A question about group etiquette

Neil Brooks wrote:
On Dec 25, 11:04 am, "Bill Sornson" wrote:
Neil Brooks wrote:
On Dec 25, 10:26 am, "Bill Sornson" wrote:
Neil Brooks wrote:
Let it GOOOOOOOOoooooooo, Bill.
How's that Magic Flying Prus (sic), Neil?
Totaled. Rear-ended on the freeway. Me = stopped, her = 50mph.

Wow. Good excuse for more 'scrips, no doubt. (Like you needed THAT.)

Were you a better person when you were on the bottle, Bill ... because
you're really quite an asshole, now.

Just curious.

At least my insults are based on /truth/, not slander.

Let's review. Whenever I commented /indirectly/ about anything you wrote,
you went ballistic -- including sending me numerous intrusive (some
threatening) e-mails. One was signed, "Respond/don't respond. It's your
choice. I do have you filtered, though, so--at least--I won't see your
e-mails. I'm just taking the high ground (IMO) here..." Classic.

Eventually we made a deal, Neil (poetry) -- you leave me alone; I leave you
alone. Worked fine for many, many months, until today you (and Diana?!?)
suddenly started humping my posts again. Multiple replies to some, even,
asking when *I* will let it go. LOL

I'll chalk it up to unusually high (even for you) intake of Vicadin and
leave it at that. I know you think it doesn't affect you, but trust me it
does.

As someone wrote me privately about you, "Neil has got to try harder to
correlate his galactic scale intelligence
with his subatomic class."

I told him (ooh, a hint) to not hold his breath on that.

Two things I despise are dishonesty and hypocrisy, so I'll take the high
(you know all about THAT LOL ) road and re-plonk you. FOAD, loser.

Bill "wonder why you chose NOW to come out from your hole, but guess I'll
never know" S.

Neil Brooks wrote:
On Dec 25, 11:04 am, "Bill Sornson" wrote:

Bill "feel free to put me back in your plonk file, Neil" S.

c) I use Google Groups. No such thing as a plonk file.

Google Groups sucks. Use Motzarella and plonk me. PLEASE!

Buh-bye, Neil. Hope you get help for all YOUR underlying (lying under all)
issues. (Hint: main one is a long-standing drug addiction that's addled
your perception and sense of decency.)

*PLONK*

On Dec 25, 3:44*pm, "Bill Sornson" wrote:

[snip. It really doesn't matter....]


As always, you're rarely in doubt, but nearly always factually wrong.

Gosh, Bill.

I guess the real answer is: you were an asshole when you were
drinking, and -- presuming you ever really DID stop -- you're no
better when you're not.

I guess that's what's meant by "Dry Drunk."

http://www.minnesotarecovery.info/li...e/drydrunk.htm

Everything ... I mean EVERYTHING ... about it fits you to a tee.

You really should seek professional help, Bill.

Seriously.

What better way could you start off the New Year?

How'd you do with reading that Car & Driver article, incidentally?

Do you EVER get tired of being factually wrong??

Just curious.....