Webmaster forum - Please don't feed the kook

Author

Please don't feed the kook

Red E. Kilowatt

2007-11-14, 10:16 pm

It has become quite clear that he is a very disturbed and obsessive
individual who can't be reasoned with or shamed. He is feeding off of
the attention.

--
Red

1001 Webs

2007-11-14, 10:16 pm

On Nov 15, 3:41 am, "Red E. Kilowatt" <spamt...@aww-faq.org> wrote:
> It has become quite clear that he is a very disturbed and obsessive
> individual who can't be reasoned with or shamed. He is feeding off of
> the attention.

Getting a bit edgy, Red?
Things are not going the way you planned, are they?

You see, Life sometimes rewards honest people and punishes CRIMINALS.
Not the general rule, but sometimes it does...

Jerry Stuckle

2007-11-15, 3:16 am

Red E. Kilowatt wrote:
> It has become quite clear that he is a very disturbed and obsessive
> individual who can't be reasoned with or shamed. He is feeding off of
> the attention.
>

Agreed, Red. I killfiled him a while ago. My inbox is much quieter :-)

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

Secret Agent X

2007-11-15, 3:16 am

"Red E. Kilowatt" <spamtrap@aww-faq.org> wrote:

>It has become quite clear that he is a very disturbed and obsessive
>individual who can't be reasoned with or shamed. He is feeding off of
>the attention.
>

He? Don't you mean "they" ?

Like all virtual environments Usenet has long attracted people who
would be shunned in a real environment.

Forget "spam" this group is just overrun with pointless flame wars.

X

1001 Webs

2007-11-15, 6:18 pm

On Nov 15, 5:15 am, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attglobal.net> wrote:
> Red E. Kilowatt wrote:
>
> Agreed, Red. I killfiled him a while ago. My inbox is much quieter :-)

Not for long Jerry, not for long.

Pretty soon you'll be receiving LOTS of indictments ...

Chaddy2222

2007-11-15, 6:18 pm

On Nov 15, 1:41 pm, "Red E. Kilowatt" <spamt...@aww-faq.org> wrote:
> It has become quite clear that he is a very disturbed and obsessive
> individual who can't be reasoned with or shamed. He is feeding off of
> the attention.
>
I could not agree more which is why I have hardly ever and will now
continue to have nothing to do with him.

1001 Webs

2007-11-15, 6:18 pm

1001 Webs

2007-11-15, 6:18 pm

On Nov 15, 2:04 pm, Chaddy2222 <spamlovermailbox-
sicur...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> On Nov 15, 1:41 pm, "Red E. Kilowatt" <spamt...@aww-faq.org> wrote:> It has become quite clear that he is a very disturbed and obsessive
>
> I could not agree more which is why I have hardly ever and will now
> continue to have nothing to do with him.

One more thing Chaddy.

Please, stop attacking our reputation and interests with your
comments.

We did nothing wrong to you to deserve what you started in the first
place.

Being legally blind does not provide with you with any legal rights to
discredit us like you did and keep doing.
We have already apologized for understandably but mistakenly taking
you for another of the criminals that hang around this forum.

Please, understand that if anyone tries to damage our interests in any
way, we have to defend ourselves.
And we'll go as far as it takes to protect our hard-worked
investments.
Not with you, obviously. We understand and respect that you don't want
anything to do with us, but please, do stop the attacks at once.

When I first posted here, I asked for Chinese and Japanese partners
for our website.
I included a link to a contact form at our website.
It was deemed as SPAM, and I did agree it could be considered that
way, so I stopped posting any more unwanted links.
That was my only "crime".

Since then, we have already partnered with people for Chinese and
Japanese sections, who at this moment are working very hard on their
sides.
Apart from that, we have people from all over Europe, Russia, Arab
countries, North and South America and several countries in Asia.
When any of you attack 1001 webs, you are attacking all those people
and their interests.

Please, bear all that in mind.

Viper

2007-11-15, 6:18 pm

1001 Webs wrote:
> you for another of the criminals that hang around this forum.

Only criminal I see is you.

>
> Please, understand that if anyone tries to damage our interests in any
> way, we have to defend ourselves.
> And we'll go as far as it takes to protect our hard-worked
> investments.

Please come after me.

> When any of you attack 1001 webs, you are attacking all those people
> and their interests.

Do they know you are a spammer that acts like he is 9?

