Dead??

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

How did this newsgroup died? It was dynamic with lots of posts, WHAT
HAPPENED????
37 answers Last reply
More about dead
  1. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

    Sam Sloan and his neverending shitstorming.


    On 7/30/05 4:37 PM, in article mdUGe.101$nK3.46@read1.cgocable.net, "Pierre
    Desmarais" <pierrede@9bit.com> wrote:

    > How did this newsgroup died? It was dynamic with lots of posts, WHAT
    > HAPPENED????
    >
    >
  2. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

    Pierre Desmarais wrote:
    > How did this newsgroup died? It was dynamic with lots of posts, WHAT
    > HAPPENED????
    >
    >
    Computer chess has become Passe !
  3. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

    Pierre Desmarais wrote:

    >How did this newsgroup died? It was dynamic with lots of posts, WHAT
    >HAPPENED????

    Sam Sloan killed it. Make sure you register your appreciation
    if he ever manages to get his name on a chess federation ballot.
  4. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

    "Pierre Desmarais" <pierrede@9bit.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
    news:mdUGe.101$nK3.46@read1.cgocable.net...
    > How did this newsgroup died? It was dynamic with lots of posts, WHAT
    > HAPPENED????

    It's summer... better to go around than use computers...

    Luigi Caselli
  5. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

    Tell us more about your experience playing against computers,
    but please don't mention He Who Must Not Be Named again... :)
  6. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

    "clarkbarr" <clarkbarr@comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:BF115F4E.805F%clarkbarr@comcast.net...
    > Sam Sloan and his neverending shitstorming.


    and don't forget Ray Gordon
  7. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

    maybe this newsgroup is dead due to a few stalkers who appeared in the
    last 9 years.

    but computerchess is not dead.

    in the moment computerchess is at the peak of the mountain.

    we have new OPEN SOURCE chess programs with enormous strength for free,
    there is a championship in iceland (maybe Bobby fischer joins it :-))
    and there are Chess 960 (Fischer Chess) events.

    I guess many people moved to CCC, a moderated newsgroup
    with password. the reason is that in this newsgroup many anonymous
    idiots made it for a long time impossible to talk about computerchess.
    instead they talked about off topic things.
    this is stalking.
  8. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

    "Guy Macon" <_see.web.page_@_www.guymacon.com_> wrote in
    >
    > Pierre Desmarais wrote:
    >
    > >How did this newsgroup died? It was dynamic with lots of posts, WHAT
    > >HAPPENED????
    >
    > Sam Sloan killed it. Make sure you register your appreciation
    > if he ever manages to get his name on a chess federation ballot.
    >

    He might have been a catalyst but it'd take more than one person to empty r.g.c.c.

    I haven't posted in years, back when Jeroen was here, I just noticed my message didn't scroll all day and
    checked the dates, I was about to post "when did this forum die?" and saw this thread.

    Anyway, come one come all!

    www.ch3ss.com
    A good game of chess and emoticons are inseperable!

    Herc
  9. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

    >
    > I haven't posted in years, back when Jeroen was here, I just noticed my
    > message didn't scroll all day and
    > checked the dates, I was about to post "when did this forum die?" and saw
    > this thread.
    >

    FYI: I assume it's the same person: a guy name Jeroen hangs around
    www.playchess.de
  10. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

    <mclanecxantia@aol.com> wrote:
    > the reason is that in this newsgroup many anonymous idiots made it for a
    > long time impossible to talk about computerchess. instead they talked
    > about off topic things. this is stalking.


    No, stalking is following somebody around threateningly. Off-topic
    posting is off-topic posting.


    Dave.

    --
    David Richerby Miniature Sumerian Hi-Fi (TM): it's
    www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ like a music system that's really old
    but you can hold in it your hand!
  11. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

    "David Richerby" <davidr@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in
    > <mclanecxantia@aol.com> wrote:
    > > the reason is that in this newsgroup many anonymous idiots made it for a
    > > long time impossible to talk about computerchess. instead they talked
    > > about off topic things. this is stalking.
    >
    >
    > No, stalking is following somebody around threateningly. Off-topic
    > posting is off-topic posting.
    >
    >
    > Dave.

    I've had 2 stalking charges, one person I hadn't seen in 8 years and another I'd never met.

