| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 23 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 49:54:41 |
| Calls: | 583 |
| Files: | 1,138 |
| Messages: | 111,303 |
On 2025-08-25, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 08:50:55 +0100, "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk>
wrote:
On 25/08/2025 01:47, Brock McNuggets wrote:
But the MID is listed there. You missed the message -- which is
fair enough.
The post should still be showing on all of the Usenet servers!
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 04:27:04 -0000 (UTC)
From: Gremlin <nobody@haph.org>
Newsgroups: alt.computer.workshop
Subject: Re: SNIT Lying about his criminal record. THE entire thread >>>with all in context.
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 04:27:04 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <XnsB2A5496F48E7HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>
References: <MPG.4212f9f9770e054b989807@news.giganews.com> >>><67aa4032$12$2757$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> >>><XnsB29FDEFBF81BFHT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5> >>><67d10034$2$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 05:27:06 +0100 (CET)
A link to the "original thread" (dated 3/17/25) was found. >><<https://groups.google.com/g/alt.computer.workshop/c/S-pznwmU_pg/m/okO >>iQG9qAAAJ>
It contains this description of the same unsourced list as was posted
here.
---
Please be aware of the following limitations of the case records
displayed:
-o The information may not be a current, accurate, or complete record
of
the case.
-o The information is subject to change at any time.
-o The information is not the official record of the court.
-o Not all cases from a participating court may be included.
-o The information should not be used as a substitute for a thorough
background search of official public records.
---
I read to the end and the post looks like more of the same bullshit
I've been seeing here in this group. A recent post here is almost a
word for word repost of that thread and proved nothing.
Some moron claimed that Snit wasn't being doxxed, all the info about
him was publicly available or found using stuff Snit posted himself.
This is why I'm so very careful to post as little PII as possible
about myself. Snit, I'm terribly sorry you got doxxed but it appears
you gave them enough ammo to find their target.
Now, you girls need to go get a room, or maybe your own NG. Neither
side of the argument has proven anything. A jury of 12 would acquit
Snit of being a troll since there is nothing but personal attacks on
him and questionable documentation of information which, frankly, has
nothing to do with Usenet trolling.
The fact that so many posters and socks are so obsessed with him
tells me these folks lack drama in their lives. I find that true of
Trump voters as well. They seem to have mistaken the American
political process for the latest season of The Apprentice and lacking
anything else to do, are taking their frustrations out on an accused
troll.
You miss one important point and that is those one hit wonder trolls
could easily be snit.
This is exactly how he behaved in CSMA years ago when he was, and
still is, shunned. Snit opened his sock drawer and the puppets
appeared all over the place.
At one point snit had so many socks talking to each other it was like
a troll farm in real life.
Another point you fail at is that snit doesn't care if a person or one
of his socks agrees or disagrees with him.
All he craves is the attention and the need to control the chaos.
snit's socks were conversing, arguing, agreeing with each other
up until the point where nobody but snit and his sock puppets were
left because they were all ignored and snit had no choice but to leave
CSMA at which point snit moved on to COLA and other Linux groups.
I dare you to ask in COLA, CSMA, alt.linux,alt.os.linux about snit and
see what replies you get, if any.......To most people snit is a pariah
that folks are not interested in discussing however try it.
Let's see if you have the nerve.
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote in
news:108ijes$3lakm$3@dont-email.me:
On 2025-08-25, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 08:50:55 +0100, "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk>
wrote:
On 25/08/2025 01:47, Brock McNuggets wrote:
But the MID is listed there. You missed the message -- which is
fair enough.
The post should still be showing on all of the Usenet servers!
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 04:27:04 -0000 (UTC)
From: Gremlin <nobody@haph.org>
Newsgroups: alt.computer.workshop
Subject: Re: SNIT Lying about his criminal record. THE entire thread >>>>with all in context.
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 04:27:04 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <XnsB2A5496F48E7HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>
References: <MPG.4212f9f9770e054b989807@news.giganews.com> >>>><67aa4032$12$2757$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> >>>><XnsB29FDEFBF81BFHT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5> >>>><67d10034$2$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 05:27:06 +0100 (CET)
A link to the "original thread" (dated 3/17/25) was found. >>><<https://groups.google.com/g/alt.computer.workshop/c/S-pznwmU_pg/m/okO >>>iQG9qAAAJ>
It contains this description of the same unsourced list as was posted
here.
---
Please be aware of the following limitations of the case records
displayed:
-o The information may not be a current, accurate, or complete record
of
the case.
-o The information is subject to change at any time.
-o The information is not the official record of the court.
-o Not all cases from a participating court may be included.
-o The information should not be used as a substitute for a thorough
background search of official public records.
---
I read to the end and the post looks like more of the same bullshit
I've been seeing here in this group. A recent post here is almost a
word for word repost of that thread and proved nothing.
Some moron claimed that Snit wasn't being doxxed, all the info about
him was publicly available or found using stuff Snit posted himself.
This is why I'm so very careful to post as little PII as possible
about myself. Snit, I'm terribly sorry you got doxxed but it appears
you gave them enough ammo to find their target.
Now, you girls need to go get a room, or maybe your own NG. Neither
side of the argument has proven anything. A jury of 12 would acquit
Snit of being a troll since there is nothing but personal attacks on
him and questionable documentation of information which, frankly, has
nothing to do with Usenet trolling.
