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.

And like clockwork, Jim Senetto seems ready for another obsessed nutjob meltdown.

And so it goes.

On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:38:16 AM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> On 2022-10-20 9:47 a.m., jdcha...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 8:43:53 AM UTC-4, blackpo...@aol.com wrote:
> >> On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 8:34:08 AM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >>> On 2022-10-20 8:28 a.m., Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:
> >>>> On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 8:02:28 AM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >>>>> On 2022-10-19 8:50 p.m., Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Saturday, December 28, 2002 at 4:12:42 PM UTC-5, opb...@yahoo.com
> >>>>> wrote:> and you know… that over the years, I HAVE

<Troll snipped>

> >>>>> Why are you post-editing 20-year old conversations from rec.arts.poems,
> >>>>> Chimp?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Will Dockery...16 years ago
> >>>>
> >>>> "I consider myself, above all else, an entertainer, and many people do dig a
> >>>> kick-ass folk-rock performance.
> >>>>
> >>>> Musicians see what I'm all about and want a piece of that action, and I'm a
> >>>> free agent to bring my "special guest star" to anyone who calls my name, to
> >>>> climb onstage and reach into my bag of tricks.
> >>>>
> >>>> It's a great, bumpy and wild ride being Will Dockery, and I wouldn't trade
> >>>> it for all the world's gold."
> >>>>
> >>> He sounds like someone happy with his life. No wonder you envy and
> >>> resent him so.
> >> Nothing better

<Malicious lies and misrepresentations from Jim Senetto snipped>
> >> There is nothing else to know about Will Dockery.

As if you'd ever stop obsessing over me, Senetto?
> > actually, there's plenty of other explanations that are possible... perhaps he was grieving and was too sad and distressed to share the info here... or perhaps he felt that the info was too personal and wouldn't be recieved with sympathy and support in a group that is quite often toxic and malicious and nasty and mean spirited and hateful...
> Thank you, Jordy; those are all good hypotheses. But I'm afraid you left
> out the most obvious one:
>
> He didn't want ace reporter "Edward Rochester" post-editing his comments
> and putting them in a trollthread.

Well put, George.

(Moved from the troll thread)

Will Dockery wrote:

> On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:38:16 AM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>> On 2022-10-20 9:47 a.m., jdcha...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 8:43:53 AM UTC-4, blackpo...@aol.com wrote:
>> >> On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 8:34:08 AM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>> >>> On 2022-10-20 8:28 a.m., Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:
>> >>>> On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 8:02:28 AM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>> >>>>> On 2022-10-19 8:50 p.m., Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Saturday, December 28, 2002 at 4:12:42 PM UTC-5, opb...@yahoo.com
>> >>>>> wrote:> and you know… that over the years, I HAVE

> <Troll snipped>

>> >>>>> Why are you post-editing 20-year old conversations from rec.arts.poems,
>> >>>>> Chimp?
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Will Dockery...16 years ago
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "I consider myself, above all else, an entertainer, and many people do dig a
>> >>>> kick-ass folk-rock performance.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Musicians see what I'm all about and want a piece of that action, and I'm a
>> >>>> free agent to bring my "special guest star" to anyone who calls my name, to
>> >>>> climb onstage and reach into my bag of tricks.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> It's a great, bumpy and wild ride being Will Dockery, and I wouldn't trade
>> >>>> it for all the world's gold."
>> >>>>
>> >>> He sounds like someone happy with his life. No wonder you envy and
>> >>> resent him so.
>> >> Nothing better

> <Malicious lies and misrepresentations from Jim Senetto snipped>

>> >> There is nothing else to know about Will Dockery.

> As if you'd ever stop obsessing over me, Senetto?

>> > actually, there's plenty of other explanations that are possible... perhaps he was grieving and was too sad and distressed to share the info here... or perhaps he felt that the info was too personal and wouldn't be recieved with sympathy and support in a group that is quite often toxic and malicious and nasty and mean spirited and hateful...
>> Thank you, Jordy; those are all good hypotheses. But I'm afraid you left
>> out the most obvious one:
>>
>> He didn't want ace reporter "Edward Rochester" post-editing his comments
>> and putting them in a trollthread.

> Well put, George.

> (Moved from the troll thread)

Agreed and seconded....

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.

And Jim Senetto's numbers continue to rise.

:)

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

Obsessing over me, Senetto?

Yes, we know what you're concerned with.

🙂

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.

Newcomers can read here to learn about Rochester aka Jim Senetto, and his obsessive, feeble mind.

HTH and HAND.

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.

> Newcomers can read here to learn about Rochester aka Jim Senetto, and his obsessive, feeble mind.

> HTH and HAND.

Yep... that puts Senetto in a ... nut shell.... ha ha.

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

Something we can all agree on.

