On Wed, 28 Feb 2001 14:23:10 GMT, Flaagg
 wrote:

>In article , John Kimball 
> says...
>
>>On Tue, 27 Feb 2001 22:41:20 GMT, (Mad Hatter�) wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:36:00 GMT, Flaagg
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>>I don't need to believe -anything-
>>>
>>>>>>>Of course you do. 
>>>
>>>>>>Of course I *don't*, I said. 
>>>
>>>>>What you say and what you mean are two entirely different things.
>>>
>>>>What I say
>>>
>>>Hey look, my burning Flaagg is back!  It's about time you summed up
>>>enough balls to reply to my post, what's the matter Flaagg, you
>>>slippin?
>>>
>>>>at you're able to -understand- might be two entirely 
>>>>different things, Goofus, but that's your problem, not mine. 
>>>
>>>Blah, blah, blah, did I ask you to defend yourself against me?  I
>>>wonder why you felt the need.  Guess I just hit a little too close to
>>>home, huh bud?
>>>
>>>>>>Pay attention when I'm ridiculing you. 
>>>
>>>>>Now, now, don't be trying to get me to not pay attention to you so you
>>>>>can run away like the cowardly little moron you are.
>>>
>>>>Those are odd accusations coming from the quivering fuckball that 
>>>>redirects his replies out of AAVFFF and into fidonet.flame whenever I 
>>>>handle him a little roughly. 
>>>
>>>I believe in making my stupider obsessives work for their beatings.
>>>You're the one in love with me, remember Stupid?  Don't you get it yet
>>>Stupid?  I'm just using you.  To me, you are nothing but a trigger,
>>>and Usenet is the target.
>>>
>>>>>>>If you didn't believe half the crap I spewed out
>>>>>>>for you kooks to try and use to contend against me you'd have been
>>>>>>>bootfucked long ago. Face it lackey, I'm the only thing keeping you
>>>>>>>going.  I mena you tout your l33t flaming skillz all the while not
>>>>>>>realizing that *I'm* the one refueling yer gas my little barbekook.
>>>
>>>>>>Well, that answers the "You just don't get the whole 'flaming for fun' 
>>>>>>CONCEPT, do you?" question well enough, doesn't it? 
>>>
>>>>>Oh, how so?  Were you stupid enough to believe everything I said
>>>>>again?  I bet you were.  
>>>
>>>>I *said* you *answered* the "You just don't get the whole 'flaming for 
>>>>fun' CONCEPT, do you?" question, Goofus. You can stop now...you're 
>>>>clueless, OK, we get it.
>>>
>>>My, my, look at you get upset.  He, he, he, see Stupid, that's the
>>>kind of reaction I'm looking for.  I want you to feel, to get upset,
>>>to want to try and get back at me for smackin your across the face
>>>like the stupid bitch you are.
>>>
>>>>>>>Hey I'm not a spongehead
>>>
>>>>>>Post proof, Spongehead.
>>>
>>>>>Okay, I am the one dousing your pathetic attempts at flaming, are ya
>>>>>happy now?
>>>
>>>>Claiming you're doing something you obviously aren't -capable- of 
>>>>doing isn't exactly the best way to prove you're not a spongehead, 
>>>>Spongehead.
>>>
>>>So then you're saying you're the one responsible for dousing out your
>>>pathetic attempts at flaming?  Yeesh, make up yer mind Spankard.  `, )
>>>
>>>-Mad Hatter
>>
>>Why did you snip aavfff again,
>
>John Kimball asks a question...
>
>> coward?
>
>And then gives the answer before anyone else can. No fair. 

I hate to point out just how, well, STUPID, you are, but I never
snipped aavfff, you moronic halfwit.  I took out AUK, but added
fidonet.flame, alt.slack, alt.flamenet, alt.hackers.malicious, and
alt.troll  I bet yer feeling pretty stupid about now, huh Stupid?  
       `, )

-Mad Hatter