The fact that so many posters and socks are so obsessed with him
tells me these folks lack drama in their lives. I find that true of
Trump voters as well. They seem to have mistaken the American
political process for the latest season of The Apprentice and lacking
anything else to do, are taking their frustrations out on an accused
troll.
You miss one important point and that is those one hit wonder trolls
could easily be snit.
This is exactly how he behaved in CSMA years ago when he was, and
still is, shunned. Snit opened his sock drawer and the puppets
appeared all over the place.
At one point snit had so many socks talking to each other it was like
a troll farm in real life.
Another point you fail at is that snit doesn't care if a person or one
of his socks agrees or disagrees with him.
All he craves is the attention and the need to control the chaos.
snit's socks were conversing, arguing, agreeing with each other
up until the point where nobody but snit and his sock puppets were
left because they were all ignored and snit had no choice but to leave
CSMA at which point snit moved on to COLA and other Linux groups.
I dare you to ask in COLA, CSMA, alt.linux,alt.os.linux about snit and
see what replies you get, if any.......To most people snit is a pariah
that folks are not interested in discussing however try it.
Let's see if you have the nerve.
I used to post as Lund in the comp.sys.mac.advocacy group about 20 years
ago and I remember snit quite well.
He was despised by pretty much everyone but another poster named sandman
(I think?) took particular delight in exposing snit as a troll.
Not that it matters but whatever you dig up on the Internet about snit is >probably mostly true.
Not all of it of course, but the key points are certainly true.
Unless he has changed his ways, I would avoid snit at all costs because
he is highly toxic.
There is another well known poster, Steve something or other that many in >the group suspected was a snit sock but never proven although snit used
many sock puppets back then.
It's sad to see he hasn't croaked because snit is a despicable
individual.
Do your own research.
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote in
news:108ijes$3lakm$3@dont-email.me:
On 2025-08-25, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 08:50:55 +0100, "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk>
wrote:
On 25/08/2025 01:47, Brock McNuggets wrote:
But the MID is listed there. You missed the message -- which is
fair enough.
The post should still be showing on all of the Usenet servers!
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 04:27:04 -0000 (UTC)
From: Gremlin <nobody@haph.org>
Newsgroups: alt.computer.workshop
Subject: Re: SNIT Lying about his criminal record. THE entire thread
with all in context.
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 04:27:04 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <XnsB2A5496F48E7HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>
References: <MPG.4212f9f9770e054b989807@news.giganews.com>
<67aa4032$12$2757$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
<XnsB29FDEFBF81BFHT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>
<67d10034$2$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 05:27:06 +0100 (CET)
A link to the "original thread" (dated 3/17/25) was found.
<<https://groups.google.com/g/alt.computer.workshop/c/S-pznwmU_pg/m/okOiQG9qAAAJ>
It contains this description of the same unsourced list as was posted
here.
---
Please be aware of the following limitations of the case records
displayed:
-o The information may not be a current, accurate, or complete record
of
the case.
-o The information is subject to change at any time.
-o The information is not the official record of the court.
-o Not all cases from a participating court may be included.
-o The information should not be used as a substitute for a thorough
background search of official public records.
---
I read to the end and the post looks like more of the same bullshit
I've been seeing here in this group. A recent post here is almost a
word for word repost of that thread and proved nothing.
Some moron claimed that Snit wasn't being doxxed, all the info about
him was publicly available or found using stuff Snit posted himself.
This is why I'm so very careful to post as little PII as possible
about myself. Snit, I'm terribly sorry you got doxxed but it appears
you gave them enough ammo to find their target.
Now, you girls need to go get a room, or maybe your own NG. Neither
side of the argument has proven anything. A jury of 12 would acquit
Snit of being a troll since there is nothing but personal attacks on
him and questionable documentation of information which, frankly, has
nothing to do with Usenet trolling.
The fact that so many posters and socks are so obsessed with him
tells me these folks lack drama in their lives. I find that true of
Trump voters as well. They seem to have mistaken the American
political process for the latest season of The Apprentice and lacking
anything else to do, are taking their frustrations out on an accused
troll.
You miss one important point and that is those one hit wonder trolls
could easily be snit.
This is exactly how he behaved in CSMA years ago when he was, and
still is, shunned. Snit opened his sock drawer and the puppets
appeared all over the place.
At one point snit had so many socks talking to each other it was like
a troll farm in real life.
Another point you fail at is that snit doesn't care if a person or one
of his socks agrees or disagrees with him.
All he craves is the attention and the need to control the chaos.
snit's socks were conversing, arguing, agreeing with each other
up until the point where nobody but snit and his sock puppets were
left because they were all ignored and snit had no choice but to leave
CSMA at which point snit moved on to COLA and other Linux groups.
I dare you to ask in COLA, CSMA, alt.linux,alt.os.linux about snit and
see what replies you get, if any.......To most people snit is a pariah
that folks are not interested in discussing however try it.
Let's see if you have the nerve.
I used to post as Lund in the comp.sys.mac.advocacy group about 20 years
ago and I remember snit quite well.
He was despised by pretty much everyone but another poster named sandman
(I think?) took particular delight in exposing snit as a troll.
Not that it matters but whatever you dig up on the Internet about snit is probably mostly true.
Not all of it of course, but the key points are certainly true.
Unless he has changed his ways, I would avoid snit at all costs because
he is highly toxic.
There is another well known poster, Steve something or other that many in
the group suspected was a snit sock but never proven although snit used
many sock puppets back then.
