On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 23:33:32 +0000 (UTC), in rec.food.cooking, PeterL wrote:

> Dan Abel > wrote in
> :
>
>> In article >,
>> rrb > wrote:
>>
>>> PeterL wrote:
>>>
>>> > You probably haven't noticed, but the *only* people 'discussing'
>>> > me, are the stalker, the trolls, and it's sockpuppets.
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> Like you help the situation when you run around screaming "FORGERY,
>>> FORGERY". If you stopped that they would most likely go away. Why
>>> don't YOU just ignore them dumb****? You know use a killfile or the
>>> brain that you supposedly have that appears to be barely functional?
>>>
>>> > Have you tried telling them to stop??
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> Yeah that will work. Uh-huh.
>>
>> I'm glad that you got the point.
>>
>
> I severely doubt he did, Dan.

"Severely doubt"? ROFL

"Damsel in dis Dress" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 17:59:18 GMT, in rec.food.cooking, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri 02 Jan 2009 10:50:08a, Cornholio told us...
>>
>>>
>>> "PeterL" > wrote in message
>>> .25...
>>>> Wayne Boatwright > wrote in
>>>> 5.247:
>>>>
>>>>> ...continue to discuss Peter Lucas, et al?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, I know I brought up the subject <again>, but it would seem if we
>>>>> *all* stop discussing this topic it will quiet down or, by some
>>>>> stretch of the imagination, go away altogether.
>>>>>
>>>>> I cannot fathom why people feel compelled to continually dissect this
>>>>> situation when a total "blackout" on the topic would be more
>>>>> effective.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm *not* a topic, thank you very much Wayne.
>>>>
>>>> I happen to be a person.
>>>
>>> And a very nice one at that.
>>>
>>> TFM®
>>>
>>
>> I have no problem with Peter himself.
>
> It's a well know fact you want that fat, sweaty pig wallowing all over
> you.
>
>> It's all the insanity going on about and around him.
>
> What planet are you on? Lucas causes the chaos. He thrives on it. If you
> don't see it you are a sicker **** that he is.
>
>
>> I will say that Peter hasn't really helped the situation with his own
>> responses to this idiocy.
>
> What did you do? Find a clue?
>
>> It would be better for everyone,
>> Peter included, to simply cease and desist responding or commenting on
>> these issues. Totally ignoring this kind of problem usually makes it go
>> away. The so called trolls and stalkers eventually give up when no one
>> pays them any attention.
>>
>> Unfortunately, it's just too tempting to do so for many people.
>
> Too late for it to go away Nancy boy. We will be here as long as Lucas is
> here.

Nobody cares. Lucas is an asshole, but you are a bigger asshole for trying
to keep him from posting. Anywhere. You're as bad as any netKKKopping
netnanny webbie old woman there is.

(And yes, Carol I know this is not you.)

On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 18:44:43 -0500, in rec.food.cooking, cybercat wrote:

> "Damsel in dis Dress" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 17:59:18 GMT, in rec.food.cooking, Wayne Boatwright
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri 02 Jan 2009 10:50:08a, Cornholio told us...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "PeterL" > wrote in message
>>>> .25...
>>>>> Wayne Boatwright > wrote in
>>>>> 5.247:
>>>>>
>>>>>> ...continue to discuss Peter Lucas, et al?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, I know I brought up the subject <again>, but it would seem if we
>>>>>> *all* stop discussing this topic it will quiet down or, by some
>>>>>> stretch of the imagination, go away altogether.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I cannot fathom why people feel compelled to continually dissect this
>>>>>> situation when a total "blackout" on the topic would be more
>>>>>> effective.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm *not* a topic, thank you very much Wayne.
>>>>>
>>>>> I happen to be a person.
>>>>
>>>> And a very nice one at that.
>>>>
>>>> TFM®
>>>>
>>>
>>> I have no problem with Peter himself.
>>
>> It's a well know fact you want that fat, sweaty pig wallowing all over
>> you.
>>
>>> It's all the insanity going on about and around him.
>>
>> What planet are you on? Lucas causes the chaos. He thrives on it. If you
>> don't see it you are a sicker **** that he is.
>>
>>
>>> I will say that Peter hasn't really helped the situation with his own
>>> responses to this idiocy.
>>
>> What did you do? Find a clue?
>>
>>> It would be better for everyone,
>>> Peter included, to simply cease and desist responding or commenting on
>>> these issues. Totally ignoring this kind of problem usually makes it go
>>> away. The so called trolls and stalkers eventually give up when no one
>>> pays them any attention.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, it's just too tempting to do so for many people.
>>
>> Too late for it to go away Nancy boy. We will be here as long as Lucas is
>> here.
>
> Nobody cares. Lucas is an asshole, but you are a bigger asshole for trying
> to keep him from posting. Anywhere. You're as bad as any netKKKopping
> netnanny webbie old woman there is.
>
> (And yes, Carol I know this is not you.)

Coming from you I consider your calling me an "asshole" complimentary. You
are probably in more kill files than all the trolls put together.

All the sign are show that you are in the grips the manic cycle of bi-polar.
You really need to reconsider your anti-medication stance before you do too
much harm.


