Remove the option to post as anonymous

[davidt]

Re:

I believe hackers can take over all those zombie computers that have been hacked / phished or whatever and post from their IP. Sure they can use proxies too. I'm just saying all of this means that the IP information is not that useful, or it can do worse damage as people convince themselves they are seeing something that isn't actually true.

How much time have you spent writing these replies? You're using the words "sophisticated hacker" like that explains everything. What would they have to hack? Your server? My explanation of a paid proxy service is the more reasonable explanation. You don't have to be a sophisticated hacker to use a proxy. Most proxy services have recognized IP's by the way. I would do the work for you if it was possible and didn't violate anyone's privacy.

 

[Anonymous]

Re: some blunt remarks on the established theme

You keep playing this record. Again, and again, and again.

(And that automatic, inhuman aspect to your presence is one issue many have with it.)

But it isn't relevant.

No one cares (very much) that you're an atheist. They care (very much) that you're an asshole.

Shaming the obese can be helpful. Oh, wow.

But you whine when your anorexia is brought up, or refuse to acknowledge its root relevance to your weird obsession with obesity. You are lying when you imply that your insults have some high-minded impetus. They are motivated by your illness, and probably also by your isolation.

Ever heard the expression, "Physician, heal thyself"?

I'm a skinny atheist who acknowledges that Morrissey is ambivalent toward womankind for their failing to play some decisive role in his life. You've never said anything on these issues that wasn't disastrously tired, wrongheaded, or simply plagiarized.

You are cruel. You are here to attempt to dominate people. You exhibit endless dishonesty, hypocrisy, and selfishness in the course of doing so.

You are simply a very, conventionally detestable personality. You are the most extreme example of your awful type that most of us have ever come across.

You cry out to be swatted. So we swat you.

That's it. It's as if someone wrote "2 and 2 is 5" on a web page. Someone's going to post, "No, it's not." Virtually nothing that you ever say is true. Which is amazing, really.

And you like this contact, because the alternative is a degree of solitude that terrifies you.

You're never going to get any of the things that you want. Not by going about it as you're doing. You're not going to be able to change yourself, because you won't acknowledge what you are now.

People dislike you because you're a f***ing monster.

Your posts are pitch perfect, but you're way too intelligent and on point for RB to get her head around. She doesn't possess the insight or critical thinking skills needed to grasp what you're telling her and in the end she's only going to copy bits of your style and prose.

 

[Deleted member 1074]

Re: You can't work the refs when you're responsible for 90% of the fouls.

Every single example that anonymous is posting of me appearing to harass another user was almost always, if not always, in retaliation of CG's baiting and systematic abusing, insulting and harassing of me all over the forums for the last year and a half. If I was psychotic like anonymous and obsessed I could gather up all the abusive posts by her. Gather all the posts where Mozza called someone a ^c***. Where Viva and NHNS called CG fat. He has taken all those posts out of context. Post the entire exchanges and you get a much different picture. Everyone knows this. He isn't fooling anyone but himself.

Appearing to harass? Really? Labeling it as "retaliation" doesn't change the fact that it is harassment...

Everybody else accepts what they do & why they do it, you refuse to accept the reality of your actions and try to excuse them away as noble...as if there is anyone around here you have to save face for.

Keep tilting at windmills, Don Quixote...

He is a self-righteous tosser with a god complex.

What is this, like, the 200th time you've used that word this week?

I bet you've adopted a posh British internal voice just for re-reading your own posts...

 

[Anonymous]

Re:

I believe hackers can take over all those zombie computers that have been hacked / phished or whatever and post from their IP. Sure they can use proxies too. I'm just saying all of this means that the IP information is not that useful, or it can do worse damage as people convince themselves they are seeing something that isn't actually true.

People do actually create these networks of hacked computers, but they usually have some purpose in mind... Again, though, all it would take is two people at established locations. I would email my post to someone in Bora Bora, and they would post it, from their IP. they would in turn email their intended reply to someone in Timbuktu who would post it. This would all be easy to do and serve absolutely no purpose at all except to confuse you as to whether your anonymous posters are anonymous. It wouldn't require hacking, botnets, or even proxies, and would therefore be the most likely solution, were you to in fact have an established record of the type I've described. Most reasonable people would see right away that these anonymous are not all one obsessed person. I do not doubt that there may be an obsessed person involved. It has happened to several people at this site. I just think that her statement that all of these are the same is obviously not the case and I enjoy seeing a problem solved. However, since there are and can be no actual consequences I suppose it doesn't matter.

