General-Zod wrote:

> Will Dockery wrote:

>> George J. Dance wrote:

>>> "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022

>>> It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has been a
>>> sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However, "obvious" isn't
>>> always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical evidence, I
>>> decided to see what I could come up with.

>>> Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
>>> eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that simply
>>> quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
>>> obsession. Using the Google feed,

>>> For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
>>> by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the 7-day period
>>> Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
>>> calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
>>> previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make up for
>>> Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).

>>> Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
>>> mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
>>> 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
>>> nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
>>> mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly triple. Which
>>> gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.

>>> I think these figures speak for themselves.

>> Note to Corey:

>> https://news.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=169631&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#169631

>> Have a look at the thread on Nova BBS, and you can see the post was definitely a crosspost:

>> https://news.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=169631&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#169631

> Yes, quite right...

Corey admitted he was mistaken.

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:41:40 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>
> "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022
>
> It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has been a
> sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However, "obvious" isn't
> always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical evidence, I
> decided to see what I could come up with.
>
> Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
> eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that simply
> quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
> obsession. Using the Google feed,
>
> For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
> by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the 7-day period
> Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
> calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
> previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make up for
> Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
>
> Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
> mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
> 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
> nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
> mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly triple. Which
> gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
>
> I think these figures speak for themselves.

And the count keeps growing.

🙂

Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:

> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:41:40 PM UTC-4, George Dance wrote:
>
>> "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022
>>
>> It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has been a
>> sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However, "obvious" isn't
>> always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical evidence, I
>> decided to see what I could come up with.
>>
>> Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
>> eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that simply
>> quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
>> obsession. Using the Google feed,
>>
>> For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
>> by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the 7-day period
>> Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
>> calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
>> previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make up for
>> Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
>>
>> Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
>> mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
>> 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
>> nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
>> mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly triple. Which
>> gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
>>
>> I think these figures speak for themselves.

> Most interesting survey, however, If I were you, I would be more concerned with xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Jim Senetto continues to obsess over the life and family of others... noted.....

On Friday, September 23, 2022 at 1:06:04 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:41:40 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >
> > "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022
> >
> > It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has been a
> > sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However, "obvious" isn't
> > always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical evidence, I
> > decided to see what I could come up with.
> >
> > Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
> > eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that simply
> > quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
> > obsession. Using the Google feed,
> >
> > For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
> > by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the 7-day period
> > Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
> > calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
> > previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make up for
> > Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
> >
> > Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
> > mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
> > 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
> > nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
> > mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly triple. Which
> > gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
> >
> > I think these figures speak for themselves.
> And the count keeps growing.

Still doesn't match the sheer amount of the Dockery and his soiled sock monkey troll and spam index-- they posts easily twice, perhaps three times, the amount of the rest of the group COMBINED!

Ash Wurthing wrote:

> On Friday, September 23, 2022 at 1:06:04 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:41:40 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>> >
>> > "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022
>> >
>> > It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has been a
>> > sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However, "obvious" isn't
>> > always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical evidence, I
>> > decided to see what I could come up with.
>> >
>> > Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
>> > eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that simply
>> > quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
>> > obsession. Using the Google feed,
>> >
>> > For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
>> > by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the 7-day period
>> > Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
>> > calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
>> > previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make up for
>> > Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
>> >
>> > Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
>> > mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
>> > 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
>> > nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
>> > mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly triple. Which
>> > gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
>> >
>> > I think these figures speak for themselves.
>> And the count keeps growing.

> Still doesn't match

Yes it does, you are just biased, Ash....

Why are Zod and Will Dockery so obsessive with promoting Ilya's cowardly essay attacks, insensitivity toward women and minorities and making this group a hostile environment for them?

From the intro of his "Send Gangsters to Africa" essay by Ilya:
"Many people have tried different things to fix the inner city. I have given a lot of thought to the subject myself. I am now proposing something that I have not seen proposed by credible sources, and that is as follows:
Send gangsters to Africa.

If they do not like America, let them leave America. If they do not like the white man, let them go to a place where there are few white people."
~~ https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/5Asgundg-G8/m/D6veDcpyBAAJ

THE TITLE OF THE ESSAY "Send gangsters to Africa" AND THE THEME OF THE
ESSAY, IS A RACIST TALKING POINT!!! Trump and his ilk say this very slogan as well.
"Machine gun preacher says send gang members back to Africa"
*(Aug 29, 2018)
https://www.theadvocate.com.au/story/5615889/machine-gun-preacher-says-send-gang-members-back-to-africa/

An assault rifle makes everything "Right"!