It's sad to see he hasn't croaked because snit is a despicable
individual.
Do your own research.
On 26 Aug 2025 00:56:53 GMT, Octal <octalfortitude@binary.net> wrote:
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote in >>news:108ijes$3lakm$3@dont-email.me:
On 2025-08-25, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 08:50:55 +0100, "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk>
wrote:
On 25/08/2025 01:47, Brock McNuggets wrote:
But the MID is listed there. You missed the message -- which is
fair enough.
The post should still be showing on all of the Usenet servers!
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 04:27:04 -0000 (UTC)
From: Gremlin <nobody@haph.org>
Newsgroups: alt.computer.workshop
Subject: Re: SNIT Lying about his criminal record. THE entire
thread with all in context.
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 04:27:04 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <XnsB2A5496F48E7HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>
References: <MPG.4212f9f9770e054b989807@news.giganews.com> >>>>><67aa4032$12$2757$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> >>>>><XnsB29FDEFBF81BFHT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5> >>>>><67d10034$2$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 05:27:06 +0100 (CET)
A link to the "original thread" (dated 3/17/25) was found. >>>><<https://groups.google.com/g/alt.computer.workshop/c/S-pznwmU_pg/m/o >>>>kO iQG9qAAAJ>
It contains this description of the same unsourced list as was
posted here.
---
Please be aware of the following limitations of the case records
displayed:
-o The information may not be a current, accurate, or complete
record of
the case.
-o The information is subject to change at any time.
-o The information is not the official record of the court.
-o Not all cases from a participating court may be included.
-o The information should not be used as a substitute for a
thorough background search of official public records.
---
I read to the end and the post looks like more of the same bullshit
I've been seeing here in this group. A recent post here is almost
a word for word repost of that thread and proved nothing.
Some moron claimed that Snit wasn't being doxxed, all the info
about him was publicly available or found using stuff Snit posted
himself.
This is why I'm so very careful to post as little PII as possible
about myself. Snit, I'm terribly sorry you got doxxed but it
appears you gave them enough ammo to find their target.
Now, you girls need to go get a room, or maybe your own NG.
Neither side of the argument has proven anything. A jury of 12
would acquit Snit of being a troll since there is nothing but
personal attacks on him and questionable documentation of
information which, frankly, has nothing to do with Usenet trolling.
The fact that so many posters and socks are so obsessed with him
tells me these folks lack drama in their lives. I find that true
of Trump voters as well. They seem to have mistaken the American
political process for the latest season of The Apprentice and
lacking anything else to do, are taking their frustrations out on
an accused troll.
You miss one important point and that is those one hit wonder trolls
could easily be snit.
This is exactly how he behaved in CSMA years ago when he was, and
still is, shunned. Snit opened his sock drawer and the puppets
appeared all over the place.
At one point snit had so many socks talking to each other it was
like a troll farm in real life.
Another point you fail at is that snit doesn't care if a person or
one of his socks agrees or disagrees with him.
All he craves is the attention and the need to control the chaos.
snit's socks were conversing, arguing, agreeing with each other
up until the point where nobody but snit and his sock puppets were
left because they were all ignored and snit had no choice but to
leave CSMA at which point snit moved on to COLA and other Linux
groups.
I dare you to ask in COLA, CSMA, alt.linux,alt.os.linux about snit
and see what replies you get, if any.......To most people snit is a
pariah that folks are not interested in discussing however try it.
Let's see if you have the nerve.
I used to post as Lund in the comp.sys.mac.advocacy group about 20
years ago and I remember snit quite well.
He was despised by pretty much everyone but another poster named
sandman (I think?) took particular delight in exposing snit as a
troll. Not that it matters but whatever you dig up on the Internet
about snit is probably mostly true.
Not all of it of course, but the key points are certainly true.
Unless he has changed his ways, I would avoid snit at all costs
because he is highly toxic.
There is another well known poster, Steve something or other that many
in the group suspected was a snit sock but never proven although snit
used many sock puppets back then.
It's sad to see he hasn't croaked because snit is a despicable
individual.
Do your own research.
So he's a troll.
SO
FUCKING
WHAT?
He must be a really, REALLY masterful troll to have so many of you
this upset and obsessed with him.
There's only one way to deal with a troll. ONE.
Ignore it completely.
*plonk*
Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote in news:m7irakhak97e1e58aic2mdo25tej0d290g@4ax.com:
On 26 Aug 2025 00:56:53 GMT, Octal <octalfortitude@binary.net> wrote:
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote in >>>news:108ijes$3lakm$3@dont-email.me:
On 2025-08-25, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 08:50:55 +0100, "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk>
wrote:
On 25/08/2025 01:47, Brock McNuggets wrote:
But the MID is listed there. You missed the message -- which is
fair enough.
The post should still be showing on all of the Usenet servers!
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 04:27:04 -0000 (UTC)
From: Gremlin <nobody@haph.org>
Newsgroups: alt.computer.workshop
Subject: Re: SNIT Lying about his criminal record. THE entire >>>>>>thread with all in context.
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 04:27:04 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <XnsB2A5496F48E7HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5> >>>>>>References: <MPG.4212f9f9770e054b989807@news.giganews.com> >>>>>><67aa4032$12$2757$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> >>>>>><XnsB29FDEFBF81BFHT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5> >>>>>><67d10034$2$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 05:27:06 +0100 (CET)
A link to the "original thread" (dated 3/17/25) was found. >>>>><<https://groups.google.com/g/alt.computer.workshop/c/S-pznwmU_pg/m/o >>>>>kO iQG9qAAAJ>
It contains this description of the same unsourced list as was
posted here.