"PeterL" > wrote in message
...
> Dan Abel > wrote in
> :
>
>> In article >,
>> Swertz > wrote:
>>
>>> Wayne Boatwright > wrote:
>>>
>>> > I cannot fathom why people feel compelled to continually dissect
>>> > this situation when a total "blackout" on the topic would be more
>>> > effective.
>>>
>>> A blackout wouldn't stop it.
>>
>> And if everybody in the world was just nice to each other, there would
>> be no more war. I think I'll suggest that. Who should I tell first?
>>
>
>
>
> Osama bin Laden.
>
>
> But if your 'world peace' movement catches on, all the soldiers of the
> world will be out of a job, there'll be massive unemployment, the crime
> rate will spiral out of control, the Gross National Debt will do the
> same, and some shiny-arse politician will come up with the 'brilliant'
> plan to stage a war to get the economy back on track.
>
>
> --
> Peter Lucas
> Brisbane
> Australia
>
>
> Be of good cheer about death and know this as a truth --that no evil can
> happen to a good man, either in life or after death.
>
> Socrates

"Damsel in dis Dress" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 23:33:32 +0000 (UTC), in rec.food.cooking, PeterL
> wrote:
>
>> Dan Abel > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> rrb > wrote:
>>>
>>>> PeterL wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > You probably haven't noticed, but the *only* people 'discussing'
>>>> > me, are the stalker, the trolls, and it's sockpuppets.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> Like you help the situation when you run around screaming "FORGERY,
>>>> FORGERY". If you stopped that they would most likely go away. Why
>>>> don't YOU just ignore them dumb****? You know use a killfile or the
>>>> brain that you supposedly have that appears to be barely functional?
>>>>
>>>> > Have you tried telling them to stop??
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> Yeah that will work. Uh-huh.
>>>
>>> I'm glad that you got the point.
>>>
>>
>> I severely doubt he did, Dan.
>
> "Severely doubt"? ROFL

About as funny as a grammar lame, asswipe.

On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 05:50:57 +0000, Wayne Boatwright wrote:

> ...continue to discuss Peter Lucas, et al?
>
> Yes, I know I brought up the subject <again>, but it would seem if we
> *all* stop discussing this topic it will quiet down or, by some stretch
> of the imagination, go away altogether.

LOL. Dream on. Dream on...

NOT going to happen.


> I cannot fathom why people feel compelled to continually dissect this
> situation when a total "blackout" on the topic would be more effective.

Fathom yourself first perhaps?





--
"Some days we don't let the line move at all. We call those weekdays"
Patty and Selma Bouvier, 1996

On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 06:16:03 +0000, PeterL wrote:

> Wayne Boatwright > wrote in
> 5.247:
>
>> ...continue to discuss Peter Lucas, et al?
>>
>> Yes, I know I brought up the subject <again>, but it would seem if we
>> *all* stop discussing this topic it will quiet down or, by some stretch
>> of the imagination, go away altogether.
>>
>> I cannot fathom why people feel compelled to continually dissect this
>> situation when a total "blackout" on the topic would be more effective.
>>
>>
>
> I'm *not* a topic, thank you very much Wayne.
>
> I happen to be a person.

Do you have any evidence to back up that assertion mucus?



--
"Some days we don't let the line move at all. We call those weekdays"
Patty and Selma Bouvier, 1996

On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 16:25:38 +0000, PeterL wrote:

> Sqwirtz > wrote in news:16oxnawt1te8z
> :
>
>> PeterL > wrote:
>>
>>> I'm *not* a topic, thank you very much Wayne.
>>>
>>> I happen to be a person.
>>
>> And a very ugly one at that. Inside and outside.
>>
>>
>
> Looking in the mirror, are you, little boy?

Watch out Sqwirtz... or more correctly, cover your ass... pedo-lucas is
on the prowl.



--
"Some days we don't let the line move at all. We call those weekdays"
Patty and Selma Bouvier, 1996

On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 12:50:08 -0500, Cornholio wrote:

> "PeterL" > wrote in message
> .25...
>> Wayne Boatwright > wrote in
>> 5.247:
>>
>>> ...continue to discuss Peter Lucas, et al?
>>>
>>> Yes, I know I brought up the subject <again>, but it would seem if we
>>> *all* stop discussing this topic it will quiet down or, by some
>>> stretch of the imagination, go away altogether.
>>>
>>> I cannot fathom why people feel compelled to continually dissect this
>>> situation when a total "blackout" on the topic would be more
>>> effective.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I'm *not* a topic, thank you very much Wayne.
>>
>> I happen to be a person.
>
> And a very nice one at that.

ROFL! For YOU he may have been, unfortunetly for you, you havent figured
out his motives, not yet anyway.




