On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 16:13:49 +1100, Noddy wrote:

> On 2/02/2022 11:13 am, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>> On 2/02/2022 8:48 am, alvey wrote:
>
>>> Btw, did you ever apologise to me for calling me a "problem gambler"?
>>>
>> No I must have forgotten...
>>
>> https://groups.google.com/g/aus.sport.cricket/c/dN9ANYza7lk/m/mJT2PARI6_gJ
>>
>> How's that syndicate going?
>
> Lol :)
>
> Alvey playing the "fucking sook" card now, is he? Jesus. Talk about a
> hypocritical bunch of fucking soft cocks :)

Nahhhh.
"soft cocks" use killfiles Fraudster. What a buffoon!

alvey

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 2/02/2022 6:05 am, alvey wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Feb 2022 17:39:45 +1000, keithr0 wrote:
>
> snip keith avoiding all the tricky bits
>
>> You asked me about my"Debating skills", that does reinforce my view that
>> the peak of your achievement was to be part of the school debating team.
>> At least there your attempts at word twisting and your smartarse remarks
>> would have been appreciated because that is what school debating is all
>> about, out here in the grown up world less so.
>
> Real "grown ups" [sic] answer questions keith.

Real "grown ups" don't get bullied by jumped up little smart arses.

On 2/02/2022 10:21 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> On 2/02/2022 7:05 am, alvey wrote:
>> On Tue, 1 Feb 2022 17:39:45 +1000, keithr0 wrote:
>>
>> snip keith avoiding all the tricky bits
>>> You asked me about my"Debating skills", that does reinforce my view that
>>> the peak of your achievement was to be part of the school debating team.
>>> At least there your attempts at word twisting and your smartarse remarks
>>> would have been appreciated because that is what school debating is all
>>> about, out here in the grown up world less so.
>> Real "grown ups" [sic] answer questions keith.
>>
>
> +1
>
>
>>
>> alvey
>> Smartarses are far more entertaining than dumbarses.
>>
>
> +1
>
>
Licky lick.

On 1/02/2022 11:53 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> On 2/02/2022 12:07 am, Xeno wrote:
>> On 1/2/2022 11:35 pm, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>> On 1/02/2022 8:45 pm, Xeno wrote:
>>>> On 1/2/2022 9:24 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, I'm pretty sure as well :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Notice the bullshit he has invented here? I never said *anything*
>>>>> about not passing any "exams", and neither did I ever mention
>>>>> missing the last 3 months of school. These are *his* insane
>>>>> inventions. What *I* said was that I left school in the last few
>>>>> weeks as I had been offered an apprenticeship and they wanted me to
>>>>> start straight away. As to how long before the end of term I left I
>>>>> couldn't accurately tell you as it was almost 45 years ago and I
>>>>> don't remember. Could have been 5 weeks, and it could have been 2.
>>>>> Either way, the school probably never noticed :)
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a document here from the Education Department of Victoria
>>>>> which is an Intermediate Technical Examination certificate dated
>>>>> December 15th, 1977 showing me passing in 5 subjects, and I'm happy
>>>>> to scan this certificate and post it to a hosting site and make the
>>>>> link to it available here in exchange for Clasener's guarantee that
>>>>> he admit that everything he has ever claimed about my secondary
>>>>> school record has been nothing but a complete falsehood, that he
>>>>> intentionally fabricated his claims for no reason other than to
>>>>> attempt to pad out his bullshit claim that my education standard
>>>>> was insufficient for me to have qualified for an apprenticeship.
>>>>>
>>>>> Over to you, Kryppy. The ball's in your court now.
>>>>
>>>> Just post your trade qualification numbers Darren. They are the only
>>>> thing that absolutely cannot be faked. Those numbers can also be
>>>> *independently verified* with no restrictions. Keeps frauds under
>>>> control, you see. What's more, the numbers also include encoded
>>>> details of the person concerned.
>>>>
>>>> BTW, no deals. your claims, you get to prove them. It's what you
>>>> impressed upon other, follow your own rules!
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Of course you couldn't take the deal xeno. It was to be expected
>>> because you know that if was qualified enough to undertake an
>>> apprenticeship your whole argument loses value. You then are in an
>>> extremely precarious
>>
>> Wrong. Darren claimed he was an AME(engines) apprentice. Even if he
>> had year 9 passes in *10* subjects, he *still* couldn't enter into
>> *any* AME apprenticeship because the entry level to any and all AME
>> apprenticeship is and always has been year 10 passes in *specific
>> subjects*. It is at year 10 level because it is a technician level
>> apprenticeship. The first 3 years of study are at Cert 3, the 4th year
>> at TAFE brings it up to Cert 4 level. My L-AME friend Graeme is on
>> LinkedIn, go and put the question to him - I did. He is a
>> L-AME(engines), L-AME(electrical) and L-AME(airframe). The L in the
>> name means *Licenced*. He is licenced to work on *turbines*, the
>> engine types Qantas had when he did his AME apprenticeship with them
>> back about the same time I did my apprenticeship as a motor mechanic.
>> As for the claim to the other two apprenticeships Darren claims to
>> have done, well he could not have done them until the laws were
>> *repealed* in 1992. Go look them up. You will find them in a link
>> inadvertently provided by Daryl. In that same link is the *proof* that
>> the AME apprenticeship requires 4 years attendance at TAFE (1280
>> hours). Of course, there is the fact that neither the trade
>> qualifications database nor the archives at PROV contain *any*
>> reference to Darren Thomas Gibbens having even been signed up to any
>> apprenticeship ever nor having been issued with any trade registration
>> numbers. *You* can verify this yourself at PROV.
>>
>> Now run along now and crawl back under your rock.
>>
>>
>
> that's good advice. he only pops up to throw shit
>
>
et tu Brute

On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 12:50:56 +1000, alvey wrote:

> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 12:32:18 +1100, Xeno wrote:
>
>> On 2/2/2022 12:53 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>> On 2/02/2022 12:07 am, Xeno wrote:
>>>> On 1/2/2022 11:35 pm, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>> On 1/02/2022 8:45 pm, Xeno wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/2/2022 9:24 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yeah, I'm pretty sure as well :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Notice the bullshit he has invented here? I never said *anything*
>>>>>>> about not passing any "exams", and neither did I ever mention
>>>>>>> missing the last 3 months of school. These are *his* insane
>>>>>>> inventions. What *I* said was that I left school in the last few
>>>>>>> weeks as I had been offered an apprenticeship and they wanted me to
>>>>>>> start straight away. As to how long before the end of term I left I
>>>>>>> couldn't accurately tell you as it was almost 45 years ago and I
>>>>>>> don't remember. Could have been 5 weeks, and it could have been 2.
>>>>>>> Either way, the school probably never noticed :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have a document here from the Education Department of Victoria
>>>>>>> which is an Intermediate Technical Examination certificate dated
>>>>>>> December 15th, 1977 showing me passing in 5 subjects, and I'm happy
>>>>>>> to scan this certificate and post it to a hosting site and make the
>>>>>>> link to it available here in exchange for Clasener's guarantee that
>>>>>>> he admit that everything he has ever claimed about my secondary
>>>>>>> school record has been nothing but a complete falsehood, that he
>>>>>>> intentionally fabricated his claims for no reason other than to
>>>>>>> attempt to pad out his bullshit claim that my education standard
>>>>>>> was insufficient for me to have qualified for an apprenticeship.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Over to you, Kryppy. The ball's in your court now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just post your trade qualification numbers Darren. They are the only
>>>>>> thing that absolutely cannot be faked. Those numbers can also be
>>>>>> *independently verified* with no restrictions. Keeps frauds under
>>>>>> control, you see. What's more, the numbers also include encoded
>>>>>> details of the person concerned.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BTW, no deals. your claims, you get to prove them. It's what you
>>>>>> impressed upon other, follow your own rules!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Of course you couldn't take the deal xeno. It was to be expected
>>>>> because you know that if was qualified enough to undertake an
>>>>> apprenticeship your whole argument loses value. You then are in an
>>>>> extremely precarious
>>>>
>>>> Wrong. Darren claimed he was an AME(engines) apprentice. Even if he
>>>> had year 9 passes in *10* subjects, he *still* couldn't enter into
>>>> *any* AME apprenticeship because the entry level to any and all AME
>>>> apprenticeship is and always has been year 10 passes in *specific
>>>> subjects*. It is at year 10 level because it is a technician level
>>>> apprenticeship. The first 3 years of study are at Cert 3, the 4th year
>>>> at TAFE brings it up to Cert 4 level. My L-AME friend Graeme is on
>>>> LinkedIn, go and put the question to him - I did. He is a
>>>> L-AME(engines), L-AME(electrical) and L-AME(airframe). The L in the
>>>> name means *Licenced*. He is licenced to work on *turbines*, the
>>>> engine types Qantas had when he did his AME apprenticeship with them
>>>> back about the same time I did my apprenticeship as a motor mechanic.
>>>> As for the claim to the other two apprenticeships Darren claims to
>>>> have done, well he could not have done them until the laws were
>>>> *repealed* in 1992. Go look them up. You will find them in a link
>>>> inadvertently provided by Daryl. In that same link is the *proof* that
>>>> the AME apprenticeship requires 4 years attendance at TAFE (1280
>>>> hours). Of course, there is the fact that neither the trade
>>>> qualifications database nor the archives at PROV contain *any*
>>>> reference to Darren Thomas Gibbens having even been signed up to any
>>>> apprenticeship ever nor having been issued with any trade registration
>>>> numbers. *You* can verify this yourself at PROV.
>>>>
>>>> Now run along now and crawl back under your rock.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> that's good advice. he only pops up to throw shit
>>>
>> The odd thing is, it was Darren himself who said he skipped the last
>> three months of year 9. It was only when I pointed it out to him that
>> would invalidate him from sitting the exam that he tried to claim he sat
>> the exam anyway. What he didn't realise that passing, or even being
>> *eligble* to sit, an exam requires attendance above a set percentage. 3
>> months out, forget it, you're done. I have consistently made the 3 month
>> claim, after he mentioned it, and *now* is the first time he says he
>> attended classes right up to the exam. The smell of bullshit is strong
>> in this one!
>
> Ooh oh!
>
> "I left school before the end of year nine because I'd been *offered* the
> job I actually wanted and apparently that's a "fail"." Fraudster, 02Dec19
>
> "I left school early because I was offered my job on the strength of my
> work experience performance, but I'm the failure and he isn't." 08Oct19
>
> "As I've said I went to the end of third form, or about 6 weeks short of it
> as I'd been given an apprenticeship and I didn't see much point in hanging
> around for the last few weeks of school when I *already* had the job I
> wanted. My birthday's in January, and I left school a couple of months
> before turning 15." 06Jul19
>
> Hmmm. Nothing about taking exams, and in Qld Yr 9 exams were well within 6
> weeks prior to end of year.
>
> alvey

