"Ron" rudely blurted out news:49021926$0$9258$ba620dc5
@nova.planet.nl:


"Lee" wrote in message
.94...
"Br'er Rabid" said in
6.81:

(snipped)

I'l just ask you again then:

You wrote:
Interesting how I use a real email address in my posts
and you don't. Although I have spam-bot defenses in the
address, you can still email me by pulling YOUR HEAD out.
Why would I want to post **** that could easily be traced
back to me by way of email or TRUE news-header information,
and thereby be dropped from accounts and possibly put in
jail?

Were you accusing me of forging my headers? You're not
are you? You wouldn't make the mistakes you're accusing other people of.
Right? Or are you? Cause if you intend to keep that up as the truth, I'd
sure like to see some proof.

How about it, sport?

Ron (the one with the sig that *is* compliant with usenet rules, and which
has not changed once!)


Well, sport...

I DID NOT SAY that you forged anything.

What I referred to was Einstein's accusations of me
forging my header information. He has also accused
others in this group of the same thing.

Need verification?

And I've only had one sig - ever. And I offered an
easy-win bet to Gutless to stand by another lie that
he told about me. I posted the challenge so he wouldn't
miss it. If he was telling the truth, he could make a
sizable one-day earning.

....And the crickets keep chirping.

------------------------
Here's *my* funny sig from an ABPA thread on 08/16/08:
Alan Erskine says... "I've got an IQ of 151"
"I'm in the 99th percentile for my age group - that's the top 1 percent"
(nice math there, Einstein!) "I doubt very strongly that you know
anyone in my range of IQ" (Thankfully, NO!)
Lee discussing newsserver retention:
"...I can go back about 6 months..."
Alan Erskine interrupts with:
"Why should we wait for six months to download an image
that was posted yesterday?"