Re: Shame about this group

On Fri, 22 May 2020 08:01:48 +0200, Joerg Lorenz wrote:

>>> It is a fact of the englispeaking usenet that people tend to post
>>> anonymously and are much more often very rude and impolite to each other.
>>>
>>> That is an oberservation I made over 20 years in the englishspeaking
>>> usenet. It is quite different in french- or germanspeaking groups.
>>>
>> 
>> Anonymity is similar to drinking. It allows people to do things they 
>> normally don't have the balls to do in person. Anonymity takes it a step 
>> higher. Most are internet badasses and heroes.
> 
> Very much so!

For the permanent Usenet record to preserve...
o This post contains _adult_ concepts of great topical import... 
  (Wilf... if you're reading... you'll _learn_ something about this ng.)

The apologists prevent an adult discussion on this ng in three key ways:
o Type I apologists brazenly deny any and all facts they don't like;
o Type II apologists prefer to remain ignorant of facts they won't like;
o Type III apologists react with hateful vitriol to the bearer of facts.

I think it's interesting that the apologists actually _believe_ the problem 
is that adults can post whatever they really think when they're anonymous.

And yet, these same apologists easily are shown to act like small children.
o Anonymous (nospam) or otherwise (Joerg Lorenz)

Factually, it's easy to show evidence the problem is apologists themselves.
o Look at, for example, nospam's incessant flat denials of known facts
o Or, for example, Alan Baker's claims that all facts are lies by liars
o Or, as another example, at _anything_ Lewis or Jolly Roger spew forth
etc.

These apologists incessantly act like children on this newsgroup
o Whether or not they're anonymous (e.g., Your Name & Alan Baker)

And yet, on the adult OS newsgroups, _some_ apologists act like adults:
o As an example, "Chris", shockingly, posted as an adult recently
  to the Linux and Windows and Freeware newsgroups (as noted prior).

*Why is it that Chris can post as an adult, to the adult OS newsgroups*
o *But Chris can't seem to post as an adult to the Apple newsgroups*

This can have _nothing_ to do with the fact he's anonymous
o Which, of course, is a fact completely lost on the apologists.

HINT: I know why (or at least I think I do), but it's beyond most people 
here why the apologists are so extremely sensitive to facts about Apple.
HINT: The clue is how much Apple MARKETING choose its customers by aiming 
its messages at those most gullible to purely imaginary belief systems.
HINT: Those purely imaginary belief system are instantly DESTROYED by 
something as innocent as a mere simple obvious published fact.
HINT: These apologists are deathly _AFRAID_ of facts; which is why, I 
posit, apologists flatly deny that facts exist, and as a result, apologists 
remain fantastically _immune_ to all facts about Apple they don't like.

It's _easy_ to show that what ruins this newsgroup, are the apologists.
o If apologists didn't exist - the remaining discussions would be adult.

After studying apologists for years, I've categorized them as...
o Type I === this is nospam in a category of his own as he's different
o Type II === these are simply clueless people; but not malicious people
o Type III === these are malicious people of questionable mental stability

*How do each of these apologistic types ruin adult discussions on this ng?*

*Type I apologists incessantly & brainlessly parrot Apple MARKETING mantra*
o It doesn't matter the topic - nospam _always_ takes MARKETING's position;
o Hence, nospam will flatly deny any & all facts he simply doesn't like;
o Worse, nospam incessantly fabricates functionality that doesn't exist;
o Sadistically sending innocent victims on fruitless wild-goose chases;
o And, of course, this is always wasting everyone's valuable time & effort;
o Since nospam's credibility, as a result, is that of a simple coin toss;
o Basically his tactic is to refute all facts he doesn't like;
o But, for those he can't attempt to refute, he will deflect & blame;
o Where countless times he deflects the topic off salient facts;
o Even stooping to the childish levels (e.g., FTFY) to deflect facts.

*Type II apologists are simply hateful & ignorant of facts about Apple*
o These are the most benign of apologists since they're simply ignorant;
o These apologists clearly prefer to remain completely ignorant of facts;
o Where their main detriment to this newsgroup is that they're often wrong;
o But they don't act like children all the time like the other types do;
o An example of an ignorant Type II apologist is Savageduck or Alan Browne;
o They're easily shown to be ignorant & childish in most of their posts;
o But they're not purposefully sadistic (like nospam) or malicious.

*Type III apologists are those who most often ruin discussions on this ng!
o These are those who can't fathom a single word said against Apple;
o While nospam will always blame & deflect when dealing with known facts;
o It's clear that nospam actually _knows_ the facts!
o Yet, these Type III apologists do NOT know the facts;
o They're shocking clueless about even the most obvious published facts;
o Such that they respond with instant hateful vitriol to all facts;
o Since they have absolutely no adult response to facts they don't like;
o Classic Type III apologists are Jolly Roger, Lewis, BK, roctb, Elfin,
  Lloyd Parsons, & Snit.

In summary, the apologists prevent an adult discussion three ways:
o Type I apologists brazenly deny any and all facts they don't like;
o Type II apologists prefer to remain ignorant of facts they won't like;
o Type III apologists react with hateful vitriol to the bearer of facts.
-- 
o Alan Baker <[email protected]>
o Alan Browne <[email protected]>
o Ammammata <[email protected]> (not an apologist, but is ignorant)
o Andreas Rutishauser <[email protected]>
o Barry Margolin <[email protected]> (educated & yet immune to fact)
o Beedle <[email protected]>
o [email protected] (it's hard to find a human any dumber, sadly to say)
o Chris <[email protected]>
o Davoud <[email protected]>
o dpb <[email protected]> (posts worthless drivel - but keeps it short)
o Elden <[email protected]> 
o Elfin <[email protected]> (aka Lloyd, aka Lloyd Parsons)
o Hawk <[email protected]> (literally posts what children would post)
o Hemidactylus <[email protected]>
o hh <[email protected]>
o joe <[email protected]>
o Joerg Lorenz <[email protected]> (has no adult thought processes)
o Johan <[email protected]>
o John McWilliams <[email protected]> (child-like cognitive skills)
o Jolly Roger <[email protected]> (one of the dumbest of all)
o Lewis <[email protected]> (dumber than most)
o Lloyd <[email protected]> (aka "Elfin")
o Lloyd Parsons <[email protected]> (aka "Elfin")
o Meanie <[email protected]>
o nospam <[email protected]> (bullshitter par excellence)
o Panthera Tigris Altaica <[email protected]>
o roctb <[email protected]> Russian poster hates all facts
o Sandman <[email protected]> (hates any and all facts about Apple)
o Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> (not dumb - but stupid)
o Snit <[email protected]> (aka Michael Glasser, troll #1)
o Tim Streater <[email protected]> (indescribably childish)
o Wade Garrett <[email protected]> (about as dumb as a human can be)
o Your Name <[email protected]> (never posts anything of value)
o et al