Nothing from the Enablers. That's odd.

Soooo, if the Fraudster doesn't put the alleged Dept Ed docs up for
verification, would a valid assumption be that he's forged them?

alvey

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 2/02/2022 11:11 am, Clocky wrote:
> On 2/02/2022 6:52 am, alvey wrote:
>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 09:17:52 +1100, Noddy wrote:
>>
>>> On 2/02/2022 9:11 am, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>> On 2/02/2022 6:27 am, alvey wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 00:29:10 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lick lick. You're another who's balls are attached to another man.
>>>>>
>>>>> What? No response to Xeno Gumps? What say you?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nothing. He's a nobody now. He's been offered an opportunity but as
>>>> usual runs away faster and further than Forrest Gump. Basically he's
>>>> not
>>>> here to discuss cars, he's here to bully and harass much like you.
>>>
>>> They want to watch themselves, as the new anti electronic media anti
>>> bullying laws are in effect and they could trip some red flags with
>>> their daily bombardment of the same repetitive shit.
>>
>> Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
>> You are such a hoot Fraudster!
>>
>> 'Repetition' isn't a problem Der Der. Your normal bile, abuse and
>> defamatory squeals however makes you *easily* the 'Most Likely' to get
>> punted.
>>
>>
>
> Indeed but not just him. There is a clear cut case for defamation from
> one of his mates too.

Better get some advice about that from Rod Speed and Phil Alison they're
QCs at the bush bar.

On 2/02/2022 1:24 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> On 2/02/2022 1:40 pm, Xeno wrote:
>> On 2/2/2022 1:29 pm, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>> On 2/02/2022 12:16 pm, alvey wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 10:13:57 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2/02/2022 8:48 am, alvey wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 08:11:41 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2/02/2022 6:27 am, alvey wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 00:29:10 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Lick lick. You're another who's balls are attached to another man.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What? No response to Xeno Gumps? What say you?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nothing. He's a nobody now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right. So no response from you then. There's a surprise.
>>>>>>> He's been offered an opportunity but as
>>>>>>> usual runs away faster and further than Forrest Gump. Basically
>>>>>>> he's not
>>>>>>> here to discuss cars, he's here to bully and harass much like you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not a great choice of analogy there Gumps. Forrest ran *away* from
>>>>>> bullies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, the "opportunity" he was offered was a load of hugely
>>>>>> hypocritical
>>>>>> stupid.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Btw, did you ever apologise to me for calling me a "problem gambler"?
>>>>>>
>>>>> No I must have forgotten...
>>>>>
>>>>> https://groups.google.com/g/aus.sport.cricket/c/dN9ANYza7lk/m/mJT2PARI6_gJ
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> How's that syndicate going?
>>>>
>>>> Could be wrong, but I don't think that it ever kicked off. Good of
>>>> you to
>>>> remind me of the Golden Age of usenet though. We (the QCCCC) used to
>>>> go out
>>>> for drinks at various seedy Briz CBD drinking spots. Lotta larfs.
>>>>
>>>> Anyhoo Gumps, an apology for that defamation please.
>>>>
>>> You're out of your mind. When I cop as much shit as I do from you and
>>> your mates, there's no way I'm going to apologize. You throw shit
>>> sometimes it comes back at you.
>>>
>> Your own shit has certainly blown back in your face, eh?
>>
>
> exactly. it's his own shit he's copping
>
Little felix peeked from under the curtain and squeaked "Me too"