On Friday, September 23, 2022 at 6:57:18 PM UTC-4, vhug...@gmail.com wrote:
> Ash Wurthing wrote:
>
> > On Friday, September 23, 2022 at 1:06:04 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> >> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:41:40 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022
> >> >
> >> > It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has been a
> >> > sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However, "obvious" isn't
> >> > always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical evidence, I
> >> > decided to see what I could come up with.
> >> >
> >> > Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
> >> > eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that simply
> >> > quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
> >> > obsession. Using the Google feed,
> >> >
> >> > For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
> >> > by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the 7-day period
> >> > Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
> >> > calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
> >> > previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make up for
> >> > Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
> >> >
> >> > Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
> >> > mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
> >> > 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
> >> > nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
> >> > mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly triple. Which
> >> > gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
> >> >
> >> > I think these figures speak for themselves.
> >> And the count keeps growing.
>
> > Still doesn't match
> Yes it does, you are just biased, Ash....

Biased? Because I'm incensed about you supporting Ilya speaking so on the this group about my kin and fellow citizens? Constantly disparaging me for being a Feminist?

You know who says send inner city gangstas- aka black gang members to Africa? White supremacists do.

On Friday, September 23, 2022 at 6:17:49 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
> Why are Zod and Will Dockery so obsessive with promoting Ilya's cowardly essay attacks, insensitivity toward women and minorities and making this group a hostile environment for them?

The Donkey sees Ilya as cannon fodder. If people are busy making fun of Ilya, they won't be making fun of him.

So the Donkey and his sock egg Ilya on with flattery and empty praise; and Ilya, believing them, continues to make his off-topic (and often politically incorrect) posts.

Which only gets Ilya in deep sh*t with the rest of us who would prefer AAPC to remain a poetry group (as opposed to some Russian expatriate's soapbox).

It's a vicious circle that has no end in sight.

On Friday, September 23, 2022 at 6:57:18 PM UTC-4, vhug...@gmail.com wrote:
> Ash Wurthing wrote:
>
> > On Friday, September 23, 2022 at 1:06:04 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> >> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:41:40 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022
> >> >
> >> > It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has been a
> >> > sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However, "obvious" isn't
> >> > always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical evidence, I
> >> > decided to see what I could come up with.
> >> >
> >> > Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
> >> > eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that simply
> >> > quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
> >> > obsession. Using the Google feed,
> >> >
> >> > For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
> >> > by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the 7-day period
> >> > Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
> >> > calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
> >> > previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make up for
> >> > Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
> >> >
> >> > Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
> >> > mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
> >> > 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
> >> > nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
> >> > mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly triple. Which
> >> > gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
> >> >
> >> > I think these figures speak for themselves.
> >> And the count keeps growing.
>
> > Still doesn't match
> Yes it does, you are just biased, Ash....

At least he's honest about it.

George J. Dance wrote:

>
> "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022

> It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has been a
> sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However, "obvious" isn't
> always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical evidence, I
> decided to see what I could come up with.

> Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
> eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that simply
> quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
> obsession. Using the Google feed,

> For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
> by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the 7-day period
> Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
> calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
> previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make up for
> Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).

> Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
> mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
> 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
> nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
> mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly triple. Which
> gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.

> I think these figures speak for themselves.

Yep... well put, G.D.

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:41:40 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>
> "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022
>
> It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has been a
> sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However, "obvious" isn't
> always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical evidence, I
> decided to see what I could come up with.
>
> Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
> eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that simply
> quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
> obsession. Using the Google feed,
>
> For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
> by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the 7-day period
> Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
> calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
> previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make up for
> Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
>
> Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
> mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
> 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
> nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
> mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly triple. Which
> gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
>
> I think these figures speak for themselves.

Still going.

🙂

On Friday, September 16, 2022 at 5:11:05 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>
> (cleaned-up copy)
> "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022
> It should be obvious to anyone reading aapc that there has been a
> sharp increase in Jim Senetto's Will Dockery Obsession this past week.
> However, "obvious" isn't always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for
> statistical evidence, I decided to see what I could come up with.
> Methodology - I decided to use only the subject's OPs, to
> eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will Dockery, or posts
> quoted mentions of Will Dockery in the backthread (neither of which is
> credible evidence of
> obsession. Using the Google feed).
>
> For the observation period (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
> by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, and used the latter
> as a percentage of the former to calculate
> the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the previous 8 days
> (Aug. 30-Sep. 6) as a control, adding an extra day to make up for
> Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
>
> Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
> mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
> 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
> rose from 18 to 35 (up 94%). Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
> mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29 (up 190%), which
> gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
> Conclusion - I think these figures speak for themselves.

And the numbers rise.