    In NSW its 'intimidation', in QLD its 'causing apprehension', the other checks are just 'one more than one
    occasion' and 'communicated with', so you can definately get charged for stalking for email and letters,
    newsgroups wouldn't be far off. Of course you have to be a woman or a CEO to get the charge turned to
    arrest.

    Hey anybody try my tournament site... no signup just play and watch games (when its busy)
    www.CH3SS.com

    Herc
  12. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

    |-|erc <h@r.c> wrote:
    > David Richerby <davidr@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in
    >> <mclanecxantia@aol.com> wrote:
    >>> the reason is that in this newsgroup many anonymous idiots made it for a
    >>> long time impossible to talk about computerchess. instead they talked
    >>> about off topic things. this is stalking.
    >>
    >> No, stalking is following somebody around threateningly. Off-topic
    >> posting is off-topic posting.
    >
    > [...]
    > In NSW its 'intimidation', in QLD its 'causing apprehension', the other
    > checks are just 'one more than one occasion' and 'communicated with', so
    > you can definately get charged for stalking for email and letters,
    > newsgroups wouldn't be far off.

    I'm not commenting on whether or not newsgroup postings can constitute
    stalking. I'm pointing out that off-topic posting does not, in and of
    itself, constitute stalking.


    Dave.

    --
    David Richerby Dangerous Umbrella (TM): it's like
    www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ an umbrella but it could explode at
    any minute!
  13. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    I'm debating whether he's thick or sick and have to use both terms in
    descibing this rabid loser
  14. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

    "David Richerby" <davidr@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in
    > |-|erc <h@r.c> wrote:
    > > David Richerby <davidr@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in
    > >> <mclanecxantia@aol.com> wrote:
    > >>> the reason is that in this newsgroup many anonymous idiots made it for a
    > >>> long time impossible to talk about computerchess. instead they talked
    > >>> about off topic things. this is stalking.
    > >>
    > >> No, stalking is following somebody around threateningly. Off-topic
    > >> posting is off-topic posting.
    > >
    > > [...]
    > > In NSW its 'intimidation', in QLD its 'causing apprehension', the other
    > > checks are just 'one more than one occasion' and 'communicated with', so
    > > you can definately get charged for stalking for email and letters,
    > > newsgroups wouldn't be far off.
    >
    > I'm not commenting on whether or not newsgroup postings can constitute
    > stalking. I'm pointing out that off-topic posting does not, in and of
    > itself, constitute stalking.

    In context you were saying "making it impossible for others to talk on topic", "over a long period of time"
    does not constitute stalking but it can. In fact those are very close to 2 of the options on the charge
    sheet.

    You need 3 factors.

    The accused :
    1/ Repeating over a period of time

    Did the following (tick one)
    2/
    a/ FOLLOWED
    b/ HIT
    c/ RESTRAINED
    d/ COMMUNICATED WITH
    e/ INTIMIDATED

    Resulting in (tick one)
    3/
    a/ hospitalisation
    b/ injury
    c/ trauma
    d/ the victim was apprehensive


    I got arrested for sending about 4 letters to a girl asking her out.

    The police spent an hour going through the charge sheet in the interview....
    NOW YOU ADMIT YOU COMMUNICATED WITH HER?
    yes
    ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION
    yes
    AND IT MADE HER APPREHENSIVE
    yes

    OK GOT IT! YOU JUST CONFESSED TO STALKING!

    NO bull! I asked for the interview tape later but they LOST it!
    Judge let me go since the only exhibit was a love letter and receipt for flower delivery.

    Herc
  15. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    Why on Earth are you crossposting my posts back to sci.skeptic?

    Notice Barry Williams, the CEO who made the bogus charges... the 'extortion' demand was actuallly "please
    reply in a day or two", was exposed on A Current Affair when they cheated, lied to and abused the next
    applicant after me!

    http://www.skeptics.com.au/media/030620aca.htm
    Media Release
    The Things that You're Liable to See on the Box that Ain't Necessarily So
    June 20, 2003
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The plain facts about Australian Skeptics' testing of Dennis Puffet on A Current Affair

    TV viewers who saw a story on A Current Affair (ACA) on Tuesday, June 17 might have been left with the
    impression that Australian Skeptics (AS) had "backed-down" from testing

    None of this went to air. In fact, of all the things Richard said on-camera, the only thing he was shown
    saying was that we did not want to be seen to be hounding a deluded individual.

