Fred <dryrot@hotmail.com> wrote:

On 26/02/2016 5:35 p.m., Rich80105 wrote:

On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 21:45:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:

Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 15:27:43 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>> dot nz> wrote:

Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
<snip for brevity>

else" attitude of a troll - when in difficulty, attack the other >>>>>>>>>>> poster - 'Right' Tony?

Wrong Rich. You calling me a troll is beyond belief. You are the one >>>>>>>>>> that
behaves that way, you are the one that is Labour right, the rest of >>>>>>>>>> the
universe wrong, you are the one that criticises the man not the >>>>>>>>>> behaviour,
you
are the one that uses sarcasm instead of logic, you are the one that >>>>>>>>>> changes
the direction of posts in a manner that you think is subtle but is in
fact
easily identified as spin. You are the one that lies and when that >>>>>>>>>> doesn't
work
who lies again and when that inevitably doesn't work who changes the >>>>>>>>>> subject
or
moves on to another lie in another thread. Me a troll? What a stupid,
inept
amd
largely inarticulate man you are! People like you are the ones that >>>>>>>>>> damage
this
country because you are simply not intelligent enough to deserve a >>>>>>>>>> vote
but
the
rest of us are in favour of allowing you to have one because we >>>>>>>>>> actually
believe in democracy unlike you! You are the one that accused a >>>>>>>>>> minister
of
the
crown of covering up a homicide without evidence, you are the one that
believes
that it is OK to block an arterial road without notice in order to >>>>>>>>>> object
to
a
decision made by the elected parliament of this country (and you don't
care
about the effect on working families) and you call me a troll - you >>>>>>>>>> are a
a
very sad man I suggest you get treatment before it is too late. You >>>>>>>>>> are
the
one
that believes that someone who is not for you is against you despite >>>>>>>>>> the
hugely
obvious lack of common sense in that. You are the one that says it is
wrong
to
"point over there' but you do it all the time. And you call me a >>>>>>>>>> troll.
You
are
the one that said you have never been a public servant but later said
that
you
have been; you are the one Rich; you are the one! Sounds like a song!
Victor has a degree of honesty, he is not too bright but at least does
not
lie
- you are not too bright but believe that lying is OK. I used to think
you
were
honest but a little off track, I know better now - you are the troll >>>>>>>>>> not
me!
Look up the definition and apply your behaviour against any of the >>>>>>>>>> defintions
you find - you will find yourself!

I called you out for associating yourself with a statement that "left >>>>>>>>> had gone mad" etc, which you tried to justify by saying you were being
unchairitable; when I told you that it had done you no credit you >>>>>>>>> tried to abuse me by claiming that I had missed invisible pathos and >>>>>>>>> irony, and calling me pathetic - in other words attacking another >>>>>>>>> poster when you are losing an argument. You do not normally act like >>>>>>>>> one of the trolls on tnz.general, but that is what you had done in >>>>>>>>> this instance, but you are no trying to smother that reality with >>>>>>>>> further abuse.

Predictable response Rich - you are twisting the truth (in other words >>>>>>>> lying).

I have not twisted the truth - if you believe I have show where you >>>>>>> think I did. So you definition of lying is now flexible

No it isn't, you lie lots - and I used a euphemism. Another bit of English
you
seem to struggle with.

- it doesn't
have to be lying, just "twisting the trugh" - which of course I have >>>>>>> not done either.

Of course you have.

Easy accusations with no evidence are easy to right -
and often plain wrong.

My comments were in fact irony and pathos, if they were invisible to you
then
maybe your education is at fault.

Perhaps, but I still cannot see any of either in your post - perhaps >>>>>>> your communication skills are at fault.

No they are not, I think I have previously suggested remedial English >>>>>> classes
for you - I suggest you have a look at what is available.

You failed to respond in a reasonable way and called me a troll. >>>>>>> No I did not; I accused you of acting like a troll on one occasion; an >>>>>>> uncharacteristic behaviour that is no less objectionable for it being >>>>>>> unusual

Another English 'fail'

My actual words were: ". .you have inadvertently adopted the typical >>>>>>> "blame someone else" attitude of a troll - when in difficulty, attack >>>>>>> the other poster - 'Right' Tony?"