--
"Some days we don't let the line move at all. We call those weekdays"
Patty and Selma Bouvier, 1996

On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 17:59:18 +0000, Wayne Boatwright wrote:

> On Fri 02 Jan 2009 10:50:08a, Cornholio told us...
>
>
>>
>> "PeterL" > wrote in message
>> .25...
>>> Wayne Boatwright > wrote in
>>> 5.247:
>>>
>>>> ...continue to discuss Peter Lucas, et al?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I know I brought up the subject <again>, but it would seem if we
>>>> *all* stop discussing this topic it will quiet down or, by some
>>>> stretch of the imagination, go away altogether.
>>>>
>>>> I cannot fathom why people feel compelled to continually dissect this
>>>> situation when a total "blackout" on the topic would be more
>>>> effective.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm *not* a topic, thank you very much Wayne.
>>>
>>> I happen to be a person.
>>
>> And a very nice one at that.
>>
>> TFM®
>>
>>
> I have no problem with Peter himself. It's all the insanity going on
> about and around him. I will say that Peter hasn't really helped the
> situation with his own responses to this idiocy. It would be better for
> everyone, Peter included, to simply cease and desist responding or
> commenting on these issues. Totally ignoring this kind of problem
> usually makes it go away. The so called trolls and stalkers eventually
> give up when no one pays them any attention.

A lot of us know this, of course. So we will continue to do so regardless
of any apparent lack of response. It makes no difference at all, one way
or the other.

> Unfortunately, it's just too tempting to do so for many people.

Unfortunately, Lucas has chosen this group to try to find somewhere to
belong, to fit in. Hence, we also will remain here.





--
"Some days we don't let the line move at all. We call those weekdays"
Patty and Selma Bouvier, 1996

On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 23:26:58 +0000, PeterL wrote:

> Wayne Boatwright > wrote in
> 5.247:
>
>> On Fri 02 Jan 2009 10:50:08a, Cornholio told us...
>>
>>
>>>
>>> "PeterL" > wrote in message
>>> .25...
>>>> Wayne Boatwright > wrote in
>>>> 5.247:
>>>>
>>>>> ...continue to discuss Peter Lucas, et al?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, I know I brought up the subject <again>, but it would seem if
>>>>> we *all* stop discussing this topic it will quiet down or, by some
>>>>> stretch of the imagination, go away altogether.
>>>>>
>>>>> I cannot fathom why people feel compelled to continually dissect
>>>>> this situation when a total "blackout" on the topic would be more
>>>>> effective.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm *not* a topic, thank you very much Wayne.
>>>>
>>>> I happen to be a person.
>>>
>>> And a very nice one at that.
>>>
>>> TFM®
>>>
>>>
>> I have no problem with Peter himself.
>
>
> It doesn't seem that way.

Poor peter lucas/mcgrath/etc... wahh! LOL.

>
>> It's all the insanity going on
>> about and around him. I will say that Peter hasn't really helped the
>> situation with his own responses to this idiocy.
>
>
> You don't like it when someone forge's you, do you?
>
> *Especially* if people who supposedly know you, reply to the forger
> thinking it's you.

Too bad for YOU eh peter?

>> It would be better
>> for everyone, Peter included, to simply cease and desist responding or
>> commenting on these issues.
>
>
> Ok...... and what about the posters who can't (or won't bother to) see
> who they are replying to and continue talking to the forger/stalker?

Too bad for YOU eh peter?

> I've done the non-response thing, but it's the morons in this group that
> continually answer the trolls/stalkers that keep them here.

Too bad for YOU eh peter?

> Your very own little friend, morrow, is the perfect example. Do you
> *really* think he's going to listen to your plea??
>
>
>> Totally ignoring this kind of problem usually makes it go away. The so
>> called trolls and stalkers eventually give up when no one pays them any
>> attention.
>
>
> Someone is *always* going to give them the attention they desire,
> because of pure laziness, or complete stupidity.

Too bad for YOU eh peter?

>> Unfortunately, it's just too tempting to do so for many people.
> You included.

Too bad for YOU eh peter?





--
"Some days we don't let the line move at all. We call those weekdays"
Patty and Selma Bouvier, 1996

On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 06:21:50 +0000, PeterL wrote:

> Wayne Boatwright > wrote in
> 5.247:
>
>> ...continue to discuss Peter Lucas, et al?
>>
>>
>
> You probably haven't noticed, but the *only* people 'discussing' me, are
> the stalker, the trolls, and it's sockpuppets.
>
>
> Have you tried telling them to stop??

ROFL!



--
"Some days we don't let the line move at all. We call those weekdays"
Patty and Selma Bouvier, 1996

On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 07:51:09 -0600, Sqwertz wrote:

> PeterL > wrote:
>
>> rrb > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Like you help the situation when you run around screaming "FORGERY,
>>> FORGERY".
>>
>> That's so that dumbshits, like you, will stop replying to them,
>> thinking it's me.
>
> Now anybody who even mention the topic is automatically a "dumbshit" and
> "shit for brains".
>
> Peter has so much charm is leaking out of his asshole. Peter needs
> euthanized.

I've tried to 'euthanize' lucas twice now, but he ran away each time
after his bluff failed to have the desired effect.