    Herc
    www.CH3SS.com
    play nice, or play not at all
  16. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 09:35:30 +1000, "|-|erc" <h@r.c> wrote:

    >Why on Earth are you crossposting my posts back to sci.skeptic?


    Because you are on topic. You are also on topic in alt.usenet.kooks,
    even though you are "formosa'd"

    >
    >Notice Barry Williams, the CEO who made the bogus charges... the 'extortion' demand was actuallly "please
    >reply in a day or two", was exposed on A Current Affair when they cheated, lied to and abused the next
    >applicant after me!

    Incorrect, you sick whacko. The ACA was a beat-up, and anyone with
    more than a single brain cell knows this. That leaves you out.


    >
    >http://www.skeptics.com.au/media/030620aca.htm
    >Media Release
    >The Things that You're Liable to See on the Box that Ain't Necessarily So
    >June 20, 2003
    >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >The plain facts about Australian Skeptics' testing of Dennis Puffet on A Current Affair
    >
    >TV viewers who saw a story on A Current Affair (ACA) on Tuesday, June 17 might have been left with the
    >impression that Australian Skeptics (AS) had "backed-down" from testing
    >
    >None of this went to air. In fact, of all the things Richard said on-camera, the only thing he was shown
    >saying was that we did not want to be seen to be hounding a deluded individual.
    >
    >Herc
    >www.CH3SS.com
    >play nice, or play not at all
    >
    --

    Read all about Australia's biggest doomsday cult:
    http://users.bigpond.net.au/wanglese/pebble.htm

    "You can't fool me, it's turtles all the way down"
  17. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    It is fascinating how lunatics see themselves !

    |-|erc wrote:
    > Don't listen to 'em r.g.c.c! R.g.c.c is where I 1st came into force onto
    > usenet some years ago and unfortunately the skeptic menace has tainted my
    > long due return. Luckily they've moved to safer moderated grounds.
    >
    > These guys stalking me on usenet are true lunatics, Wally is almost famous
    > for his "scientific viewpoints" in alt.astrology, whether they're wanted or
    > not!
    >
    > Results 1 - 10 of about 671,000 for author:anglesea KOOK
    >
    > Wally Anglesea, a kookaburra in his former life.
    >
    > Yes I do post amazing claims on usenet, maybe you should start listening to
    > them.
    >
    > Herc
  18. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    |-|erc wrote:
    > "Cardinal Chunder" <cc@foo.no.spam.xyzabcfghllaa.com> wrote in
    > > |-|erc wrote:
    > > > Don't listen to 'em r.g.c.c! R.g.c.c is where I 1st came into force
    > onto
    > > > usenet some years ago and unfortunately the skeptic menace has tainted
    > my
    > > > long due return. Luckily they've moved to safer moderated grounds.
    > >
    > > The "skeptic menace" as you put it is people who have viewed your
    > > insanity and chosen to reply and say as much.
    > >
    > > I have no idea what you're blabbering about "safer moderated grounds" for.
    > >
    > > > These guys stalking me on usenet are true lunatics,
    > >
    > > Since when is responding to occasional posts by yourself to a group I
    > > happen to read regarded as stalking?
    > >
    > > I wouldn't even have a clue about your latest newsgroup foray if someone
    > > hadn't crossposted it to this group.
    > >
    > > > Wally is almost famous
    > > > for his "scientific viewpoints" in alt.astrology, whether they're wanted
    > or
    > > > not!
    > >
    > > Who are you to judge when something is wanted and when it is not?
    > >
    > > > Results 1 - 10 of about 671,000 for author:anglesea KOOK
    > > >
    > > > Wally Anglesea, a kookaburra in his former life.
    > >
    > > Or a kookologist in this life.
    > >
    > > Have you conducted similar searches for Herc & schizophrenic?
    > >
    > > > Yes I do post amazing claims on usenet, maybe you should start listening
    > to
    > > > them.
    > > >
    > > > Herc
    > >
    > > We do listen to them. We even ask you for evidence to back up your
    > > claims. None is forthcoming.
    > >
    > > Remember when you claimed there was a 24 hour CIA radio station
    > > broadcasting to you and I asked you to tape a bit of and web it up?
    > >
    > > Where's that tape Herc?
    >
    > I asked my lawyer for the police interview tape and he made me write an
    > official request, then he wrote back saying there was no tape in storage.
    >
    > how sensitive are MP3 voice recorders to ambient noise? high on my shopping
    > list so probably later this year if they work.
    >
    and he's going to buy it from Dick Smiths.....
  19. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    "Ú" <=?ISO-8859-1?B? E gLaA=?=> wrote in message
    news:11flle852kued8d@corp.supernews.com...
    >
    >
    > |-|erc the Jerk wrote:
    >>"...we did not want to be seen to be hounding a deluded individual..."
    >
    > That was nice of them. However, this is Usenet. We **SPECIALIZE**
    > in hounding deluded individuals! Stop posting if you don't like it.
    >
    That's a keeper...
  20. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    "Don Freeman" <freemand@sonic.net> wrote in message
    news:YGMKe.8694$p%3.36287@typhoon.sonic.net...
    >
    > "Ú" <=?ISO-8859-1?B? E gLaA=?=> wrote in message
    > news:11flle852kued8d@corp.supernews.com...
    >>
    >>
    >> |-|erc the Jerk wrote:
    >>>"...we did not want to be seen to be hounding a deluded individual..."
    >>
    >> That was nice of them. However, this is Usenet. We **SPECIALIZE**
    >> in hounding deluded individuals! Stop posting if you don't like it.
    >>
    > That's a keeper...
    >
    Consider it stolen:
    -Don
    --
    "However, this is Usenet. We **SPECIALIZE**
    in hounding deluded individuals!"
    -Ú explains the facts of life to one more deluded individual
  21. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    "|-|erc" <h@r.c> wrote in message
    news:42fb1bec$0$15633$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
    >
    > Yes I do post amazing claims on usenet, maybe you should start listening
    > to
    > them.
    >
    > Herc