On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 10:21:46 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Friday, September 16, 2022 at 5:11:05 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >
> > (cleaned-up copy)
> > "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022
> > It should be obvious to anyone reading aapc that there has been a
> > sharp increase in Jim Senetto's Will Dockery Obsession this past week.
> > However, "obvious" isn't always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for
> > statistical evidence, I decided to see what I could come up with.
> > Methodology - I decided to use only the subject's OPs, to
> > eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will Dockery, or posts
> > quoted mentions of Will Dockery in the backthread (neither of which is
> > credible evidence of
> > obsession. Using the Google feed).
> >
> > For the observation period (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
> > by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, and used the latter
> > as a percentage of the former to calculate
> > the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the previous 8 days
> > (Aug. 30-Sep. 6) as a control, adding an extra day to make up for
> > Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
> >
> > Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
> > mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
> > 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
> > rose from 18 to 35 (up 94%). Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
> > mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29 (up 190%), which
> > gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
> > Conclusion - I think these figures speak for themselves.
>
> And the numbers rise.

Of course they do -- you increase the number of posts you make each day, so the number of negative reactions to them increases exponentially as a result.

Why does everyone detest you so much, Donkey?

Michael Pendragon
"Not true, when I made a mistake, I correct it."
-- Will Donkey, demonstrating his inability to successfully make corrections.

On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 3:34:33 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> On 2022-09-15 9:57 p.m., Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:41:40 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>
> >> "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022
> >>
> >> It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has been a
> >> sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However, "obvious" isn't
> >> always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical evidence, I
> >> decided to see what I could come up with.
> >>
> >> Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
> >> eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that simply
> >> quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
> >> obsession. Using the Google feed,
> >>
> >> For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
> >> by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the 7-day period
> >> Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
> >> calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
> >> previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make up for
> >> Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
> >>
> >> Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
> >> mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
> >> 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
> >> nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
> >> mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly triple. Which
> >> gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
> >>
> >> I think these figures speak for themselves.
> >
> >
> > Most interesting survey, however, If I were you, I would be more concerned with the weight of your wife and daughter, which seems far more dangerous to health than my thinking Dockery is a twat, something he has heard for 25 years from various folks and groups.
> >
> > At 75, I carry 186 in weight, 6' in height on a 32-inch waist.
> >
> > Personally, I think you should focus more on their health rather than my interest in useless bums, or your dismal political career where you posted 0 wins and 10 loses.
> >
> > Other than that, I wish you a pleasant evening.
> >
> I already replied to this post, but it's worth pointing out again it
> exists -
> Message-ID: <3f07292f-5935-441b...@googlegroups.com>
> - in light of the fact that
> (1) he deleted his reply, and declared (again) that he had left aapc; and
> (2) his allies are now saying it was "posted behind his back," meaning
> he never saw it.

<Crickets>

On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 10:52:57 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 3:34:33 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > On 2022-09-15 9:57 p.m., Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:
> > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:41:40 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >
> > >> "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022
> > >>
> > >> It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has been a
> > >> sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However, "obvious" isn't
> > >> always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical evidence, I
> > >> decided to see what I could come up with.
> > >>
> > >> Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
> > >> eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that simply
> > >> quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
> > >> obsession. Using the Google feed,
> > >>
> > >> For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
> > >> by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the 7-day period
> > >> Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
> > >> calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
> > >> previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make up for
> > >> Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
> > >>
> > >> Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
> > >> mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
> > >> 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
> > >> nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
> > >> mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly triple. Which
> > >> gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
> > >>
> > >> I think these figures speak for themselves.
> > >
> > >
> > > Most interesting survey, however, If I were you, I would be more concerned with the weight of your wife and daughter, which seems far more dangerous to health than my thinking Dockery is a twat, something he has heard for 25 years from various folks and groups.
> > >
> > > At 75, I carry 186 in weight, 6' in height on a 32-inch waist.
> > >
> > > Personally, I think you should focus more on their health rather than my interest in useless bums, or your dismal political career where you posted 0 wins and 10 loses.
> > >
> > > Other than that, I wish you a pleasant evening.
> > >
> > I already replied to this post, but it's worth pointing out again it
> > exists -
> > Message-ID: <3f07292f-5935-441b...@googlegroups.com>
> > - in light of the fact that
> > (1) he deleted his reply, and declared (again) that he had left aapc; and
> > (2) his allies are now saying it was "posted behind his back," meaning
> > he never saw it.
> <Crickets>

What do you think we're supposed to be saying?

That George is lying through his teeth?

Jim's "allies" were saying that it was "posted behind his back" because George had cross-posted it to at least one group Jim doesn't participate in.

George thinks that by building "strawmen" he is putting one over on the rest of us. He consistently fails to realize that we all know exactly what he is doing. This is one of the main reasons why few people here like and/or trust George.

Happy now, Donkey?

Michael Pendragon
"I'm correcting the part where you're lying and ingredients, Pendragon, you shit slinging little monkey."
-- Will Dockery fantasizing about dinner.