Forget it. I suggest we who are still paying attention just enjoy it as an amusing learning opportunity about paranoia and the way it can build.

 

[realitybites]

Re: You can't work the refs when you're responsible for 90% of the fouls.

Appearing to harass? Really? Labeling it as "retaliation" doesn't change the fact that it is harassment...

Everybody else accepts what they do & why they do it, you refuse to accept the reality of your actions and try to excuse them away as noble...as if there is anyone around here you have to save face for.

Keep tilting at windmills, Don Quixote...



What is this, like, the 200th time you've used that word this week?

I bet you've adopted a posh British internal voice just for re-reading your own posts...

Are you anonymous posting lists of my 'insults' towards CG? Were you posting all those posts of mine? No. Is this discussion about me bitching about you, or Mozza, or CG? And don't say everyone else deals with it without complaining. You just recently reported a post made by Playcat that suggested you jump off a bridge. A post I did not even find offensive.

No, I am dealing with ONE lunatic who is obsessed with me. Derives pleasure making me think he is you, or TBT, or others and has admitted such. He is a banned former member who cannot post under a registered name without soon being banned for trolling, again. This is what this thread has turned into. It started out discussing the headaches of dealing with anonymous posting. Then the tosser with the god complex had to chime in. Trying to get David to state that the anonymous posts are being made by more than one person. Which David can't do. It is impossible. It is all speculation. Why anonymous wants others to think he is more than one person is apparent. If he is just ONE person, then he is outed as the obsessed person he is. A person who is tech savvy, uses proxies, and is a seasoned troll. BUT, if he gets people to think MANY are posting these stalkerish posts, then he just looks like he is one guy posting his opinion who just happens to have the same opinion as many. Smoke and mirrors.

David don't cave. This troll is manipulating the forum and trying to manipulate you. It is all a game to him. There have been many trolls over the years. Morrithey and Dave were, imo, two of the most relentless. There may have been others that I am not aware of. Why are they successful at causing mayhem? Because the are psychopaths who have tech skills. You need both elements to be great and successful at trolling. Pet Troll has both in spades.

 

[Anonymous]

Re: You can't work the refs when you're responsible for 90% of the fouls.

Every single example that anonymous is posting of me appearing to harass another user was almost always, if not always, in retaliation of CG's baiting and systematic abusing, insulting, and harassing of me all over the forums for the last year and a half. If I were psychotic and obsessed like anonymous I could/would gather up all the abusive posts by her. And round up all the posts where Mozza called someone a ^c***. Where Viva and NHNS called CG fat. Etc., etc., etc. He has taken all those posts out of context. Post the entire exchanges and you get a much different picture. Everyone knows this. He isn't fooling anyone but himself.

He is a self-righteous tosser with a god complex.

Anybody reading this, please ask yourself, is that person obsessed? Giving you the creeps? What really is going on here? Why is he hellbent on destroying my reputation? And trying to silence me? Why am I so threatening to him? Could it be that he is overweight, religious, vegan, socialist, beta, short, low class? Something I said, and the way I believe, REALLY, REALLY gets under his skin. Those who anger you conquer you. He has given me power over his emotions. I don't even know who he is or even care. He means nothing. But his world seems to revolve around me. This is a shame. He is wasting his time. I am staying and I am not going to shut up. He appears mentally unhinged. But I think he thinks he looks clever. Clever like those idiots toting their guns on that ranch in Nevada. Fighting for some 'cause' no one cares about but himself.

It's so simple yet you continually turn everything into a carnival of nonsense. 'Anonymous' goes after you because of your hypocritical, ill-informed and cruel posts.

 

[davidt]

Re:

That is true, it doesn't take much sophistication if multiple people are involved. The anonymous person however is being a bit abusive / stalking however, and likely works alone. I think we can agree showing IP information, beyond the privacy issues, isn't actually that reliable to determine who is who as it can be manipulated as necessary. If the anonymous person wants to avoid confusion if they are going to converse, they need to bite the bullet and take a minute to create an account.