    Sorry, left my tin foil hat at the laundry, maybe next time...
    --
    "However, this is Usenet. We **SPECIALIZE**
    in hounding deluded individuals!"
    -Ú explains the facts of life to one more deluded individual
  22. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    "Don Freeman"

    interesting name, numerologically.

    > "However, this is Usenet. We **SPECIALIZE**
    > in hounding deluded individuals!"

    fitting

    Herc
  23. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    "|-|erc" <h@r.c> wrote in message
    news:42fc07e7$0$21593$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
    > "Don Freeman"
    >
    > interesting name, numerologically.
    >
    I know I am going to be sorry I asked this but I ...
    Can't....Help....Myself...:

    How so?
  24. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    Quite agree. I always understood numerology to involve numbers. I was
    expecting some convoluted code to "prove" Don's name added up to 666 or
    similar. I have to say that I am dissapointed. Trying to claim Don
    sounds like Don't is limp even by Herc's standard.
  25. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    "Don Freeman" <freemand@sonic.net> wrote in
    >
    > "|-|erc" <h@r.c> wrote in message
    > > "Don Freeman"
    > >
    > > interesting name, numerologically.
    > >
    > I know I am going to be sorry I asked this but I ...
    > Can't....Help....Myself...:
    >
    > How so?

    Your surname is a phrase "free man", and if you say your name fast, it
    sounds like DONT FREE MAN.

    Now examine your sig:

    "However, this is Usenet. We **SPECIALIZE**
    in hounding deluded individuals!"

    So, your destiny is entangled with your name. Now you can all deny...
    *persecuting people as a directive*
    is not really your sig, theme, or name, but then it would be you who is
    deluding yourself.

    Herc
  26. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    "|-|erc" <h@r.c> wrote in message
    news:42fd29cc$0$83861$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
    > "Don Freeman" <freemand@sonic.net> wrote in
    >>
    >> "|-|erc" <h@r.c> wrote in message
    >> > "Don Freeman"
    >> >
    >> > interesting name, numerologically.
    >> >
    >> I know I am going to be sorry I asked this but I ...
    >> Can't....Help....Myself...:
    >>
    >> How so?
    >
    > Your surname is a phrase "free man", and if you say your name fast, it
    > sounds like DONT FREE MAN.
    >
    (Yeah I knew it, I'm sorry already) How the hell does that have anything
    remotely connected to numerology in it? Other then that fact that it and
    your explanation are nothing but complete gibberish.
  27. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    |-|erc the Jerk wrote:

    >Now examine your sig:
    >
    >"However, this is Usenet. We **SPECIALIZE** in hounding deluded
    >individuals!"