--
"Some days we don't let the line move at all. We call those weekdays"
Patty and Selma Bouvier, 1996

On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 23:33:32 +0000, PeterL wrote:

> Dan Abel > wrote in
> :
>
>> In article >,
>> rrb > wrote:
>>
>>> PeterL wrote:
>>>
>>> > You probably haven't noticed, but the *only* people 'discussing' me,
>>> > are the stalker, the trolls, and it's sockpuppets.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> Like you help the situation when you run around screaming "FORGERY,
>>> FORGERY". If you stopped that they would most likely go away. Why
>>> don't YOU just ignore them dumb****? You know use a killfile or the
>>> brain that you supposedly have that appears to be barely functional?
>>>
>>> > Have you tried telling them to stop??
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> Yeah that will work. Uh-huh.
>>
>> I'm glad that you got the point.
>>
>>
>
>
> I severely doubt he did, Dan.

How many times have you sucked Dan's cock pete?

Also, are you (or Dan) going to reveal that little 'something' regarding
posting via a shared connection, along with the identities used on this
group? Nah... thought not



--
"Some days we don't let the line move at all. We call those weekdays"
Patty and Selma Bouvier, 1996

On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 15:10:19 +0000, Wayne Boatwright wrote:

> On Fri 02 Jan 2009 06:47:58a, Swertz told us...
>
>> Wayne Boatwright > wrote:
>>
>>> I cannot fathom why people feel compelled to continually dissect this
>>> situation when a total "blackout" on the topic would be more
>>> effective.
>>
>> A blackout wouldn't stop it.
>>
>> -sw
>>
>>
> It wouldn't hurt to try it.

How naive are you?



--
"Some days we don't let the line move at all. We call those weekdays"
Patty and Selma Bouvier, 1996

On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 23:39:30 +0000, PeterL wrote:

> Dan Abel > wrote in
> :
>
>> In article >,
>> Swertz > wrote:
>>
>>> Wayne Boatwright > wrote:
>>>
>>> > I cannot fathom why people feel compelled to continually dissect
>>> > this situation when a total "blackout" on the topic would be more
>>> > effective.
>>>
>>> A blackout wouldn't stop it.
>>
>> And if everybody in the world was just nice to each other, there would
>> be no more war. I think I'll suggest that. Who should I tell first?
>>
>>
>
>
> Osama bin Laden.

LOL, you *would* think of him, wouldnt you?
Now, why would you even think of him anyway?

> But if your 'world peace' movement catches on, all the soldiers of the
> world will be out of a job, there'll be massive unemployment, the crime
> rate will spiral out of control, the Gross National Debt will do the
> same, and some shiny-arse politician will come up with the 'brilliant'
> plan to stage a war to get the economy back on track.

Such a plan is always 'brilliant' peter, depending on whether you're in a
position to benefit from it or not.





--
"Some days we don't let the line move at all. We call those weekdays"
Patty and Selma Bouvier, 1996

On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 16:54:24 -0600, Damsel in dis Dress wrote:

> On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 05:50:57 GMT, in rec.food.cooking, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:
>
>> ...continue to discuss Peter Lucas, et al?
>>
>> Yes, I know I brought up the subject <again>, but it would seem if we
>> *all* stop discussing this topic it will quiet down or, by some stretch
>> of the imagination, go away altogether.
>>
>> I cannot fathom why people feel compelled to continually dissect this
>> situation when a total "blackout" on the topic would be more effective.
>
> I can not fathom why you would begin an entire new thread about Peter
> Lucas of *all* topics. You are a pethetic little Nancy Boy. Why don't
> you just hike your hiney down to Oz and let him have a poke at? You may
> as well admit you have the hots for that fat,foul, loser.

If only he knew what peter *really* thinks about gays...
It's all documented on Usenet - years before anyone thought about
impersonating him on rfc.



--
"Some days we don't let the line move at all. We call those weekdays"
Patty and Selma Bouvier, 1996

On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 01:05:52 +0000 (UTC), in rec.food.cooking, Jeßus wrote:

> On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 23:33:32 +0000, PeterL wrote:
>
>> Dan Abel > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> rrb > wrote:
>>>
>>>> PeterL wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > You probably haven't noticed, but the *only* people 'discussing' me,
>>>> > are the stalker, the trolls, and it's sockpuppets.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> Like you help the situation when you run around screaming "FORGERY,
>>>> FORGERY". If you stopped that they would most likely go away. Why
>>>> don't YOU just ignore them dumb****? You know use a killfile or the
>>>> brain that you supposedly have that appears to be barely functional?
>>>>
>>>> > Have you tried telling them to stop??
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> Yeah that will work. Uh-huh.
>>>
>>> I'm glad that you got the point.
>>>
>>
>> I severely doubt he did, Dan.
>
> How many times have you sucked Dan's cock pete?
>
> Also, are you (or Dan) going to reveal that little 'something' regarding
> posting via a shared connection, along with the identities used on this
> group? Nah... thought not

Do tell! A shared connection? I smell a conspiracy.