On 1/02/2022 5:45 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> On 1/02/2022 5:44 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>> On 31/01/2022 11:29 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>> On 31/01/2022 11:24 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>>>> On 31/01/2022 11:23 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>> On 31/01/2022 9:00 am, alvey wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 30 Jan 2022 22:08:05 +1000, keithr0 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 30/01/2022 9:33 pm, Clocky wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 30/01/2022 5:06 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 30/01/2022 5:17 pm, alvey wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 30 Jan 2022 09:02:13 +1000, keithr0 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 30/01/2022 12:35 am, Clocky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 29/01/2022 9:00 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 29/01/2022 8:59 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 29/01/2022 12:02 pm, jonz@ nothere.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, 29 January 2022 at 01:53:22 UTC+11, Yosemite
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sam
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 29/01/2022 12:13 am, Clocky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You have *never* completed an apprenticeship. Absolutely
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> positively
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 100% sure of it. You are a fraud!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which speaks volumes about his enablers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ~~~~~~~~~
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     And heeerrrreeeeeesssssss pepe... <G> Just while yer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> here (for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whatever reason) tell me more about this non synchro
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vauxhall you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> er, owned???
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I love this "enablers" bullshit. Apparently anyone who
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disagrees
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the "FLC" is automatically a supporter of mine, because
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> apparently
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these fuckwits have the mentality of 10 year olds and can't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relate to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the idea that people simply think whatever they're saying is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> complete
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just like the comment of Jerky Birko's above. He's 100% sure
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> apparently. Oddly enough, he was *also* 100% sure that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Clasener was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> right about the train incident in that it never happened
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and that I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was never there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He was 100% sure about that *right* up to the point where
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proven to be conclusively wrong and had to make a grovelling
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> apology.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> These fucking idiots apparently *never* learn from their own
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mistakes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you're the one who never learns to stop lying. we know that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Xeno
>>>>>>>>>>>>> taught where he said he did, so you can just stfu!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Noddy.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> We know with 100% certainty that Xeno taught where he said
>>>>>>>>>>>> he taught
>>>>>>>>>>>> because the proof is irrefutable and can be cross-checked.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Noddy posts
>>>>>>>>>>>> photos of cable ties and projects he copied from youtube but
>>>>>>>>>>>> nothing
>>>>>>>>>>>> that proves he ever completed an apprenticeship.
>>>>>>>>>>>> If he completed an apprenticeship how can it be that there
>>>>>>>>>>>> is no
>>>>>>>>>>>> record
>>>>>>>>>>>> of it and he knows *nothing* about the process?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Why does the VACC have no record of his claimed long term
>>>>>>>>>>>> membership?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is his explanation for that?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> His gutless enablers don't dare ask these questions but even
>>>>>>>>>>>> they must
>>>>>>>>>>>> wonder why he's so forthcoming with pointless chest-beating
>>>>>>>>>>>> crap yet
>>>>>>>>>>>> when it comes to posting the only thing that could restore some
>>>>>>>>>>>> credibility and integrity, IOW verifiable proof that he is
>>>>>>>>>>>> qualified,
>>>>>>>>>>>> the keyboard tough guy that has been deriding, attacking,
>>>>>>>>>>>> bullying and
>>>>>>>>>>>> false attributing his lies etc to others and demanding proof
>>>>>>>>>>>> of claims
>>>>>>>>>>>> of others for decades suddenly develops a glass jaw and runs
>>>>>>>>>>>> away,
>>>>>>>>>>>> sniping more lies as he goes.
>>>>>>>>>>> There is a quote popularly (and probably mistakenly)
>>>>>>>>>>> attributed to
>>>>>>>>>>> Albert Einstein "The definition of insanity is doing the same
>>>>>>>>>>> thing
>>>>>>>>>>> over
>>>>>>>>>>> and over and expecting different results".
>>>>>>>>>> lol.
>>>>>>>>>> You're basing your position on an unattributed and incorrect
>>>>>>>>>> quote.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The actual definition of insanity is, "Insanity. n. mental
>>>>>>>>>> illness of
>>>>>>>>>> such
>>>>>>>>>> a severe nature that a person cannot distinguish fantasy from
>>>>>>>>>> reality,
>>>>>>>>>> cannot conduct her/his affairs due to psychosis or is subject to
>>>>>>>>>> uncontrollable impulsive behavior". Psychology Today.
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/in-therapy/200907/the-definition-insanity
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So, you're off to a ripping start then and anything following
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> fatally
>>>>>>>>>> flawed opening is redundant. But let's have a look anyway!
>>>>>>>>>>> Well you and xeno, and your two gutless enablers have been
>>>>>>>>>>> doing just
>>>>>>>>>>> that multiple times a day for years now. Even the meanest
>>>>>>>>>>> intellect
>>>>>>>>>>> must
>>>>>>>>>>> realise that no matter how many times you try, the result will
>>>>>>>>>>> always be
>>>>>>>>>>> the same.
>>>>>>>>>> Well as one of the "meanest intellects" around that may be your
>>>>>>>>>> conclusion,
>>>>>>>>>> it isn't mine. There is absolutely nothing to say that that the
>>>>>>>>>> result will
>>>>>>>>>> always be the same.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You are achieving nothing other than wrecking the news group.
>>>>>>>>>>   From that other intellect again, the alternative is even
>>>>>>>>>> worse. If it's
>>>>>>>>>> "insanity" that you're trying to use as a reason then howabout
>>>>>>>>>> this?
>>>>>>>>>> Why on
>>>>>>>>>> earth would anyone in their right mind allow a lying,
>>>>>>>>>> hypocritical,
>>>>>>>>>> abusive, and cowardly fraud to continue on his rancid way
>>>>>>>>>> untroubled?
>>>>>>>>> SSDD
>>>>>>>> Dodging another valid question keith?
>>>>>>> Exactly what is valid about it? It's just your little friend being
>>>>>>> smartarsed as usual.
>>>>>> Right. So it's "valid" for you to use your crazed opinions to reach a
>>>>>> conclusion, but it's invalid for someone to opine against your
>>>>>> conclusion
>>>>>> regardless of how rational, reasonable and fact-based their
>>>>>> opinion is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well you're certainly making yourself clear keith...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> further to my previous post.. and he's also a silver medalist in
>>>>> the Olympic event 'answering a question with a question"
>>>>
>>>> You must really like the taste of alvey's arse, you spend all day
>>>> licking it.
>>>
>>>
>>> your mates are having a party in the sewer. you should join them. oh
>>> sorry, you already have..
>>>
>>>
>> So you don't deny it then.
>
>
> there's something wrong with your brain. my remark doesn't indicate
> that, only that your mind resides in the sewer.. along with the rest of
> the flcjc
>
>
You still haven't denied it then?

On 1/02/2022 11:45 pm, Clocky wrote:
> On 1/02/2022 2:46 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>> On 1/02/2022 1:03 am, Clocky wrote:
>>> On 31/01/2022 9:30 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>> On 31/01/2022 11:25 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>>>>> On 31/01/2022 9:03 am, Clocky wrote:
>>>>>> On 30/01/2022 8:06 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>>>>>>> On 30/01/2022 9:35 pm, Clocky wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 30/01/2022 5:08 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 30/01/2022 6:49 pm, Clocky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 30/01/2022 7:02 am, keithr0 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 30/01/2022 12:35 am, Clocky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 29/01/2022 9:00 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 29/01/2022 8:59 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 29/01/2022 12:02 pm, jonz@ nothere.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, 29 January 2022 at 01:53:22 UTC+11, Yosemite
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sam wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 29/01/2022 12:13 am, Clocky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You have *never* completed an apprenticeship.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Absolutely positively
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 100% sure of it. You are a fraud!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which speaks volumes about his enablers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ~~~~~~~~~
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   And heeerrrreeeeeesssssss pepe... <G> Just while yer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> here (for whatever reason) tell me more about this non
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> synchro Vauxhall you er, owned???
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I love this "enablers" bullshit. Apparently anyone who
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disagrees with the "FLC" is automatically a supporter of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mine, because apparently these fuckwits have the mentality
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of 10 year olds and can't relate to the idea that people
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simply think whatever they're saying is complete nonsense.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just like the comment of Jerky Birko's above. He's 100%
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sure apparently. Oddly enough, he was *also* 100% sure
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Clasener was right about the train incident in that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it never happened and that I was never there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He was 100% sure about that *right* up to the point where
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he was proven to be conclusively wrong and had to make a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> grovelling apology.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> These fucking idiots apparently *never* learn from their
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> own mistakes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you're the one who never learns to stop lying. we know that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Xeno taught where he said he did, so you can just stfu!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Noddy.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> We know with 100% certainty that Xeno taught where he said
>>>>>>>>>>>> he taught because the proof is irrefutable and can be
>>>>>>>>>>>> cross-checked. Noddy posts photos of cable ties and projects
>>>>>>>>>>>> he copied from youtube but nothing that proves he ever
>>>>>>>>>>>> completed an apprenticeship.
>>>>>>>>>>>> If he completed an apprenticeship how can it be that there
>>>>>>>>>>>> is no record of it and he knows *nothing* about the process?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Why does the VACC have no record of his claimed long term
>>>>>>>>>>>> membership? Where is his explanation for that?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> His gutless enablers don't dare ask these questions but even
>>>>>>>>>>>> they must wonder why he's so forthcoming with pointless
>>>>>>>>>>>> chest-beating crap yet when it comes to posting the only
>>>>>>>>>>>> thing that could restore some credibility and integrity, IOW
>>>>>>>>>>>> verifiable proof that he is qualified, the keyboard tough
>>>>>>>>>>>> guy that has been deriding, attacking, bullying and false
>>>>>>>>>>>> attributing his lies etc to others and demanding proof of
>>>>>>>>>>>> claims of others for decades suddenly develops a glass jaw
>>>>>>>>>>>> and runs away, sniping more lies as he goes.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There is a quote popularly (and probably mistakenly)
>>>>>>>>>>> attributed to Albert Einstein "The definition of insanity is
>>>>>>>>>>> doing the same thing over and over and expecting different
>>>>>>>>>>> results".
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You mean like claiming you're qualified for decades when all
>>>>>>>>>> the evidence shows you're not?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What have I ever claimed to be qualified for?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Or telling grand lies that are easily disproved but sticking
>>>>>>>>>> to them in the face of cold hard evidence?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What evidence?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Nobody in the history of aus.cars has done so much damage to
>>>>>>>>>> the group. Just look at the most recent attacks on people that
>>>>>>>>>> dared ask an automotive question FFS keith.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What damage have I done to the NG?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Open your fucking eyes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> That sort of thing?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Do you even know who you're replying to?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "On 30/01/2022 5:08 pm, keithr0 wrote:"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you remember keith?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You're pretty vague these days mate and making less and less
>>>>>>>> sense by the day.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think that your the one who's vague, your remarks were
>>>>>>> obviously not meant for me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They *are* meant for you in reference to the *fraud* which you
>>>>>> pretend you don't understand.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At least, I hope you are pretending...
>>>>>
>>>>> You reply to me with a direct attack on somebody else, you are
>>>>> really losing it, must be the isolation.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> it was obvious what he did for anyone with at least half a brain
>>>>
>>>
>>> keith needs to see a doctor.
>>
>> I'm going to see my endocrinologist this week - good enough?
>
> That remains to be seen but I sincerely hope so for your sake.