---
Please be aware of the following limitations of the case records
displayed:
-o The information may not be a current, accurate, or complete
record of
the case.
-o The information is subject to change at any time.
-o The information is not the official record of the court.
-o Not all cases from a participating court may be included.
-o The information should not be used as a substitute for a
thorough background search of official public records.
---
I read to the end and the post looks like more of the same bullshit
I've been seeing here in this group. A recent post here is almost
a word for word repost of that thread and proved nothing.
Some moron claimed that Snit wasn't being doxxed, all the info
about him was publicly available or found using stuff Snit posted
himself.
This is why I'm so very careful to post as little PII as possible
about myself. Snit, I'm terribly sorry you got doxxed but it
appears you gave them enough ammo to find their target.
Now, you girls need to go get a room, or maybe your own NG.
Neither side of the argument has proven anything. A jury of 12
would acquit Snit of being a troll since there is nothing but
personal attacks on him and questionable documentation of
information which, frankly, has nothing to do with Usenet trolling.
The fact that so many posters and socks are so obsessed with him
tells me these folks lack drama in their lives. I find that true
of Trump voters as well. They seem to have mistaken the American
political process for the latest season of The Apprentice and
lacking anything else to do, are taking their frustrations out on
an accused troll.
You miss one important point and that is those one hit wonder trolls
could easily be snit.
This is exactly how he behaved in CSMA years ago when he was, and
still is, shunned. Snit opened his sock drawer and the puppets
appeared all over the place.
At one point snit had so many socks talking to each other it was
like a troll farm in real life.
Another point you fail at is that snit doesn't care if a person or
one of his socks agrees or disagrees with him.
All he craves is the attention and the need to control the chaos.
snit's socks were conversing, arguing, agreeing with each other
up until the point where nobody but snit and his sock puppets were
left because they were all ignored and snit had no choice but to
leave CSMA at which point snit moved on to COLA and other Linux
groups.
I dare you to ask in COLA, CSMA, alt.linux,alt.os.linux about snit
and see what replies you get, if any.......To most people snit is a
pariah that folks are not interested in discussing however try it.
Let's see if you have the nerve.
I used to post as Lund in the comp.sys.mac.advocacy group about 20
years ago and I remember snit quite well.
He was despised by pretty much everyone but another poster named
sandman (I think?) took particular delight in exposing snit as a
troll. Not that it matters but whatever you dig up on the Internet
about snit is probably mostly true.
Not all of it of course, but the key points are certainly true.
Unless he has changed his ways, I would avoid snit at all costs
because he is highly toxic.
There is another well known poster, Steve something or other that many
in the group suspected was a snit sock but never proven although snit >>>used many sock puppets back then.
It's sad to see he hasn't croaked because snit is a despicable >>>individual.
Do your own research.
So he's a troll.
SO
FUCKING
WHAT?
He must be a really, REALLY masterful troll to have so many of you
this upset and obsessed with him.
There's only one way to deal with a troll. ONE.
Ignore it completely.
*plonk*
While your advice is spot on for the typical troll, snit is not a typical troll.
He doxxes people, contacts their family, friends, harasses their employer and makes lewd advances towards young girls.
And then he floods USeNet with accusations where he is projecting or
blaming others for what he himself has done.
I do not expect you or anyone else to accept my word for any of this but
I will offer you some advice, ask snit about Elizabot as that long time incident will show you everything you need to know about snit.
Also I remembered the name of the person people thought was a snit sock.
It was Steve Caroll.
All of this is in the comp.sys.advocacy groups but you can save yourself
a lot of time if you simple post a message there asking about snit.
I doubt you will though because it seems you and snit are joined at the
hip. I don't know you so I am assuming you are not yet another snit sock. Cheers
On 2025-08-27, Octal <octalfortitude@binary.net> wrote:o
Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote in
news:m7irakhak97e1e58aic2mdo25tej0d290g@4ax.com:
On 26 Aug 2025 00:56:53 GMT, Octal <octalfortitude@binary.net> wrote:
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote in >>>>news:108ijes$3lakm$3@dont-email.me:
On 2025-08-25, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 08:50:55 +0100, "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk>
wrote:
On 25/08/2025 01:47, Brock McNuggets wrote:
But the MID is listed there. You missed the message -- which is >>>>>>>> fair enough.
The post should still be showing on all of the Usenet servers!
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 04:27:04 -0000 (UTC)
From: Gremlin <nobody@haph.org>
Newsgroups: alt.computer.workshop Subject: Re: SNIT Lying about his >>>>>>>criminal record. THE entire thread with all in context.
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 04:27:04 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <XnsB2A5496F48E7HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5> >>>>>>>References: <MPG.4212f9f9770e054b989807@news.giganews.com> >>>>>>><67aa4032$12$2757$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> >>>>>>><XnsB29FDEFBF81BFHT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5> >>>>>>><67d10034$2$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 05:27:06 +0100 (CET)
A link to the "original thread" (dated 3/17/25) was found. >>>>>><<https://groups.google.com/g/alt.computer.workshop/c/S-pznwmU_pg/m/
Steve Carroll is not a snit sock.kO iQG9qAAAJ>
It contains this description of the same unsourced list as was
posted here.
