Re: The Lime sock on Stephan Pickering and NAMBLA

On Fri, 7 Feb 2025 16:49:20 +0000, George J. Dance wrote:

On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 16:39:15 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain (MMP) aka
"HarryLime" wrote:

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

On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 15:23:41 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain (MMP) aka
"HarryLime"aka "HarryLime" wrote:

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

>

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.

>
I opened this thread to respond to false statements you were making
about your flame war on Stephan, Will, myself, and others on other
threads. No one has said it wasn't about you.
>

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

>
Get with the program. Precisely because of the whining about your
petname that Will mentioned, I changed it several days ago.
>

The reason I am pointing this out is because it appears in the Subject
header for this thread -- indicating that this thread is about me; and
that it purportedly presents my opinions (reworded by Mr. Dance, of
course) on the topics of Pickles Pickering and NAMBLA.

>
No, Lying Michael; this thread was a response to comments that you were
making about your flaming of Stephan (in another thread for deflection
purposes, as per your M.O.) You comments were quoted fairly and
accurately, not "reworded" in the slightest.
>
You're welcome to talk about them here; but be warned that going
forward, if you attempt to deflect by talking about something else, your
comments will be snipped here, and moved to the appropriate thread where
necessary.
>

Mr. Dance was whining that I am butting in on what was intended to be a
conversation between the two of you.

>
No, Lying Michael. I am "whining" about you (once again) immediately
trying to change the subject of the discussion to something else. Your
first comment in this thread was to call me a liar (presumably just for
preemption). Your second was a misrepresentation of something I'd said
in the "Psychology of MPP" thread which I'd already dealt with on that
thread, so you simply repeated it here. Your third comment contained
both a lie and a faked quote about my poem "My Father's House". (Both
the latter two have been moved to the "My Father's House" thread Will
opened, if you're willing to talk about them there.)
>

I am pointing out that this
so-called conversation is a one-sided affair in which Mr. Dance attempts
to put forth libelous statements about me.

>
It's hardly a one-sided conversation, HarryLiar, when and all my posts
in it (including the OP) have been replies to you, and you've written
more posts in it than I have,  Please stop whining about being excluded
from it, since you obviously are not.
>

If Mr. Dance had not wanted me to "butt in" on his "conversation," he
would not have included my name (his latest name for me, that is) in the
Subject header.

>
Now you're supporting your earlier lie with fake quotes, which did not
come from anything I said, but came from you.

Lying and misrepresenting is as much of his schtick as second handing
is.

Tit for Tat is a concept that still seems to go over his head.
>
And so it goes.

>
Tit for Tat is a concept that I abandoned somewhere before having
attended Kindergarten.  Unfortunately, I cannot say the same for you and
George.

>
No, Lying Michael. You continually rely on the concept. You may not
believe in govern your own behavior by reciprocal ethics - there's no
sign that your behavior is governed by any ethics - but you clearly pay
lip service to T4T to try to justify your behavior.

As has been proven over and over in the archives for nearly a decade
now.

For instance, every time that you "attack" (troll and flame) someone,
you try to justify it with a story (sometimes true, sometimes not) that
they attacked you first. That's been the gist of every one of your
on-topic statements about the Team Monkey flamewar; that you and your
team went after Stephan, Will, and myself because they "attacked" you
first.

And usually these excuses are based on his own lies and
misrepresentations.
And so it goes.