On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 11:15:50 AM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 10:52:57 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 3:34:33 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > On 2022-09-15 9:57 p.m., Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:41:40 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > >
> > > >> "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022
> > > >>
> > > >> It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has been a
> > > >> sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However, "obvious" isn't
> > > >> always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical evidence, I
> > > >> decided to see what I could come up with.
> > > >>
> > > >> Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
> > > >> eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that simply
> > > >> quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
> > > >> obsession. Using the Google feed,
> > > >>
> > > >> For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
> > > >> by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the 7-day period
> > > >> Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
> > > >> calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
> > > >> previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make up for
> > > >> Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
> > > >>
> > > >> Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
> > > >> mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
> > > >> 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
> > > >> nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
> > > >> mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly triple. Which
> > > >> gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
> > > >>
> > > >> I think these figures speak for themselves.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Most interesting survey, however, If I were you, I would be more concerned with the weight of your wife and daughter, which seems far more dangerous to health than my thinking Dockery is a twat, something he has heard for 25 years from various folks and groups.
> > > >
> > > > At 75, I carry 186 in weight, 6' in height on a 32-inch waist.
> > > >
> > > > Personally, I think you should focus more on their health rather than my interest in useless bums, or your dismal political career where you posted 0 wins and 10 loses.
> > > >
> > > > Other than that, I wish you a pleasant evening.
> > > >
> > > I already replied to this post, but it's worth pointing out again it
> > > exists -
> > > Message-ID: <3f07292f-5935-441b...@googlegroups.com>
> > > - in light of the fact that
> > > (1) he deleted his reply, and declared (again) that he had left aapc; and
> > > (2) his allies are now saying it was "posted behind his back," meaning
> > > he never saw it.
> > <Crickets>
> What do you think we're supposed to be saying?
>
> That George is lying through his teeth?
>
> Jim's "allies" were saying that it was "posted behind his back" because George had cross-posted it to at least one group Jim doesn't participate in.
>
> George thinks that by building "strawmen" he is putting one over on the rest of us. He consistently fails to realize that we all know exactly what he is doing. This is one of the main reasons why few people here like and/or trust George.
>
> Happy now, Donkey?
>
>
> Michael Pendragon
> "I'm correcting the part where you're lying and ingredients, Pendragon, you shit slinging little monkey."
> -- Will Dockery fantasizing about dinner.

Ingredients, ingredients, and more ingredients.

On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 3:34:33 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> On 2022-09-15 9:57 p.m., Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:41:40 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >> "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022
> >>
> >> It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has been a
> >> sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However, "obvious" isn't
> >> always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical evidence, I
> >> decided to see what I could come up with.
> >>
> >> Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
> >> eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that simply
> >> quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
> >> obsession. Using the Google feed,
> >>
> >> For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
> >> by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the 7-day period
> >> Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
> >> calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
> >> previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make up for
> >> Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
> >>
> >> Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
> >> mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
> >> 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
> >> nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
> >> mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly triple. Which
> >> gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
> >>
> >> I think these figures speak for themselves.
> >
> >
> > Most interesting survey, however, If I were you, I would be more concerned with the weight of your wife and daughter, which seems far more dangerous to health than my thinking Dockery is a twat, something he has heard for 25 years from various folks and groups.
> >
> > At 75, I carry 186 in weight, 6' in height on a 32-inch waist.
> >
> > Personally, I think you should focus more on their health rather than my interest in useless bums, or your dismal political career where you posted 0 wins and 10 loses.
> >
> > Other than that, I wish you a pleasant evening.
> >
> I already replied to this post, but it's worth pointing out again it
> exists -
> Message-ID: <3f07292f-5935-441b...@googlegroups.com>
> - in light of the fact that
> (1) he deleted his reply, and declared (again) that he had left aapc; and
> (2) his allies are now saying it was "posted behind his back," meaning
> he never saw it.

Since Senetto obviously read and replied to you, it was hardly behind his back.

So Pendragon is lying again, which is expected from a shit slinging little monkey mother fucker like him.

HTH and HAND.

On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 2:53:20 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 3:34:33 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > On 2022-09-15 9:57 p.m., Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:
> > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:41:40 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > >> "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022
> > >>
> > >> It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has been a
> > >> sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However, "obvious" isn't
> > >> always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical evidence, I
> > >> decided to see what I could come up with.
> > >>
> > >> Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
> > >> eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that simply
> > >> quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
> > >> obsession. Using the Google feed,
> > >>
> > >> For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
> > >> by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the 7-day period
> > >> Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
> > >> calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
> > >> previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make up for
> > >> Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
> > >>
> > >> Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
> > >> mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
> > >> 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
> > >> nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
> > >> mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly triple. Which
> > >> gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
> > >>
> > >> I think these figures speak for themselves.
> > >
> > >
> > > Most interesting survey, however, If I were you, I would be more concerned with the weight of your wife and daughter, which seems far more dangerous to health than my thinking Dockery is a twat, something he has heard for 25 years from various folks and groups.
> > >
> > > At 75, I carry 186 in weight, 6' in height on a 32-inch waist.
> > >
> > > Personally, I think you should focus more on their health rather than my interest in useless bums, or your dismal political career where you posted 0 wins and 10 loses.
> > >
> > > Other than that, I wish you a pleasant evening.
> > >
> > I already replied to this post, but it's worth pointing out again it
> > exists -
> > Message-ID: <3f07292f-5935-441b...@googlegroups.com>
> > - in light of the fact that
> > (1) he deleted his reply, and declared (again) that he had left aapc; and
> > (2) his allies are now saying it was "posted behind his back," meaning
> > he never saw it.
> Since Senetto obviously read and replied to you, it was hardly behind his back.
>
> So Pendragon is lying again, which is expected from a shit slinging little monkey mother fucker like him.
>
> HTH and HAND.