On 1/02/2022 5:48 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> On 1/02/2022 5:46 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>> On 1/02/2022 6:18 am, alvey wrote:
>>> On Mon, 31 Jan 2022 22:25:59 +1000, keithr0 wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 31/01/2022 9:03 am, Clocky wrote:
>>>>> On 30/01/2022 8:06 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>>>>>> On 30/01/2022 9:35 pm, Clocky wrote:
>>>>>>> On 30/01/2022 5:08 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 30/01/2022 6:49 pm, Clocky wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 30/01/2022 7:02 am, keithr0 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 30/01/2022 12:35 am, Clocky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 29/01/2022 9:00 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 29/01/2022 8:59 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 29/01/2022 12:02 pm, jonz@ nothere.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, 29 January 2022 at 01:53:22 UTC+11, Yosemite Sam
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 29/01/2022 12:13 am, Clocky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You have *never* completed an apprenticeship. Absolutely
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> positively
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 100% sure of it. You are a fraud!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which speaks volumes about his enablers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ~~~~~~~~~
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    And heeerrrreeeeeesssssss pepe... <G> Just while yer here
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (for whatever reason) tell me more about this non synchro
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vauxhall you er, owned???
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I love this "enablers" bullshit. Apparently anyone who
>>>>>>>>>>>>> disagrees with the "FLC" is automatically a supporter of mine,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> because apparently these fuckwits have the mentality of 10
>>>>>>>>>>>>> year
>>>>>>>>>>>>> olds and can't relate to the idea that people simply think
>>>>>>>>>>>>> whatever they're saying is complete nonsense.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just like the comment of Jerky Birko's above. He's 100% sure
>>>>>>>>>>>>> apparently. Oddly enough, he was *also* 100% sure that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Clasener
>>>>>>>>>>>>> was right about the train incident in that it never happened
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and that I was never there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> He was 100% sure about that *right* up to the point where he
>>>>>>>>>>>>> was proven to be conclusively wrong and had to make a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> grovelling apology.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> These fucking idiots apparently *never* learn from their own
>>>>>>>>>>>>> mistakes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> you're the one who never learns to stop lying. we know that
>>>>>>>>>>>> Xeno
>>>>>>>>>>>> taught where he said he did, so you can just stfu!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Noddy.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> We know with 100% certainty that Xeno taught where he said he
>>>>>>>>>>> taught because the proof is irrefutable and can be
>>>>>>>>>>> cross-checked.
>>>>>>>>>>> Noddy posts photos of cable ties and projects he copied from
>>>>>>>>>>> youtube but nothing that proves he ever completed an
>>>>>>>>>>> apprenticeship.
>>>>>>>>>>> If he completed an apprenticeship how can it be that there is no
>>>>>>>>>>> record of it and he knows *nothing* about the process?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Why does the VACC have no record of his claimed long term
>>>>>>>>>>> membership? Where is his explanation for that?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> His gutless enablers don't dare ask these questions but even
>>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>>> must wonder why he's so forthcoming with pointless chest-beating
>>>>>>>>>>> crap yet when it comes to posting the only thing that could
>>>>>>>>>>> restore some credibility and integrity, IOW verifiable proof
>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>> he is qualified, the keyboard tough guy that has been deriding,
>>>>>>>>>>> attacking, bullying and false attributing his lies etc to others
>>>>>>>>>>> and demanding proof of claims of others for decades suddenly
>>>>>>>>>>> develops a glass jaw and runs away, sniping more lies as he
>>>>>>>>>>> goes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There is a quote popularly (and probably mistakenly)
>>>>>>>>>> attributed to
>>>>>>>>>> Albert Einstein "The definition of insanity is doing the same
>>>>>>>>>> thing over and over and expecting different results".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You mean like claiming you're qualified for decades when all the
>>>>>>>>> evidence shows you're not?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What have I ever claimed to be qualified for?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Or telling grand lies that are easily disproved but sticking to
>>>>>>>>> them in the face of cold hard evidence?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What evidence?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Nobody in the history of aus.cars has done so much damage to the
>>>>>>>>> group. Just look at the most recent attacks on people that dared
>>>>>>>>> ask an automotive question FFS keith.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What damage have I done to the NG?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Open your fucking eyes.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That sort of thing?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you even know who you're replying to?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "On 30/01/2022 5:08 pm, keithr0 wrote:"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you remember keith?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You're pretty vague these days mate and making less and less
>>>>>>> sense by
>>>>>>> the day.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that your the one who's vague, your remarks were obviously
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> meant for me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> They *are* meant for you in reference to the *fraud* which you pretend
>>>>> you don't understand.
>>>>>
>>>>> At least, I hope you are pretending...
>>>>
>>>> You reply to me with a direct attack on somebody else, you are really
>>>> losing it, must be the isolation.
>>>
>>> If that's regarded by you as "losing it", then it's *very* odd you've
>>> not
>>> noticed (and commented) that "replying to someone with a direct
>>> attack on
>>> somebody else" is most of Fraudsters' prolific postings. He does it
>>> so much
>>> that he must have "lost" way more "it" than anyone else and is
>>> completely
>>> barking. Odd that you haven't noticed...
>>
>> SSDD
>
>
> your contributions to this newsgrope are truly outstanding! shirley you
> must have studied long and hard to achieve such excellence!
>
It's all that the post deserved. Btw "shirley" is alveys signature so
are you two so close that yo are now part of him?