---
Please be aware of the following limitations of the case records
displayed:
-o The information may not be a current, accurate, or complete
record of the case.
-o The information is subject to change at any time.
-o The information is not the official record of the court.
-o Not all cases from a participating court may be included.
-o The information should not be used as a substitute for a thorough >>>>>> background search of official public records.
---
I read to the end and the post looks like more of the same bullshit >>>>>> I've been seeing here in this group. A recent post here is almost >>>>>> a word for word repost of that thread and proved nothing.
Some moron claimed that Snit wasn't being doxxed, all the info
about him was publicly available or found using stuff Snit posted
himself.
This is why I'm so very careful to post as little PII as possible
about myself. Snit, I'm terribly sorry you got doxxed but it
appears you gave them enough ammo to find their target.
Now, you girls need to go get a room, or maybe your own NG. Neither >>>>>> side of the argument has proven anything. A jury of 12 would
acquit Snit of being a troll since there is nothing but personal
attacks on him and questionable documentation of information which, >>>>>> frankly, has nothing to do with Usenet trolling.
The fact that so many posters and socks are so obsessed with him
tells me these folks lack drama in their lives. I find that true
of Trump voters as well. They seem to have mistaken the American
political process for the latest season of The Apprentice and
lacking anything else to do, are taking their frustrations out on
an accused troll.
You miss one important point and that is those one hit wonder trolls >>>>> could easily be snit.
This is exactly how he behaved in CSMA years ago when he was, and
still is, shunned. Snit opened his sock drawer and the puppets
appeared all over the place.
At one point snit had so many socks talking to each other it was
like a troll farm in real life.
Another point you fail at is that snit doesn't care if a person or
one of his socks agrees or disagrees with him.
All he craves is the attention and the need to control the chaos.
snit's socks were conversing, arguing, agreeing with each other up
until the point where nobody but snit and his sock puppets were left >>>>> because they were all ignored and snit had no choice but to leave
CSMA at which point snit moved on to COLA and other Linux groups.
I dare you to ask in COLA, CSMA, alt.linux,alt.os.linux about snit
and see what replies you get, if any.......To most people snit is a
pariah that folks are not interested in discussing however try it.
Let's see if you have the nerve.
I used to post as Lund in the comp.sys.mac.advocacy group about 20 >>>>years ago and I remember snit quite well.
He was despised by pretty much everyone but another poster named >>>>sandman (I think?) took particular delight in exposing snit as a >>>>troll. Not that it matters but whatever you dig up on the Internet >>>>about snit is probably mostly true.
Not all of it of course, but the key points are certainly true. Unless >>>>he has changed his ways, I would avoid snit at all costs because he is >>>>highly toxic.
There is another well known poster, Steve something or other that many >>>>in the group suspected was a snit sock but never proven although snit >>>>used many sock puppets back then.
It's sad to see he hasn't croaked because snit is a despicable >>>>individual.
Do your own research.
So he's a troll.
SO
FUCKING
WHAT?
He must be a really, REALLY masterful troll to have so many of you
this upset and obsessed with him.
There's only one way to deal with a troll. ONE.
Ignore it completely.
*plonk*
While your advice is spot on for the typical troll, snit is not a
typical troll.
He doxxes people, contacts their family, friends, harasses their
employer and makes lewd advances towards young girls.
And then he floods USeNet with accusations where he is projecting or
blaming others for what he himself has done.
I do not expect you or anyone else to accept my word for any of this
but I will offer you some advice, ask snit about Elizabot as that long
time incident will show you everything you need to know about snit.
Also I remembered the name of the person people thought was a snit
sock. It was Steve Caroll.
All of this is in the comp.sys.advocacy groups but you can save
yourself a lot of time if you simple post a message there asking about
snit.
I doubt you will though because it seems you and snit are joined at the
hip. I don't know you so I am assuming you are not yet another snit
sock.
Cheers
The rest of what you posted is true,.
Snit made all kinds of sexual advances towards Elizabot who at the time
was vulnerable as she, as a teen, was having teen issues.
Slimeball snit tried to take advantage of that situation as kind of a teacher---student situation.
It's all in Usenet archives so you can judge for yourself. My advice is
to not waste your time as pretty much everyone knows what a sleaze snit
is so proof is no longer necessary.
BTW I remember you.
On Wed, 27 Aug 2025 01:11:18 -0000 (UTC), pothead wrote:
On 2025-08-27, Octal <octalfortitude@binary.net> wrote:
Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote inSteve Carroll is not a snit sock.
news:m7irakhak97e1e58aic2mdo25tej0d290g@4ax.com:
On 26 Aug 2025 00:56:53 GMT, Octal <octalfortitude@binary.net> wrote:
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote in
news:108ijes$3lakm$3@dont-email.me:
On 2025-08-25, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 08:50:55 +0100, "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 25/08/2025 01:47, Brock McNuggets wrote:
But the MID is listed there. You missed the message -- which is >>>>>>>>> fair enough.
The post should still be showing on all of the Usenet servers! >>>>>>>>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 04:27:04 -0000 (UTC)
From: Gremlin <nobody@haph.org>
Newsgroups: alt.computer.workshop Subject: Re: SNIT Lying about his >>>>>>>> criminal record. THE entire thread with all in context.
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 04:27:04 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <XnsB2A5496F48E7HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>
References: <MPG.4212f9f9770e054b989807@news.giganews.com>
<67aa4032$12$2757$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
<XnsB29FDEFBF81BFHT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>
<67d10034$2$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 05:27:06 +0100 (CET)
A link to the "original thread" (dated 3/17/25) was found.