On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 01:12:33 +0000 (UTC), in rec.food.cooking, Jeßus wrote:

> On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 16:54:24 -0600, Damsel in dis Dress wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 05:50:57 GMT, in rec.food.cooking, Wayne Boatwright
>> wrote:
>>
>>> ...continue to discuss Peter Lucas, et al?
>>>
>>> Yes, I know I brought up the subject <again>, but it would seem if we
>>> *all* stop discussing this topic it will quiet down or, by some stretch
>>> of the imagination, go away altogether.
>>>
>>> I cannot fathom why people feel compelled to continually dissect this
>>> situation when a total "blackout" on the topic would be more effective.
>>
>> I can not fathom why you would begin an entire new thread about Peter
>> Lucas of *all* topics. You are a pethetic little Nancy Boy. Why don't
>> you just hike your hiney down to Oz and let him have a poke at? You may
>> as well admit you have the hots for that fat,foul, loser.
>
> If only he knew what peter *really* thinks about gays...
> It's all documented on Usenet - years before anyone thought about
> impersonating him on rfc.

It's not just gays either. He hates women and blacks as well. Actually
Petey boy has shown he hates just about anyone that doesn't look, smell and
act exactly as he does.

Is it a prerequisite to be a welfare cheat in order to join the 'Petey
Pitty Party"?

In article 7>,
says...
> On Fri 02 Jan 2009 10:50:08a, Cornholio told us...
>
> >
> >
> > "PeterL" > wrote in message
> > .25...
> >> Wayne Boatwright > wrote in
> >> 5.247:
> >>
> >>> ...continue to discuss Peter Lucas, et al?
> >>>
> >>> Yes, I know I brought up the subject <again>, but it would seem if we
> >>> *all* stop discussing this topic it will quiet down or, by some
> >>> stretch of the imagination, go away altogether.
> >>>
> >>> I cannot fathom why people feel compelled to continually dissect this
> >>> situation when a total "blackout" on the topic would be more
> >>> effective.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> I'm *not* a topic, thank you very much Wayne.
> >>
> >> I happen to be a person.
> >
> > And a very nice one at that.
> >
> > TFM®
> >
>
> I have no problem with Peter himself. It's all the insanity going on about
> and around him. I will say that Peter hasn't really helped the situation
> with his own responses to this idiocy. It would be better for everyone,
> Peter included, to simply cease and desist responding or commenting on
> these issues. Totally ignoring this kind of problem usually makes it go
> away. The so called trolls and stalkers eventually give up when no one
> pays them any attention.
>
> Unfortunately, it's just too tempting to do so for many people.
>
>

Rule One of Usenet is never, ever feed the trolls.

On Fri 02 Jan 2009 09:18:26p, T told us...

> In article 7>,
> says...
>> On Fri 02 Jan 2009 10:50:08a, Cornholio told us...
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > "PeterL" > wrote in message
>> > .25...
>> >> Wayne Boatwright > wrote in
>> >> 5.247:
>> >>
>> >>> ...continue to discuss Peter Lucas, et al?
>> >>>
>> >>> Yes, I know I brought up the subject <again>, but it would seem if
we
>> >>> *all* stop discussing this topic it will quiet down or, by some
>> >>> stretch of the imagination, go away altogether.
>> >>>
>> >>> I cannot fathom why people feel compelled to continually dissect
this
>> >>> situation when a total "blackout" on the topic would be more
>> >>> effective.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I'm *not* a topic, thank you very much Wayne.
>> >>
>> >> I happen to be a person.
>> >
>> > And a very nice one at that.
>> >
>> > TFM®
>> >
>>
>> I have no problem with Peter himself. It's all the insanity going on
abo
> ut
>> and around him. I will say that Peter hasn't really helped the
situation
>
>> with his own responses to this idiocy. It would be better for everyone,
>
>> Peter included, to simply cease and desist responding or commenting on
>> these issues. Totally ignoring this kind of problem usually makes it go
>
>> away. The so called trolls and stalkers eventually give up when no one
>
>> pays them any attention.
>>
>> Unfortunately, it's just too tempting to do so for many people.
>>
>>
>
> Rule One of Usenet is never, ever feed the trolls.
>
>

Trouble is, it seems the people who follow the rule are in the minority.

--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)
************************************************** **********************
Date: Friday, 01(I)/02(II)/09(MMIX)
************************************************** **********************
Countdown till Martin Luther King, Jr. Day
2wks 2dys 2hrs 25mins
************************************************** **********************
Being good at being stupid doesn't count.
************************************************** **********************

Wayne Boatwright > wrote in
5.247:

> On Fri 02 Jan 2009 09:18:26p, T told us...
>

>>
>> Rule One of Usenet is never, ever feed the trolls.
>>
>>
>
> Trouble is, it seems the people who follow the rule are in the
> minority.
>


And even people like you can slip up and make a mistake. MerryB did just
that. She fed the original troll/stalker (spamlister) that brought all the
others trolls and stalkers in.



--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

The Gunfighters Rule:
"Be courteous to everyone, friendly to no one. Be polite.
Be professional. But, have a plan to kill everyone you meet."

On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 04:45:22 +0000 (UTC), in rec.food.cooking, PeterL wrote:

> Wayne Boatwright > wrote in
> 5.247:
>
>> On Fri 02 Jan 2009 09:18:26p, T told us...
>>
>
>>>
>>> Rule One of Usenet is never, ever feed the trolls.
>>>
>>
>> Trouble is, it seems the people who follow the rule are in the
>> minority.
>>
>
> And even people like you can slip up and make a mistake. MerryB did just
> that. She fed the original troll/stalker (spamlister) that brought all the
> others trolls and stalkers in.

