right to do that in a post where I'm defending myself.

Please see my above statement.

If someone claims that I'm referencing a book that I "never" read, I'm going to set the record straight. I'm going to tell them I read that book, understood the concepts, and applied them in my argument.

If you feel that I'm trivializing what you said, then it's because your intellect is telling you that you don't have an argument, and that you're just pulling $#!t out of your @$$.

Adhering to beliefs alone doesn't give person character and integrity. A crook will adhere to his zero scruples beliefs. By your definition, his doing so gives him character and integrity. But it doesn't.

Practicing what you demand of others? Now THAT'S what gives people character and integrity.

You don't do what you demand from others. So guess what that makes you?

Those people that want me to stop debating here for example.

If they wanted me to stop, then they'd stop debating me. But, if they continue to debate with me, demanding that I stop debating, then they're showing that they don't have integrity. If these same people demand that we pull out of Iraq, but refuse to cede an argument, then they don't have integrity. It's THAT simple.

Don't mistake my countering their rebuttals as "belittling" the other person's beliefs. I'm just showing that poster, and the readers, that the person I'm arguing doesn't know what he or she is talking about. That they're simply talking out of their hind ends.

Again, I also do that to discredit attempts to diminish my credibility, and prove them wrong.

If you don't want to be belittled, then don't post lies about me. If you don't want to be discredited, then actually know what you're talking about when you're arguing with me. A prerequisite for me to jump into an argument is that I know more about the argument topic than the person that I'm arguing with.

I'm just showing the fence sitters that the other side of the argument doesn't have a real argument.

No, my debating ad infinitum doesn't "prove" that this is "all" I have. Far from it. This is one of my pastimes. I have others.

I spend only a fraction of a day on this board making my posts. THAT should've been obvious. By logical extension, I don't spend all my time on this board. However, the fact that you take issues with my doing this proves that going after me is all that you have.

Otherwise, you'd quit trying to solve the "problem" by addressing the effect but not dealing with the cause.

Orgasmic pleasure? No. Sadistic pleasure? Yes.

Know your facts about me before you label the fence sitters as "ignorant." In the mean time, I'm going to continue to hammer the opposition.

You spewed:

I can only compare these debate posts from a certain person to revisiting Spain in 1492. You remember your history. All people not Catholic were to be expelled from the country immediately.

What the majority did was pretend to be Catholic in public and continued to practice their own religion in the privacy of their homes and in their hearts. Bullying tactics seldom work, as a core belief (be it politics, childrearing or even what brand of toilet paper you buy) is exactly that and no amount of discussion will change anyone's mind.

Having the last word does not always mean you have won. Usually it means the other party is just tired of arguing and chooses to tune out the constant buzzing in their ears of redundant thoughts.

I can't help but feel pity for anyone who has chosen to make the internet the focal point in their lives and puts so much time and effort into debating with nameless faceless strangers.

Facts or opinions....they're just semantics. A person will believe what they choose to believe. And adhereing to those beliefs gives a person character and integrity. Trivializing the beliefs of others only highlights the immaturity and intolerance if the person doing the belittling.

In closing, personally these numerous posts don't bother me. They are entitled to their opinion as much as the next person, but it's obvious that this is all they have. I can almost feel their orgasmic pleasure as they "hammer" the opponent and continue the battle to "educate" the ignorant.

To each his own I guess.

What the Flag Abuser Doesn't Want You to Know

Hey Control Freak, you're abusing the purpose behind flaggings on this board. From the page before coming into craigslist:

"2. I understand "rants and raves" may include offensive content."

Obviously, many posts, mine specifically, OFFEND you. From Craigslist Terms of Use:

"9. NO SPAM POLICY

You understand and agree that sending unsolicited email advertisements to craigslist email addresses or through craigslist computer systems, which is expressly prohibited by these Terms, will use or cause to be used servers located in California.  Any unauthorized use of craigslist computer systems is a violation of these Terms and certain federal and state laws, including without limitation the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (18 U.S.C. § 1030 et seq.), Section 502 of the California Penal Code and Section 17538.45 of the California Business and Professions Code.  Such violations may subject the sender and his or her agents to civil and criminal penalties."

Read that 10 times, then read it laud 3 times, then write it word for word 3 times if you have to in order to get it.

As for OVER-POSTS.

The intent of that part of their flagging policy is to flag multiple duplicate posts. This is clarified further: "in multiple cities/categories." For it to be considered "too frequently," it has to exist as multiple posts. The first part: posted too frequently," means that there are multiple existing posts in one city or category.

The intent for that is to have only ONE post of its kind ACTIVE. You said you'd flag the second post. Second to what? It has to be second to a first post that people could read. But there's a problem with that. You deleted the original. It doesn't count as a "first" post for flagging purposes.

Reposting a post that you flagged doesn't count as posting "too frequently." It's a single active post that has no duplicate existing posts in this, or other forums.