Sorry , empty head, I knew nothing of the cross post.

On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 3:04:38 PM UTC-4, blackpo...@aol.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 2:53:20 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 3:34:33 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > On 2022-09-15 9:57 p.m., Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:41:40 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > >> "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022
> > > >>
> > > >> It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has been a
> > > >> sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However, "obvious" isn't
> > > >> always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical evidence, I
> > > >> decided to see what I could come up with.
> > > >>
> > > >> Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
> > > >> eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that simply
> > > >> quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
> > > >> obsession. Using the Google feed,
> > > >>
> > > >> For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
> > > >> by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the 7-day period
> > > >> Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
> > > >> calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
> > > >> previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make up for
> > > >> Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
> > > >>
> > > >> Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
> > > >> mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
> > > >> 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
> > > >> nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
> > > >> mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly triple. Which
> > > >> gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
> > > >>
> > > >> I think these figures speak for themselves.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Most interesting survey, however, If I were you, I would be more concerned with the weight of your wife and daughter, which seems far more dangerous to health than my thinking Dockery is a twat, something he has heard for 25 years from various folks and groups.
> > > >
> > > > At 75, I carry 186 in weight, 6' in height on a 32-inch waist.
> > > >
> > > > Personally, I think you should focus more on their health rather than my interest in useless bums, or your dismal political career where you posted 0 wins and 10 loses.
> > > >
> > > > Other than that, I wish you a pleasant evening.
> > > >
> > > I already replied to this post, but it's worth pointing out again it
> > > exists -
> > > Message-ID: <3f07292f-5935-441b...@googlegroups.com>
> > > - in light of the fact that
> > > (1) he deleted his reply, and declared (again) that he had left aapc; and
> > > (2) his allies are now saying it was "posted behind his back," meaning
> > > he never saw it.
> > Since Senetto obviously read and replied to you, it was hardly behind his back.
> >
> > So Pendragon is lying again, which is expected from a shit slinging little monkey mother fucker like him.
> >
> > HTH and HAND.
> Sorry , empty head, I knew nothing of the cross post.

So what?

You read and replied to the post.

On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 3:10:12 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 3:04:38 PM UTC-4, blackpo...@aol.com wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 2:53:20 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 3:34:33 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > On 2022-09-15 9:57 p.m., Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:41:40 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > >> "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022
> > > > >>
> > > > >> It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has been a
> > > > >> sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However, "obvious" isn't
> > > > >> always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical evidence, I
> > > > >> decided to see what I could come up with.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
> > > > >> eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that simply
> > > > >> quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
> > > > >> obsession. Using the Google feed,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
> > > > >> by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the 7-day period
> > > > >> Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
> > > > >> calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
> > > > >> previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make up for
> > > > >> Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
> > > > >> mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
> > > > >> 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
> > > > >> nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
> > > > >> mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly triple.. Which
> > > > >> gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I think these figures speak for themselves.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Most interesting survey, however, If I were you, I would be more concerned with the weight of your wife and daughter, which seems far more dangerous to health than my thinking Dockery is a twat, something he has heard for 25 years from various folks and groups.
> > > > >
> > > > > At 75, I carry 186 in weight, 6' in height on a 32-inch waist.
> > > > >
> > > > > Personally, I think you should focus more on their health rather than my interest in useless bums, or your dismal political career where you posted 0 wins and 10 loses.
> > > > >
> > > > > Other than that, I wish you a pleasant evening.
> > > > >
> > > > I already replied to this post, but it's worth pointing out again it
> > > > exists -
> > > > Message-ID: <3f07292f-5935-441b...@googlegroups.com>
> > > > - in light of the fact that
> > > > (1) he deleted his reply, and declared (again) that he had left aapc; and
> > > > (2) his allies are now saying it was "posted behind his back," meaning
> > > > he never saw it.
> > > Since Senetto obviously read and replied to you, it was hardly behind his back.
> > >
> > > So Pendragon is lying again, which is expected from a shit slinging little monkey mother fucker like him.
> > >
> > > HTH and HAND.
> > Sorry , empty head, I knew nothing of the cross post.
> So what?
>
> You read and replied to the post.