People do actually create these networks of hacked computers, but they usually have some purpose in mind... Again, though, all it would take is two people at established locations. I would email my post to someone in Bora Bora, and they would post it, from their IP. they would in turn email their intended reply to someone in Timbuktu who would post it. This would all be easy to do and serve absolutely no purpose at all except to confuse you as to whether your anonymous posters are anonymous. It wouldn't require hacking, botnets, or even proxies, and would therefore be the most likely solution, were you to in fact have an established record of the type I've described. Most reasonable people would see right away that these anonymous are not all one obsessed person. I do not doubt that there may be an obsessed person involved. It has happened to several people at this site. I just think that her statement that all of these are the same is obviously not the case and I enjoy seeing a problem solved. However, since there are and can be no actual consequences I suppose it doesn't matter.

Forget it. I suggest we who are still paying attention just enjoy it as an amusing learning opportunity about paranoia and the way it can build.

 

[realitybites]

Re:

People do actually create these networks of hacked computers, but they usually have some purpose in mind... Again, though, all it would take is two people at established locations. I would email my post to someone in Bora Bora, and they would post it, from their IP. they would in turn email their intended reply to someone in Timbuktu who would post it. This would all be easy to do and serve absolutely no purpose at all except to confuse you as to whether your anonymous posters are anonymous. It wouldn't require hacking, botnets, or even proxies, and would therefore be the most likely solution, were you to in fact have an established record of the type I've described. Most reasonable people would see right away that these anonymous are not all one obsessed person. I do not doubt that there may be an obsessed person involved. It has happened to several people at this site. I just think that her statement that all of these are the same is obviously not the case and I enjoy seeing a problem solved. However, since there are and can be no actual consequences I suppose it doesn't matter.

Forget it. I suggest we who are still paying attention just enjoy it as an amusing learning opportunity about paranoia and the way it can build.

Where and when did I EVER say all anonymous posts are being made by one person? Or that all insulting/critical posts are being made by one person? I didn't claim this. In fact, the majority of anonymous posts on the forum--especially in the GD forums--are most likely NOT made by him. But ANYONE reading this thread can see that there IS an obsessed person on my heals. Stalking me and following me around the forums reading everything I post and analyzing it. This guy COULD write my biography. You don't find that troubling? I do. Not threatening. Just on a psychological level. To witness it. It is something you usually only get to experience/witness in film or books. Not in real time. I hope someone is taking notes. (Actually, I am. ) It is not just a case study in paranoia. But one in psychopathology as well.

 

[DavidGlasgow]

Dear Anonymous: My details are on my posts, I respond giving people the ability to at least identify me as a user and I can be held accountable by doing so.

That makes me a man and you, a boy. Be a man, step up and show who you are. Time to grow up.

 

[realitybites]

Re:

That is true, it doesn't take much sophistication if multiple people are involved. The anonymous person however is being a bit abusive / stalking however, and likely works alone. I think we can agree showing IP information, beyond the privacy issues, isn't actually that reliable to determine who is who as it can be manipulated as necessary. If the anonymous person wants to avoid confusion if they are going to converse, they need to bite the bullet and take a minute to create an account.

I agree that showing the IPs won't really help. This person can create an account(s). Then get banned again. Then post anonymously again. Or do a combination of both. I bet you a million bucks he has a least one registered account now. The guy does not know what it means to converse. He is not capable of having a considered dialog. He can't fit in here. If he could, he would.

 

[I like cake]

Re: You can't work the refs when you're responsible for 90% of the fouls.

This is what this thread has turned into. It started out discussing the headaches of dealing with anonymous posting.

Your argument was that too many anonymous posts were "abusive." The point was made, by the mass of quotations, that registered users post the vast majority of "abuse," and that hand-wringing over anonymous posters is a lot of rubbish. An additional point, obvious to everyone, was that you have no place lecturing people on such things.

It might have stopped there, but then you mounted your hobbyhorse of false accusations against absent parties.

Then the tosser with the god complex had to chime in. Trying to get David to state that the anonymous posts are being made by more than one person.