Inadvertently adopting the attitude of a troll does not mean that you >>>>>>> are a troll - but I was prepared to believe you had made a mistake, >>>>>>> because such behaviour was not at that time a characteristic of
yours..

You are very patronising, but unfortunately for you there needs to be some
sort
of authority for patronising behaviour to be succesful and you have no >>>>>> authority - not intellectual and certainly not moral.

But I did not call you a troll - I accused you of acting like one in >>>>> this thread. Typically however you try to slip[ away from admitting yu >>>>> were wrong.

If you do stuff like that then you must accept the consequences - I >>>>>>>> simply
called you what you are; proven by your repeated behaviour over time. >>>>>>>>>

You should be disappointed with your intemperate, unjustified and >>>>>>>>> uncharacteristic offence against decency and polite usenet discourse. >>>>>>>> You wouldn'y know what that is - you lie, you abuse and you change the >>>>>>>> sense

of
what people post - Rich you are the one that should be ashamed but >>>>>>>> unfortunately that is impossible for a pathological liar - treatment is
available. You are a dangerous person, you do damage to caring people >>>>>>>> with
your
repeated defense of the indefensible. You are the problem, not me! >>>>>>> You have not managed to point out one lie from me - instead you

persist in baseless and empty allegations.

To satisfy your curiosity and probably your misplaced ego here are a >>>>>> couple -
On 23 July you posted
"It appears that Correctins and the Minister may have willfully covered >>>>>> up a murder to avoid Serco suffering a financial penalty and bringing >>>>>> the government's "loose" oversight of privately contacted public
services to the attention of the public."

At the time there were media accusations exactly in line with my
comment - and specifically that a death of an inmate at the hands of >>>>> other inmates had been covered up. My comment allowed for the reality >>>>> that there was no proof - but it appeared that something may have
happened. From memory we still do not know about the events that were >>>>> of concern at that stage, but there was no lie. You may not have
appreciated the tone of the post, indeed for all I know you have
worked for Corrections or Serco or the Minister, but you should be
able to look past your own prejudices to take statements as they are >>>>> written.

There was no cover up - you deliberately tried to mislead -that is lying.

We still do not know, but what part of "may have wilfully covered up" >>>>> do you not understand?.

On 13 October you posted
"At a time when more have to wait longer to get operations, when
schools (except Charter Schools) are under high financial pressure, >>>>>> while people wait and wait in Christchurch for re-building, while
benefits are harder to get, easier to lose, and dont meet rent
increases, ít may be nice for some to know that when the government >>>>>> really thinks something is important, it can always bend the rulesand >>>>>> find a bit more money for its friends . . .

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/286820/cyf-reviewer-paid-$2000-a-day"
Much worse than mere spin you are alluding to alleged deliberate missuse >>>>>> of
public money - it was a lie.

Where was the lie - the rules gave a maximum rate; National had to use >>>>> other rules to permit a higher than normal payment - that may not be >>>>> missuse of funds in your view but it was in teh view of others. No lie >>>>> again.

These two examples came to mind after 1 minute of thought - there are >>>>>> dozens
more out there waiting fo you.
You are a liar! A pathological one in my opinion which is why you persist
in
denying it rather than scuttling away.

You appear to define a lie as anything you do not like - I am sad for >>>>> you.

Everything you have posted above is nonsense.
You have repeatedly lied in this newsgroup and your protestations about the
definition of words and phrases will hold no sway with anyone.
You deny your obvious lying just as any other pathological liar would; and >>>> you
will continue to do that because you cannot help it. Your family must be >>>> very
distressed.
You say that you are sad for me - another lie! Of course you are not sad for

Fred
I used to enjoy debating with Rich and there was a time when I thought it

be fun to have a cup of coffee or a small alcoholic drink with him and

(but politely) argue the state of our nation with him.
But soon after the last election it seemed to me that he became embittered

as you put it, paranoid. He has not been the same person since then that he

three or more years ago. Sad really because we need robust debate and we need

political system with smart and intelligent opposition in parliament. He has let his blindly beloved party down.

