Originally posted by Paul W. Sondersted, Jr.:

What was negative & hateful?

In what way was telling the truth negative & hateful? He was indeed being hypocritical in his pitiful attempt at trying to be the "voice of reason" when in the very recent past he has shown that he is anything but.



I didn't say the truth cannot exist without hate or negativity. I'm saying the things that I believe to be the truth in this instance are not expressed through hate or negativity.
As far as JB goes, what EXACTLY do you feel that fills JB with hate & negativity?

Poor precious Pally. He's still struggling to come up with a defense and failing. The fact is that nobody other than the gamester himself has contradicted me and there's no reason to doubt the obvious patterns that have been displayed over the years. To actually assign an identity to this poster would be speculation and whenever that's been done, it's been so labelled. No other reasonable hypothesis has been put forward to explain the Pally posting pattern and the intentionally flawed logic patterns have been clearly detailed to the point that he's no longer able to credibly deny them.

He's even fell so low as to use the "I know you are but what am I gambit" by inferring delusionality on my part. This would have to be considered a violation of the rules that he set forth when decrying posters psychoanalyzing others on the web. I'm fairly certain (although not positive) that he's aware that he isn't being psychoanalyzed but rather having his posting game patterns outlined, perhaps in an attempt to make sure that a full psychosocial profile of his imaginary Pally creation isn't posted on line. I think it more likely, though, that he's hoping that I or someone else will do just that as he does seem to enjoy the attention. Me, I'm perfectly willing to play with the little scamp but I'm not willing to actually work for him unless he's willing to pay me.



Obviously there's nothing terribly hard to understand about this Pally creation. From the name calling to the attempts at portraying paranoia when anyone calls his bluff (let's not forget to mention the vast Anti-Byrne conspiracy every post or three) the posts all fall into an easily recognized pattern. Unfortunately I'm growing disappointed in his predictability. Perhaps I was mistaken to think that he could rise to the challenge when others agreed to play his games by his rules, but so far he's shown very little ingenuity. Never the less I won't give up on him. I still think that he's able to show better gamesmanship and skills if he just applies himself. Otherwise he'll only have his tenacity to fall back on and that'd be far too one-dimensional for a two dimensional creation.

Are you asking me to mind-read?

As far as I can tell, he's always been a mean-spirited person, which has only been exacerbated as he has continued to be left behind in a profession that he feels he should be the king of.

I think it's very negative to call Erik Larsen a hypocrite, especially in the harsh terms you used.

Originally posted by Paul W. Sondersted, Jr.:
In a way, she's right.
When you make your own rules you have the advantage.
In her case, though, she's so convinced that she's right about what someone posts on a message board, that the "thought" that she may be wrong never occurs to her, so she continues to firmly tie herself to her delusional frame of "mind".
No matter what is said to contradict her, no matter how much she could actually learn otherwise



Ooh! I feel so special!



Still delusional es ever I see.



In your reality, of course. Not the real world.



It's nice to have a fan...In a weird, psychotic stalker sort of way.



This is where your pitiful ass-umptions fail (continuously, I might add). My identity has only been in question to those too lazy to look in a profile...like yourself.



The only thing around here that appears to be intentional, is your continuously bizarre attempts at Internet Psychoanalysis. Your "mind", such as it is, appears to be so set on believing your very own "intentionally flawed logic patterns".
Or, for the layman, believing your own BS.



The shoe fits...



More of YOUR attempts at making this out to be a game. Which shows that your apparently attempting to hide your "fun" behind your afformentioned "intentionally flawed logic patterns".
Anyone with even an ounce of gray matter can see through your pettiness. See it for what it truly is...an attempt (and a failed one at that) to put someone down.
Still, you get your kudos from your fellow derogatories...which I'm sure is your whole purpose here.



Of course I'm fully aware, which is why I usually point out that someone like you is "attempting" to do such an inane thing.



More delusions on your part. Ever thought that you may be wrong about your ass-umptions? Don't bother answering...it was rhetorical, of course.



That's the scary part.



Oh yeah. It's SO much fun dealing with close-minded individuals who are so full of their own delusional BS. I have more fun going to the dentist (don't swing at the easy ones).



What is your usual fee for Internet Psychoanalysis?

Originally posted by Paul W. Sondersted, Jr.:
...if she bothered to open her "mind", she is so set on her "psychoanalysis" via the Internet, and of course feels that she is impressing her fellow derogatories with her "intellectual" observations.
She apparently derives "fun" from this delusion, and the fact that she has a few small-minded individuals who give her the Internet high-fives that she so obviously craves, I'm sure helps her through the "hard" times.
Still, to answer the "question" about me giving my "best". You insist that this is some sort of contest and/or game in which someone is trying to outdo another (this appears to be Ms. Keller's agenda)...I do not.
Hard for some to understand? Of course.