You're talking about (at least) two different anonymous users in just this instance alone.

Which David can't do. It is impossible.

No one in this participation knows enough to say that, or the persons who do aren't willing to say it. But you don't have this knowledge.

There have been many trolls over the years. Morrithey and Dave were, imo, two of the most relentless. There may have been others that I am not aware of. Why are they successful at causing mayhem? Because the are psychopaths who have tech skills. You need both elements to be great and successful at trolling. Pet Troll has both in spades.

The only person in the history of the site with access to the kind of technical skills you're referring to was actually yourself, via your former husband. And anyone who would like to use the advanced search function can discover what you did with those skills.

This guy COULD write my biography. You don't find that troubling?

Um, you self-published your biography, didn't you? And haven't you linked to your journal before and testily instructed people to read up? Your combination of exhibitionism and bashfulness speaks of a psychogenic fugue.

The guy does not know what it means to converse. He is not capable of having a considered dialog. He can't fit in here. If he could, he would.

How many more times are you going to post this? As for a dialogue, that would require your replying to his posts with something more than accusations of shortness and pictures of dogs.

By the way, plenty of anonymous posts don't get through. Here's the lay of the land: the "stalking" and so on is done by registered users. Those of you who are wedded to this pathology are frustrated that people you can't stalk in return occasionally contribute a comment, here and there, on your dirty laundry. The site's intelligent users aren't being heckled. Aspire to their standard of behavior, and you'll have fewer causes for these ridiculous breakdowns.

And wasn't Realitybites going to stop responding to anonymous comments, like, two pages ago? Ugh. Woman, you're weak.

 

[Anonymous]

Re:

That is true, it doesn't take much sophistication if multiple people are involved. The anonymous person however is being a bit abusive / stalking however, and likely works alone. I think we can agree showing IP information, beyond the privacy issues, isn't actually that reliable to determine who is who as it can be manipulated as necessary. If the anonymous person wants to avoid confusion if they are going to converse, they need to bite the bullet and take a minute to create an account.

Yes, there is only "the anonymous person." You got me! I am Dave and I use proxies to stalk people. I am a hacker and I hacked your server to fake my IP. As a backup measure I also created a huge botnet, all so I could post anonymously. I did all this to fool you so that I could do something anyone can do at any time. That's definitely the most likely explanation.

 

[BrummieBoy]

Re: You can't work the refs when you're responsible for 90% of the fouls.

Any impartial third party would also realize, reading this thread, that she is the only harasser present in the scenario! (Have her grandiose compliments of your "priceless" and "perfect" outpourings bought your silence on this elephantine hypocrisy? I recall how you immediately turned off the "Stockholm syndrome" talk last year, following her initial hosannas for your loggorhea--or was than an ironic sell-out?)

Stockholm Syndrome acquiescence to Group Think is still an appropriate explanatory model for a LOT of people on this site. Whether it's kow-towing to the dynamics of a particular thread or being subservient to global strategies of unquestioned hero-worship of "Morrissey". I'm happy to revisit that topic. Ironically, of course. I don't defer to praise or insults, but 'loggorhea' is an excellent word. A A Gill was entirely right to use it in relation to Morrissey's ridiculous "Autobiography". I'm in good company!

http://articles.latimes.com/2014/fe...of-panning-an-author-named-morrissey-20140211

 

[Deleted member 1074]

Re: You can't work the refs when you're responsible for 90% of the fouls.

Are you anonymous posting lists of my 'insults' towards CG? Were you posting all those posts of mine? No.

Maybe I am...
Maybe I'm not...
You'll never know exactly who it is.

You need a name for your pain...so you're picking them out of a hat. The fact that you'll never have a specific someone to point to and vent all of that bitterness & menopausal rage towards makes me happy inside...because I know it absolutely kills you.

Is this discussion about me bitching about you, or Mozza, or CG?

This is a forum. I don't need to be invited by you to post in a thread. I'm not a f***ing vampire...you are the vampire...sucking the lifeblood out of this forum with endless self-righteous, egocentric drama that you spew in every thread even after time and time again assuring everyone (though mostly just yourself) that you're finished with it because you're "above it all."

Whether you like it or whether you don't like it...learn to love it. I'm not going anywhere. Woooooo!