Tony

Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
<snip>

You should be disappointed with your intemperate, unjustified and >>>>>>> uncharacteristic offence against decency and polite usenet discourse. >>>>>> You wouldn'y know what that is - you lie, you abuse and you change the >>>>>> sense

of
what people post - Rich you are the one that should be ashamed but >>>>>> unfortunately that is impossible for a pathological liar - treatment is >>>>>> available. You are a dangerous person, you do damage to caring people with
your
repeated defense of the indefensible. You are the problem, not me!

You have not managed to point out one lie from me - instead you
persist in baseless and empty allegations.

To satisfy your curiosity and probably your misplaced ego here are a couple -
On 23 July you posted
"It appears that Correctins and the Minister may have willfully covered >>>> up a murder to avoid Serco suffering a financial penalty and bringing
the government's "loose" oversight of privately contacted public
services to the attention of the public."

At the time there were media accusations exactly in line with my
comment - and specifically that a death of an inmate at the hands of
other inmates had been covered up. My comment allowed for the reality
that there was no proof - but it appeared that something may have
happened. From memory we still do not know about the events that were
of concern at that stage, but there was no lie. You may not have
appreciated the tone of the post, indeed for all I know you have
worked for Corrections or Serco or the Minister, but you should be
able to look past your own prejudices to take statements as they are
written.

There was no cover up - you deliberately tried to mislead -that is lying. >>> We still do not know, but what part of "may have wilfully covered up"

do you not understand?.

On 13 October you posted
"At a time when more have to wait longer to get operations, when
schools (except Charter Schools) are under high financial pressure,
while people wait and wait in Christchurch for re-building, while
benefits are harder to get, easier to lose, and dont meet rent
increases, ít may be nice for some to know that when the government
really thinks something is important, it can always bend the rulesand
find a bit more money for its friends . . .
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/286820/cyf-reviewer-paid-$2000-a-day"
Much worse than mere spin you are alluding to alleged deliberate missuse of
public money - it was a lie.

Where was the lie - the rules gave a maximum rate; National had to use
other rules to permit a higher than normal payment - that may not be
missuse of funds in your view but it was in teh view of others. No lie
again.

These two examples came to mind after 1 minute of thought - there are dozens
more out there waiting fo you.
You are a liar! A pathological one in my opinion which is why you persist in
denying it rather than scuttling away.

You appear to define a lie as anything you do not like - I am sad for
you.

Everything you have posted above is nonsense.
You have repeatedly lied in this newsgroup and your protestations about the >> definition of words and phrases will hold no sway with anyone.
You deny your obvious lying just as any other pathological liar would; and you
will continue to do that because you cannot help it. Your family must be very
distressed.
You say that you are sad for me - another lie! Of course you are not sad for >> me- it would be entirely out of character for you. Anyway there is no need >> because I am very comfortable indeed in every important way.
Others that decide it is worthy of their time to sift through your nonsense >> here and elsewhere will be the final judges - not me.
I hope you get treatment and that you get to understand that the whole world >> is
not against you - only the sane ones!
Tony

What a patronising content avoiding twit!

You will believe what you want Tony, despite evidence - you see the
worst in others if they disagree with your prejudicesand opinions. I
do feel sorry for you.
Goodbye.

I would like to say how sorry I am to see you go. But I won't do that because it would be disingenuous.
What I will say, with sincerity, is that the newsgroup will be less colourful without you albeit dramatically more honest.
Good luck with the medication.
Tony

If you go through this newsgroup objectively you might see what others
see. A massive number of posts from you - each and every one about
National and/or John Key. All negative and if you can't find anything negative you twist and spin anything at all to turn every post into an
attack on National and Key. You may not realise it but you are severely paranoid. You see some sort of conspiracy from every movement or
utterance from the govt. Most of us can probably understand a bit of
spin and even a bit ofr ribbing from the party faithful, from any party;
but the stuff you come up with is way way way beyond that. It's up uo
you to do something about it, but you wont until you realise your own situations.