Another lie from you asswipe. YOU brought in "the original troll/stalker".
You alone have that particular distinction.

In article 7>,
says...
> On Fri 02 Jan 2009 09:18:26p, T told us...
>
> > In article 7>,
> > says...
> >> On Fri 02 Jan 2009 10:50:08a, Cornholio told us...
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "PeterL" > wrote in message
> >> > .25...
> >> >> Wayne Boatwright > wrote in
> >> >> 5.247:
> >> >>
> >> >>> ...continue to discuss Peter Lucas, et al?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Yes, I know I brought up the subject <again>, but it would seem if
> we
> >> >>> *all* stop discussing this topic it will quiet down or, by some
> >> >>> stretch of the imagination, go away altogether.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I cannot fathom why people feel compelled to continually dissect
> this
> >> >>> situation when a total "blackout" on the topic would be more
> >> >>> effective.
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm *not* a topic, thank you very much Wayne.
> >> >>
> >> >> I happen to be a person.
> >> >
> >> > And a very nice one at that.
> >> >
> >> > TFM®
> >> >
> >>
> >> I have no problem with Peter himself. It's all the insanity going on
> abo
> > ut
> >> and around him. I will say that Peter hasn't really helped the
> situation
> >
> >> with his own responses to this idiocy. It would be better for everyone,
> >
> >> Peter included, to simply cease and desist responding or commenting on
> >> these issues. Totally ignoring this kind of problem usually makes it go
> >
> >> away. The so called trolls and stalkers eventually give up when no one
> >
> >> pays them any attention.
> >>
> >> Unfortunately, it's just too tempting to do so for many people.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Rule One of Usenet is never, ever feed the trolls.
> >
> >
>
> Trouble is, it seems the people who follow the rule are in the minority.

I know. Hell, I've even argued with myself on Usenet. Don't ask how that
happened.

PeterL > wrote:

> And even people like you can slip up and make a mistake. MerryB did just
> that. She fed the original troll/stalker (spamlister) that brought all the
> others trolls and stalkers in.

You really are a gem. Trying to blame your mess on somebody else.
You have the courage of a possum.

-sw

Wayne Boatwright > wrote:

> On Fri 02 Jan 2009 06:47:58a, Swertz told us...
>
>> Wayne Boatwright > wrote:
>>
>>> I cannot fathom why people feel compelled to continually dissect this
>>> situation when a total "blackout" on the topic would be more effective.
>>
>> A blackout wouldn't stop it.
>
> It wouldn't hurt to try it.

I would stop if Peter stops. He's the single-most person here who
could stop it. Without that, it's not even worth trying since Peter
would be determined to drag this out.

-sw

On Fri 02 Jan 2009 10:03:02p, T told us...

> In article 7>,
> says...
>> On Fri 02 Jan 2009 09:18:26p, T told us...
>>
>> > In article 7>,
>> > says...
>> >> On Fri 02 Jan 2009 10:50:08a, Cornholio told us...
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > "PeterL" > wrote in message
>> >> > .25...
>> >> >> Wayne Boatwright > wrote in
>> >> >> 5.247:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> ...continue to discuss Peter Lucas, et al?
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Yes, I know I brought up the subject <again>, but it would seem
if
>
>> we
>> >> >>> *all* stop discussing this topic it will quiet down or, by some
>> >> >>> stretch of the imagination, go away altogether.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> I cannot fathom why people feel compelled to continually dissect
>
>> this
>> >> >>> situation when a total "blackout" on the topic would be more
>> >> >>> effective.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I'm *not* a topic, thank you very much Wayne.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I happen to be a person.
>> >> >
>> >> > And a very nice one at that.
>> >> >
>> >> > TFM®
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I have no problem with Peter himself. It's all the insanity going on
>
>> abo
>> > ut
>> >> and around him. I will say that Peter hasn't really helped the
>> situation
>> >
>> >> with his own responses to this idiocy. It would be better for
everyon
> e,
>> >
>> >> Peter included, to simply cease and desist responding or commenting
on
>
>> >> these issues. Totally ignoring this kind of problem usually makes it
> go
>> >
>> >> away. The so called trolls and stalkers eventually give up when no
on
> e
>> >
>> >> pays them any attention.
>> >>
>> >> Unfortunately, it's just too tempting to do so for many people.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > Rule One of Usenet is never, ever feed the trolls.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Trouble is, it seems the people who follow the rule are in the minority.
>
> I know. Hell, I've even argued with myself on Usenet. Don't ask how that
> happened.
>
>

<g>

--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)
************************************************** **********************
Date: Friday, 01(I)/02(II)/09(MMIX)
************************************************** **********************
Countdown till Martin Luther King, Jr. Day
2wks 2dys 1hrs 24mins
************************************************** **********************
Cats must knock Mom's Cheerios off of her spoon as she brings it to
her mouth.
************************************************** **********************

Wayne Boatwright > wrote in
5.247:


>
> <g>
>



C'mon Wayne!! 95 lines of a post just so's you could add that <g>??