On 2/02/2022 2:09 pm, Xeno wrote:
> On 2/2/2022 1:50 pm, alvey wrote:
>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 12:32:18 +1100, Xeno wrote:
>>
>>> On 2/2/2022 12:53 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>> On 2/02/2022 12:07 am, Xeno wrote:
>>>>> On 1/2/2022 11:35 pm, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/02/2022 8:45 pm, Xeno wrote:
>>>>>>> On 1/2/2022 9:24 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yeah, I'm pretty sure as well :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Notice the bullshit he has invented here? I never said *anything*
>>>>>>>> about not passing any "exams", and neither did I ever mention
>>>>>>>> missing the last 3 months of school. These are *his* insane
>>>>>>>> inventions. What *I* said was that I left school in the last few
>>>>>>>> weeks as I had been offered an apprenticeship and they wanted me to
>>>>>>>> start straight away. As to how long before the end of term I left I
>>>>>>>> couldn't accurately tell you as it was almost 45 years ago and I
>>>>>>>> don't remember. Could have been 5 weeks, and it could have been 2.
>>>>>>>> Either way, the school probably never noticed :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have a document here from the Education Department of Victoria
>>>>>>>> which is an Intermediate Technical Examination certificate dated
>>>>>>>> December 15th, 1977 showing me passing in 5 subjects, and I'm happy
>>>>>>>> to scan this certificate and post it to a hosting site and make the
>>>>>>>> link to it available here in exchange for Clasener's guarantee that
>>>>>>>> he admit that everything he has ever claimed about my secondary
>>>>>>>> school record has been nothing but a complete falsehood, that he
>>>>>>>> intentionally fabricated his claims for no reason other than to
>>>>>>>> attempt to pad out his bullshit claim that my education standard
>>>>>>>> was insufficient for me to have qualified for an apprenticeship.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Over to you, Kryppy. The ball's in your court now.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just post your trade qualification numbers Darren. They are the only
>>>>>>> thing that absolutely cannot be faked. Those numbers can also be
>>>>>>> *independently verified* with no restrictions. Keeps frauds under
>>>>>>> control, you see. What's more, the numbers also include encoded
>>>>>>> details of the person concerned.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW, no deals. your claims, you get to prove them. It's what you
>>>>>>> impressed upon other, follow your own rules!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course you couldn't take the deal xeno. It was to be expected
>>>>>> because you know that if was qualified enough to undertake an
>>>>>> apprenticeship your whole argument loses value. You then are in an
>>>>>> extremely precarious
>>>>>
>>>>> Wrong. Darren claimed he was an AME(engines) apprentice. Even if he
>>>>> had year 9 passes in *10* subjects, he *still* couldn't enter into
>>>>> *any* AME apprenticeship because the entry level to any and all AME
>>>>> apprenticeship is and always has been year 10 passes in *specific
>>>>> subjects*. It is at year 10 level because it is a technician level
>>>>> apprenticeship. The first 3 years of study are at Cert 3, the 4th year
>>>>> at TAFE brings it up to Cert 4 level. My L-AME friend Graeme is on
>>>>> LinkedIn, go and put the question to him - I did. He is a
>>>>> L-AME(engines), L-AME(electrical) and L-AME(airframe). The L in the
>>>>> name means *Licenced*. He is licenced to work on *turbines*, the
>>>>> engine types Qantas had when he did his AME apprenticeship with them
>>>>> back about the same time I did my apprenticeship as a motor mechanic.
>>>>> As for the claim to the other two apprenticeships Darren claims to
>>>>> have done, well he could not have done them until the laws were
>>>>> *repealed* in 1992. Go look them up. You will find them in a link
>>>>> inadvertently provided by Daryl. In that same link is the *proof* that
>>>>> the AME apprenticeship requires 4 years attendance at TAFE (1280
>>>>> hours). Of course, there is the fact that neither the trade
>>>>> qualifications database nor the archives at PROV contain *any*
>>>>> reference to Darren Thomas Gibbens having even been signed up to any
>>>>> apprenticeship ever nor having been issued with any trade registration
>>>>> numbers. *You* can verify this yourself at PROV.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now run along now and crawl back under your rock.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> that's good advice. he only pops up to throw shit
>>>>
>>> The odd thing is, it was Darren himself who said he skipped the last
>>> three months of year 9. It was only when I pointed it out to him that
>>> would invalidate him from sitting the exam that he tried to claim he sat
>>> the exam anyway. What he didn't realise that passing, or even being
>>> *eligble* to sit, an exam requires attendance above a set percentage. 3
>>> months out, forget it, you're done. I have consistently made the 3 month
>>> claim, after he mentioned it, and *now* is the first time he says he
>>> attended classes right up to the exam. The smell of bullshit is strong
>>> in this one!
>>
>> Ooh oh!
>>
>> "I left school before the end of year nine because I'd been *offered* the
>> job I actually wanted and apparently that's a "fail"." Fraudster, 02Dec19
>>
>> "I left school early because I was offered my job on the strength of my
>> work experience performance, but I'm the failure and he isn't." 08Oct19
>>
>> "As I've said I went to the end of third form, or about 6 weeks short
>> of it
>> as I'd been given an apprenticeship and I didn't see much point in
>> hanging
>> around for the last few weeks of school when I *already* had the job I
>> wanted. My birthday's in January, and I left school a couple of months
>> before turning 15." 06Jul19
>>
>> Hmmm. Nothing about taking exams, and in Qld Yr 9 exams were well
>> within 6
>> weeks prior to end of year.
>>
>>
>>
>> alvey
>>
> Same in Vic. I recalled all the bullshit he spun. Such a pity for Darren
> that, by skipping the end of school, and the exams, he *failed to
> qualify* for any apprenticeship in aviation and automotive. He's been
> hung by his own words. Darren might well have been offered an
> apprenticeship but any offer would be predicated upon him meeting the
> minimum educational requirements which, for automotive was year 9 and ,
> for aviation, year 10. The more the clown stirs the pot, the more the
> bullshit rises to the surface. And there's a real thick scum layer of
> bullshit there now.
>
Interesting, a self perpetuating flame storm, there hasn't been one of
those around here for a while. Surprising really.

On 2/02/2022 4:56 pm, alvey wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 12:29:42 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>
>> On 2/02/2022 12:16 pm, alvey wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 10:13:57 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2/02/2022 8:48 am, alvey wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 08:11:41 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/02/2022 6:27 am, alvey wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 00:29:10 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Lick lick. You're another who's balls are attached to another man.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What? No response to Xeno Gumps? What say you?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nothing. He's a nobody now.
>>>>>
>>>>> Right. So no response from you then. There's a surprise.
>>>>>
>>>>>> He's been offered an opportunity but as
>>>>>> usual runs away faster and further than Forrest Gump. Basically he's not
>>>>>> here to discuss cars, he's here to bully and harass much like you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not a great choice of analogy there Gumps. Forrest ran *away* from bullies.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, the "opportunity" he was offered was a load of hugely hypocritical
>>>>> stupid.
>>>>>
>>>>> Btw, did you ever apologise to me for calling me a "problem gambler"?
>>>>>
>>>> No I must have forgotten...
>>>>
>>>> https://groups.google.com/g/aus.sport.cricket/c/dN9ANYza7lk/m/mJT2PARI6_gJ
>>>>
>>>> How's that syndicate going?
>>>
>>> Could be wrong, but I don't think that it ever kicked off. Good of you to
>>> remind me of the Golden Age of usenet though. We (the QCCCC) used to go out
>>> for drinks at various seedy Briz CBD drinking spots. Lotta larfs.
>>>
>>> Anyhoo Gumps, an apology for that defamation please.
>>>
>> You're out of your mind. When I cop as much shit as I do from you and
>> your mates, there's no way I'm going to apologize.
>
> So you won't retract a defamatory statement you made about me because other
> people put shit on you. That's a novel defence Gumps.

You put shit on me all the time you buffoon. BTW How do you defame
someone who doesn't actually exist. You're just a sock. No one here
knows who the hell you are but you sure as shit throw enough crap around
to have people think you are full of your own importance.
>
>> You throw shit sometimes it comes back at you.
>
> So it's ok to declare that you're a child molesting, tax dodging
> necrophiliac then because your heroic mate hurls abuse at me most days?

Go right ahead. It will only confirm my opinion that there's more than a
few sheep running loose in the top paddock.