;)

On Monday, 7 November 2022 at 19:24:23 UTC-5, Will Dockery wrote:
> 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
>
> Something we can all agree on.
>
> ;)

What’s this fucking “we” shit? You got a rat in your pocket?

On Wednesday, October 5, 2022 at 9:35:34 PM UTC-4, Zod wrote:
> Michael Pendragon wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, October 5, 2022 at 4:40:54 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> >> Michael Pendragon wrote:
> >> >> >>>> On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 3:34:33 PM UTC-4, George Dance 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 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 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.
> >>
> >> > You're the one who isn't understanding, George (perhaps intentionally).
> >>
> >> > When you cross-post to different groups, Jim is only able to address your comments in the group/s he is a member of.
> >>
> >> > If you cross-post to RAP and Jim is not a member of RAP, your post (and any accusations it contains) will go unaddressed.
> >>
> >> > Both you and your Donkey have stressed what you believe to be the importance of "setting the record straight." How can Jim set the record straight in groups that he isn't a member of, and is therefore unaware that any accusations had been posted?
> >>
> >> > The alleged accusation that you have been posting behind Jim's back is 100% correct.
> >>
> >> > It's a Georgie Porgie tactic: attack in several groups. When those you've attacked confront you in one of the groups, you'll still remain unchallenged in the others.
> >> Actually, cross posting the truth /is/ setting the record straight.
>
> > Only in the mind of a 5-year old,
> You are the most childish poster on the group, Pendragon....
>
> Just saying....

What else would you expect from a shit slinging little monkey?

🙂

On Monday, 7 November 2022 at 19:51:57 UTC-5, ME wrote:
> On Monday, 7 November 2022 at 19:24:23 UTC-5, Will Dockery wrote:
> > 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
> >
> > Something we can all agree on.
> >
> > ;)
> What’s this fucking “we” shit? You got a rat in your pocket?

And so it goes….

On Thursday, October 6, 2022 at 12:31:08 AM UTC-4, Zod wrote:
> 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."
> What a bunch of nit-pickers on the Pen Gang.

They're trolls, that's what trolls do.

🙂

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.

Senetto obsesses on, heading for his inevitable meltdown.

And so it goes.

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.

Jim Senetto is now sniffing George Dance farts now, of course.

🙂

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

Agreed, and due for an update.

On Thursday, December 25, 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.

Some things never change, do they...?

Ha ha.

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.

Speaking of Senetto stats.

🙂

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.

Ha ha, what a feeble minded dip shit Jim Senetto is...!

On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 5:43:43 PM UTC-5, Zod 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.
> Ha ha, what a feeble minded dip shit Jim Senetto is...!

This from someone with a criminal record I believe? Public indecency was it? With a history of assaulting a disabled person? Some one who brags about sipping wine along the river bank while proudly proclaiming to being a willing vagrant yet tries to fool people for sympathy that he's a helpless victim so he can sponge off of charity so he can continue to live the easy life without having to work for it like the rest of us...
We need to rename this thread "Sordid Sod, Troll Thread Obsesso," in honor of the simp obsessing over this troll thread! Quite the obsesso this Sod is-- he will obsessively bump typo laming and troll threads for month, sometimes even longer than a year. And he will certainly necrobump any dead troll thread irregardless of its age.
#Genereal Zod, this doesn't look like "real" poetry or any kind of poetry commentary that I know of. So your boasts of "real" poetry and poetry commentary are then apparently hoaxes...

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 list grows daily.

🙂

On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 9:16:36 PM UTC-5, 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 list grows daily.

Not compared the ever expanding list of the laming, shaming trolling post editing misrepresenting obsession that sWilly, Duncie, and their drunken manic sock monkey Sod have with everyone in this group that don't give them fan service-- you and Sod post nearly three times as much as everyone else combined!!!
Just reporting the observations that everyone makes every day here!
You whippin' fools makes this child's play.

Ash Wurthing wrote:

> On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 9:16:36 PM UTC-5, 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 list grows daily.

> Not compared the ever expanding list

I didn't expect you to admit or understand it, Ash.

🙂

On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:35:14 AM UTC-5, Will Dockery wrote:
> Ash Wurthing wrote:
>
> > On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 9:16:36 PM UTC-5, 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 list grows daily.
>
> > Not compared the ever expanding list
> I didn't expect you to admit or understand it, Ash.

But I did expect you obsess with your trolling and having to get in the last to enforce your narrative upon everyone else! And you, my puppet, didn't disappoint!!

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, and the current obsessions here make these figures seem mild... ha ha.

On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 7:25:12 PM UTC-5, Zod 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.
> Yep, and the current obsessions here make these figures seem mild... ha ha.

Zod tryin' to speak with any semblance of dignity about obsession... ROFLMAO