Red E. Kilowatt

2007-11-15, 6:18 pm

Secret Agent X <Secret Agent X> wrote in message:
473bf1c7.1961453@news.freenetname.co.uk,

> "Red E. Kilowatt" <spamtrap@aww-faq.org> wrote:
>
>
> He? Don't you mean "they" ?
>
> Like all virtual environments Usenet has long attracted people who
> would be shunned in a real environment.
>
> Forget "spam" this group is just overrun with pointless flame wars.
>
> X

A few here do seem to enjoy the flaming a bit more than talking about
webmastering and it is a distraction. And whether they actually enjoy it
or not, they do always seem to be right in the thick of every dust-up.

--
Red

1001 Webs

2007-11-15, 6:18 pm

On Nov 15, 8:14 pm, "Red E. Kilowatt" <spamt...@aww-faq.org> wrote:
> Secret Agent X <Secret Agent X> wrote in message:
> 473bf1c7.1961...@news.freenetname.co.uk,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> A few here do seem to enjoy the flaming a bit more than talking about
> webmastering and it is a distraction. And whether they actually enjoy it
> or not, they do always seem to be right in the thick of every dust-up.
Untrue Red, and you bloody well know it.

Every time I started posting about things related to webmastering, you
and many more started to attack me with all kinds of gratuitous
insults not related to the topic or to webmastering.

It's there and anyone can check it out.

Ed Jay

2007-11-15, 6:18 pm

1001 Webs scribed:

>On Nov 15, 8:14 pm, "Red E. Kilowatt" <spamt...@aww-faq.org> wrote:
>Untrue Red, and you bloody well know it.
>
>Every time I started posting about things related to webmastering, you
>and many more started to attack me with all kinds of gratuitous
>insults not related to the topic or to webmastering.
>
>It's there and anyone can check it out.

FWIW, I agree with 1001Webs. His/her original post was attacked as spam.
He/she apologized to all, and proceeded to contribute somewhat valuable,
on-topic, information to the Group. Every post has been met by insults and
attempts to offend. That he/she stood up to all the crap tossed is testimony
to his/her character. The inappropriate actions of some other individuals
also speaks loudly to their character.

1001, I suggest that you continue your worthwhile topical contributions and
ignore those who have nothing to add but their insults.
--
Ed Jay (remove 'M' to respond by email)

2007-11-15, 6:18 pm

1001 Webs wrote:
> On Nov 15, 8:14 pm, "Red E. Kilowatt" <spamt...@aww-faq.org> wrote:
> Untrue Red, and you bloody well know it.
>
> Every time I started posting about things related to webmastering, you
> and many more started to attack me with all kinds of gratuitous
> insults not related to the topic or to webmastering.
>
> It's there and anyone can check it out.

So, what's the big deal?

Check the archives dude. It's been going on here for quite awhile.
Why do you think traffic to this group has been dwindling?
It's gone from resource, to toilet.

1001 Webs

2007-11-15, 6:18 pm

On Nov 15, 8:46 pm, Ed Jay <ed...@aes-intl.com> wrote:
> 1001 Webs scribed:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> FWIW, I agree with 1001Webs. His/her original post was attacked as spam.
> He/she apologized to all, and proceeded to contribute somewhat valuable,
> on-topic, information to the Group. Every post has been met by insults and
> attempts to offend. That he/she stood up to all the crap tossed is testimony
> to his/her character. The inappropriate actions of some other individuals
> also speaks loudly to their character.
>
> 1001, I suggest that you continue your worthwhile topical contributions and
> ignore those who have nothing to add but their insults.
> --
> Ed Jay (remove 'M' to respond by email)

Thank you Ed.
Most appreciated, really.
I would honestly like to continue contributing worthwhile topics
related to webmastering if they just let me for a bloody minute.

Ed Jay

2007-11-15, 6:18 pm

1001 Webs scribed:

>On Nov 15, 8:46 pm, Ed Jay <ed...@aes-intl.com> wrote:
>
>Thank you Ed.
>Most appreciated, really.
>I would honestly like to continue contributing worthwhile topics
>related to webmastering if they just let me for a bloody minute.

They're not stopping you from doing anything. You continue to make the
choice to confront their insults, and you apparently believe that fighting
fire with fire is the way to do it. From what I can see, that attitude does
little to further your objectives, but goes far to inspire 'them' to attack
you all the more. IMHO, the only way that you're going to win the battle is
to walk away from it. If the attacks follow you, don't worry about it. The
rest of us will think more highly of you and less of them.

