There's the famous Wolf Weiss that I was looking for, full of self righteousness and more than capable of deflecting issues under this guise of being the end-all, be-all of truth.

Calling me George L. (wrong, btw) doesn't defend your actions.

Calling me out for using a pen name won't erase all the postings you've made under fake names. (It's pretty obvious which ones are yours and the hypocrisy of you saying someone is afraid to post under their real name is enough to make a man puke).

I need to get over this idea that you threatened anyone? Didn't you bring that up about Mr. Mike? All I did was point out that you are guilty of the same action.

You can try to distort this however you'd like, but the actual truth (not your brand of "it's true cause me and my buddies think so) is that you made threats online against Mr. Mike.

I didn't include your entire post because the threat was made in the last two paragraphs. First you bring up this theory of being a murderer, which by itself doesn't seem like much more than the ridiculous ramblings of someone frustrated with the way their life has turned out.

But then you make this key mistake, the one that makes what you said a threat. You ask him if he wants to find out if you are bluffing, following that threat with information about where he lives, works and where his mother lives.

That's not a "theoretical situation used in an argument to make a point," that's a threat against this man and his family.

I think you're going to have to come up with a better argument than what you've produced so far. I heard you were sharp-minded, but so far you seem no more formidable than my four-year old son. At least he has the excuse of being a toddler. What's yours?

If you really believe I, Wolfgang J. Weiss made threats against Mad Mike Foulks, you have a duty to report me to the proper authorities.

However, you need to consider this: I say it was a a fictional serial killer that a person who uses the fake name MOLR or Masked On-Line Ranger made up.

The "maybe" the "alternate theory" in MOLR's statement are not mere hints, elliptical allusions or innuendo.

These terms distinctly describe the nature of the statements and qualify the content of the statements.

One can liken this kind of text to line of actors in a play. The actors are real. The script is real. The action and the spoken words on the stage are fake. Get it? Fake. Unreal. Fiction.

Threats. I suppose if I fart, you would deem it biochemical warfare. What an ignoid.

Go ahead, file a complaint. I dare you. Is that a threat, am I threatening YOU now? Fool.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

There's the famous Wolf Weiss that I was looking for, full of self righteousness and more than capable of deflecting issues under this guise of being the end-all, be-all of truth.

Calling me George L. (wrong, btw) doesn't defend your actions.

Calling me out for using a pen name won't erase all the postings you've made under fake names. (It's pretty obvious which ones are yours and the hypocrisy of you saying someone is afraid to post under their real name is enough to make a man puke).

I need to get over this idea that you threatened anyone? Didn't you bring that up about Mr. Mike? All I did was point out that you are guilty of the same action.

You can try to distort this however you'd like, but the actual truth (not your brand of "it's true cause me and my buddies think so) is that you made threats online against Mr. Mike.

I didn't include your entire post because the threat was made in the last two paragraphs. First you bring up this theory of being a murderer, which by itself doesn't seem like much more than the ridiculous ramblings of someone frustrated with the way their life has turned out.

But then you make this key mistake, the one that makes what you said a threat. You ask him if he wants to find out if you are bluffing, following that threat with information about where he lives, works and where his mother lives.

That's not a "theoretical situation used in an argument to make a point," that's a threat against this man and his family.

I think you're going to have to come up with a better argument than what you've produced so far. I heard you were sharp-minded, but so far you seem no more formidable than my four-year old son. At least he has the excuse of being a toddler. What's yours?

I think Mr. Informed's four year-old will be sadly disappointed in his father's incredibly lame thought process by the time he is five.

But of course, I too, think Informed has difficulty separating fiction from truth. This is the same problem Foulks seem to suffer from, it is the same problem Lutfallah and Bullington seem to suffer from.

In a very sadly pathetic, distorted way, Foulks, Lutfallah and Bullington have used this shared inability -- this shared character deficit, lack of judgment and failure to recognize simple common sense -- to separate the real from the false to the determent of those who have undertaken driver organizing activities and to the determent of the various organizations who have participated in these honorable pursuits.

It is obvious that the only reason "Informed" is attacking Mr. Weiss is to take the focus away from -- and the heat off – the cyber stalking felon, Mad Mike Flakey Foulks whose incessant criminal harassment of people who mistakenly believe this is a discussion forum for cab drivers.