On 2/2/2022 6:20 pm, alvey wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 12:50:56 +1000, alvey wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 12:32:18 +1100, Xeno wrote:
>>
>>> On 2/2/2022 12:53 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>> On 2/02/2022 12:07 am, Xeno wrote:
>>>>> On 1/2/2022 11:35 pm, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/02/2022 8:45 pm, Xeno wrote:
>>>>>>> On 1/2/2022 9:24 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yeah, I'm pretty sure as well :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Notice the bullshit he has invented here? I never said *anything*
>>>>>>>> about not passing any "exams", and neither did I ever mention
>>>>>>>> missing the last 3 months of school. These are *his* insane
>>>>>>>> inventions. What *I* said was that I left school in the last few
>>>>>>>> weeks as I had been offered an apprenticeship and they wanted me to
>>>>>>>> start straight away. As to how long before the end of term I left I
>>>>>>>> couldn't accurately tell you as it was almost 45 years ago and I
>>>>>>>> don't remember. Could have been 5 weeks, and it could have been 2.
>>>>>>>> Either way, the school probably never noticed :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have a document here from the Education Department of Victoria
>>>>>>>> which is an Intermediate Technical Examination certificate dated
>>>>>>>> December 15th, 1977 showing me passing in 5 subjects, and I'm happy
>>>>>>>> to scan this certificate and post it to a hosting site and make the
>>>>>>>> link to it available here in exchange for Clasener's guarantee that
>>>>>>>> he admit that everything he has ever claimed about my secondary
>>>>>>>> school record has been nothing but a complete falsehood, that he
>>>>>>>> intentionally fabricated his claims for no reason other than to
>>>>>>>> attempt to pad out his bullshit claim that my education standard
>>>>>>>> was insufficient for me to have qualified for an apprenticeship.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Over to you, Kryppy. The ball's in your court now.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just post your trade qualification numbers Darren. They are the only
>>>>>>> thing that absolutely cannot be faked. Those numbers can also be
>>>>>>> *independently verified* with no restrictions. Keeps frauds under
>>>>>>> control, you see. What's more, the numbers also include encoded
>>>>>>> details of the person concerned.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW, no deals. your claims, you get to prove them. It's what you
>>>>>>> impressed upon other, follow your own rules!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course you couldn't take the deal xeno. It was to be expected
>>>>>> because you know that if was qualified enough to undertake an
>>>>>> apprenticeship your whole argument loses value. You then are in an
>>>>>> extremely precarious
>>>>>
>>>>> Wrong. Darren claimed he was an AME(engines) apprentice. Even if he
>>>>> had year 9 passes in *10* subjects, he *still* couldn't enter into
>>>>> *any* AME apprenticeship because the entry level to any and all AME
>>>>> apprenticeship is and always has been year 10 passes in *specific
>>>>> subjects*. It is at year 10 level because it is a technician level
>>>>> apprenticeship. The first 3 years of study are at Cert 3, the 4th year
>>>>> at TAFE brings it up to Cert 4 level. My L-AME friend Graeme is on
>>>>> LinkedIn, go and put the question to him - I did. He is a
>>>>> L-AME(engines), L-AME(electrical) and L-AME(airframe). The L in the
>>>>> name means *Licenced*. He is licenced to work on *turbines*, the
>>>>> engine types Qantas had when he did his AME apprenticeship with them
>>>>> back about the same time I did my apprenticeship as a motor mechanic.
>>>>> As for the claim to the other two apprenticeships Darren claims to
>>>>> have done, well he could not have done them until the laws were
>>>>> *repealed* in 1992. Go look them up. You will find them in a link
>>>>> inadvertently provided by Daryl. In that same link is the *proof* that
>>>>> the AME apprenticeship requires 4 years attendance at TAFE (1280
>>>>> hours). Of course, there is the fact that neither the trade
>>>>> qualifications database nor the archives at PROV contain *any*
>>>>> reference to Darren Thomas Gibbens having even been signed up to any
>>>>> apprenticeship ever nor having been issued with any trade registration
>>>>> numbers. *You* can verify this yourself at PROV.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now run along now and crawl back under your rock.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> that's good advice. he only pops up to throw shit
>>>>
>>> The odd thing is, it was Darren himself who said he skipped the last
>>> three months of year 9. It was only when I pointed it out to him that
>>> would invalidate him from sitting the exam that he tried to claim he sat
>>> the exam anyway. What he didn't realise that passing, or even being
>>> *eligble* to sit, an exam requires attendance above a set percentage. 3
>>> months out, forget it, you're done. I have consistently made the 3 month
>>> claim, after he mentioned it, and *now* is the first time he says he
>>> attended classes right up to the exam. The smell of bullshit is strong
>>> in this one!
>>
>> Ooh oh!
>>
>> "I left school before the end of year nine because I'd been *offered* the
>> job I actually wanted and apparently that's a "fail"." Fraudster, 02Dec19
>>
>> "I left school early because I was offered my job on the strength of my
>> work experience performance, but I'm the failure and he isn't." 08Oct19
>>
>> "As I've said I went to the end of third form, or about 6 weeks short of it
>> as I'd been given an apprenticeship and I didn't see much point in hanging
>> around for the last few weeks of school when I *already* had the job I
>> wanted. My birthday's in January, and I left school a couple of months
>> before turning 15." 06Jul19
>>
>> Hmmm. Nothing about taking exams, and in Qld Yr 9 exams were well within 6
>> weeks prior to end of year.
>>
>> alvey
>
> Nothing from the Enablers. That's odd.

Did you expect anything?
>
> Soooo, if the Fraudster doesn't put the alleged Dept Ed docs up for
> verification, would a valid assumption be that he's forged them?
>
The only secondary school document that is easily verified are those
from year 12. They are externally set, externally marked and *listed*
publicly.

That said, those docs are not the ones that matter. Even with the year 9
pass, Darren *still didn't qualify* for an apprenticeship. For that he
would have needed year 10 passes - and he left *before* the end of year
9. I regret now mentioning that the trade registration numbers are
uniquely identifiable - it would have been very interesting to see if he
would have faked those.
>
>
> alvey
>

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

On 2/2/2022 6:52 pm, Grumpy Tech wrote:
> On 2/02/2022 4:56 pm, alvey wrote:
>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 12:29:42 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>
>>> On 2/02/2022 12:16 pm, alvey wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 10:13:57 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2/02/2022 8:48 am, alvey wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 08:11:41 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2/02/2022 6:27 am, alvey wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 00:29:10 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Lick lick. You're another who's balls are attached to another man.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What? No response to Xeno Gumps? What say you?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nothing. He's a nobody now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right. So no response from you then. There's a surprise.
>>>>>>> He's been offered an opportunity but as
>>>>>>> usual runs away faster and further than Forrest Gump. Basically
>>>>>>> he's not
>>>>>>> here to discuss cars, he's here to bully and harass much like you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not a great choice of analogy there Gumps. Forrest ran *away* from
>>>>>> bullies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, the "opportunity" he was offered was a load of hugely
>>>>>> hypocritical
>>>>>> stupid.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Btw, did you ever apologise to me for calling me a "problem gambler"?
>>>>>>
>>>>> No I must have forgotten...
>>>>>
>>>>> https://groups.google.com/g/aus.sport.cricket/c/dN9ANYza7lk/m/mJT2PARI6_gJ
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> How's that syndicate going?
>>>>
>>>> Could be wrong, but I don't think that it ever kicked off. Good of
>>>> you to
>>>> remind me of the Golden Age of usenet though. We (the QCCCC) used to
>>>> go out
>>>> for drinks at various seedy Briz CBD drinking spots. Lotta larfs.
>>>>
>>>> Anyhoo Gumps, an apology for that defamation please.
>>>>
>>> You're out of your mind. When I cop as much shit as I do from you and
>>> your mates, there's no way I'm going to apologize.
>>
>> So you won't retract a defamatory statement you made about me because
>> other
>> people put shit on you. That's a novel defence Gumps.
>
> You put shit on me all the time you buffoon. BTW How do you defame
> someone who doesn't actually exist. You're just a sock. No one here
> knows who the hell you are but you sure as shit throw enough crap around
> to have people think you are full of your own importance.
>>
>>> You throw shit sometimes it comes back at you.
>>
>> So it's ok to declare that you're a child molesting, tax dodging
>> necrophiliac then because your heroic mate hurls abuse at me most days?
>
> Go right ahead. It will only confirm my opinion that there's more than a
> few sheep running loose in the top paddock.

How odd! That was almost exactly the opinion I had formed of you. I was
thinking kangas bouncing around though for you sure are rattled lately.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

On 2/02/2022 6:25 pm, Xeno wrote:
> On 2/2/2022 6:52 pm, Grumpy Tech wrote:

>>
>> Go right ahead. It will only confirm my opinion that there's more than
>> a few sheep running loose in the top paddock.
>
> How odd! That was almost exactly the opinion I had formed of you. I was
> thinking kangas bouncing around though for you sure are rattled lately.

Not in your wildest dreams xeno. You have no credibility with me so
therefore I take what you say with a grain of salt. Your Napoleonic
complex is outstanding.

As someone said, it's like being beaten with a feather by your
grandmother in a nursing home.

You're a loser xeno. Always have been, always will be.

On 2/2/2022 7:49 pm, Grumpy Tech wrote:
> On 2/02/2022 6:25 pm, Xeno wrote:
>> On 2/2/2022 6:52 pm, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Go right ahead. It will only confirm my opinion that there's more
>>> than a few sheep running loose in the top paddock.
>>
>> How odd! That was almost exactly the opinion I had formed of you. I
>> was thinking kangas bouncing around though for you sure are rattled
>> lately.
>
> Not in your wildest dreams xeno. You have no credibility with me so
> therefore I take what you say with a grain of salt. Your Napoleonic
> complex is outstanding.
>
> As someone said, it's like being beaten with a feather by your
> grandmother in a nursing home.
>
> You're a loser xeno. Always have been, always will be.

You puir wee little man!

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

On 2/02/2022 6:38 pm, keithr0 wrote:
> On 2/02/2022 2:09 pm, Xeno wrote:

> Interesting, a self perpetuating flame storm, there hasn't been one of
> those around here for a while. Surprising really.

Lol :)

The FLC *live* for this shit. It's their substitute for achievement :)

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

On 2/02/2022 6:06 pm, keithr0 wrote:
> On 1/02/2022 6:49 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:

>> as I've told you several times already, I don't care what you think.
>> It's only your ego that makes you think I would. like.. "omg, keefy
>> doesn't think much of me. maybe I should jump off the Westgate
>> bridge". and the bottom line.. what business is my life of yours
>> anyway? answer: it's none of your business. no one needs to lay their
>> life bare just to post on a newsgroup. I used to think you were
>> erudite and intelligent. now I just think you're a dickhead, because
>> there's ample evidence to support the view.
>>
>>
> So what is it about your life that makes you so ashamed that you don't
> want to mention it?

