Clay's feet's new shoes

Clay's feet's new shoes

Post by Terry Palfr » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00




Usenet.comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Re: Shoes... <cont>

Quote:>You are a troll Clay, no one can have this type
>of conversation out to four iterations and not
>be deliberately pushing it.

No answer here Clay?

Quote:>Okay, if you say there is a real person at that address
>and that you are that person even though experience has
>taught us the exact opposite.

Slough this one off but I do have the experience to
make this statement and let me, for the record, assure
you this is a pleasant change that a real person named
Clay Kent resides at this account address.

Quote:>>>you provide no bona fides,
>>>you answer no questions,
>>>and you simply attack me.

No resolution to this one either.

Quote:>Exactly who, Clay, are you, to jump in and
>be judge and jury of "tude" as you put it
>with little or no experience much less
>history with the participants or the
>newsgroup?

No answer here either.

Quote:>>How am I a hypocrite? Care to explain this charge?
>On what basis was this judgement of "tude" rendered?
>Past history and experience? Offence at the tone?
>You sit on your high horse rendering judgement without
>feeling the need to be a participant or to present any
>credentials to back up your judgement.

There was your answer Clay, you accuse me, unprovoked,
of arrogant attitude yet cannot see that that action
in itself is totally arrogant especially given the
conditions as layed out and then you "snip" for
convenience ducking the questions.

Quote:>Trust me on this Clay, once you ask me to "be quiet" you
>display that you have no great experience, are unable to
>grasp the concept of a kill file and are simply looking
>for trouble.

Do you know what a kill file is Clay? It's obvious that
you do not after you threw "plonk" back at me. It's quite
obvious that you do not have a grounding in a lot of net
things yet you barge ahead like some title maddened
contender.

Quote:>>>You are a bad parody, you fail to understand
>>>quite deliberately that you really have no
>>>legitimate voice, that you cannot make a
>>>mountain out of a molehill
>>Based upon the number and content of your posts
>>directed at me, it is you who are making a mountain
>>out of a mole hill.
>I never posted to you at any time until you posted at me.
>You started it. I will finish it. <now that is slightly
>arrogant but perfectly acceptable given my long history in
>.advocacy>.

No comment? Was it the part about how confused I became over
the fact that some unknown was jumping into the middle of
something and starting a second level of conflict and making
sure I knew it by posting a copy in my mailbox. That I
interpreted that behaviour as obnoxious and responded in
kind. There is no other interpretation for your actions.
You either did it willfully or out of stupidity.

Quote:>>In all fairness, I am willing to admit my err and take the egg
>>on my face for it. It was never my intention to send e-mail and
>>a post. Let the public record show that my apology to you,
>>accepted or not, has been sincerely extended.

Wasn't it you that implied english was my second language. "Take
the egg on my face for it" doesn't parse very well. How about
"I am willing to admit my error and wipe the egg off of my face"?

Quote:>Sincerity is also best judged by actions not words, so
>the words are there for the record the actions however
>remain to be seen.

After your last post I can see where things are going.
You were warned off, you were given a chance. Your actions
are what is at issue here.

Quote:>>And you accuse me of not answering your questions.
>>Look in the mirror Terry. Who is the hypocrite here?
>Your questions have been responded to as far as any
>right thinking individual would feel necessary until
>such a time as your "time in" and established "bona
>fides" make you a player here instead of some "wannabe"
>doing a "net cop" impression, badly.

The label of hypocrite remains. I answered your question
you left my questions out of your response. My questions
on your Amiga use remain unanswered. You cannot even
describe my stance on the Amiga in paraphrase.

Quote:>Come on Clay, describe your Amiga. What do you use it
>for? Why are you using it and not a clone or apple? Or
>tell us why you still use it when you have whatever
>setup you have that *s up your air-tight case of
>"tude" here by sending e-mail as a default newsgroup
>posting setting.

Too difficult? Come back when you finish the one pointers.

