Re: Why Are Americans So Deeply Ashamed Of God?

>>> On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 18:32:38 -0400, in alt.astrology, petey wrote:
>>>>ellis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
>>>>> petey wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>>Hmm, and how many times has Obama waffled up to now?
>>>>> 
>>>>> How many times has Dubya failed to "waffle" when he should have? 
Not
>>>>> being able to change when new data becomes available isn't an asset.
>>>>
>>>>Good point.  Problem is, I like people who stick to their original
>>>>convictions.
>>>>
>>>>"Waffling" is something women are famous for doing.

Hmmm. First you slam Obama, a man. Now you seem to be slamming Palin,
since she's a woman. I think you're confused.

-- 
________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! mhm 29x21; Usenet Ruiner #5; Official Chung Demon
The original "Henry Schmidt"; Top Asshole #3; Lits **** #16
COOSN-029-06-71069; Most Hated Usenetizen of All Time #13
Gutter Chix0r #17; BowTie's Spuriously Accused Pedo Photographer #4
AUK Psycho & Felon #21; Parrot & Zombie #2
Anonymous Psycho Criminal #18
"Do not taunt the Happy Fun Ball. If Happy Fun Ball starts to smoke, run
away and take cover."

Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle
Trainer of ****chMonkey4Life
The PM4L FAQ: http://www.screedbomb.info/****chie/

================================================
Brad Jesness Memorial Kook Appraisal Test (KAT or KAT Index) v. 5.1 by
Cipher and the a.u.k crew

So, you think you've got a contender, eh? Hard to separate the Kooks
from the mere pains in the ass though. Hopefully this will help you.

Instructions :
In this section give your Prospective Kook ONE point for every YES
answer. Give your Prospective Kook additional points for multiple
occurrences.

Grading scale follows questions.

Have they ever :

1. Been the first to go ad-hominem in a newsgroup debate.

2. Accused someone of breaking a non-existent Federal Law.

3. Called a properly formatted cancel of a BI>20 article a *forged
cancel*

4. Ranted about *Free Speech* when a moderator rejected their article.
Two points if it's spelled "FREE SPEACH".

5. Tried to censor others, yet scream when others suggest that they
killfile them or create a moderated newsgroup.

6. Complained to someone's ISP when they got spanked in a flame war.

7. Been complained about to their ISP deservedly.

8. Flamed someone from an anonymous account.

9. Made a spelling flame. (*)

10. Used RANT-CAPS & manic punctuation.

11. Claimed to be qualified to make a legal determination or medical
diagnosis with no justification - bonus points if the kook is obviously
projecting her/his *own* condition/behavior. (**)

12. Claimed an academic or professional degree they obviously do not
have.

13. Claimed that because of a degree or research topic, another poster
cannot know anything about any other subject.

In this section give your Prospective Kook TWO points for every YES
answer. Give your Prospective Kook additional points for multiple
occurrences.

1. Called someone a pedophile or drug pusher without proof.

2. Bonus if they called anyone a "Republican Nazi Pedophile"

3. Ranted about *Free Speech* when an anti-spammer canceled their
article.

4. Posted to a newsgroup via sock-puppet.

5. Thought about becoming a Freedom Knight.

6. Voted via sock-puppet in a Big Eight vote.

7. Defended a well known kook.

8. Been Nominated for a Kook award.

9. Invented Usenet 'rules' & 'laws', particularly coming up with
creative definitions for what constitutes spam & spamming.

10. Implied that she/he has powerful allies who will deal with his/her
enemies, due to having affiliations with Microsoft, the CIA or some
other powerful organization - no matter how flimsy the association.

11. Claimed an academic or professional degree after having stated they
are a high school dropout or otherwise indicated their actual level of
achievement, or claim multiple PhD's, MD's, etc.

12. 'Removed' an academic or professional degree or title from another
more clueful poster. (Includes scare quotes such as 'Esq.', or 'Dr.')

13. Claimed one of the well known regulars of AUK is using a remailer to
impersonate them, when all kook sign points to them.

In this section give your Prospective Kook THREE points for every YES
answer. Give your Prospective Kook additional points for multiple
occurrences.

1. Threatened to kill or cause bodily harm to another via mail or post.

2. Told someone they have caused the kook to harm himself.

3. Stalked/harassed an opponent off-line.

4. Mail-bombed anyone.

5. Spammed a newsgroup.

6. Posted a forged or altered newsgroup article.

7. Lost an account due to abuse.

8. Won a kook award.

9. Threatened a groundless lawsuit via mail or post. LA Law bonus:
Additional point if a TV lawyer is used.)

(Grubor bonus: If they claim John Grubor/Law Systems Institoot as
counsel)

10. Threatened to have their "agents" come after someone.

11. Had a FAQ posted about their kookiness.

12. Pretended to be a sysadmin or ISP owner.

13. CC'ed emailed complaints to irrelevant or non-existent organizations
email addresses, such as the DOJ, AG, CIA, FBI etc.

14. Been TOSsed and then claimed to have canceled it, her/it/himself?

(*) PalmJob Exception Rule. Cannot be applied to a mere troll's points.

(**) Brad Jesness Factor. Not applicable to BJ, it is expected.

Scale/Rank :
1 - 10 points : Kook Wannabe. Needs to read Grubor's posting history on
dejanews. Your Prospective Kook has much to learn. They may have just
screwed up once or twice.

11 - 25 points : Journeyman Kook. Needs to Continue to mimic the real
kooks. Your Prospective Kook could be a contender.

26 - 36 points : Kook First Class. Still a lesser light, but Your
Prospective Kook HAS arrived! People killfile him/her.

36 - 50 points : Kook *** Laude. Someone is considering writing a FAQ
about your Prospective Kook. Has been nominated for at least one a.u.k
award.

51 + points : Kook Magna *** Laude. Your Prospective Kook has a FAQ.
Your Prospective Kook will eventually win all the big awards. Your
Prospective Kook can leap tall newbies with a single bound.