To disagree is one thing. To make statements that dispute or even refute another’s contention is one thing. To offer facts and information that lead to conclusions that differ from another’s assertions is one thing. This considered normal, commonly tolerable behavior in discourse made in the spirit of good fellowship and intellectual progress.

But contrary to such ideals, the operators of this forum have given unfettered license to the likes of Foulks and Informed to “defecate on whoever (they) will" as one former contributor has noted.

With regard to Informed’s silly taunts and childish insults it should be noted that they do not a make a case except for followers of the "Long Eared Father of Fools" -- all one of them. Apparent (from his post) Informed is vying for Foulks' lofty position at the top of that solid waste pile.

While I don't need help with lame brained fools like Informed, I thank Mr. Weiss and the others for having the guts to stand up to this kind of foolishness. It is an unclean business, indeed. Sorry for the flak you have to take on my account, Weiss!

I thank Mr. Weiss and others for speaking out about the disgraceful, continual bad-mouthing and name calling and character assassination undertaken by Foulks and others to avenge themselves for statements that dispute their wild claims and sorrowfully wrong conclusions.

A perfect example of this kind of behavior is when Infomed chastises Mr. Weiss for being hypocritical, having missed a most obvious and hilarious mockery of Foulks' obsession about pen names. Mr. Weiss' jibe went right over Informed's sanctimonious head!

The tragedy is, of course, Informed is attempting to protect and defend Foulks and the operators of this website from potential and real danger of legal action. But it will take a whole lot more than his limited thinking aptitude, writing skills and facility to reason to accomplish that.

-Masked On-Line Ranger

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

If you really believe I, Wolfgang J. Weiss made threats against Mad Mike Foulks, you have a duty to report me to the proper authorities.

However, you need to consider this: I say it was a a fictional serial killer that a person who uses the fake name MOLR or Masked On-Line Ranger made up.

The "maybe" the "alternate theory" in MOLR's statement are not mere hints, elliptical allusions or innuendo.

These terms distinctly describe the nature of the statements and qualify the content of the statements.

One can liken this kind of text to line of actors in a play. The actors are real. The script is real. The action and the spoken words on the stage are fake. Get it? Fake. Unreal. Fiction.

Threats. I suppose if I fart, you would deem it biochemical warfare. What an ignoid.

Go ahead, file a complaint. I dare you. Is that a threat, am I threatening YOU now? Fool.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

There's the famous Wolf Weiss that I was looking for, full of self righteousness and more than capable of deflecting issues under this guise of being the end-all, be-all of truth.

Calling me George L. (wrong, btw) doesn't defend your actions.

Calling me out for using a pen name won't erase all the postings you've made under fake names. (It's pretty obvious which ones are yours and the hypocrisy of you saying someone is afraid to post under their real name is enough to make a man puke).

I need to get over this idea that you threatened anyone? Didn't you bring that up about Mr. Mike? All I did was point out that you are guilty of the same action.

You can try to distort this however you'd like, but the actual truth (not your brand of "it's true cause me and my buddies think so) is that you made threats online against Mr. Mike.

I didn't include your entire post because the threat was made in the last two paragraphs. First you bring up this theory of being a murderer, which by itself doesn't seem like much more than the ridiculous ramblings of someone frustrated with the way their life has turned out.

But then you make this key mistake, the one that makes what you said a threat. You ask him if he wants to find out if you are bluffing, following that threat with information about where he lives, works and where his mother lives.

That's not a "theoretical situation used in an argument to make a point," that's a threat against this man and his family.

I think you're going to have to come up with a better argument than what you've produced so far. I heard you were sharp-minded, but so far you seem no more formidable than my four-year old son. At least he has the excuse of being a toddler. What's yours?

I hope In-for-med(s)is man enough to clean up his man barf.

Moose

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

I think Mr. Informed's four year-old will be sadly disappointed in his father's incredibly lame thought process by the time he is five.

But of course, I too, think Informed has difficulty separating fiction from truth. This is the same problem Foulks seem to suffer from, it is the same problem Lutfallah and Bullington seem to suffer from.