Keith, you know by continually hounding Felix in this way you're making
yourself look just as batshit crazy as the people you criticise for
doing it, right?

If Felix doesn't want to say, he doesn't have to. Who gives a shit?

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

On 2/02/2022 1:15 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 2/02/2022 1:29 pm, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>> On 2/02/2022 12:16 pm, alvey wrote:
>
>>>> How's that syndicate going?
>>>
>>> Could be wrong, but I don't think that it ever kicked off. Good of
>>> you to
>>> remind me of the Golden Age of usenet though. We (the QCCCC) used to
>>> go out
>>> for drinks at various seedy Briz CBD drinking spots. Lotta larfs.
>>>
>>> Anyhoo Gumps, an apology for that defamation please.
>>>
>> You're out of your mind. When I cop as much shit as I do from you and
>> your mates, there's no way I'm going to apologize. You throw shit
>> sometimes it comes back at you.
>
> ROTFL :)
>
> These fragile as meringue fucktards should stay the fuck away from the
> internet :)
>
>
>

Says the coward sniping from behind his killfail...

On 2/02/2022 3:52 pm, Grumpy Tech wrote:
> On 2/02/2022 4:56 pm, alvey wrote:
>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 12:29:42 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>
>>> On 2/02/2022 12:16 pm, alvey wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 10:13:57 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2/02/2022 8:48 am, alvey wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 08:11:41 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2/02/2022 6:27 am, alvey wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 00:29:10 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Lick lick. You're another who's balls are attached to another man.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What? No response to Xeno Gumps? What say you?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nothing. He's a nobody now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right. So no response from you then. There's a surprise.
>>>>>>> He's been offered an opportunity but as
>>>>>>> usual runs away faster and further than Forrest Gump. Basically
>>>>>>> he's not
>>>>>>> here to discuss cars, he's here to bully and harass much like you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not a great choice of analogy there Gumps. Forrest ran *away* from
>>>>>> bullies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, the "opportunity" he was offered was a load of hugely
>>>>>> hypocritical
>>>>>> stupid.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Btw, did you ever apologise to me for calling me a "problem gambler"?
>>>>>>
>>>>> No I must have forgotten...
>>>>>
>>>>> https://groups.google.com/g/aus.sport.cricket/c/dN9ANYza7lk/m/mJT2PARI6_gJ
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> How's that syndicate going?
>>>>
>>>> Could be wrong, but I don't think that it ever kicked off. Good of
>>>> you to
>>>> remind me of the Golden Age of usenet though. We (the QCCCC) used to
>>>> go out
>>>> for drinks at various seedy Briz CBD drinking spots. Lotta larfs.
>>>>
>>>> Anyhoo Gumps, an apology for that defamation please.
>>>>
>>> You're out of your mind. When I cop as much shit as I do from you and
>>> your mates, there's no way I'm going to apologize.
>>
>> So you won't retract a defamatory statement you made about me because
>> other
>> people put shit on you. That's a novel defence Gumps.
>
> You put shit on me all the time you buffoon. BTW How do you defame
> someone who doesn't actually exist.

You know all my details and so does everyone else thanks to you posting
my personal details in this public forum without permission for
nefarious reasons *and* you then defamed me calling *me* a "stalker".

You even admitted that you went too far.

A retraction and an apology will be fine.

You're just a sock. No one here
> knows who the hell you are

You know this how?

but you sure as shit throw enough crap around
> to have people think you are full of your own importance.
>>
>>> You throw shit sometimes it comes back at you.
>>
>> So it's ok to declare that you're a child molesting, tax dodging
>> necrophiliac then because your heroic mate hurls abuse at me most days?
>
> Go right ahead. It will only confirm my opinion that there's more than a
> few sheep running loose in the top paddock.

OIC but defaming someone as a "stalker" or another a "problem gambler"
is OK somehow?

On 2/2/2022 9:13 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 2/02/2022 6:06 pm, keithr0 wrote:
>> On 1/02/2022 6:49 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>
>>> as I've told you several times already, I don't care what you think.
>>> It's only your ego that makes you think I would. like.. "omg, keefy
>>> doesn't think much of me. maybe I should jump off the Westgate
>>> bridge". and the bottom line.. what business is my life of yours
>>> anyway? answer: it's none of your business. no one needs to lay their
>>> life bare just to post on a newsgroup. I used to think you were
>>> erudite and intelligent. now I just think you're a dickhead, because
>>> there's ample evidence to support the view.
>>>
>>>
>> So what is it about your life that makes you so ashamed that you don't
>> want to mention it?
>
> Keith, you know by continually hounding Felix in this way you're making
> yourself look just as batshit crazy as the people you criticise for
> doing it, right?
>
> If Felix doesn't want to say, he doesn't have to. Who gives a shit?
>
Oooh, Darren has just realised the hypocrisy!

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

On 2/02/2022 10:57 pm, Clocky wrote:
> On 2/02/2022 3:52 pm, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>> On 2/02/2022 4:56 pm, alvey wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 12:29:42 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2/02/2022 12:16 pm, alvey wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 10:13:57 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/02/2022 8:48 am, alvey wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 08:11:41 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2/02/2022 6:27 am, alvey wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 00:29:10 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Lick lick. You're another who's balls are attached to another
>>>>>>>>>> man.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What? No response to Xeno Gumps? What say you?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nothing. He's a nobody now.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Right. So no response from you then. There's a surprise.
>>>>>>>> He's been offered an opportunity but as
>>>>>>>> usual runs away faster and further than Forrest Gump. Basically
>>>>>>>> he's not
>>>>>>>> here to discuss cars, he's here to bully and harass much like you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not a great choice of analogy there Gumps. Forrest ran *away*
>>>>>>> from bullies.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also, the "opportunity" he was offered was a load of hugely
>>>>>>> hypocritical
>>>>>>> stupid.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Btw, did you ever apologise to me for calling me a "problem
>>>>>>> gambler"?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> No I must have forgotten...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/g/aus.sport.cricket/c/dN9ANYza7lk/m/mJT2PARI6_gJ
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How's that syndicate going?
>>>>>
>>>>> Could be wrong, but I don't think that it ever kicked off. Good of
>>>>> you to
>>>>> remind me of the Golden Age of usenet though. We (the QCCCC) used
>>>>> to go out
>>>>> for drinks at various seedy Briz CBD drinking spots. Lotta larfs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyhoo Gumps, an apology for that defamation please.
>>>>>
>>>> You're out of your mind. When I cop as much shit as I do from you and
>>>> your mates, there's no way I'm going to apologize.
>>>
>>> So you won't retract a defamatory statement you made about me because
>>> other
>>> people put shit on you. That's a novel defence Gumps.
>>
>> You put shit on me all the time you buffoon. BTW How do you defame
>> someone who doesn't actually exist.
>
> You know all my details and so does everyone else thanks to you posting
> my personal details in this public forum without permission for
> nefarious reasons *and* you then defamed me calling *me* a "stalker".
>
> You even admitted that you went too far.
>
> A retraction and an apology will be fine.
>
>
>
>  You're just a sock. No one here
>> knows who the hell you are
>
> You know this how?
>
> but you sure as shit throw enough crap around
>> to have people think you are full of your own importance.
>>>
>>>> You throw shit sometimes it comes back at you.
>>>
>>> So it's ok to declare that you're a child molesting, tax dodging
>>> necrophiliac then because your heroic mate hurls abuse at me most days?
>>
>> Go right ahead. It will only confirm my opinion that there's more than
>> a few sheep running loose in the top paddock.
>
>
> OIC but defaming someone as a "stalker" or another a "problem gambler"
> is OK somehow?

You're the victim when you have bullied, harassed and vilified me for
years. Grow a brain idiot.