Fred
I used to enjoy debating with Rich and there was a time when I thought it might
be fun to have a cup of coffee or a small alcoholic drink with him and robustly
(but politely) argue the state of our nation with him.
But soon after the last election it seemed to me that he became embittered and,
as you put it, paranoid. He has not been the same person since then that he was
three or more years ago. Sad really because we need robust debate and we need a
political system with smart and intelligent opposition in parliament. He has >let his blindly beloved party down.

Tony

What a patronising content avoiding twit!

You will believe what you want Tony, despite evidence - you see the
worst in others if they disagree with your prejudicesand opinions. I
do feel sorry for you.
Goodbye.

If you go through this newsgroup objectively you might see what others
see. A massive number of posts from you - each and every one about
National and/or John Key. All negative and if you can't find anything >negative you twist and spin anything at all to turn every post into an
attack on National and Key. You may not realise it but you are severely >paranoid. You see some sort of conspiracy from every movement or
utterance from the govt. Most of us can probably understand a bit of
spin and even a bit ofr ribbing from the party faithful, from any party;
but the stuff you come up with is way way way beyond that. It's up uo
you to do something about it, but you wont until you realise your own >situations.

On 26/02/2016 7:42 p.m., Tony wrote:

Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
<snip>

What a patronising content avoiding twit!

You will believe what you want Tony, despite evidence - you see the
worst in others if they disagree with your prejudicesand opinions. I
do feel sorry for you.
Goodbye.

I would like to say how sorry I am to see you go. But I won't do that because
it would be disingenuous.
What I will say, with sincerity, is that the newsgroup will be less colourful
without you albeit dramatically more honest.
Good luck with the medication.
Tony

I agree with most you have posted on this subject, but can't agree with
the colouful bit. His posts have become so predictable and silly they
are simply boring and lead into replies from others that should not be >necessary. The end result is a less interesting newsgroup to scroll
through. He's almost in the same category as that fruit-loop, Ras
Maharishi Wombat McArthy or something like that who occasionally appears >here..

On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 21:16:26 +1300, Fred <dryrot@hotmail.com> wrote:

On 26/02/2016 7:42 p.m., Tony wrote:

Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
<snip>

[snip more]

What a patronising content avoiding twit!

You will believe what you want Tony, despite evidence - you see the
worst in others if they disagree with your prejudicesand opinions. I
do feel sorry for you.
Goodbye.

I would like to say how sorry I am to see you go. But I won't do that because
it would be disingenuous.
What I will say, with sincerity, is that the newsgroup will be less colourful
without you albeit dramatically more honest.
Good luck with the medication.
Tony

I agree with most you have posted on this subject, but can't agree with
the colouful bit. His posts have become so predictable and silly they
are simply boring and lead into replies from others that should not be >>necessary. The end result is a less interesting newsgroup to scroll >>through. He's almost in the same category as that fruit-loop, Ras
Maharishi Wombat McArthy or something like that who occasionally appears >>here..

I agree with both of you in part. In recent years Rich has become >increasingly more anti-John-Key or anti-National in both volume and
tenor of his posts. This gradual change gives rise to the suspicion
that there are several people posting under the 'Rich80105' 'nym, and
in turn that these posts are a deliberately orchestrated effort.

He has accused me of being pro-National simply on the basis I have
pointed out that the cite he provided has no direct relation to the >(anti-National or anti-John Key) subject line he authored (as in this
thread - there is no sustained downward trend in John Key's
popularity), or that I have questioned the validity of his comments.

Interesting to read this:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/76837125/can-john-key-pull-off-a-fourth-term-here-are-the-reasons-why-he-might

I like this assessment:

"So what's Key's secret? It's a question asked not just by the
succession of Labour leaders who've come to understand the true
meaning of futility after throwing themselves against the impenetrable
Key fortress for years."

Now the grammar is poor - 'not just' is redundant because there is no
'but also' to follow - but I nit-pick on an article that would be
perfect if the references to Malcolm Turnbull were all removed.

On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 10:30:28 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 09:44:32 +1300, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 19:12:21 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net dot >>>nz> wrote:

But you? You of all people?