--
Ed Jay (remove 'M' to respond by email)

Red E. Kilowatt

2007-11-15, 6:18 pm

Ed Jay <edMbj@aes-intl.com> wrote in message:
k78pj39h8ig43ftpqqsbmnn3os2gt4dqmv@4ax.com,

> 1001 Webs scribed:
>
>
> FWIW, I agree with 1001Webs. His/her original post was attacked as
> spam.

His original post was "unsolicited advertising" and as such was
reportable.

> He/she apologized to all, and proceeded to contribute somewhat
> valuable, on-topic, information to the Group. Every post has been met
> by insults and attempts to offend.

Not by me. And the way I see it, his attitude (the tone of his remarks)
is what brought the continued negative response. He responded to the
attacks on his web site, etc. with personal attacks on those who did the
criticizing.

And note that he thinks everything is about him, when in fact my comment
above was about those who have been mixing it up with him.

> That he/she stood up to all the
> crap tossed is testimony to his/her character.

So, he may have had cause to return some of the flames in kind, but no
matter how you slice it, this guy is still a frickin Kook because of the
outrageous things HE has done; like running criminal checks on people
and all of his ridiculous accusations of fraud and criminal activity.

> The inappropriate
> actions of some other individuals also speaks loudly to their
> character.
>
> 1001, I suggest that you continue your worthwhile topical
> contributions and ignore those who have nothing to add but their
> insults.

After what this guy has already done, I can't believe you're actually
encouraging him to stay and essentially telling him that everything he
has done has been justified because he was mistreated.

--
Red

Ed Jay

2007-11-15, 6:18 pm

Red E. Kilowatt scribed:

>Ed Jay <edMbj@aes-intl.com> wrote in message:
>k78pj39h8ig43ftpqqsbmnn3os2gt4dqmv@4ax.com,
>
>
>His original post was "unsolicited advertising" and as such was
>reportable.
>
>
>Not by me. And the way I see it, his attitude (the tone of his remarks)
>is what brought the continued negative response. He responded to the
>attacks on his web site, etc. with personal attacks on those who did the
>criticizing.
>
>And note that he thinks everything is about him, when in fact my comment
>above was about those who have been mixing it up with him.
>
>
>So, he may have had cause to return some of the flames in kind, but no
>matter how you slice it, this guy is still a frickin Kook because of the
>outrageous things HE has done; like running criminal checks on people
>and all of his ridiculous accusations of fraud and criminal activity.

Red, no offense intended, but from what I've seen of some of your own
efforts, you're not one who should be calling others a kook.
>
>
>After what this guy has already done, I can't believe you're actually
>encouraging him to stay and essentially telling him that everything he
>has done has been justified because he was mistreated.

You have an interesting perspective. Me? When both sides are at fault and
locked in unwinnable confrontation, I'm all for the concept of wiping the
slate clean and moving forward in contrived peace and harmony.
Unfortunately, for some of the participants in this little battle wiping the
slate clean, etc., is beyond the scope of their abilities, so my suggestion
to 1101 is to move forward without the seeming character flaws that fed the
flames.
--
Ed Jay (remove 'M' to respond by email)

Red E. Kilowatt

2007-11-15, 6:18 pm

Ed Jay <edMbj@aes-intl.com> wrote in message:
jidpj3ll6e98q0ml6689ob7nir1ak7gdtf@4ax.com,

> Red E. Kilowatt scribed:
>
> Red, no offense intended, but from what I've seen of some of your own
> efforts, you're not one who should be calling others a kook.

No offense intended?

Well that's a nice throwaway line, but rather than respond to the
substance of what I said concerning the individual in question, you try
to turn it back on me with a cheap shot.

If the spamcopping and the flaming bothers you so much, here's one way
for you to handle it. Just killfile everyone you think is more trouble
than they are worth. Like this:

Goodbye Ed.

"plonk"

--
Red

Ed Jay

2007-11-15, 6:18 pm

Red E. Kilowatt scribed:

>Ed Jay <edMbj@aes-intl.com> wrote in message:
>jidpj3ll6e98q0ml6689ob7nir1ak7gdtf@4ax.com,
>
>
>No offense intended?

Nope. Sorry you took it.
>
>Well that's a nice throwaway line, but rather than respond to the
>substance of what I said concerning the individual in question, you try
>to turn it back on me with a cheap shot.

Nope.
>
>If the spamcopping and the flaming bothers you so much, here's one way
>for you to handle it. Just killfile everyone you think is more trouble
>than they are worth. Like this:
>
>Goodbye Ed.
>
>"plonk"

I feel cleaner already.
--
Ed Jay (remove 'M' to respond by email)

WindsorFox

2007-11-15, 6:18 pm

Red E. Kilowatt wrote:
> It has become quite clear that he is a very disturbed and obsessive
> individual who can't be reasoned with or shamed. He is feeding off of
> the attention.
>

Who?