So buttons, ingredients.

On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 3:10:12 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 3:04:38 PM UTC-4, blackpo...@aol.com wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 2:53:20 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 3:34:33 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > On 2022-09-15 9:57 p.m., Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:41:40 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > >> "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022
> > > > >>
> > > > >> It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has been a
> > > > >> sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However, "obvious" isn't
> > > > >> always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical evidence, I
> > > > >> decided to see what I could come up with.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
> > > > >> eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that simply
> > > > >> quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
> > > > >> obsession. Using the Google feed,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
> > > > >> by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the 7-day period
> > > > >> Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
> > > > >> calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
> > > > >> previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make up for
> > > > >> Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
> > > > >> mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
> > > > >> 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
> > > > >> nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
> > > > >> mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly triple.. Which
> > > > >> gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I think these figures speak for themselves.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Most interesting survey, however, If I were you, I would be more concerned with the weight of your wife and daughter, which seems far more dangerous to health than my thinking Dockery is a twat, something he has heard for 25 years from various folks and groups.
> > > > >
> > > > > At 75, I carry 186 in weight, 6' in height on a 32-inch waist.
> > > > >
> > > > > Personally, I think you should focus more on their health rather than my interest in useless bums, or your dismal political career where you posted 0 wins and 10 loses.
> > > > >
> > > > > Other than that, I wish you a pleasant evening.
> > > > >
> > > > I already replied to this post, but it's worth pointing out again it
> > > > exists -
> > > > Message-ID: <3f07292f-5935-441b...@googlegroups.com>
> > > > - in light of the fact that
> > > > (1) he deleted his reply, and declared (again) that he had left aapc; and
> > > > (2) his allies are now saying it was "posted behind his back," meaning
> > > > he never saw it.
> > > Since Senetto obviously read and replied to you, it was hardly behind his back.
> > >
> > > So Pendragon is lying again, which is expected from a shit slinging little monkey mother fucker like him.
> > >
> > > HTH and HAND.
> > Sorry , empty head, I knew nothing of the cross post.
> So what?
>
> You read and replied to the post.

Asshole..the behind my back was the cross posting, which I knew nothing about.

I assumed when I post here, it stays here.

I was wrong and now I'll comment on Dunce knowing it will be read at the other joint.. Dunce is a scumbag.

and you, Dockery, a mother fucker.

Tell Clay you've riled me up and that isn't good.

On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 3:24:39 PM UTC-4, blackpo...@aol.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 3:10:12 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 3:04:38 PM UTC-4, blackpo...@aol.com wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 2:53:20 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 3:34:33 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo..ca wrote:
> > > > > On 2022-09-15 9:57 p.m., Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:
> > > > > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:41:40 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > > >> "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep. 14, 2022
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has been a
> > > > > >> sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However, "obvious" isn't
> > > > > >> always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical evidence, I
> > > > > >> decided to see what I could come up with.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
> > > > > >> eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that simply
> > > > > >> quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
> > > > > >> obsession. Using the Google feed,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of OPs made
> > > > > >> by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the 7-day period
> > > > > >> Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
> > > > > >> calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
> > > > > >> previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make up for
> > > > > >> Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10 of which
> > > > > >> mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession Index of
> > > > > >> 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the subject's OPs
> > > > > >> nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise in posts
> > > > > >> mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly triple. Which
> > > > > >> gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I think these figures speak for themselves.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Most interesting survey, however, If I were you, I would be more concerned with the weight of your wife and daughter, which seems far more dangerous to health than my thinking Dockery is a twat, something he has heard for 25 years from various folks and groups.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > At 75, I carry 186 in weight, 6' in height on a 32-inch waist.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Personally, I think you should focus more on their health rather than my interest in useless bums, or your dismal political career where you posted 0 wins and 10 loses.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Other than that, I wish you a pleasant evening.
> > > > > >
> > > > > I already replied to this post, but it's worth pointing out again it
> > > > > exists -
> > > > > Message-ID: <3f07292f-5935-441b...@googlegroups.com>
> > > > > - in light of the fact that
> > > > > (1) he deleted his reply, and declared (again) that he had left aapc; and
> > > > > (2) his allies are now saying it was "posted behind his back," meaning
> > > > > he never saw it.
> > > > Since Senetto obviously read and replied to you, it was hardly behind his back.
> > > >
> > > > So Pendragon is lying again, which is expected from a shit slinging little monkey mother fucker like him.
> > > >
> > > > HTH and HAND.
> > > Sorry , empty head, I knew nothing of the cross post.
> > So what?
> >
> > You read and replied to the post.
> Asshole..the behind my back was the cross posting, which I knew nothing about.
>
> I assumed when I post here, it stays here.
>
> I was wrong and now I'll comment on Dunce knowing it will be read at the other joint.. Dunce is a scumbag.
>
> and you, Dockery, a mother fucker.
>
> Tell Clay you've riled me up and that isn't good.