On 2/02/2022 3:21 pm, keithr0 wrote:
> On 2/02/2022 11:11 am, Clocky wrote:
>> On 2/02/2022 6:52 am, alvey wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 09:17:52 +1100, Noddy wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2/02/2022 9:11 am, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>> On 2/02/2022 6:27 am, alvey wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 00:29:10 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lick lick. You're another who's balls are attached to another man.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What? No response to Xeno Gumps? What say you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Nothing. He's a nobody now. He's been offered an opportunity but as
>>>>> usual runs away faster and further than Forrest Gump. Basically
>>>>> he's not
>>>>> here to discuss cars, he's here to bully and harass much like you.
>>>>
>>>> They want to watch themselves, as the new anti electronic media anti
>>>> bullying laws are in effect and they could trip some red flags with
>>>> their daily bombardment of the same repetitive shit.
>>>
>>> Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
>>> You are such a hoot Fraudster!
>>>
>>> 'Repetition' isn't a problem Der Der. Your normal bile, abuse and
>>> defamatory squeals however makes you *easily* the 'Most Likely' to get
>>> punted.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Indeed but not just him. There is a clear cut case for defamation from
>> one of his mates too.
>
> Better get some advice about that from Rod Speed and Phil Alison they're
> QCs at  the bush bar.

lol :-)

On 2/02/2022 10:09 pm, Grumpy Tech wrote:
> On 2/02/2022 10:57 pm, Clocky wrote:
>> On 2/02/2022 3:52 pm, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>> On 2/02/2022 4:56 pm, alvey wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 12:29:42 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2/02/2022 12:16 pm, alvey wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 10:13:57 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2/02/2022 8:48 am, alvey wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 08:11:41 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2/02/2022 6:27 am, alvey wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 00:29:10 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Lick lick. You're another who's balls are attached to another
>>>>>>>>>>> man.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What? No response to Xeno Gumps? What say you?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Nothing. He's a nobody now.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Right. So no response from you then. There's a surprise.
>>>>>>>>> He's been offered an opportunity but as
>>>>>>>>> usual runs away faster and further than Forrest Gump. Basically
>>>>>>>>> he's not
>>>>>>>>> here to discuss cars, he's here to bully and harass much like you.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Not a great choice of analogy there Gumps. Forrest ran *away*
>>>>>>>> from bullies.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also, the "opportunity" he was offered was a load of hugely
>>>>>>>> hypocritical
>>>>>>>> stupid.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Btw, did you ever apologise to me for calling me a "problem
>>>>>>>> gambler"?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No I must have forgotten...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/g/aus.sport.cricket/c/dN9ANYza7lk/m/mJT2PARI6_gJ
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How's that syndicate going?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could be wrong, but I don't think that it ever kicked off. Good of
>>>>>> you to
>>>>>> remind me of the Golden Age of usenet though. We (the QCCCC) used
>>>>>> to go out
>>>>>> for drinks at various seedy Briz CBD drinking spots. Lotta larfs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyhoo Gumps, an apology for that defamation please.
>>>>>>
>>>>> You're out of your mind. When I cop as much shit as I do from you and
>>>>> your mates, there's no way I'm going to apologize.
>>>>
>>>> So you won't retract a defamatory statement you made about me
>>>> because other
>>>> people put shit on you. That's a novel defence Gumps.
>>>
>>> You put shit on me all the time you buffoon. BTW How do you defame
>>> someone who doesn't actually exist.
>>
>> You know all my details and so does everyone else thanks to you
>> posting my personal details in this public forum without permission
>> for nefarious reasons *and* you then defamed me calling *me* a "stalker".
>>
>> You even admitted that you went too far.
>>
>> A retraction and an apology will be fine.
>>
>>
>>
>>   You're just a sock. No one here
>>> knows who the hell you are
>>
>> You know this how?
>>
>> but you sure as shit throw enough crap around
>>> to have people think you are full of your own importance.
>>>>
>>>>> You throw shit sometimes it comes back at you.
>>>>
>>>> So it's ok to declare that you're a child molesting, tax dodging
>>>> necrophiliac then because your heroic mate hurls abuse at me most days?
>>>
>>> Go right ahead. It will only confirm my opinion that there's more
>>> than a few sheep running loose in the top paddock.
>>
>>
>> OIC but defaming someone as a "stalker" or another a "problem gambler"
>> is OK somehow?
>
> You're the victim when you have bullied, harassed and vilified me for
> years. Grow a brain idiot.

Really? In that case I offer you a full retraction and unreserved
apology for every instance of bullying, harassment and vilification for
which you provide evidence of.

However you know all my details and so does everyone else thanks to you
posting my personal details in this public forum without permission for
nefarious reasons *and* you then publicly defamed me by calling me a
"stalker".

You even admitted that you went too far.

A full retraction and an unreserved apology will be fine.

On 3/02/2022 1:11 am, Clocky wrote:
> On 2/02/2022 10:09 pm, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>> On 2/02/2022 10:57 pm, Clocky wrote:
>>> On 2/02/2022 3:52 pm, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>> On 2/02/2022 4:56 pm, alvey wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 12:29:42 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/02/2022 12:16 pm, alvey wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 10:13:57 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2/02/2022 8:48 am, alvey wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 08:11:41 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 2/02/2022 6:27 am, alvey wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 00:29:10 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Lick lick. You're another who's balls are attached to
>>>>>>>>>>>> another man.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What? No response to Xeno Gumps? What say you?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Nothing. He's a nobody now.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Right. So no response from you then. There's a surprise.
>>>>>>>>>> He's been offered an opportunity but as
>>>>>>>>>> usual runs away faster and further than Forrest Gump.
>>>>>>>>>> Basically he's not
>>>>>>>>>> here to discuss cars, he's here to bully and harass much like
>>>>>>>>>> you.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Not a great choice of analogy there Gumps. Forrest ran *away*
>>>>>>>>> from bullies.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Also, the "opportunity" he was offered was a load of hugely
>>>>>>>>> hypocritical
>>>>>>>>> stupid.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Btw, did you ever apologise to me for calling me a "problem
>>>>>>>>> gambler"?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No I must have forgotten...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/g/aus.sport.cricket/c/dN9ANYza7lk/m/mJT2PARI6_gJ
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How's that syndicate going?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Could be wrong, but I don't think that it ever kicked off. Good
>>>>>>> of you to
>>>>>>> remind me of the Golden Age of usenet though. We (the QCCCC) used
>>>>>>> to go out
>>>>>>> for drinks at various seedy Briz CBD drinking spots. Lotta larfs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Anyhoo Gumps, an apology for that defamation please.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> You're out of your mind. When I cop as much shit as I do from you and
>>>>>> your mates, there's no way I'm going to apologize.
>>>>>
>>>>> So you won't retract a defamatory statement you made about me
>>>>> because other
>>>>> people put shit on you. That's a novel defence Gumps.
>>>>
>>>> You put shit on me all the time you buffoon. BTW How do you defame
>>>> someone who doesn't actually exist.
>>>
>>> You know all my details and so does everyone else thanks to you
>>> posting my personal details in this public forum without permission
>>> for nefarious reasons *and* you then defamed me calling *me* a
>>> "stalker".
>>>
>>> You even admitted that you went too far.
>>>
>>> A retraction and an apology will be fine.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>   You're just a sock. No one here
>>>> knows who the hell you are
>>>
>>> You know this how?
>>>
>>> but you sure as shit throw enough crap around
>>>> to have people think you are full of your own importance.
>>>>>
>>>>>> You throw shit sometimes it comes back at you.
>>>>>
>>>>> So it's ok to declare that you're a child molesting, tax dodging
>>>>> necrophiliac then because your heroic mate hurls abuse at me most
>>>>> days?
>>>>
>>>> Go right ahead. It will only confirm my opinion that there's more
>>>> than a few sheep running loose in the top paddock.
>>>
>>>
>>> OIC but defaming someone as a "stalker" or another a "problem
>>> gambler" is OK somehow?
>>
>> You're the victim when you have bullied, harassed and vilified me for
>> years. Grow a brain idiot.
>
> Really? In that case I offer you a full retraction and unreserved
> apology for every instance of bullying, harassment and vilification for
> which you provide evidence of.

Your bullying me with this intimidation and a conditional apology which
is not worth the time it took you to type it out. This is the first
example as you are claiming something that is not the case. I posted
what you had already divulged in the forum and it was not for nefarious
reasons. You had already posted the information. Granted it was some
time ago. You have called me a stalker on several occasions and I
strongly object to that. I'll accept an unreserved apology, nothing
more, nothing less.
>
> However you know all my details and so does everyone else thanks to you
> posting my personal details in this public forum without permission for
> nefarious reasons *and* you then publicly defamed me by calling me a
> "stalker".
>
> You even admitted that you went too far.
>
> A full retraction and an unreserved apology will be fine.

NO chance until you are prepared to do the same. Unconditional.
Admitting that you have bullied and harassed me without equivocation.