Try snipping.



--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

The Gunfighters Rule:
"Be courteous to everyone, friendly to no one. Be polite.
Be professional. But, have a plan to kill everyone you meet."

On Jan 3, 1:45*pm, PeterL > wrote:
> Wayne Boatwright > wrote . 185.247:
>
> > On Fri 02 Jan 2009 09:18:26p, T told us...
>
> >> Rule One of Usenet is never, ever feed the trolls.
>
> > Trouble is, it seems the people who follow the rule are in the
> > minority.
>
> And even people like you can slip up and make a mistake. MerryB did just
> that. She fed the original troll/stalker (spamlister) that brought all the
> others trolls and stalkers in.
>
> --
> Peter Lucas
> Brisbane
> Australia
>
> The Gunfighters Rule:
> "Be courteous to everyone, friendly to no one. Be polite.
> Be professional. But, have a plan to kill everyone you meet."

Pardon ? why are you mentioning spam lister ?

Spam lister is fair as ------------- now just because of of some
back channel "chat " you perceive and presume to arc up.

Perhaps a retraction or apology is in order .If not safety is
off . Up to you.

"PeterL" > wrote in message
.25...
> "Cornholio" > wrote in
> om:
>
>
>>
>> I still feed the cats, and I still feed the trolls. Sorry about the
>> latter. Strong drink can lead to degradation of judgment.
>>
>
>
> Strong drink will do that :-)
>
>
> Did you end up trying the TimTam straw trick??


Actually I went strawless. I will eventually get to it though.

TFM®

"Cornholio" > wrote in news:495f6869$0$2557
:

>
>
> "PeterL" > wrote in message
> .25...
>> "Cornholio" > wrote in
>> om:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I still feed the cats, and I still feed the trolls. Sorry about the
>>> latter. Strong drink can lead to degradation of judgment.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Strong drink will do that :-)
>>
>>
>> Did you end up trying the TimTam straw trick??
>
>
> Actually I went strawless. I will eventually get to it though.
>




I'll be there in spirit with you in a couple of hours, my friend.


Give Christy a 'Gidday' from me.




--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia


Life is a walk of death. Each day we walk hand in hand with death, and
nothing can guarantee our living one more day.
Treat every breath as the last, every heart beat, every moonrise, and
every smile.
For who can say they won't be... Ride the Wind's, and where ever they
take you, make it better, that is the way of the warrior.

"SteveB" > wrote in
:

>
> "Swertz" > wrote
>
>> I would stop if Peter stops. He's the single-most person here who
>> could stop it. Without that, it's not even worth trying since Peter
>> would be determined to drag this out.
>>
>> -sw
>
> Without Usenet, Peter would not have a life. If you chronicle his
> posts, he would have to use a PortaPotty at his keyboard. Wouldn't
> even have time to jump off the garage.
>




A name changing troll, feeding another name changing troll.



You people are ****ing pathetic. *Really*




--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia


Life is a walk of death. Each day we walk hand in hand with death, and
nothing can guarantee our living one more day.
Treat every breath as the last, every heart beat, every moonrise, and
every smile.
For who can say they won't be... Ride the Wind's, and where ever they
take you, make it better, that is the way of the warrior.

"T" > wrote

I know. Hell, I've even argued with myself on Usenet. Don't ask how that
happened.

The upside is that 99% of the people have a short memory and attention span.
People forget fast, so if you step on your own dick, just shut up for a
while. You will never get rid of the other anal 1% who can drag up stuff
ten years old. Except their own, of course.

Steve

"Swertz" > wrote

> I would stop if Peter stops. He's the single-most person here who
> could stop it. Without that, it's not even worth trying since Peter
> would be determined to drag this out.
>
> -sw

Without Usenet, Peter would not have a life. If you chronicle his posts, he
would have to use a PortaPotty at his keyboard. Wouldn't even have time to
jump off the garage.

Steve

On Jan 4, 1:58*am, PeterL > wrote:
> "Cornholio" > wrote in news:495f6869$0$2557
> :
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "PeterL" > wrote in message
> 0.25...
> >> "Cornholio" > wrote in
> .com:
>
> >>> I still feed the cats, and I still feed the trolls. *Sorry about the
> >>> latter. Strong drink can lead to degradation of judgment.
>
> >> Strong drink will do that :-)
>
> >> Did you end up trying the TimTam straw trick??
>
> > Actually I went strawless. *I will eventually get to it though.
>
> I'll be there in spirit with you in a couple of hours, my friend.
>
> Give Christy a 'Gidday' from me.

What a crockpot of shit!
Lucas has never met the bloke and yet from another country and 18
hours.Lucas is offering him condolence, What a phoney!

On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 09:50:54 -0500, "Cornholio"
> wrote:

>
>
>"PeterL" > wrote in message
0.25...
>> "Cornholio" > wrote in
>> om:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I still feed the cats, and I still feed the trolls. Sorry about the
>>> latter. Strong drink can lead to degradation of judgment.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Strong drink will do that :-)
>>
>>
>> Did you end up trying the TimTam straw trick??
>
>
>Actually I went strawless. I will eventually get to it though.
>
>TFM®

You can buy Tim Tams in Florida?


