Fatheaded Ed's blatant hypocrisy
I saw the following exchange in the comment thread under an Ed Brayton blog article about the campaign to restore the fairness doctrine for broadcasting:
I would not have believed it if I had not seen it with my own eyes.
Also, one commenter actually proposed that all related comments be deleted in order to destroy the evidence --
.
Sick, sick, sick.
.
Ed Brayton: Nice try Larry. I don't know how long it's gonna take to sink through your thick skull that you are not allowed to comment here, period.
ard falten: appears to be a lot of censoring going on right here -- makes it quite hipocritical for you, ed, to be whining about a new fairness doctrine as a censorship tool.
Ed Brayton: What censorship has gone on here? And even if there was, how would that make me a hypocrite?
I would not have believed it if I had not seen it with my own eyes.
Also, one commenter actually proposed that all related comments be deleted in order to destroy the evidence --
.
Actually, I think you'd be completely justified in deleting our comments responding to him. I'd hate to lose that one above, though (posted June 28, 0924), as I'm pretty happy with the way it turned out -- frequently not the case with my own writing. But if I notice one of my responses vanished along with someone else's, I'll hold my tongue -- or at most, complain via e-mail. I hope and expect that most of your other readers would do the same.
Sick, sick, sick.
.
posted by Larry Fafarman | 6/28/2007 11:02:00 AM
15 Comments:
That's, what, four blogs you've been busted on this week alone? It's not difficult to figure out that it's you making the posts. You have a distinct posting style, Larry. On the blogs where you aren't banned, I usually don't even need to scroll down to the name to figure out that you made the post.
The only person that you are fooling with you claims that it isn't you making those posts is yourself. Not that you had any credibility to start with, but getting caught with your hand in the cookie jar and then lying about it destroys any semblance of honesty you had left.
Or in other words, you are a lying sack of shit and the only reason anybody comes here is to laugh at your absurd attempts at attacking all forms of knowledge.
> What censorship has gone on here? <
You drop posts arbitrarily calling some of them "gossip" and making no mention of others.
> And even if there was, how would that make me a hypocrite? <
Have you redefined "hypocrite" as you have many words?
Kevin is right. You could put any name you want on your posts and they would be quite recognizable. Your ranting repetitive irrational is quite distinctive.
> Also, one commenter actually proposed that all related comments be deleted in order to destroy the evidence <
The purpose didn't seem to be to destroy the evidence. It was more a case of cleaning the trash of the blog. They know that your goal is to get attention at all costs.
Have you discussed this with your therapist?
Kevin Vicklund drivels,
>>>>>>That's, what, four blogs you've been busted on this week alone? <<<<<
Wrong. I was "busted" on only one blog -- Jason Rosenhouse's Evolution Blog. The other "busts" were of a commenter (or commenters) posting under the name "Anonymous."
These "busts" were not even based on content but were based on who was commenting or believed to be commenting.
You are a lousy hypocrite, dunghill. You approve of the censorship of polite, on-topic, and serious comments on other blogs and yet you feel free to come here and call me a "lying sack of shit."
ViW wheezes,
>>>>>> You drop posts arbitrarily calling some of them "gossip" and making no mention of others. <<<<<<
I am really pissed off at your groundless charges of censorship. I have invited you to resubmit comments that you claim have disappeared, and you have not done so.
>>>>> The purpose didn't seem to be to destroy the evidence. It was more a case of cleaning the trash of the blog. <<<<<<
I agree -- the responses to Anonymous were trash. But a lot of the authors of that trash would be pissed if it were removed, so the only reason for removing this trash would be to get rid of the evidence.
>>>Wrong. I was "busted" on only one blog -- Jason Rosenhouse's Evolution Blog. The other "busts" were of a commenter (or commenters) posting under the name "Anonymous."
These "busts" were not even based on content but were based on who was commenting or believed to be commenting.<<<
The posts made my "anonymous" were quite obviously you. The fact that you continue denying this easily determined fact makes a lying sack of shit, you lying sack of shit. Stop lying, you lying sack of shit.
You are banned from posting on those blogs. This means that you don't get to post, regardless of content. Your posts will continue to be deleted, regardless of content, regardless of your transparent attempts to hide your identity, not because of the content, but because you have repeatedly demonstrated that you can't act responsibly on the blogs you have been banned from.
Prove it, dunghill.
1) In the past,, you have admitted to making posts that you had previously vehemenently denied making.