What can I say?
Rich and people like him do damage, not much of course, but the damage >>>>is real.
In some work environments, fortunately not any I have worked in, people >>>>like
him get to feel the pain of a fist. I believe that his posts are not a >>>>release
but actually reflect his behaviour in real life - why do I believe that? >>>>Because I have met one or two like him and they are always shallow - >>>>what the
author of a book I once read calls "a tap dancer" (someone who when you >>>>scratch
the surface reveals a void, a non-person, no real personality just a >>>>sham). But
as I say they do real damage and I call out people who don't care that >>>>they are
damaging other people. You may think that is foolish or a weakness - so >>>>be it.
So I do not accept that there is anything that I need to learn here. >>>>Finally I
believe he is just one person, some who post here think it is a >>>>co-ordinated
group and perhaps even organised by the Labour party. I think both of >>>>those
things are highly unlikely. Firstly if you google his gmail address you >>>>will
find he has had a little activity in at least one non political >>>>technical forum
(noticed by me only because I contribute to that technical forum) and >>>>secondly
I do not believe any political party would waste their time doing this. >>>>Anyway there it is - he does not make me angry (he doesn't have that >>>>power) he
just frustrates my sense of what is right and I am always inclined to >>>>say so
when someone behaves that badly.
Tony

"believe he is just one person, some who post here think it is a
co-ordinated"
Richs little campaign might not be co-ordinated. That is very debaitable >>>. But he does have access to information. If Rich is one person he >>>does
have a few problems.
Because over the years we have had Thicko Rich to Bright Rich along >>>with a number of writing styles.
There is one underlying theme. In all of Richbots post.
Heartland NZ might be more than happy with National. But Richs world >>>they are wrong
Labour knows best. And in the public good Labour would change society >>>to how
The central committee wants it.

sniped

Rich you are off topic. As I posted regarding a point Tony had raised.
My post must of been correct for you to try and change the subject.
By changing the topic also proves Tony's point.
Threads will get variations as they develop. There is nothing wrong with that.
But to change from discussing about your labour association to some
deluded story about poverty.
Is totally off topic.

On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 10:30:28 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 09:44:32 +1300, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 19:12:21 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net dot >>>nz> wrote:

But you? You of all people?

What can I say?
Rich and people like him do damage, not much of course, but the damage >>>>is real.
In some work environments, fortunately not any I have worked in, people >>>>like
him get to feel the pain of a fist. I believe that his posts are not a >>>>release
but actually reflect his behaviour in real life - why do I believe that? >>>>Because I have met one or two like him and they are always shallow - >>>>what the
author of a book I once read calls "a tap dancer" (someone who when you >>>>scratch
the surface reveals a void, a non-person, no real personality just a >>>>sham). But
as I say they do real damage and I call out people who don't care that >>>>they are
damaging other people. You may think that is foolish or a weakness - so >>>>be it.
So I do not accept that there is anything that I need to learn here. >>>>Finally I
believe he is just one person, some who post here think it is a >>>>co-ordinated
group and perhaps even organised by the Labour party. I think both of >>>>those
things are highly unlikely. Firstly if you google his gmail address you >>>>will
find he has had a little activity in at least one non political >>>>technical forum
(noticed by me only because I contribute to that technical forum) and >>>>secondly
I do not believe any political party would waste their time doing this. >>>>Anyway there it is - he does not make me angry (he doesn't have that >>>>power) he
just frustrates my sense of what is right and I am always inclined to >>>>say so
when someone behaves that badly.
Tony

"believe he is just one person, some who post here think it is a
co-ordinated"
Richs little campaign might not be co-ordinated. That is very debaitable >>>. But he does have access to information. If Rich is one person he >>>does
have a few problems.
Because over the years we have had Thicko Rich to Bright Rich along >>>with a number of writing styles.
There is one underlying theme. In all of Richbots post.
Heartland NZ might be more than happy with National. But Richs world >>>they are wrong
Labour knows best. And in the public good Labour would change society >>>to how
The central committee wants it.

sniped

Rich you are off topic. As I posted regarding a point Tony had raised.
My post must of been correct for you to try and change the subject.
By changing the topic also proves Tony's point.
Threads will get variations as they develop. There is nothing wrong with that.
But to change from discussing about your labour association to some
deluded story about poverty.
Is totally off topic.

