FLM films - My Webpage

1996-05-01 00:00:00 - The solution to Gharlane of Eddore (everyone please read this) - (zikzak23@usa.pipeline.com)


Recently, alt.tv.sliders has endured an extended flame war between myself and the person who calls himself Gharlane of Eddore. It was started when he posted a message so full of hate and ridicule that I became determined to force him out of the group. I insulted him and exposed his lies and cruelty, day after day. Many people told me it was useless to fight him on his own terms. I didn't listen, believing that Gharlane was of such pompous arrogance that I could destroy him by exposing him for the fool he is. But then he revealed himself to be a sad, lonely man so desperate for attention that he flamed us day after day, simply to get someone to notice him. I was moved with pity. So it ends now. The "Virtual Coup" (as he put it) is over. I have come up with a simple solution to Gharlane's presence here; we will ignore him. My newsreader allows me to see who writes what in this group at a glance.

1996-05-03 00:00:00 - Re: The solution to Gharlane of Eddore (everyone please read this) - ("Joseph \\Coot\" Thompson <jrt@uoknor.edu>")


I disagree totally. We need him. His presence has probably made all of us who like the show more determined to save it just for spite. Coot P.S.: I think I know his true identity, but I'm not sure. If he's who I think he is, it should've been obvious.

1996-05-03 00:00:00 - Re: The solution to Gharlane of Eddore (everyone please read this) - (jyarnot@netcom.com)


Zikzax wants to ignore Gharlane. I disagree. The flamewars are often so much more entertaining than the show. -- Jan Yarnot, net.granny, RABbabe, Proud Mom to Stands-With-a-Book, the Booklist Boy, the IRS Guy, the Tycoon, and Sunbunny. Growing older is mandatory, growing up is optional. jyarnot@netcom.com Putting the fun in "dysfunctional."

1996-05-05 00:00:00 - Re: The solution to Gharlane of Eddore (everyone please read this) - (Menthol of Amnesia <heisenberg@talvi.demon.co.uk>)


> I had thought that fighting fire with fire would work, namely dissecting flaws in the grammer of its posts would work, but from experience, Gharlane simply ignores anyone exposing grammatical weakness or flaws in its critique. Gharlane's analytical technique is pure binary analysis. Either a show/topic is excellent, or complete rubbish. No middle ground whatsoever. In its defence I will say that it does invariably resort to destructive criticism, at least this does provoke a higher quality of debate, rather than the usual "Let's harp on about this minor flaw in this week's episode" that most newsgroups are plagued with -- Menthol of Amnesia

1996-05-05 00:00:00 - Re: The solution to Gharlane of Eddore (everyone please read this) - (rufferta@cts.com)


In article <4m6fmq$5ct@news2.h1.usa.pipeline.com>, zikzak23@usa.pipeline.com() wrote: <snip-sliding away> > > I propose that everyone on this group who can, do the same. Everyone who > agrees to comply with this plan, please respond to this posting with the > word "agree." Those who oppose, respond with "disagree." It's that > simple. In that way, Gharlane can see exactly how many people on this > group will be rendering his insults impotent. Hopefully all of us. I'll > be re-posting a variation of this message every week for the newbies. > Sorry Zikzak, I disagree. I used to share your opinion, especially after my first retort to Gharlane ended up in alt-dev-null. But after reading his posts for awhile, I realized killfiling him was not the answer. Suffer, learn, and grow.