    >is not really your sig

    Sure it is. I hereby give the esteemed Don Freeman all rights and
    full ownership of the phrase "This is Usenet. We **SPECIALIZE**
    in hounding deluded individuals!" and all derivitive phrases.
    While I may have written it first, I based it on Don Freeman's
    excellent posts, so he deserves full credit.

    It also reflects a basic reality that you, being a deluded individual,
    should be well aware of. Actions have consequences, and your actions
    (posting whackjob rants about Truman sattelites and making death threats)
    have the consequence you being verbally abused on Usenet and of you being
    locked up - again. You like being in jail, loser? Just keep it up!

    --
    "This is Usenet. We **SPECIALIZE** in hounding deluded individuals!"
    -Copyright (C) 2005 Don Freeman; all rights reserved.
  28. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    "Don Freeman" <freemand@sonic.net> wrote in
    > > "Don Freeman" <freemand@sonic.net> wrote in
    > >>
    > >> "|-|erc" <h@r.c> wrote in message
    > >> > "Don Freeman"
    > >> >
    > >> > interesting name, numerologically.
    > >> >
    > >> I know I am going to be sorry I asked this but I ...
    > >> Can't....Help....Myself...:
    > >>
    > >> How so?
    > >
    > > Your surname is a phrase "free man", and if you say your name fast, it
    > > sounds like DONT FREE MAN.
    > >
    > (Yeah I knew it, I'm sorry already) How the hell does that have anything
    > remotely connected to numerology in it? Other then that fact that it and
    > your explanation are nothing but complete gibberish.

    How is it gibberish? Just point out the 1st part that you don't understand.

    > > Your surname is a phrase "free man"
    DID YOU GET THIS FAR?

    Herc
  29. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    E wrote:
    > |-|erc the Jerk wrote:
    >
    > >Now examine your sig:
    > >
    > >"However, this is Usenet. We **SPECIALIZE** in hounding deluded
    > >individuals!"
    >
    > >is not really your sig
    >
    > Sure it is. I hereby give the esteemed Don Freeman all rights and
    > full ownership of the phrase "This is Usenet. We **SPECIALIZE**
    > in hounding deluded individuals!" and all derivitive phrases.
    > While I may have written it first, I based it on Don Freeman's
    > excellent posts, so he deserves full credit.
    >
    > It also reflects a basic reality that you, being a deluded individual,
    > should be well aware of. Actions have consequences, and your actions
    > (posting whackjob rants about Truman sattelites and making death threats)
    > have the consequence you being verbally abused on Usenet and of you being
    > locked up - again. You like being in jail, loser? Just keep it up!

    Well. Prison is where his 'special' friend is.
    Its where he knows some-one whos a bigger pain in the arse than he is
    I had this quaint idea that numerology was about numbers.
    As do things like dictionaries


    Really great sig left in


    "This is Usenet. We **SPECIALIZE** in hounding deluded individuals!"
    -Copyright (C) 2005 Don Freeman; all rights reserved.
  30. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    <Ú> wrote in
    > It also reflects a basic reality that you, being a deluded individual,
    > should be well aware of. Actions have consequences, and your actions
    > (posting whackjob rants about Truman sattelites and making death threats)
    > have the consequence you being verbally abused on Usenet and of you being
    > locked up - again. You like being in jail, loser? Just keep it up!
    >

    you do care!

    Herc
  31. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 16:00:15 -0700, atlas@plats.map wrote:

    :
    >directed at me, and host of other people. I would have been concerned but
    >Coop couldn't buy a ticket to the US.

    Pity.
    We really want to see the back of this dangerous loon down here.

    Guantanamo Bay, perhaps?

    Now there's something that the US Army could do,
    that would win them a lot of good publicity.
    Bob knows that they desperately need some...
  32. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    Michael Gray wrote:
    >
    >We really want to see the back of this dangerous loon down here.
    >
    >Guantanamo Bay, perhaps?
    >
    >Now there's something that the US Army could do,
    >that would win them a lot of good publicity.
    >Bob knows that they desperately need some...

    "It turns out that human communication includes a sideband of
    non-verbal cues and without those, people's ability to avoid
    arguing is impaired. Also, online there are no consequences
    to calling someone a half-shaven chimpanzee with delusions of
    habilitry [1], whereas face to face there may be. Do not, for
    example, use the phrase "you moron" when explaining to a half-
    naked crazed drug user that the device that he is currently
    trying to shoot you with is not, in fact, a gun.