On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 00:32:08 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:

Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 22:53:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:

Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 21:47:56 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>>dot nz> wrote:

Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 13:48:28 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>>>>dot nz> wrote:

Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 21 Feb 2016 16:36:29 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot >>>>>>>>>net
dot nz> wrote:

Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 09:55:58 +1300, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> >>>>>>>>>>>wrote:

Seen the comments over on Red Radio??
Well they're gone now but KiwiBlog and Whaleoil recorded them in >>>>>>>>>>>>screenshots...
Some want to shoot Key. others to run him over and one wishing >>>>>>>>>>>>the
nazis
had killed his mother...
The left have gone mad and are unable to function in a normal >>>>>>>>>>>>society.
Either Liebor divorces itself from those nutters or -20% in >>>>>>>>>>>>polls is
the
next stop..
Meanwhile Key retains his polling nubers

Been doing a little extra-curricular posting on whoils behalf >>>>>>>>>>>have you
george? If you;ve been promised payment don;t hold your breath! >>>>>>>>>>>https://dimpost.wordpress.com/2016/02/22/the-mysterious-case-of-the-hate-speech-on-the-rnz-facebook-page/

It is easy to blame the journalism, such posts should be >>>>>>>>>>moderated. But
the
real issue here is sour faced hatred fostered by blind political >>>>>>>>>>dogma.
Tony

I agree; as the article says:
"Radio New Zealand should absolutely be moderating comments like >>>>>>>>>the
ones WhaleOil found. They haven't in the past because they haven't >>>>>>>>>had
comments like that before. Or, really, many comments at all. Hooton >>>>>>>>>argues that they've been flushed out by 'the NZ left's hate >>>>>>>>>campaigns'. But here's the thing. You can search Facebook for the >>>>>>>>>profiles captured in WhaleOil's screenshots. None of them seem to >>>>>>>>>be
left-wing activists, or commentators on New Zealand politics, or >>>>>>>>>previous RNZ commentators, or, in a couple of cases, active >>>>>>>>>Facebook
users. Although it's hard to know for sure, because they don't tend >>>>>>>>>to
have any of the autobiographical information or other interactions >>>>>>>>>that normal Facebook users do.

So it seems really odd that people like Insane Clown Posse fan 'Tim >>>>>>>>>Wikidclownz' would all randomly one weekend decide to pour into a >>>>>>>>>sleepy Radio New Zealand Facebook page and leave comments about >>>>>>>>>gassing John Key's mother and similar obscenities. And that >>>>>>>>>WhaleOil,
the guy who stumbled over that copy of The Luminaries uploaded to >>>>>>>>>Mega
that only the person who illegally uploaded it would know about, >>>>>>>>>also
stumbled over these."

So the two problem that we can all deplore are :
1. The "sour faced hatred fostered by blind political dogma" - we >>>>>>>>>just
can't identify the brand of blind dogma involved

I made no attempt to identify them, "methinks thou doth protest too >>>>>>>>much"!

No, that had already been done by george who said:

The left have gone mad and are unable to function in a normal >>>>>>>>>>>>society.
Either Liebor divorces itself from those nutters or -20% in >>>>>>>>>>>>polls is
the
next stop..

and you didn't bother to dissociate yourself with that unwarranted >>>>>>>slur on "the left". . .

No, I follow your lead very occasionally; to be singlemindedly >>>>>>uncharitable.

Thank you for the admission that you were being uncharitable. In a >>>>>thread relating to posters to a site being uncharitable, albeit to a >>>>>greater extent than yourself, that does you no credit.

Oh dear, you took my comment as being literal. Pathos and irony are well >>>>beyond
your comprehension!

Of dear, you have inadvertently adopted the typical "blame someone
else" attitude of a troll - when in difficulty, attack the other
poster - 'Right' Tony?

