A-B C. <acanton@adams-blake.com> says...
>
>notbob wrote:
>>
>> Lordy, can there be any more doubt this guy's a troll?
>
>Come on nb, even YOU are smarter than this!

Again with the personal attacks and childish insults.
Typical Troll behavior. Try posting without making any
personal references at all. I don't think you can do it.

>I've been here for almost or just over a year now. Most tolls
>do a slash and burn in a NG and are gone.

You are pretending that every Troll is a Hit, Run, and Watch Troll.
This was defined in my previous post as:

2c) The HIT, RUN AND WATCH TROLL - The troll will drop a single post
with a disagreeable header and creative content, then sit back and
watch the thread run it's course.

You are a Confidence Troll. This was defined in my previous post as:

2d) The CONFIDENCE or TACTICAL TROLL - The troll will begin by posting
a few messages in a given NG that are on-topic, if not slightly
over-the-top. Methodically, the troll will begin writing the messages
to be a little more sarcastic, silly, or even more over-the-top than
the last one, until the group finally catches on that the poster is a
troll.

As I posted before, this describes your behavior perfectly.

>I sign all of my posts with my real name or initials.

You are pretending that a Troll is defined by anonymity.

>Yes, I do ask some provocative questions that I'm interested in.
>Is that what bothers you?

You are changing your story. Before you said that you post this
stuff "for the dialectic and because it drives some of you arrogant
SOB know-it-alls crazy." Now you say it's because you are interested
in the answers. Which is it?

Whether or not you are a Troll has already been established by
Two Ravens.

Here is the post where he proved it:

| From: Two Ravens <tworavens$$@eudoramail.$$com>
| Subject: Re: Install wish-list for Slack 10
| Newsgroups: alt.os.linux.slackware
| Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 19:23:47 +0100
| Message-ID: <1088101349.14300.0@nnrp-t71-01.news.uk.clara.net>
|
| A-B C. wrote:
|
| > Two Ravens wrote:
| <snip>
| >> *Trolling*.
| > That's the favorite word on this NG. It's the "N" word of AOLS.
| > Whenever anyone disagrees with the Ravens or the Hicks or the Macons
| > of the group they are trolls. It's tiresome. You're tiresome.
|
| From the Glossary of Jargon: 2. n. An individual who chronically trolls
| in sense 1; regularly posts specious arguments,... to a newsgroup...
| Trolls are recognizable by the fact that they have no real interest in
| learning about the topic at hand...
|
| Your passage:
|
| > Thus my tirades on how to make Slack better is mainly for the
| > dialectic... and because it drives some of you arrogant SOB
| > know-it-alls crazy.
|
| Seems to fulfill the requirements of: "posts specious arguments... to a
| newsgroup", thus, trolling.
|
| [...]
|
| You seem to have conveniently forgotten that during October of last
| year, when you were making the initial install, I gave you my name and
| private email address, so that you could, *as* *you* *did*, email me
| directly for help. Having looked back over some of the Email's, I see
| that on one occasion I waited up way past my bedtime, (due to the time
| difference), in order to help you out over one specific problem. If you
| still have the complete set of Email's you may like to publish them
| here, together with my name, the address is now defunct. I also seem to
| remember that I am either the same age as yourself or slightly older.

Shall I repost the many examples of insult and abuse you have hurled
at Two Ravens as his reward for waiting up way past his bedtime in order
to help you?

You are, by your own admission, am individual who regularly posts
specious arguments to a newsgroup. By definition, that's Trolling.

"Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with
diarrhea -- massive, difficult to redirect, awe-inspiring,
entertaining, and a source of mind-boggling amounts of
excrement when you least expect it." -Gene Spafford,1992