“What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas.”
is just an advertising slogan. It isn’t true.
Posts here will appear in Google search.

George J. Dance wrote:

> On 2022-09-16 6:10 p.m., Spam-I-Am wrote:
>> On Friday, September 16, 2022 at 5:17:30 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>>
>>> Depends on what means by the term "Jim Senetto".
>>
>> There’s something wrong with that sentence. Do you know what it is?

> Once again, that depends on whom it's wrong to (or for).

> What's wrong for me is that it omitted a word, "one". Though on
> reflection it would have been better in the passive tense; so in that
> sense, it would have still been wrong as there was a better way to put it.

> Whereas for you, what was wrong with it was that it led to the next
> sentence, the one you post-edited out:

> "If we use that [ie, "Jim Senetto"] as a
> general term for those too stupid to know, or care, what an apostrophe
> means, then I'd say there are now four of you."

Well put, GD....

On 2022-09-28 3:24 p.m., Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 3:10:12 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 3:04:38 PM UTC-4,
blackpo...@aol.com wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 2:53:20 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery
wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 3:34:33 PM UTC-4,
george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>>>>> On 2022-09-15 9:57 p.m., Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:
>>>>>> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:41:40 PM UTC-4,
george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>>>>>>> "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep.
14, 2022
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has
been a
>>>>>>> sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However,
"obvious" isn't
>>>>>>> always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical
evidence, I
>>>>>>> decided to see what I could come up with.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
>>>>>>> eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that
simply
>>>>>>> quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
>>>>>>> obsession. Using the Google feed,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of
OPs made
>>>>>>> by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the
7-day period
>>>>>>> Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
>>>>>>> calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
>>>>>>> previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make
up for
>>>>>>> Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10
of which
>>>>>>> mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession
Index of
>>>>>>> 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the
subject's OPs
>>>>>>> nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise
in posts
>>>>>>> mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly
triple. Which
>>>>>>> gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think these figures speak for themselves.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Most interesting survey, however, If I were you, I would be more
concerned with the weight of your wife and daughter, which seems far
more dangerous to health than my thinking Dockery is a twat, something
he has heard for 25 years from various folks and groups.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At 75, I carry 186 in weight, 6' in height on a 32-inch waist.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Personally, I think you should focus more on their health rather
than my interest in useless bums, or your dismal political career where
you posted 0 wins and 10 loses.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Other than that, I wish you a pleasant evening.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I already replied to this post, but it's worth pointing out again it
>>>>> exists -
>>>>> Message-ID: <3f07292f-5935-441b...@googlegroups.com>
>>>>> - in light of the fact that
>>>>> (1) he deleted his reply, and declared (again) that he had left
aapc; and
>>>>> (2) his allies are now saying it was "posted behind his back,"
meaning
>>>>> he never saw it.
>>>> Since Senetto obviously read and replied to you, it was hardly
behind his back.
>>>>
>>>> So Pendragon is lying again, which is expected from a shit
slinging little monkey mother fucker like him.
>>>>
>>>> HTH and HAND.
>>> Sorry , empty head, I knew nothing of the cross post.
>> So what?
>>
>> You read and replied to the post.
>
>
> Asshole..the behind my back was the cross posting, which I knew
nothing about.

Your problem may be that you still don't understand how cross-posting
works. Cross-posting is posting one message, at one time, to more than
one usenet group.

I cross-posted two messages on this thread. We know you saw the first
one, even if you didn't read it, because you replied to it. You didn't
reply to the second, so we can't prove you saw that one; but it's hard
to believe you didn't see it either; and, besides, it was merely a
cleaned-up edit of the first one.

IOW - two posts, both of which you've seen, and had an opportunity to
read or reply to. If you didn't read 'em, that was purely by your own
choice.

> I assumed when I post here, it stays here.
>
> I was wrong

And you still are, it seems.

No one else can cross-post *your* posts to another group but you. People
can cross-post their own posts only, not those of anyone else.

> and now I'll comment on Dunce knowing it will be read at the other
joint..
At least now you're letting us know that you didn't read either of the
posts in question.

As the archives show, one was an OP, the other a reply to it; neither
contained your "comment on Dunce" or any other "comments" by
anyone else. In fact, neither contained any backthread at all.

> Dunce is a scumbag.
>
> and you, Dockery, a mother fucker.

And you, Mr. Senetto, appear to have OCD, as I've shown. But I'm not a
psychiatrist; you really should discuss your condition with one.

