Re: The Lime sock on Stephan Pickering and NAMBLA

On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 16:39:15 +0000, HarryLime wrote:

On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 16:15:50 +0000, Will Dockery wrote:
>

On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 15:23:41 +0000, HarryLime wrote:
>

On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 0:13:13 +0000, George J. Dance wrote:
>

On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 18:07:50 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain (MMP) aka
"HarryLime" wrote:

On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 16:51:59 +0000, George J. Dance wrote:

On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 15:52:18 +0000, Will Dockery wrote:

>

That's okay, Pendragon, but I think George Dance has some things to say
about the poem, since George Dance was the person who mentioned MFH in
this thread.
>
HTH and HAND.

>
Based on George's reaction to the previous comments of my colleague, Dr.
NancyGene and myself, I should think that he would want to stick a "No
Trespassing" sign on his father's lawn.

>
I see HarryLiar is still miffed that I called the comments of him and
"Dr." NastyGoon psychobabble (which is why he's started calling our
psychoanalysis of him "psychobabble"),

>
I honestly don't recall your having previously used the term, George.

>
I certainly can't call you a liar for that. Both Will and I have
commented on your selective memory. But that of course belongs in the
"Psycho-epistemology" thread; you're only bringing it up her

>
It is hardly a matter of selective memory to not know who first
introduced a commonly used word into a specific Usenet group over seven
years ago.
>
Why should *anyone* remember such a triviality?
>
More importantly... why do you remember it?
>

I suspect that all (me, NancyGene, and yourself) used it when we were
discussing your poem in the past...

>
I seriously doubt that either "Doctor" Peabrain or "Doctor" NastyGoon
referred to their own efforts as psychobabble.

>
No one said that we did, George.
>
(Attempted "straw man" noted.)
>
It does, otoh, make perfect sense that we would have used it in response
to one of your signature IKYABWAI outbursts, which our psychological
evaluations provoked.
>

but I really don't care enough to
bother looking it up.

>
Of course you don't care to look anything up before talking about it.
But that, too, belongs on the "Psycho-Epistemology" thread.

>
What makes you think that I have any interest in talking about it?
>
It is a ridiculously inconsequential point at most.
>
"Psychobabble" is a commonly used word used to dismiss a
psychology-based argument as worthless because the person making the
analysis is merely throwing around psychological terminology without
having a valid understanding of what they actually mean.
>
It's exactly the sort of word you would employ, because you act under
the childish assumption that sticking a negative label on an argument
somehow automatically negates it.
>
OTOH, it's exactly the sort of word which would apply to your own
attempts at psychological evaluation, as your *misuse* of clinical words
like "transference" makes embarrassingly clear.
>
>

I'm calling yours "psychobabble" because your misuse of psychology-based
terms like "transference" make it clear that you have little to no
knowledge of the subject.

>
Thank you for giving me something I *can* call you a liar for, Lying
Michael. In point of fact, you were copying the term "psychobabble"
before you accused me of misusing the term "transference" (which I may
well be; it looks like psychological jargon for what's commonly called
"projection")

>
Wrong, George.
>
Your entire attempt at psychoanalysis is as ignorant as your misuse of
that well known psychological term.  In short, your understanding of
psychology is parallel with your Donkey's understanding of English
(perhaps a slight exaggeration, but it's almost Donkey level).
>
>

Okay, we've heard your misrepresentation, Pendragon, I said George Dance
might have something to say about his poem.

>
Of course I'd prefer that readers read my poem, and my own comments on
it, rather than HarryLiar's psychobabble about it. So I'll be happy to
post and talk about it again when I have time.

>
You're becoming as attention hungry as your Donkey, George.

>
HarryLiar, try to make some sense. You've noted correctly that
post-google there are hardlly any people reading aapc; I'm certainly not
seeking "attention" for the poem from a non-existent audience.

>
LOL! No, George.  You're desperate for attention from me.
>
Not that I blame you.  I'm an excellent, and often challenging,
conversationalist; and you've been stuck here for the past year with no
one but the Donkey and his socks to keep you company.
>
If I sent you a soccer ball at this point, you'd welcome it with open
arms.
>
>

My reason for opening a new thread would be because you're constantly
bringing up my poem in unrelated threads, as per your M.O. which I
already noted. (As that contained a few typos), I'll copy it in here:
>
"That's been your regular M.O. since you showed up. Whenever I try to
have
a conversation with Will, about anything, you jump in and start spewing
false claims about something else, in the mistaken belief that I'd only
have two options:
(1) try to refute your false claims, in which case you've successfully
disrupted the conversation; or
(2) ignore them (in which some people might think those false claims of
yours are actually true)."

>
When you're having a conversation *about me*, you mean to say, deceitful
George.
>
If you make false statements about me on a social media platform
(libel), you should expect, at very least, a refutation.
>
>

To save time, why don't you just bump the old thread up to the top of
the feed?
>
Rereading it requires much less time on both our parts than repeating
the same points that we'd made at the time.

>
HarryLiar, no one is asking you to comment on that thread (or any of the
other threads I've opened FTM). If you have nothing to say on the poem,
you're more than welcome to sit that one out.

>
Since the Subject of this thread is "Re: The Lime sock on Stephan
Pickering and NAMBLA" (and since "The Lime sock[sic]" is the latest
childish name you have come up with to call me

>
Ever the hypocrite here's Michael Pendragon whining about childish name
calling when he's the one who began that practice here years ago.

>
I'm not complaining about the name-calling

Stop lying, Pendragon.
You've been incessantly whining about what you call childish name
calling for weeks, now.

I'm merely pointing out that "The Lime sock[sic]" is George Dance's
latest name for me.

And you've been whining incessantly about it for a couple of weeks, now,
Pendragon.
And so it goes.