<<https://groups.google.com/g/alt.computer.workshop/c/S-pznwmU_pg/m/> o >>>>>>> kO iQG9qAAAJ>
It contains this description of the same unsourced list as was
posted here.
---
Please be aware of the following limitations of the case records >>>>>>> displayed:
-o The information may not be a current, accurate, or complete
record of the case.
-o The information is subject to change at any time.
-o The information is not the official record of the court.
-o Not all cases from a participating court may be included.
-o The information should not be used as a substitute for a thorough >>>>>>> background search of official public records.
---
I read to the end and the post looks like more of the same bullshit >>>>>>> I've been seeing here in this group. A recent post here is almost >>>>>>> a word for word repost of that thread and proved nothing.
Some moron claimed that Snit wasn't being doxxed, all the info
about him was publicly available or found using stuff Snit posted >>>>>>> himself.
This is why I'm so very careful to post as little PII as possible >>>>>>> about myself. Snit, I'm terribly sorry you got doxxed but it
appears you gave them enough ammo to find their target.
Now, you girls need to go get a room, or maybe your own NG. Neither >>>>>>> side of the argument has proven anything. A jury of 12 would
acquit Snit of being a troll since there is nothing but personal >>>>>>> attacks on him and questionable documentation of information which, >>>>>>> frankly, has nothing to do with Usenet trolling.
The fact that so many posters and socks are so obsessed with him >>>>>>> tells me these folks lack drama in their lives. I find that true >>>>>>> of Trump voters as well. They seem to have mistaken the American >>>>>>> political process for the latest season of The Apprentice and
lacking anything else to do, are taking their frustrations out on >>>>>>> an accused troll.
You miss one important point and that is those one hit wonder trolls >>>>>> could easily be snit.
This is exactly how he behaved in CSMA years ago when he was, and
still is, shunned. Snit opened his sock drawer and the puppets
appeared all over the place.
At one point snit had so many socks talking to each other it was
like a troll farm in real life.
Another point you fail at is that snit doesn't care if a person or >>>>>> one of his socks agrees or disagrees with him.
All he craves is the attention and the need to control the chaos.
snit's socks were conversing, arguing, agreeing with each other up >>>>>> until the point where nobody but snit and his sock puppets were left >>>>>> because they were all ignored and snit had no choice but to leave
CSMA at which point snit moved on to COLA and other Linux groups.
I dare you to ask in COLA, CSMA, alt.linux,alt.os.linux about snit >>>>>> and see what replies you get, if any.......To most people snit is a >>>>>> pariah that folks are not interested in discussing however try it. >>>>>> Let's see if you have the nerve.
I used to post as Lund in the comp.sys.mac.advocacy group about 20
years ago and I remember snit quite well.
He was despised by pretty much everyone but another poster named
sandman (I think?) took particular delight in exposing snit as a
troll. Not that it matters but whatever you dig up on the Internet
about snit is probably mostly true.
Not all of it of course, but the key points are certainly true. Unless >>>>> he has changed his ways, I would avoid snit at all costs because he is >>>>> highly toxic.
There is another well known poster, Steve something or other that many >>>>> in the group suspected was a snit sock but never proven although snit >>>>> used many sock puppets back then.
It's sad to see he hasn't croaked because snit is a despicable
individual.
Do your own research.
So he's a troll.
SO
FUCKING
WHAT?
He must be a really, REALLY masterful troll to have so many of you
this upset and obsessed with him.
There's only one way to deal with a troll. ONE.
Ignore it completely.
*plonk*
While your advice is spot on for the typical troll, snit is not a
typical troll.
He doxxes people, contacts their family, friends, harasses their
employer and makes lewd advances towards young girls.
And then he floods USeNet with accusations where he is projecting or
blaming others for what he himself has done.
I do not expect you or anyone else to accept my word for any of this
but I will offer you some advice, ask snit about Elizabot as that long
time incident will show you everything you need to know about snit.
Also I remembered the name of the person people thought was a snit
sock. It was Steve Caroll.
All of this is in the comp.sys.advocacy groups but you can save
yourself a lot of time if you simple post a message there asking about
snit.
I doubt you will though because it seems you and snit are joined at the
hip. I don't know you so I am assuming you are not yet another snit
sock.
Cheers
That is a fact.
SC is not a snit sock although snit has posted as many socks.
The rest of what you posted is true,.
Snit made all kinds of sexual advances towards Elizabot who at the time
was vulnerable as she, as a teen, was having teen issues.
While I was not around at that time, I did look in the archives and apparently snit had some kind of crush on this Elizabot and it got out of control.
I really don't know and don't care about the details.
Slimeball snit tried to take advantage of that situation as kind of a
teacher---student situation.
Yuck.
It's all in Usenet archives so you can judge for yourself. My advice is
to not waste your time as pretty much everyone knows what a sleaze snit
is so proof is no longer necessary.
BTW I remember you.
Snit landed in several gun groups which is where I first encountered him.
He managed to piss off the regulars and after a couple of weeks of snit trying to set up his trolling he was politely asked to leave, which to his credit he did.
After he was gone, some people posted older messages that involved snit
and the general consensus was that snit had serious mental issues and the regulars, including me, were just happy he had the good sense to leave.
Sadly snit has found other fertile ground for his trolling.
My advice is to never reply to snit.