And don't say everyone else deals with it without complaining.

Where did I say everyone else deals with anything without complaining? Yet another example of you not being able to comprehend a point...or is it just perverting something to fit your current need and hoping no one will actually go back and check the source? One can never tell with you...

You just recently reported a post made by Playcat that suggested you jump off a bridge. A post I did not even find offensive.

I don't give a good f*** what you find offensive.

I'm sorry, did you think I based all my actions on the results of the Jehne Lunden Litmus Test?

No, I am dealing with ONE lunatic who is obsessed with me.

Of course. Because it totally isn't possible at all that you irritate the living f*** out of more than one person...

Derives pleasure making me think he is you, or TBT, or others and has admitted such.

Nobody made you think anything...or are you saying you're not a "freethinker" after all? You came to the conclusion yourself, in your infinite wisdom...and, as usual, you were wrong. But I can understand your confusion...as we all know, multi-quotes and an ellipsis are copyrighted properties exclusive to !Viva Hate! Incorporated.

He is a banned former member who cannot post under a registered name without soon being banned for trolling, again.

You don't know that. You don't know anything. Quit stating your opinion as a fact.

This is what this thread has turned into.

This is what you turned the thread into...this is what you turn every thread into.

People don't like you because you are annoying. You are annoying because people don't like you. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

It started out discussing the headaches of dealing with anonymous posting. Then the tosser with the god complex had to chime in. Trying to get David to state that the anonymous posts are being made by more than one person. Which David can't do. It is impossible. It is all speculation. Why anonymous wants others to think he is more than one person is apparent. If he is just ONE person, then he is outed as the obsessed person he is. A person who is tech savvy, uses proxies, and is a seasoned troll. BUT, if he gets people to think MANY are posting these stalkerish posts, then he just looks like he is one guy posting his opinion who just happens to have the same opinion as many. Smoke and mirrors.

Did you really just try to explain 7 pages of this thread to me...while once again portraying yourself as a victim?

This is two of the reasons people find you annoying: <---- sorry for the superfluous & incorrect use of...oh, wait, nevermind.

1.) You're a whiner always portraying yourself as a victim of the very fights you start.
2.) You treat people like idiots by explaining the obvious to them. More often than not, their own thoughts!

David don't cave. This troll is manipulating the forum and trying to manipulate you.

The only person really trying to get anything out of David is you...

It is all a game to him.

Then stop playing. Oh, that's right, you can't...

There have been many trolls over the years.

Blake, Russell Bertrand, Bertie, Smithson, Realitybites just to name a few...

Morrithey and Dave were, imo, two of the most relentless. There may have been others that I am not aware of. Why are they successful at causing mayhem? Because the are psychopaths who have tech skills. You need both elements to be great and successful at trolling. Pet Troll has both in spades.

Or maybe, just maybe, they're so successful because you've spent page after page giving them attention in a failing attempt at raising your credibility via the victim card and stamping out dissenters who refuse to worship Saint Jehne at the imaginary temple you've constructed out of ego & mortar over the span of a decade?

And let me stop you in your tracks right now on the one thing you could reply about that would be valid and true - I don't give a single f*** whether that was a run-on sentence or not.

 

[Just my opinion]

This has turned out to be a pretty good thread.

 

[Ben Stein's bunny]

No self-control, you people

Dear Anonymous: My details are on my posts, I respond giving people the ability to at least identify me as a user and I can be held accountable by doing so.

That makes me a man and you, a boy. Be a man, step up and show who you are. Time to grow up.

Hello, David. Your manly use of a registered account helps me to identify you as a participant in this exchange, on the thread's first page:

Incidentally registered users are able to ignore anonymous posts, click settings on top right.

Thank you Kewpie that's a great help, I'll do just that.

A man does what he says he'll do.

 

[Anonymous]

Re: You can't work the refs when you're responsible for 90% of the fouls.