Quote:>>>I keep records, you're not in them, you respond to
>>>none of my Amiga barbs or questions and continue to
>>>lecture me on how things work.
>>How could I possibly respond to your Amiga barbs when
>>I agree with your position of advocacy for the Amiga
>>100 percent!!!
>What would that be Clay? In less than a hundred words
>of your own choosing, describe "MY" position on the
>Amiga. You've already stated:
>*}> It depends on what you mean by the term "use".
>*}> I own an Amiga that I would never ever part with
>*}> for any amount of money, but it is too old to be
>*}> useable beyond the software that was once written
>*}> for it.
>This rejoinder, one of only two so far, places
>everything in the "past" tense; and is silent
>with regards to current use and upgrading other
>than to indicate a striking similarity with
>Laura Rogers' positions.

Try very hard Clay to accomplish this task. You
are not doing very well with the basics and yet
you want to be judged an expert on "right and wrong".

Quote:>>It is your needlessly arrogant "tude", instead of a
>>clear, logical and mature defense of your position
>>that I am challenging.
>#}> I see some things seem to never change.
>#}> It's been a few years since I've checked
>#}> in here.  It seems that this Palfrey guy
>#}> has just become more and more arrogant.

Talk about being exposed as a hypocrite, your only
motive in posting was to berate and belittle me.
You have no time in, no use for the Amiga and
have simply chosen this forum to play in.

Quote:>In the words of "Laura Rogers" I'd call this an
>unprovoked "rabid" attack by someone ... to deflect
>the conversation away from the issues at hand onto
>matters best described as being of style and
>personality.
>Clay you are not subtle or sly. You simply hurl your
>brand of garbage hoping for some of it to stick so
>that you can continue your game, whatever that is.

As to the final matter, you again expose yourself for
what you are, a provacateur of the worst sort:

*>>What profound arrogance, based on what, a half a dozen
*>>posts and some distant undocumented past experience you
*>>presume to dissect my motivation, personality and
*>>lifestyle?

*>Wow! Talk about making a mountain out of a mole hill!
*>Why is it that my response to your arrogant blabbering
*>has to be interpreted as a full blown personal attack
*>on poor, young Terry and his whole personality and
*>lifestyle? I don't know you, and so I have no reason to
*>comment on your lifestyle. Even if I did, I wouldn't
*>comment on it.

You lie like a rug Clay. Exactly what did you mean to say
when you typed this little gem and left what I was responding
to so conveniently out of the reply?

*>>>I don't believe that there is any way for any one
*>>>to ever answer you to your satisfaction, since, you
*>>>are the sort of spoiled brat who only wants to hear
*>>>what he likes to hear.  I take it "yes men" are
*>>>your favorite type of company?

What happened to your objective analysis Clay?

*>>It is your needlessly arrogant "tude", instead of a
*>>clear, logical and mature defense of your position
*>>that I am challenging.

Sure you are Clay, with winning lines like this:

*>>you are an arrogant, self-centered person who can
*>>dish it out, but can't take it very well.

You Clay dish it out but don't feel obliged to take
it in any way.

Terry

 
 
 

Clay's feet's new shoes

Post by Clay Ke » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



says...


>Usenet.comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Re: Shoes... <cont>

>>You are a troll Clay, no one can have this type
>>of conversation out to four iterations and not
>>be deliberately pushing it.

If the conversation is out to four iterations is that entirely my fault?
I just keep responding to you.

Quote:>No answer here Clay?

See my above remarks.

Quote:>>Okay, if you say there is a real person at that address
>>and that you are that person even though experience has
>>taught us the exact opposite.

>Slough this one off but I do have the experience to
>make this statement and let me, for the record, assure
>you this is a pleasant change that a real person named
>Clay Kent resides at this account address.

Congratulations!!!  If you are ever in the area, stop by, I'll buy you a beer
or two.

snip.

Quote:>>Come on Clay, describe your Amiga. What do you use it
>>for?

 In a moment, be patient.

Quote:>>Why are you using it and not a clone or apple? Or
>>tell us why you still use it when you have whatever
>>setup you have that *s up your air-tight case of
>>"tude" here by sending e-mail as a default newsgroup
>>posting setting.

I thought we already covered this ground before Terry...I apologized, you
accepted.  What does my setup have to do with my unintentional error?

Snip.

Quote:>*>>It is your needlessly arrogant "tude", instead of a
>*>>clear, logical and mature defense of your position
>*>>that I am challenging.