Wrong Rich. You calling me a troll is beyond belief. You are the one that >>behaves that way, you are the one that is Labour right, the rest of the >>universe wrong, you are the one that criticises the man not the behaviour, >>you
are the one that uses sarcasm instead of logic, you are the one that >>changes
the direction of posts in a manner that you think is subtle but is in fact >>easily identified as spin. You are the one that lies and when that doesn't >>work
who lies again and when that inevitably doesn't work who changes the >>subject or
moves on to another lie in another thread. Me a troll? What a stupid,
inept amd
largely inarticulate man you are! People like you are the ones that damage >>this
country because you are simply not intelligent enough to deserve a vote
but the
rest of us are in favour of allowing you to have one because we actually >>believe in democracy unlike you! You are the one that accused a minister
of the
crown of covering up a homicide without evidence, you are the one that >>believes
that it is OK to block an arterial road without notice in order to object >>to a
decision made by the elected parliament of this country (and you don't
care
about the effect on working families) and you call me a troll - you are a
a
very sad man I suggest you get treatment before it is too late. You are
the one
that believes that someone who is not for you is against you despite the >>hugely
obvious lack of common sense in that. You are the one that says it is
wrong to
"point over there' but you do it all the time. And you call me a troll.
You are
the one that said you have never been a public servant but later said that >>you
have been; you are the one Rich; you are the one! Sounds like a song! >>Victor has a degree of honesty, he is not too bright but at least does not >>lie
- you are not too bright but believe that lying is OK. I used to think you >>were
honest but a little off track, I know better now - you are the troll not >>me!
Look up the definition and apply your behaviour against any of the >>defintions
you find - you will find yourself!

I called you out for associating yourself with a statement that "left
had gone mad" etc, which you tried to justify by saying you were being unchairitable; when I told you that it had done you no credit you
tried to abuse me by claiming that I had missed invisible pathos and
irony, and calling me pathetic - in other words attacking another
poster when you are losing an argument. You do not normally act like
one of the trolls on tnz.general, but that is what you had done in
this instance, but you are no trying to smother that reality with
further abuse.

You should be disappointed with your intemperate, unjustified and uncharacteristic offence against decency and polite usenet discourse.

Meantime, to get back to the subject of the thread, Key continues to
lose his charm . . .

The difference is that you are always like that - what a pity you can >>>>>>never
see
the real issues!

So point out where I have been uncharitable in this thread, or what >>>>>the real issue is that I have apparently not seen . . .

Why did you not even attempt to answer this query, then, Tony?

Don't be any more stupid than you have been already.

. . . or identify
the people (other than Cameron Slater) involved - they do not >>>>>>>>>appear
to have made similar troll-type posts to other websites or blogs. >>>>>>>>>2. That the RNZ people did not manage to delete the offensive posts >>>>>>>>>quickly. (I havent looked to see if t'hey are still there).

Tony

You may enjoy this light-hearted look at the "event"" >>>>>>>http://imperatorfish.com/2016/02/23/people-have-been-awful-on-the-internet-again/

Tony

Tony

Tony

On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 18:46:21 +1300, Fred <dryrot@hotmail.com> wrote:

What a patronising content avoiding twit!

You will believe what you want Tony, despite evidence - you see the
worst in others if they disagree with your prejudicesand opinions. I
do feel sorry for you.
Goodbye.

If you go through this newsgroup objectively you might see what others >>see. A massive number of posts from you - each and every one about
National and/or John Key. All negative and if you can't find anything >>negative you twist and spin anything at all to turn every post into an >>attack on National and Key. You may not realise it but you are severely >>paranoid. You see some sort of conspiracy from every movement or
utterance from the govt. Most of us can probably understand a bit of
spin and even a bit ofr ribbing from the party faithful, from any party; >>but the stuff you come up with is way way way beyond that. It's up uo
you to do something about it, but you wont until you realise your own >>situations.

What the current Rich fails to understand. Is heartland NZ doesn't care a stuff about
all the cry of the week crap. The left try and make a mountain out of
mole hill over.
Sure the government makes mistakes . So what Cry babies should harden
up.
Does anyone really want our society changed to suit a small group of Marxist
with a hidden agenda. I suspect not.