On 2025-08-27, Octal <octalfortitude@binary.net> wrote:
Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote in
news:m7irakhak97e1e58aic2mdo25tej0d290g@4ax.com:
On 26 Aug 2025 00:56:53 GMT, Octal <octalfortitude@binary.net> wrote:
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote in
news:108ijes$3lakm$3@dont-email.me:
On 2025-08-25, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 08:50:55 +0100, "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk>
wrote:
On 25/08/2025 01:47, Brock McNuggets wrote:
But the MID is listed there. You missed the message -- which is >>>>>>>> fair enough.
The post should still be showing on all of the Usenet servers!
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 04:27:04 -0000 (UTC)
From: Gremlin <nobody@haph.org>
Newsgroups: alt.computer.workshop
Subject: Re: SNIT Lying about his criminal record. THE entire
thread with all in context.
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 04:27:04 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <XnsB2A5496F48E7HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>
References: <MPG.4212f9f9770e054b989807@news.giganews.com>
<67aa4032$12$2757$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
<XnsB29FDEFBF81BFHT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>
<67d10034$2$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 05:27:06 +0100 (CET)
A link to the "original thread" (dated 3/17/25) was found.
<<https://groups.google.com/g/alt.computer.workshop/c/S-pznwmU_pg/m/okO >>>>>> iQG9qAAAJ>
It contains this description of the same unsourced list as was
posted here.
---
Please be aware of the following limitations of the case records
displayed:
-o The information may not be a current, accurate, or complete
record of
the case.
-o The information is subject to change at any time.
-o The information is not the official record of the court.
-o Not all cases from a participating court may be included.
-o The information should not be used as a substitute for a
thorough background search of official public records.
---
I read to the end and the post looks like more of the same bullshit >>>>>> I've been seeing here in this group. A recent post here is almost >>>>>> a word for word repost of that thread and proved nothing.
Some moron claimed that Snit wasn't being doxxed, all the info
about him was publicly available or found using stuff Snit posted
himself.
This is why I'm so very careful to post as little PII as possible
about myself. Snit, I'm terribly sorry you got doxxed but it
appears you gave them enough ammo to find their target.
Now, you girls need to go get a room, or maybe your own NG.
Neither side of the argument has proven anything. A jury of 12
would acquit Snit of being a troll since there is nothing but
personal attacks on him and questionable documentation of
information which, frankly, has nothing to do with Usenet trolling. >>>>>>
The fact that so many posters and socks are so obsessed with him
tells me these folks lack drama in their lives. I find that true
of Trump voters as well. They seem to have mistaken the American
political process for the latest season of The Apprentice and
lacking anything else to do, are taking their frustrations out on
an accused troll.
You miss one important point and that is those one hit wonder trolls >>>>> could easily be snit.
This is exactly how he behaved in CSMA years ago when he was, and
still is, shunned. Snit opened his sock drawer and the puppets
appeared all over the place.
At one point snit had so many socks talking to each other it was
like a troll farm in real life.
Another point you fail at is that snit doesn't care if a person or
one of his socks agrees or disagrees with him.
All he craves is the attention and the need to control the chaos.
snit's socks were conversing, arguing, agreeing with each other
up until the point where nobody but snit and his sock puppets were
left because they were all ignored and snit had no choice but to
leave CSMA at which point snit moved on to COLA and other Linux
groups.
I dare you to ask in COLA, CSMA, alt.linux,alt.os.linux about snit
and see what replies you get, if any.......To most people snit is a
pariah that folks are not interested in discussing however try it.
Let's see if you have the nerve.
I used to post as Lund in the comp.sys.mac.advocacy group about 20
years ago and I remember snit quite well.
He was despised by pretty much everyone but another poster named
sandman (I think?) took particular delight in exposing snit as a
troll. Not that it matters but whatever you dig up on the Internet
about snit is probably mostly true.
Not all of it of course, but the key points are certainly true.
Unless he has changed his ways, I would avoid snit at all costs
because he is highly toxic.
There is another well known poster, Steve something or other that many >>>> in the group suspected was a snit sock but never proven although snit
used many sock puppets back then.
It's sad to see he hasn't croaked because snit is a despicable
individual.
Do your own research.
So he's a troll.
SO
FUCKING
WHAT?
He must be a really, REALLY masterful troll to have so many of you
this upset and obsessed with him.
There's only one way to deal with a troll. ONE.
Ignore it completely.
*plonk*
While your advice is spot on for the typical troll, snit is not a typical
troll.
He doxxes people, contacts their family, friends, harasses their employer
and makes lewd advances towards young girls.
And then he floods USeNet with accusations where he is projecting or
blaming others for what he himself has done.
I do not expect you or anyone else to accept my word for any of this but
I will offer you some advice, ask snit about Elizabot as that long time
incident will show you everything you need to know about snit.
Also I remembered the name of the person people thought was a snit sock.
It was Steve Caroll.
All of this is in the comp.sys.advocacy groups but you can save yourself
a lot of time if you simple post a message there asking about snit.
I doubt you will though because it seems you and snit are joined at the
hip. I don't know you so I am assuming you are not yet another snit sock.
Cheers
Steve Carroll is not a snit sock.
the rest of what you posted is true,.
Snit made all kinds of sexual advances towards Elizabot who at the time
was vulnerable as she, as a teen, was having teen issues.
Slimeball snit tried to take advantage of that situation as kind of
a teacher---student situation.