    "There's a classic study from the late '80s, early '90s where
    groups were given a problem to solve. One set was in the same
    room, the other on terminals. The first group came up with a
    solution whereas if I recall correctly the second group not
    only failed but the disagreements were so acrimonious that
    some of the members had to be removed from the building through
    seperate doors."

    "1: The exception is threatening the President of the United
    States, which can produce real world results in a suprisingly
    short time."
    -James Nicoll
  33. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    atlas@plats.map wrote:

    > I would think he could fly to Canada and crossover to the US without
    > hinderance, couldn't he?
    >
    > I think people in the UK don't need visa or passports to move from the
    > different segment of the Old British Empire.
    >

    I doubt it. My experience of crossing over from Canada to the US is that
    it is little different from flying in. You get printed, photographed and
    then your passport is stamped.

    Once you get the entry visa it's easy enough to pass back and forth, at
    least on foot since the visa is good for 90 days I think. I walked back
    between Canada & US a good number of times. To be honest upstate New
    York and Niagara Falls US is a shithole in case you're ever tempted to
    cross that way, but there is a pretty good outlet mall a couple of bus
    rides away on the US side. I also won a lot of money in the Seneca
    casino so I can't complain :)

    Australia is probably in the visa waiver programme, so if Herc got
    himself a passport he could just turn up and be let in. There are some
    questions on the back of the card but it would be easy enough to lie.

    This assumes he were allowed to fly by Qantas et al (whose systems might
    be plugged into a domestic nut database), and he could control himself
    the whole time.

    Then there is the small matter of convincing US customs that he was just
    a tourist. This in itself might be an insurmountable hurdle for Mr Herc
    since he may have to provide proof of a place to stay, cash, credit
    cards etc.
  34. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    "|-|erc" <h@r.c> wrote in message
    news:430278b1$0$54103$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...

    I'll give you free time soon so make the most of it.
    >

    Don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out.
  35. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    |-|erc wrote:

    >I'll give you free time soon so make the most of it.

    "In the clearing stands a boxer,
    and a fighter by his trade.
    And he carries the reminders,
    of every glove that layed him down,
    or cut him till he cried out,
    in his anger and his shame;
    "I am leaving, I am leaving",
    But the fighter still remains..."

    -_The Boxer_, by Simon & Garfunkel
  36. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    "Don Freeman" <freemand@sonic.net> wrote in
    >
    > "|-|erc" <h@r.c> wrote in message >
    > I'll give you free time soon so make the most of it.
    > >
    >
    > Don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out.

    HUH? Don't fall in a heap as you all run to the door after me, crossposting
    back to sci.skeptic
    Sci.skeptic : come back come back... everyone crosspost herc back to
    sci.skeptic

    you're nothing short of an orgy of poofters into molesting little astrology
    believers.

    Herc
  37. Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer,sci.skeptic (More info?)

    |-|erc the Jerk (Graham Andrew Cooper) wrote:

    >"Cardinal Chunder" <cc@foo.no.spam.xyzabcfghllaa.com> wrote in
    >>
    >> You mean challenging by threatening to slit someone's throat? Stealing
    >> your neighbour's mail? Threatening to kill cops? Ranting incoherently
    >> over various women?
    >
    >None of which happened.

    Bullshit. Your posts are all archived and the URLs to them have been
    published many times.

    >I was discussing diplomatic immunity and your gang of cowards all
    >abused me constantly saying "now threaten me, now threaten me",

    Changing your story AGAIN??? Which is it, you never made the threats
    or you did make the threats and were justified because someone taunted
    you? Pick a story and stick with it, please.

    >all based on the incident when police commited fraud by rewriting
    >some emails I wrote.

    Ah. The OJ Simpson defense; "the police framed me, so of course
    there is abundant evidence of my guilt." Sorry, kook - The UK
    ain't hollywood and you ain't a celebrity.

    Try to enter the US now that I have forwarded your death threat
    against a politician and your threat to put poison in the food
    supply to the Dept. of Homeland Security, and you just might be
    a celebrity in your cell in Guantonomo Bay... BWAHAHAHAHA!!!
Ask a new question

Read More

PC gaming Newsgroup Games Computers Video Games