Stockholm Syndrome acquiescence to Group Think is still an appropriate explanatory model for a LOT of people on this site. Whether it's kow-towing to the dynamics of a particular thread or being subservient to global strategies of unquestioned hero-worship of "Morrissey". I'm happy to revisit that topic. Ironically, of course. I don't defer to praise or insults, but 'loggorhea' is an excellent word. A A Gill was entirely right to use it in relation to Morrissey's ridiculous "Autobiography". I'm in good company!

http://articles.latimes.com/2014/fe...of-panning-an-author-named-morrissey-20140211

You seem a lot more interesting, fun, and intelligent in smaller doses and especially before you run through your whole routine and start repeating. How many posts do you mention Stockholm Syndrome for example? Still thank you for "f*** Your Honda Civic." I like you but you do worry me with the repetition.

 

[DavidGlasgow]

RIGHT. LOOK. I started this thread, I feel responsible for it, and I want to be the one to start it finishing.

These anonymous people aren't going to go away. There is obviously a history here about which I have no idea as I am a new user. But this is just going round and round. What is going on with this? How can there be so much in-fighting? Can't everyone agree that Morrissey's music is fantastic and get along?

 

[realitybites]

Re: You can't work the refs when you're responsible for 90% of the fouls.

Maybe I am...
Maybe I'm not...
You'll never know exactly who it is.

You need a name for your pain...so you're picking them out of a hat. The fact that you'll never have a specific someone to point to and vent all of that bitterness & menopausal rage towards makes me happy inside...because I know it absolutely kills you.


This is a forum. I don't need to be invited by you to post in a thread. I'm not a f***ing vampire...you are the vampire...sucking the lifeblood out of this forum with endless self-righteous, egocentric drama that you spew in every thread even after time and time again assuring everyone (though mostly just yourself) that you're finished with it because you're "above it all."

Whether you like it or whether you don't like it...learn to love it. I'm not going anywhere. Woooooo!

Where did I say everyone else deals with anything without complaining? Yet another example of you not being able to comprehend a point...or is it just perverting something to fit your current need and hoping no one will actually go back and check the source? One can never tell with you...

I don't give a good f*** what you find offensive.

I'm sorry, did you think I based all my actions on the results of the Jehne Lunden Litmus Test?

Of course. Because it totally isn't possible at all that you irritate the living f*** out of more than one person...


Nobody made you think anything...or are you saying you're not a "freethinker" after all? You came to the conclusion yourself, in your infinite wisdom...and, as usual, you were wrong. But I can understand your confusion...as we all know, multi-quotes and an ellipsis are copyrighted properties exclusive to !Viva Hate! Incorporated.

You don't know that. You don't know anything. Quit stating your opinion as a fact.

This is what you turned the thread into...this is what you turn every thread into.

People don't like you because you are annoying. You are annoying because people don't like you. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Did you really just try to explain 7 pages of this thread to me...while once again portraying yourself as a victim?

This is two of the reasons people find you annoying: <---- sorry for the superfluous & incorrect use of...oh, wait, nevermind.

1.) You're a whiner always portraying yourself as a victim of the very fights you start.
2.) You treat people like idiots by explaining the obvious to them. More often than not, their own thoughts!

The only person really trying to get anything out of David is you...

Then stop playing. Oh, that's right, you can't...

Blake, Russell Bertrand, Bertie, Smithson, Realitybites just to name a few...

Or maybe, just maybe, they're so successful because you've spent page after page giving them attention in a failing attempt at raising your credibility via the victim card and stamping out dissenters who refuse to worship Saint Jehne at the imaginary temple you've constructed out of ego & mortar over the span of a decade?

And let me stop you in your tracks right now on the one thing you could reply about that would be valid and true - I don't give a single f*** whether that was a run-on sentence or not.

Can you construct a retort in paragraph form? Or are you only capable of refuting points line by line with cliched one-liners that never address the context as a whole?

I am not going to even bother responding to any of that drivel. I have better things to do.

 

[Anonymous]

Re: You can't work the refs when you're responsible for 90% of the fouls.

Can you construct a retort in paragraph form? Or are you only capable of refuting points line by line with cliched one-liners that never address the context as a whole?

You plea for "dialogue" when confronted with paragraphs.

You plea for "paragraphs" when you're engaged in dialogue.

Nonstop evasion, usually through some pretense of aesthetic sensitivity. Our great debater.

I am not going to even bother responding to any of that drivel. I have better things to do.

Where to begin...