In a very sadly pathetic, distorted way, Foulks, Lutfallah and Bullington have used this shared inability -- this shared character deficit, lack of judgment and failure to recognize simple common sense -- to separate the real from the false to the determent of those who have undertaken driver organizing activities and to the determent of the various organizations who have participated in these honorable pursuits.

It is obvious that the only reason "Informed" is attacking Mr. Weiss is to take the focus away from -- and the heat off – the cyber stalking felon, Mad Mike Flakey Foulks whose incessant criminal harassment of people who mistakenly believe this is a discussion forum for cab drivers.

To disagree is one thing. To make statements that dispute or even refute another’s contention is one thing. To offer facts and information that lead to conclusions that differ from another’s assertions is one thing. This considered normal, commonly tolerable behavior in discourse made in the spirit of good fellowship and intellectual progress.

But contrary to such ideals, the operators of this forum have given unfettered license to the likes of Foulks and Informed to “defecate on whoever (they) will" as one former contributor has noted.

With regard to Informed’s silly taunts and childish insults it should be noted that they do not a make a case except for followers of the "Long Eared Father of Fools" -- all one of them. Apparent (from his post) Informed is vying for Foulks' lofty position at the top of that solid waste pile.

While I don't need help with lame brained fools like Informed, I thank Mr. Weiss and the others for having the guts to stand up to this kind of foolishness. It is an unclean business, indeed. Sorry for the flak you have to take on my account, Weiss!

I thank Mr. Weiss and others for speaking out about the disgraceful, continual bad-mouthing and name calling and character assassination undertaken by Foulks and others to avenge themselves for statements that dispute their wild claims and sorrowfully wrong conclusions.

A perfect example of this kind of behavior is when Infomed chastises Mr. Weiss for being hypocritical, having missed a most obvious and hilarious mockery of Foulks' obsession about pen names. Mr. Weiss' jibe went right over Informed's sanctimonious head!

The tragedy is, of course, Informed is attempting to protect and defend Foulks and the operators of this website from potential and real danger of legal action. But it will take a whole lot more than his limited thinking aptitude, writing skills and facility to reason to accomplish that.

-Masked On-Line Ranger

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

If you really believe I, Wolfgang J. Weiss made threats against Mad Mike Foulks, you have a duty to report me to the proper authorities.

However, you need to consider this: I say it was a a fictional serial killer that a person who uses the fake name MOLR or Masked On-Line Ranger made up.

The "maybe" the "alternate theory" in MOLR's statement are not mere hints, elliptical allusions or innuendo.

These terms distinctly describe the nature of the statements and qualify the content of the statements.

One can liken this kind of text to line of actors in a play. The actors are real. The script is real. The action and the spoken words on the stage are fake. Get it? Fake. Unreal. Fiction.

Threats. I suppose if I fart, you would deem it biochemical warfare. What an ignoid.

Go ahead, file a complaint. I dare you. Is that a threat, am I threatening YOU now? Fool.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

There's the famous Wolf Weiss that I was looking for, full of self righteousness and more than capable of deflecting issues under this guise of being the end-all, be-all of truth.

Calling me George L. (wrong, btw) doesn't defend your actions.

Calling me out for using a pen name won't erase all the postings you've made under fake names. (It's pretty obvious which ones are yours and the hypocrisy of you saying someone is afraid to post under their real name is enough to make a man puke).

I need to get over this idea that you threatened anyone? Didn't you bring that up about Mr. Mike? All I did was point out that you are guilty of the same action.

You can try to distort this however you'd like, but the actual truth (not your brand of "it's true cause me and my buddies think so) is that you made threats online against Mr. Mike.

I didn't include your entire post because the threat was made in the last two paragraphs. First you bring up this theory of being a murderer, which by itself doesn't seem like much more than the ridiculous ramblings of someone frustrated with the way their life has turned out.

But then you make this key mistake, the one that makes what you said a threat. You ask him if he wants to find out if you are bluffing, following that threat with information about where he lives, works and where his mother lives.

That's not a "theoretical situation used in an argument to make a point," that's a threat against this man and his family.

I think you're going to have to come up with a better argument than what you've produced so far. I heard you were sharp-minded, but so far you seem no more formidable than my four-year old son. At least he has the excuse of being a toddler. What's yours?