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 09:01:59 -0800, SteveB wrote:

> "Swertz" > wrote
>
>> I would stop if Peter stops. He's the single-most person here who
>> could stop it. Without that, it's not even worth trying since Peter
>> would be determined to drag this out.
>>
>
> Without Usenet, Peter would not have a life. If you chronicle his
> posts, he would have to use a PortaPotty at his keyboard. Wouldn't even
> have time to jump off the garage.

The best bit is how far he's willing to go, just in order to find some
people who don't loathe him. All I see lucas in rfc doing is bending over
backwards to ingratiate himself into the main cliques here.







--
"Some days we don't let the line move at all. We call those weekdays"
Patty and Selma Bouvier, 1996

On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 04:45:22 +0000, PeterL wrote:

> Wayne Boatwright > wrote in
> 5.247:
>
>> On Fri 02 Jan 2009 09:18:26p, T told us...
>>
>>
>
>>> Rule One of Usenet is never, ever feed the trolls.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Trouble is, it seems the people who follow the rule are in the
>> minority.
>>
>>
>
> And even people like you can slip up and make a mistake. MerryB did just
> that. She fed the original troll/stalker (spamlister) that brought all
> the others trolls and stalkers in.

Yep... there's some peter lucas logic for you

He hasnt changed /in any way/ that I can see, other than going to some
efforts to bury his true nature.



--
"Some days we don't let the line move at all. We call those weekdays"
Patty and Selma Bouvier, 1996

On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 21:31:06 -0600, MarsupiaI wrote:

> On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 01:12:33 +0000 (UTC), in rec.food.cooking, Jeßus
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 16:54:24 -0600, Damsel in dis Dress wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 05:50:57 GMT, in rec.food.cooking, Wayne
>>> Boatwright wrote:
>>>
>>>> ...continue to discuss Peter Lucas, et al?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I know I brought up the subject <again>, but it would seem if we
>>>> *all* stop discussing this topic it will quiet down or, by some
>>>> stretch of the imagination, go away altogether.
>>>>
>>>> I cannot fathom why people feel compelled to continually dissect this
>>>> situation when a total "blackout" on the topic would be more
>>>> effective.
>>>
>>> I can not fathom why you would begin an entire new thread about Peter
>>> Lucas of *all* topics. You are a pethetic little Nancy Boy. Why
>>> don't you just hike your hiney down to Oz and let him have a poke at?
>>> You may as well admit you have the hots for that fat,foul, loser.
>>
>> If only he knew what peter *really* thinks about gays... It's all
>> documented on Usenet - years before anyone thought about impersonating
>> him on rfc.
>
> It's not just gays either. He hates women and blacks as well.

I know. One day I might be sufficiently motived to search GG for relevent
examples from our good friend mr lucas.

It just amazes me how he can now swallow his pride on these issues (that
are/were clearly important to him), all just to give a good impression of
himself in this group.

> Actually
> Petey boy has shown he hates just about anyone that doesn't look, smell
> and act exactly as he does.

Yep... don't forget the years he used to rail against 'civvies' on Usenet.

> Is it a prerequisite to be a welfare cheat in order to join the 'Petey
> Pitty Party"?

Possibly?





--
"Some days we don't let the line move at all. We call those weekdays"
Patty and Selma Bouvier, 1996

On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 21:25:19 -0600, Marsupial wrote:

> On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 01:05:52 +0000 (UTC), in rec.food.cooking, Jeßus
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 23:33:32 +0000, PeterL wrote:
>>
>>> Dan Abel > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> In article >,
>>>> rrb > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> PeterL wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > You probably haven't noticed, but the *only* people 'discussing'
>>>>> > me, are the stalker, the trolls, and it's sockpuppets.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> Like you help the situation when you run around screaming "FORGERY,
>>>>> FORGERY". If you stopped that they would most likely go away. Why
>>>>> don't YOU just ignore them dumb****? You know use a killfile or the
>>>>> brain that you supposedly have that appears to be barely functional?
>>>>>
>>>>> > Have you tried telling them to stop??
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> Yeah that will work. Uh-huh.
>>>>
>>>> I'm glad that you got the point.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I severely doubt he did, Dan.
>>
>> How many times have you sucked Dan's cock pete?
>>
>> Also, are you (or Dan) going to reveal that little 'something'
>> regarding posting via a shared connection, along with the identities
>> used on this group? Nah... thought not
>
> Do tell! A shared connection? I smell a conspiracy.


There were a few posts here in rfc that were /very/ revealing (to me).
Alas I didn't mark them or save them, so now I'd have to manually search
for them. But put it this way - the wording was ALL lucas (referring to
me)... except it came from a U.S ISP. Two names I see here frequently,
both coincidentally share the same U.S ISP, and both mention things that
could *only* have come from lucas.


--
"Some days we don't let the line move at all. We call those weekdays"
Patty and Selma Bouvier, 1996