--
"I get the impression that Jamie is a papusa or two short of a
combination plate." - Kent Wills

"A lot of Southeast Oregon appears to be low resolution
even when you are physically driving through it! - Uncle Bob

1001 Webs

2007-11-15, 10:16 pm

On Nov 15, 10:07 pm, "Red E. Kilowatt" <spamt...@aww-faq.org> wrote:
> Ed Jay <ed...@aes-intl.com> wrote in message:
>
> k78pj39h8ig43ftpqqsbmnn3os2gt4d...@4ax.com,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> His original post was "unsolicited advertising" and as such was
> reportable.
My original post was NOT "unsolicited advertising".
Not for this Group's standards in any case.
I posted a link to a contact form where anyone interested in
partnering with 1001webs.net could get in touch with us.

>
> Not by me. And the way I see it, his attitude (the tone of his remarks)
> is what brought the continued negative response. He responded to the
> attacks on his web site, etc. with personal attacks on those who did the
> criticizing.
See, it's the other way around.
It was he continued negative response what brought about my self-
defense.
Perfectly legitimate.

> And note that he thinks everything is about him, when in fact my comment
> above was about those who have been mixing it up with him.
Now you are blatantly lying, Red, and I can't really imagine how could
you ever believed that you could get away with it.
Because what you posted was:
"It has become quite clear that he is a very disturbed and obsessive
individual who can't be reasoned with or shamed"
So, It's not about me then. It was about those who have been mixing it
up with me.
I see.
And how should you be portrayed after reading your post and your lies,
Red?
I think the most appropriate for you would be:
"a extremely disturbed and obsessive individual who can't be reasoned
with or shamed of his own blatant lies"
Yeah, that suits you right, Red.

>
> So, he may have had cause to return some of the flames in kind, but no
> matter how you slice it, this guy is still a frickin Kook because of the
> outrageous things HE has done; like running criminal checks on people
> and all of his ridiculous accusations of fraud and criminal activity.
Are you talking about the post I made about CRIMINAL Jerry Stuckle who
advertises himself as the MD of JDS Computer Training Corp., who is
blatantly lying in each and every message he posts with the
unequivocally purpose of committing FRAUD.?
Because you see Red, there's no such JDS Computer Training corporation
and there has never been one.
The only JDS Computer company that existed in Maryland was forfeited
in 1996.
There is however another company that Jerry Stuckle was a principal
of, called Smartech, which has been also forfeited last year by the
Maryland Taxpayer Services Division.

In case you ignore it, Red, for a Maryland entity to be forfeited,
means that its existence has been ended by the State for some
delinquency.

I'm explaining all this to you Red, because you're obviously a
fricking moron who needs to have things repeated quite a few number of
times before you start to grasp it, Red.

>
>
> After what this guy has already done, I can't believe you're actually
> encouraging him to stay and essentially telling him that everything he
> has done has been justified because he was mistreated.

But I didn't do anything that serious, Red.
Specially when compared to what they did to me or what you've just
done in this post.
And you can't deny it, Red.
If you had half the moral values you claim to have, you should
apologize like I did when I realized I had made a mistake, but that's
not your thing, am I right now, Red?

Secret Agent X

2007-11-17, 6:15 am

Ed Jay <edMbj@aes-intl.com> wrote:

>Red E. Kilowatt scribed:
>
>
>Nope. Sorry you took it.
>
>Nope.
>
>I feel cleaner already.

<sigh>

What did I say? Does no one ever listen to me?

X

Doug Baiter

2007-11-23, 3:28 am

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 18:41:42 -0800, "Red E. Kilowatt"
<spamtrap@aww-faq.org> wrote:

>It has become quite clear that he is a very disturbed and obsessive
>individual who can't be reasoned with or shamed. He is feeding off of
>the attention.

As you've done yourself regularly, by creating new threads such as
this one? LOL

Doug Baiter

2007-11-23, 3:28 am

On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 11:14:53 -0800, "Red E. Kilowatt"
<spamtrap@aww-faq.org> wrote:
>
>A few here do seem to enjoy the flaming a bit more than talking about
>webmastering and it is a distraction. And whether they actually enjoy it
>or not, they do always seem to be right in the thick of every dust-up.

As evidenced by your name appearing in the thread, huh?