>Sure you are Clay, with winning lines like this:

>*>>you are an arrogant, self-centered person who can
>*>>dish it out, but can't take it very well.

>You Clay dish it out but don't feel obliged to take
>it in any way.

I have been taking your dribble all along, as well as responding to it. So,
I don't see your point here. You seem to be the one who is getting all worked
up over it all.

I would say that, in all of these posts you have managed to back up my
original statement admirably. All I have had to do is respond to your posts,
and let you do the rest.

But, enough of that. I have thrown a few sincere compliments to you amongst
all of my replies, which I hope you understood. All in all, you certainly
have been a lot more honest than your pal Kent Paul Dolan, who has
continously resorted to a tactic of public post, followed by a mass of ugly
e-mails to me, followed by public posts with his interpretation of what was
said in the e-mails,(without, of course, any of my actual words in the e-mail
conversations, as well as his words, Understandably so, since they would tend
to expose him for what he obviously is).

I'm going to see what you are all about now. I will tell you what computers I
use.  I own an Amiga 1000, (the one that I would never part with for no
amount of money, and the one that is limited to the software that was written
for it), as well as an IBM PS1, (the one that I use to access the internet
and post here in this usenet newsgroup), albeit, it has a different
motherboard in it now.

The Amiga 1000 was the first personal computer that I ever owned. Even though
it only has 512K of RAM, it actually multi-tasks, which is something that the
"Wintel" systems still can not do in any real sense. They tend to lock up
frequently.  I can remember when 1 Mb of memory was the goal. Of course, now
a days, 1 Mb of RAM isn't anything. I joined the Air Force and was stationed
in Spain. I can remember the BX was selling the Amiga 500 with 1Mb included,
but unfortunately, I never could afford it due to my low rank and pay at the
time.  My problem with the Amiga worsened when I returned back stateside. I
couldn't find anything anywhere for the Amiga.  The IBM PC clones dominated
everything. Believe it or not, I wanted to continue with the Amiga but soon I
found myself with an old Amiga and no way out but to buy an IBM machine.

I don't claim to be an expert on the history of the Amiga, so don't take what
I am about to say in that vein, but, my take on the Amiga runs along these
lines.. . the Commodore corporation had a gem on their hands, but had no real
clue on how to effectively market it. I believe that the lack of a sufficent
amout of software development doomed it. I'm not trying to slight the
software developers for the Amiga here in any way. Those that supported the
Amiga did an outstanding job, but not enough developers appeared on the scene
to compete with the Microsoft gang.

As much as many don't like Bill Gates, one thing is clear; he had the
foresight it took to recognize that the personal computer would one day enter
the business world. So, he jumped on his vision, and tailored his software
products for the PC to suit a business use. Commodore and Apple, either,
didn't have the same vision, or were slower than Gates to cash in.  In the
end Gates/Intel won.  The Apple, apart from school contracts, and avid users,
struggles to hang on.

The Amiga, in my understanding, has changed hands through several companies,
like Escom and others, throughout the years, with each one promising to
revive the Amiga, but failing to follow through.  The last that I heard, was
that Gateway bought the rights to the Amiga. I suspect that Gateway will
probably do no more than cannabilize it.  As much as I would wish to the
contrary, I doubt the Amiga will ever come back out on the market as a viable
player.

It's ashame really.  On a scale of one to ten, where the computer industry is
now, in terms of capability and power, we are at a four, at best, compared to
where we would be if the Amiga had been backed properly and had been the
dominate pc on the market.  I am by no means a fan of the Wintel machine,
but, in my situation, I really don't see where I have any choice in the
matter.  Gates has made that choice for the many.  I was a little hopeful
earlier that the U.S. Government would bust up Microsoft, charging it for
what if is a monopoly, (over the Internet Brower, O/S scandal), but in the
end, it appears that Gates will walk away scott free. This is a travesty that
we will all pay for.

I haven't really given up on the Amiga. It is my hope that some day I will
have enough money to purchase, (as soon as I found out where) the most recent
Amiga available.  I have always been impressed with the Amiga's power and
design.  ADOS definately "kicks the snot" out of MSDOS.  It's like the
difference between driving a Yugo and a Porche.

Here it is for you Terry. Have some real fun now with trashing this
newbie/looser.

Clay