Your clones and you complain about political posts being "mis-categorized." You'd have an argument if you were CONSISTENT. For instance:

This rants and rave post belongs to the groups forum:

http://norfolk.craigslist.org/rnr/840738415.html

These rants and rave posts belong in the sports forum:

http://norfolk.craigslist.org/rnr/840600776.html

http://norfolk.craigslist.org/rnr/840581205.html

http://norfolk.craigslist.org/rnr/840462624.html

http://norfolk.craigslist.org/rnr/840481243.html

These rants and rave posts belong in the Parenting forum:

http://norfolk.craigslist.org/rnr/840332950.html

http://norfolk.craigslist.org/rnr/840303433.html

http://norfolk.craigslist.org/rnr/839030069.html

http://norfolk.craigslist.org/rnr/840269624.html

Oh, and why are these political posts still up?

http://norfolk.craigslist.org/rnr/841627030.html

http://norfolk.craigslist.org/rnr/832550375.html

http://norfolk.craigslist.org/rnr/834497041.html

http://norfolk.craigslist.org/rnr/838181202.html

http://norfolk.craigslist.org/rnr/837273868.html

http://norfolk.craigslist.org/rnr/837206439.html

There's more where THOSE came from, but you get the picture. Your clones and you flag my political posts, but other political posts stay up. The posts that I replied to didn't get deleted, but my replies did. So this statement goes out the window:

"I'll be honest about it," - CONTROL FREAK

No, You're not being honest with anybody, and you're not being honest with yourself.

So, you CAN'T give us the canard that politics don't belong here if you aren't consistent with what you flag for removal, and what you leave alone. I still see other posts here that should be in other forums.

I still see political posts here that you haven't flagged for removal.

Conversations don't belong on this forum. Yet, I don't see you constantly bitching up a storm about moving conversations elsewhere.

You just flagged the posts that inconvenienced YOU.

Then you took it upon yourself to decide for everyone else what they get to read, and what they don't get to read. So this throws your sincerity about getting rid of mis categorized posts, and frequent posts, out.

You flag my post, I repost them. If you STOP flagging my posts, I won't have to repost them. Yet, you're justifying your flagging my posts by saying that I post them too much... ignoring the fact that I wouldn't be doing this if you simply did what you tell other people to do regarding posts.

Which leads to another intent behind frequent posts.

It wasn't intended to prevent me from reposting something that was flagged. It was intended for people that post duplicate posts on the same or other forums. It was designed to make sure that only one ACTIVE post was displayed.

Based on the above facts, you've got no legitimate grounds for flagging my posts.

"if I've seen the same post more than once, I WILL flag the second post, and will continue to flag it as spam/over post." - CONTROL FREAK

In case of a flagged post, you may have seen something twice, but future readers haven't.

You're flagging posts that you have personal issues with. You don't want to see people challenging your drivel. So you have them deleted so that future readers only see your drivel, but not my replies to them.

That's the real reason you're flagging my posts, then crying about me reposting my replies.

I mean, who died and made you the rants and raves administrator?

You've taken it upon yourself to decide what's redundant, and what's not. You, either directly or through one of your clone identities, have consistently complained about my posts. Yet, you can't even follow the advice you dish out:

"It pissed you off, you had your say, now you have one of two choices in life, get over it, or die worried about it." - CONTROL FREAK

So let me get this straight. If you had your say, and someone comes behind you and hammers you, or says something that pisses you off, you abuse this board's flagging system.

But, if someone has issues with you doing this, they're supposed to suck it up and move on?

I know that I'm not the only one that sees the double standard in this statement. Why don't you do as you preach? If you see my posts, and other people's posts, and they piss you off, why don't you get over it or die worrying about it?

Your statement proves my belief that your arrogance is negatively correlated to your intelligence.

"I feel the same way about that political crap that was tossed out like bad gas from a bloated goat." - CONTROL FREAK

Correction, that you flagged for removal. I guess the aliens forgot to remove your anal probe again. Just because your shit is all backed up like that doesn't mean that you could spew it all over this board.

Again, leave that to future readers to decide. Don't deny them the opportunity to read my rebuttals to your clones', and your, posts.

"I would like to think that you have more in your life then to worry about what some woman you don't even know did." - CONTROL FREAK

And I'd like to think that you have more in your life than to worry about what people you don't even know did. But NOOOOOOOHHH! You see posts you've deemed unnecessary for future readers, get a hair up your ass, and go on a flagging spree.

"If you don't have anything better to consume your time, try getting a hobby. It's good for you. I make centerpieces for the holidays," - CONTROL FREAK

If hobbies consume your time, are good for you, etc, then obviously you need to find another hobby. Because the hobby you do isn't enough to keep you from wasting your time on this board. You seem to be on here constantly. And it's not doing any good at reducing your stress.

Besides, that hobby and you don't mix. Your actions on here contradict one of the underlying meanings of the holidays.

"and I'm now going to go out to my boyfriend's shop and make some more center pieces and post them onto my web site and sell some more of them." - CONTROL FREAK

I call BS. You wasted your time flagging posts when you could've given yourself time to go to the shop to make those centerpieces.

You said:

I'll be honest about it, if I've seen the same post more than once, I WILL flag the second post, and will continue to flag it as spam/over post. You complained about the woman wanting the ink cartridges and wanted delivery and I heard you the first time. To re post it the very next day is redundant and unneeded. I feel the same way about that political crap that was tossed out like bad gas from a bloated goat.
It pissed you off, you had your say, now you have one of two choices in life, get over it, or die worried about it. I would like to think that you have more in your life then to worry about what some woman you don't even know did. If you don't have anything better to consume your time, try getting a hobby. It's good for you. I make centerpieces for the holidays, and I'm now going to go out to my boyfriend's shop and make some more center pieces and post them onto my web site and sell some more of them.