When you make ass-umptions & presumptions...



To individuals like yourself who have such a "firm" grasp on reality, of course.
Then again, once you take into consideration that pretty much all of your "brilliant deductions" are in actuality ass-umtions & preseumptions, then it becomes readily apparent (once again for the afformentioned individuals who have at least an ounce of gray matter), that your simply attempting (and once again failing) to "talk down" to someone (or in your rather bizarre case, talk OF someone as though they are beneath contempt).
Petty & sadly pathetic.



Of course you are. I imagine the fact that you are so full of yourself & your belief that your Internet Psychoanalysis is flawless, that you must be drooling at the prospect of returning here every day to "prove" your delusional theories.
Once again...petty & sadly pathetic.



There's a revelation!



Oh, and you HAVE? Oh wait, your delusional. Nevermind.



You certainly are persistent, I'll give you that. It must be nice to believe in something so much that all logical thought is thrown out the window.
I'll continue to stick to reality, though.

Originally posted by Paul W. Sondersted, Jr.:
As far as JB goes, what EXACTLY do you feel that fills JB with hate & negativity?



You're certainly making far too many ass-umptions & presumptions, to say the least.



Where do you get that idea?
JB certainly has an ego in regards to his accomplishments, but contrary to popular (Anti-Byrne fanatical) opinion, that ego does NOT disregard reality.
And when you say, "As far as I can tell", I would suggest that you take a peek at the overwhelmingly positive interaction between JB and those that show him the respect that he deserves (this is where Anti-Byrne fanatics step in to call those that show JB respect something like ass-kissers or sychophants, etc.).
Of course, you are already fully aware that the vast majority of JB's postings are NOT "mean-spirited" because you already have admitted that you haunt his forum. You (and your other online screennames) choose to point out (and exaggerate) the negative situations.

Originally posted by Paul W. Sondersted, Jr.:

I didn't say the truth cannot exist without hate or negativity. I'm saying the things that I believe to be the truth in this instance are not expressed through hate or negativity.



And you are fully aware of WHY I was calling him a hypocrite after he acted like a jealous child, then later attempted to act the voice of reason.
Hypocritical.

Originally posted by C Keller:
Perhaps I was mistaken to think...

Pally:There's a revelation!

This is indicitive of Pally's idea of how to defend the indefensible. Quote tiny bits of a sentence, make a snide remark and then ignore the content of everything written. Then go on to repeat the same standard insults while peppering his own posts with distractions and evasions. Paranoically, he'll go on to discount any point made as the product of a conspiratorial paranoia and see any protestation of his reasoning to be proof of whatever point he's otherwise failed to make. Whether he pretends to cotton to it or not (and I conjecture that he's not unaware of this) this is a classic description of delusional behaviour patterns. Thank goodness that he's only playing an odd little self-devised game, or we really might be forced to reach some sad conclusions about his mental health.

On the one hand it really is kind of fun dissecting the gamesmanship, otherwise it wouldn't be worth doing. Still, there is something sad about the thought that some people actually are as nasty, insightless and narrow minded as Pally pretends to be. Possibly that was his original point when he started playing his game. If he weren't playing a game it would indeed be sad to contemplate the little critter's actual quality of life.

Admittedly he does possess a strong tenacity, but there's really otherwise not a lot of content or value to what he posts and the only joy that ever comes across in those posts is when he pretends that he has successfully savaged some other poster. While there's always a very slim chance that I'm mistaken and he isn't just playing a game, I truly hope that this isn't the case. If the little guy really is sincere about the way he portrays himself in his posts it would be indicitive of a very sad and lonely life. I'd wish that on no one, and failing reasonable proof to the contrary I'll continue to give the guy the benefit of the doubt and acknowledge him as a skillful game player.

Byrne himself lives a sad and lonely life, with only life-size robots as companions in his large home.

Tell you what pally, you stop repeating "ass-u-mption" like it's some kind of sterling gem you just discovered, and I won't let my irritation level boil over into something

We got the "ass-u-me" point the first time you posted it.

Why don't you just masturbate to the idea that a girl is responding to you online, and have a nice orgasm in the process? I mean, it's pretty clear that you love it, otherwise you wouldn't continue to stick your nose up in the air at her.

Or maybe that's your ass-u-me.