1996-05-06 00:00:00 - Gharlane of Eddore, call your office - (timchaos@servtech.com)


zikzak23@usa.pipeline.com() wrote: >Many people told me it was useless to fight him on his own terms. I didn't >listen, believing that Gharlane was of such pompous arrogance that I could >destroy him by exposing him for the fool he is. But then he revealed >himself to be a sad, lonely man so desperate for attention that he flamed >us day after day, simply to get someone to notice him. I was moved with >pity. > There is only one solutionfor Gharlane, and it involves Kimball Kinnson and the Elders of Arisia. :) Tim --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I don't care if I'm a Lemming, I'm not going! Tim Tulley, Rochester NY Chapter head of Christians and Athiests united against creeping Agnostisism -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------\

1996-05-13 00:00:00 - Re: The solution to Gharlane of Eddore (everyone please read this) - (gharlane@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu)


I thought I'd responded to Mr. "zikzak" on this subject before, but this entry just showed up on our server, so here goes... In <4m6fmq$5ct@news2.h1.usa.pipeline.com> zikzak23@usa.pipeline.com() writes: > > Recently, alt.tv.sliders has endured an extended flame war between myself > and the person who calls himself Gharlane of Eddore. It was started when > he posted a message so full of hate and ridicule that I became determined "Ridicule," occasionally; but since it's not productive, it's not my stock-in-trade. And if you think I was "flaming," or that the discussion was "extended," you've really got an egotism problem. You'd need to see printouts of the four-month wrangle over the preferability of silicon-on-sapphire versus silicon-diamond HF transistor junctions that was carried out on a UUCP mailing-list in 1974, to understand what real "flaming" is all about. All you've seen here are a few sarcastic comments. "Hate" implies some sort of respect or emotional investment; where you are concerned, the term is inapplicable. > to force him out of the group. I insulted him and exposed his lies and > cruelty, day after day. Lies and cruelty? I don't remember either, and I certainly don't remember any "exposure." > Many people told me it was useless to fight him on his own terms. I didn't > listen, believing that Gharlane was of such pompous arrogance that I could > destroy him by exposing him for the fool he is. But then he revealed Were I the fool you assert, I'd hardly be amenable to "proof" of the fact. > himself to be a sad, lonely man so desperate for attention that he flamed > us day after day, simply to get someone to notice him. I was moved with > pity. Oh, yes, I'm just sooooo lonely. I seem to recall posting a DejaNews "author profile" here recently; perhaps you ought to take another look at the stats, and consider how very little time I spent on this topic. You might also consider that I only started posting in response to inappropriately multiply-posted entries that showed up on the topics I prefer to read. > So it ends now. The "Virtual Coup" (as he put it) is over. I have come up > with a simple solution to Gharlane's presence here; we will ignore him. No, twit. We've already gone through this; the phrase I used was "counting virtual coup," in reference to your continuous attempts. This has nothing to do with *a* "virtual coup," which is a political or social upheaval. "Counting coup" is an entirely separate concept, and your inability to recognize it is simply one more indicator of your limited education and conceptual capacity. > My newsreader allows me to see who writes what in this group at a glance. > From now on, I will be deleting his messages WITHOUT READING THEM. That > way, he will not even be an annoyance. He will cease to exist. Your loss; have a nice life. > I propose that everyone on this group who can, do the same. Everyone who > agrees to comply with this plan, please respond to this posting with the > word "agree." Those who oppose, respond with "disagree." It's that > simple. In that way, Gharlane can see exactly how many people on this > group will be rendering his insults impotent. Hopefully all of us. I'll > be re-posting a variation of this message every week for the newbies. Feel free; it's amusing to think of you actually going to that much trouble to try to pick a fight with a complete stranger. > Gharlane, your presence here is unwanted. But the Internet is a free > country, so you can be wherever you want. But you should also know that > that freedom allows us to choose who we associate with. And we choose not > to associate with you. No skin off my proboscis; if it helps your blood pressure, go for it. Just don't expect me to be intimidated, and try to remember that if you actually knew anything about computer communications fora, you'd have simply exercised your KillFile the first time you read something offensive into one of my entries. The InterNet is *HUGE*; conducting campaigns against someone you don't like is a losing, lifespan-wasting proposition. If you actually feel the need to conduct a vendetta by making regular entries blackening my previously-unbesmirched escutcheon, have a good time with it. > Sincerely, > Nigel G. Mitchell Why is it that when I read the name "Nigel," I think of.... oh, well, never mind.