Doug Baiter

2007-11-23, 3:28 am

On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 13:07:21 -0800, "Red E. Kilowatt"
<spamtrap@aww-faq.org> wrote:
>
>His original post was "unsolicited advertising" and as such was
>reportable.
>
True to form, sanctimonious holier-than-thou halfwit

>
>Not by me. And the way I see it, his attitude (the tone of his remarks)
>is what brought the continued negative response. He responded to the
>attacks on his web site, etc. with personal attacks on those who did the
>criticizing.
>
Something you've _never_ done, right, Red? BWAHAHAHAAA

>And note that he thinks everything is about him, when in fact my comment
>above was about those who have been mixing it up with him.
>
>
>So, he may have had cause to return some of the flames in kind, but no
>matter how you slice it, this guy is still a frickin Kook because of the
>outrageous things HE has done; like running criminal checks on people
>and all of his ridiculous accusations of fraud and criminal activity.
>
"Outrageous things" like the lies, half truths, and downright libels
you create on your hate-sites, you mean? Publishing the names and
addresses of half a dozen people, _that_ sort of outrageous?

Doug Baiter

2007-11-23, 3:28 am

On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 13:44:42 -0800, "Red E. Kilowatt"
<spamtrap@aww-faq.org> wrote:

>Ed Jay <edMbj@aes-intl.com> wrote in message:
>jidpj3ll6e98q0ml6689ob7nir1ak7gdtf@4ax.com,
>
>
>No offense intended?
>
>Well that's a nice throwaway line, but rather than respond to the
>substance of what I said concerning the individual in question, you try
>to turn it back on me with a cheap shot.
>
No cheap shot at all. Its just someone pointing out how Kooky you are
yourself when things dont go your way...

>If the spamcopping and the flaming bothers you so much, here's one way
>for you to handle it. Just killfile everyone you think is more trouble
>than they are worth. Like this:
>
>Goodbye Ed.
>
>"plonk"

LMFAO! Another person who didnt swallow the Gospel According to Red
gets plonked. Cant be long now before your newsreader just has you
talking to yourself, eh? :o)

Doug Baiter

2007-11-23, 3:28 am

On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 16:14:38 -0800 (PST), 1001 Webs
<1001webs@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote:

>On Nov 15, 10:07 pm, "Red E. Kilowatt" <spamt...@aww-faq.org> wrote:
>My original post was NOT "unsolicited advertising".
>Not for this Group's standards in any case.
>I posted a link to a contact form where anyone interested in
>partnering with 1001webs.net could get in touch with us.
>
>See, it's the other way around.
>It was he continued negative response what brought about my self-
>defense.
>Perfectly legitimate.
>
>Now you are blatantly lying, Red, and I can't really imagine how could
>you ever believed that you could get away with it.
>Because what you posted was:
>"It has become quite clear that he is a very disturbed and obsessive
>individual who can't be reasoned with or shamed"
>So, It's not about me then. It was about those who have been mixing it
>up with me.
>I see.
>And how should you be portrayed after reading your post and your lies,
>Red?
>I think the most appropriate for you would be:
>"a extremely disturbed and obsessive individual who can't be reasoned
>with or shamed of his own blatant lies"
>Yeah, that suits you right, Red.
>
>Are you talking about the post I made about CRIMINAL Jerry Stuckle who
>advertises himself as the MD of JDS Computer Training Corp., who is
>blatantly lying in each and every message he posts with the
>unequivocally purpose of committing FRAUD.?
>Because you see Red, there's no such JDS Computer Training corporation
>and there has never been one.
>The only JDS Computer company that existed in Maryland was forfeited
>in 1996.
>There is however another company that Jerry Stuckle was a principal
>of, called Smartech, which has been also forfeited last year by the
>Maryland Taxpayer Services Division.
>
>In case you ignore it, Red, for a Maryland entity to be forfeited,
>means that its existence has been ended by the State for some
>delinquency.
>
>I'm explaining all this to you Red, because you're obviously a
>fricking moron who needs to have things repeated quite a few number of
>times before you start to grasp it, Red.
>
>
>But I didn't do anything that serious, Red.
>Specially when compared to what they did to me or what you've just
>done in this post.
>And you can't deny it, Red.
>If you had half the moral values you claim to have, you should
>apologize like I did when I realized I had made a mistake, but that's
>not your thing, am I right now, Red?

What you're missing here 'webs. is that Red doesn't apply the same
standards to himself that he does to others. Its pointless asking him
to behave ethically while demanding that you do the same, because he
simply doesn't get that its hypocritical not to. Google him for some
examples!