It's all in Usenet archives so you can judge for yourself. My advice is to not
waste your time as pretty much everyone knows what a sleaze snit is so proof is
no longer necessary.
BTW I remember you.
Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote in news:m7irakhak97e1e58aic2mdo25tej0d290g@4ax.com:
On 26 Aug 2025 00:56:53 GMT, Octal <octalfortitude@binary.net> wrote:
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote in
news:108ijes$3lakm$3@dont-email.me:
On 2025-08-25, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 08:50:55 +0100, "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk>
wrote:
On 25/08/2025 01:47, Brock McNuggets wrote:
But the MID is listed there. You missed the message -- which is
fair enough.
The post should still be showing on all of the Usenet servers!
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 04:27:04 -0000 (UTC)
From: Gremlin <nobody@haph.org>
Newsgroups: alt.computer.workshop
Subject: Re: SNIT Lying about his criminal record. THE entire
thread with all in context.
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 04:27:04 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <XnsB2A5496F48E7HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>
References: <MPG.4212f9f9770e054b989807@news.giganews.com>
<67aa4032$12$2757$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
<XnsB29FDEFBF81BFHT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>
<67d10034$2$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 05:27:06 +0100 (CET)
A link to the "original thread" (dated 3/17/25) was found.
<<https://groups.google.com/g/alt.computer.workshop/c/S-pznwmU_pg/m/okO >>>>> iQG9qAAAJ>
It contains this description of the same unsourced list as was
posted here.
---
Please be aware of the following limitations of the case records
displayed:
-o The information may not be a current, accurate, or complete
record of
the case.
-o The information is subject to change at any time.
-o The information is not the official record of the court.
-o Not all cases from a participating court may be included.
-o The information should not be used as a substitute for a
thorough background search of official public records.
---
I read to the end and the post looks like more of the same bullshit
I've been seeing here in this group. A recent post here is almost
a word for word repost of that thread and proved nothing.
Some moron claimed that Snit wasn't being doxxed, all the info
about him was publicly available or found using stuff Snit posted
himself.
This is why I'm so very careful to post as little PII as possible
about myself. Snit, I'm terribly sorry you got doxxed but it
appears you gave them enough ammo to find their target.
Now, you girls need to go get a room, or maybe your own NG.
Neither side of the argument has proven anything. A jury of 12
would acquit Snit of being a troll since there is nothing but
personal attacks on him and questionable documentation of
information which, frankly, has nothing to do with Usenet trolling.
The fact that so many posters and socks are so obsessed with him
tells me these folks lack drama in their lives. I find that true
of Trump voters as well. They seem to have mistaken the American
political process for the latest season of The Apprentice and
lacking anything else to do, are taking their frustrations out on
an accused troll.
You miss one important point and that is those one hit wonder trolls
could easily be snit.
This is exactly how he behaved in CSMA years ago when he was, and
still is, shunned. Snit opened his sock drawer and the puppets
appeared all over the place.
At one point snit had so many socks talking to each other it was
like a troll farm in real life.
Another point you fail at is that snit doesn't care if a person or
one of his socks agrees or disagrees with him.
All he craves is the attention and the need to control the chaos.
snit's socks were conversing, arguing, agreeing with each other
up until the point where nobody but snit and his sock puppets were
left because they were all ignored and snit had no choice but to
leave CSMA at which point snit moved on to COLA and other Linux
groups.
I dare you to ask in COLA, CSMA, alt.linux,alt.os.linux about snit
and see what replies you get, if any.......To most people snit is a
pariah that folks are not interested in discussing however try it.
Let's see if you have the nerve.
I used to post as Lund in the comp.sys.mac.advocacy group about 20
years ago and I remember snit quite well.
He was despised by pretty much everyone but another poster named
sandman (I think?) took particular delight in exposing snit as a
troll. Not that it matters but whatever you dig up on the Internet
about snit is probably mostly true.
Not all of it of course, but the key points are certainly true.
Unless he has changed his ways, I would avoid snit at all costs
because he is highly toxic.
There is another well known poster, Steve something or other that many
in the group suspected was a snit sock but never proven although snit
used many sock puppets back then.
It's sad to see he hasn't croaked because snit is a despicable
individual.
Do your own research.
So he's a troll.
SO
FUCKING
WHAT?
He must be a really, REALLY masterful troll to have so many of you
this upset and obsessed with him.
There's only one way to deal with a troll. ONE.
Ignore it completely.
*plonk*
While your advice is spot on for the typical troll, snit is not a typical troll.
He doxxes people, contacts their family, friends, harasses their employer
and makes lewd advances towards young girls.
And then he floods USeNet with accusations where he is projecting or
blaming others for what he himself has done.
I do not expect you or anyone else to accept my word for any of this but
I will offer you some advice, ask snit about Elizabot as that long time incident will show you everything you need to know about snit.
Also I remembered the name of the person people thought was a snit sock.
It was Steve Caroll.
All of this is in the comp.sys.advocacy groups but you can save yourself
a lot of time if you simple post a message there asking about snit.
I doubt you will though because it seems you and snit are joined at the
hip. I don't know you so I am assuming you are not yet another snit sock. Cheers
It's all in Usenet archives so you can judge for yourself.
On Wed, 27 Aug 2025 01:11:18 -0000 (UTC), pothead wrote:
It's all in Usenet archives so you can judge for yourself.
You guys keep saying that but all I see are accusations. No proof of
any of the charges you've made against him.