In message .com, at
04:27:24 on Tue, 14 Mar 2006, La Puce wibbled

June Hughes wrote:
After a quick scan, it looked to me as though someone there was telling
La Puce off for replying to trolls. Perhaps I missed the bit where they
may or may not have talked about flooding this ng.

As far as I can tell from my archives the trolls didn't. The regulars
there /certainly/ didn't. HTH.

I was told in September to stop posting to ah by Tony. a) ah had and
always had a compliant sig., b) he became a friend and not only to me
and c) he is really funny, intelligent etc. So I refused. Rules are
rules. In the meantime two characters kept posting to him, including
Pedt actually.

I was intending just lurking to see if a handle could be got on the
occasional flooder here but I am /not/ accepting that I kept posting
to ah. Apologies to the rest of the newsgroup for posting once to
refute it.

http://tinyurl.com/gyr84 resolves to my own Google posting history
in demon.local since 1st Jan 2003. There were /precisely/ three posts
in response to ah, two documented on Google (both on page 2).

Two posts are http://tinyurl.com/rdddm and http://tinyurl.com/mo8ao
plus a missing one but which that latter references, just after your
friend replied to nearly every post in a flood, similar to but smaller
than those here, at the rate of over 10 a minute.

I suggested the unfairness of it all - but it didn't go
down well. Ah was then replying to a lot of trolls, cascading etc. I
kept saying that this wasn't my business and my business was to reply
to ah when he addressed me.
[..]
This has never ever been anything to do with me. I don't take part in
cascading, I don't take part in responding to trolls because I know how
they work etc.

But you appreciate cascades as http://tinyurl.com/nfbrc proves.
"...and a lovely cascade is being created..." and you have responded
to trolls - your friend ah, for one, who claimed he crapped on a
newsgroup better than other trolls http://tinyurl.com/r67fy and
admitted that he replied to all of the flood posts - what I quoted
in http://tinyurl.com/mo8ao.

I see no reason to correspond further on the subject in urg, and will
not be doing so, as a) the public archives speak for themselves and
b) ^up there I have promised urglers that I will not do so.


I'm not taking sides. I'm not interested in who said what to whom,
when, why, where or how that started the spats here on either side.
I'm merely refuting a lie involving me used as supporting material
in a spat. Whichever side used one I would do so.


--
Pedt