On Friday, September 30, 2022 at 12:55:30 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> On 2022-09-28 3:24 p.m., Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 3:10:12 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> >> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 3:04:38 PM UTC-4,
> blackpo...@aol.com wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 2:53:20 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery
> wrote:
> >>>> On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 3:34:33 PM UTC-4,
> george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >>>>> On 2022-09-15 9:57 p.m., Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:
> >>>>>> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:41:40 PM UTC-4,
> george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> "Chimp Obsesso" - Jim Senetto's Dockery Obsession Index, Sep.
> 14, 2022
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It should be obvious to anyone reading the list that there has
> been a
> >>>>>>> sharp increase in Jim Senetto's this past week. However,
> "obvious" isn't
> >>>>>>> always good enough. Accordingly, when asked for statistical
> evidence, I
> >>>>>>> decided to see what I could come up with.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Methodology - I decided to limit myself to the subject's OPs, to
> >>>>>>> eliminate replies to others' posts that mentioned Will, or that
> simply
> >>>>>>> quoted mentions of Will, neither of which is credible evidence of
> >>>>>>> obsession. Using the Google feed,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> For the previous 7 days (Sept. 7-13) I added up the number of
> OPs made
> >>>>>>> by the subject, and the number that mentioned Will, for the
> 7-day period
> >>>>>>> Sept. 7-13 and used the latter as a percentage of the former to
> >>>>>>> calculate the subject's Dockery Obsession Index. I then used the
> >>>>>>> previous 8 days (Aug. 30-Sep. 6), adding an extra day to make
> up for
> >>>>>>> Labor Day (when the subject did not post any OPs).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Results - For the control period, the subject made 18 OPs, 10
> of which
> >>>>>>> mentioned or alluded to Will Dockery, for a Dockery Obsession
> Index of
> >>>>>>> 55.56%. In contrast, over the following 7 days saw the
> subject's OPs
> >>>>>>> nearly doubled, from 18 to 35. Even more dramatic was the rise
> in posts
> >>>>>>> mentioning Will Dockery, which rose from 10 to 29, nearly
> triple. Which
> >>>>>>> gives the subject a Dockery Obsession Index of 82.86%.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I think these figures speak for themselves.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Most interesting survey, however, If I were you, I would be more
> concerned with the weight of your wife and daughter, which seems far
> more dangerous to health than my thinking Dockery is a twat, something
> he has heard for 25 years from various folks and groups.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> At 75, I carry 186 in weight, 6' in height on a 32-inch waist.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Personally, I think you should focus more on their health rather
> than my interest in useless bums, or your dismal political career where
> you posted 0 wins and 10 loses.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Other than that, I wish you a pleasant evening.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> I already replied to this post, but it's worth pointing out again it
> >>>>> exists -
> >>>>> Message-ID: <3f07292f-5935-441b...@googlegroups.com>
> >>>>> - in light of the fact that
> >>>>> (1) he deleted his reply, and declared (again) that he had left
> aapc; and
> >>>>> (2) his allies are now saying it was "posted behind his back,"
> meaning
> >>>>> he never saw it.
> >>>> Since Senetto obviously read and replied to you, it was hardly
> behind his back.
> >>>>
> >>>> So Pendragon is lying again, which is expected from a shit
> slinging little monkey mother fucker like him.
> >>>>
> >>>> HTH and HAND.
> >>> Sorry , empty head, I knew nothing of the cross post.
> >> So what?
> >>
> >> You read and replied to the post.
> >
> >
> > Asshole..the behind my back was the cross posting, which I knew
> nothing about.
> Your problem may be that you still don't understand how cross-posting
> works. Cross-posting is posting one message, at one time, to more than
> one usenet group.
>
> I cross-posted two messages on this thread. We know you saw the first
> one, even if you didn't read it, because you replied to it. You didn't
> reply to the second, so we can't prove you saw that one; but it's hard
> to believe you didn't see it either; and, besides, it was merely a
> cleaned-up edit of the first one.
>
> IOW - two posts, both of which you've seen, and had an opportunity to
> read or reply to. If you didn't read 'em, that was purely by your own
> choice.
> > I assumed when I post here, it stays here.
> >
> > I was wrong
> And you still are, it seems.
>
> No one else can cross-post *your* posts to another group but you. People
> can cross-post their own posts only, not those of anyone else.
> > and now I'll comment on Dunce knowing it will be read at the other
> joint..
> At least now you're letting us know that you didn't read either of the
> posts in question.
>
> As the archives show, one was an OP, the other a reply to it; neither
> contained your "comment on Dunce" or any other "comments" by
> anyone else. In fact, neither contained any backthread at all.
> > Dunce is a scumbag.
> >
> > and you, Dockery, a mother fucker.
> And you, Mr. Senetto, appear to have OCD, as I've shown. But I'm not a
> psychiatrist; you really should discuss your condition with one.

Observation is overtaking Senetto's feeble little mind.

And so it goes.