2) You recently announced your intention to resume illicit posting on blogs where you were banned
3) Since that announcement, "Anonymous" has been posting on a number of blogs using your exact style and the same IP address that you use
4) "Anonymous" started posting on Jason's blog immediately after you were banned and made reference to arguments he claimed to have made, but the claim was made by you
You, sir, have been busted.
Stop lying, you lying sack of shit.
What in the hell are you talking about, dunghill? Look at this comment by Anonymous -- he can't even spell my name right! He spells it "Farfaman."
> These "busts" were not even based on content but were based on who was commenting or believed to be commenting. <
Nobody said that they were based on anything other than who was commenting.
> You are a lousy hypocrite, dunghill. You approve of the censorship of polite, on-topic, and serious comments on other blogs <
1. He has banned you from his blog.
2. You have never made a polite, on-topic and serious comment in your life.
> and yet you feel free to come here and call me a "lying sack of shit." <
He is only making an observation of an obvious fact.
> I am really pissed off at your groundless charges of censorship. <
I haven't made any groundless charges of censorship.
> I have invited you to resubmit comments that you claim have disappeared, and you have not done so. <
You lying sack of shit. You invited me to email them to you and you would resubmit them. My emails to you have gone into a black hole.
> the only reason for removing this trash would be to get rid of the evidence. <
You are always making these non-sequiturs. There are many reasons to remove them. One is to take away your needed attention.
> The other "busts" were of a commenter (or commenters) posting under the name "Anonymous." <
They were of Larry Fafarman posting under the name "Anonymous".
> there is no way to determine who posted those comments. <
Kevin just did, you lying sack of shit.
> Larry Fafarman said...
Prove it, dunghill. <
Hello! Is anybody there? Kevin just proved it.
You, sir, have been busted.
Stop lying, you lying sack of shit.
> Look at this comment by Anonymous -- he can't even spell my name right! He spells it "Farfaman." <
Nice try. Anyone can see through that, you lying sack of shit.
ViW wheezed,
>>>>>> And why didn't you try to re-post the comments yourself? <
Why bother? <<<<<<
Then why did you allegedly "bother" to email the comments to me (I never got them), dunghill?
>>>>> All "gossip" I have stated has been merely to correct your lies. <<<<<
How many times do I have to explain to you that whether or not something is gossip has nothing to do with whether it is true or false, beetlebrain?
> I never got them <
Given that you have lied repeatedly on this blog and have been proven to lie, I would bet on the honesty of ViW in this case.
> How many times do I have to explain to you ... <
You have never explained this to anyone. You have just stated it without explanation.
Your willingness to lie about your personal information for no apparant reason is certainly a reflection on the honesty of your other statements.
>>>>>>> Your willingness to lie about your personal information for no apparant reason is certainly a reflection on the honesty of your other statements. <<<<<<<
Damn you, you no-good lousy worthless piece of crap, when are you going to get it through your thick skull that we don't gossip about your private affairs here and so we should not gossip about mine? Sheeeesh. I am really getting sick and tired of repeating this over and over again. How would you like it if others pretended to test your "honesty" by gossiping about your private affairs?
Give up already, dunghill. You are only making yourself look more and more foolish.
While you dirtbags ridicule my opposition to arbitrary censorship of blog visitors' comments, you hypocritically take unfair advantage of my no-censorship policy here.
> While you dirtbags ridicule my opposition to arbitrary censorship of blog visitors' comments, you hypocritically take unfair advantage of my no-censorship policy here. <
You hypocritical pathetic liar. You have censored a post by me and another by Bill Carter that were here last night. Don't bray about "gossip" or "arbitrary censorship" while you remain the biggest practicioner.
This is one reason that everybody laughs about "Larry's Cry Room".
If you want to be taken seriously, you will have to drop the arbitrary censorship.
> I can "gossip" about me here, but you can't. Those are the rules. <
So much for your braying about the "fairness doctrine".
> However, I generally try to avoid gossiping about myself here. <
Much of your description of yourself is untrue. You claim not to censor and you even claim not to have deleted posts when you have done so.
> I was forced to gossip about myself when Fake Dave misrepresented himself as my brother in comments on Fatheaded Ed's blog. <
Fake Dave did not misrepresent himself. The only one posting as Dave Fafarman on Ed's blog was your brother, real Dave.
If you don't believe that it was your real brother, why did you pressure your mother to call him and ask him to stop posting?
Post a Comment
<< Home