Subject: Re: Understanding Erik Naggum
From: Erik Naggum <>
Date: 05 Oct 2002 12:47:01 +0000
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>

* Pascal Costanza
| In fact there is considerable evidence that this way of criticizing people
| is much more effective.

  You talk about something entirely different.  People who commit crimes
  and cause people real loss, are /not/ met with with what you suggest.

  I am somewhat surprised that you think this is the same thing.

  Have you read any of these fights at all?  Have you actually /read/ the
  article I write that causes the morons to attack me?  Or do you not
  remember it because it was precisely what people here favor?

  The fact of the matter is, some people here continue to fight me
  regardless of what I do.  I am always blamed when someone feels bad,
  regardless of whether it is reasonable or not.  Take a close look at
  these two articles and /try/ to reach a conclusion that does not depend
  on prejudice:

  in which Jeremy H. Brown fueled the current feud with this moronic
  comment: "PS Is Erik Naggum always so full of poisonous bile?" which he
  apparently thought was an OK thing to "ask" in this forum because of the
  shitheads that hang around here and talk about me all the time.

  in which I respond to his "religious" argument among others.  That is
  what he rates as "poisonous bile" because the other article I wrote to
  him, elicited no such response.

  is a simple response to a silly question like "Where's the harm?"

  Now tell me, where did this guy get the idea that I was full of poisonous
  bile?  What I had I /done/ to him?  How rational and reasonable was his
  response to what I had written?

  Am I the only person on this planet who considers the /irrationality/ of
  people who have nothing whatsoever to offer but hate messages directed at
  me?  I ask you people, and especially the bastards whose sense of justice
  is so warped they /encourage/ Erann Gat, had this person been able to
  think I was full of poisonous bile based on his /own/ observations, or
  did he need community approval of his hatred before he could lower
  himself to such a depth that he could ask that "question"?  In light of
  his brief experience with the forum, I should say it was an innocent
  question asked because others had already validated it with their
  constant harrassment of me.

  I DO NOT ATTACK PEOPLE FOR NO REASON!  I do not attack people at all, in
  fact.  What had I /done/ to Jeremy H. Brown to deserve his response?
  What had I /done/ to Erann Gat, Ray Blaak, and Raffael Cavallero, our
  resident evil, this time to warrant their hateful, destructive messages?

| I also have to admit that I don't know a lot about the "history" of the
| arguments in c.l.l.  So maybe my point is not so relevant in this
| context.  (Sorry in advance if that's the case.)

  Our resident evil bastards attack me for their own hurt feelings in feuds
  past, not because of anything I do.  Read what I write, for God's sake,
  and you will see that I am /not/ attacking those who do not badmouth me
  first.  If they do not like how I try to help and correct them, tell me,
  but do they /have/ to engage in all-out hate campaigns against me?

  And to think that some people are so /indecent/ as to encourage Erann
  Gat.  /That/ will truly take me some time to get over.  Presuming that
  shithead is not lying, of course.

Erik Naggum, Oslo, Norway

Act from reason, and failure makes you rethink and study harder.
Act from faith, and failure makes you blame someone and push harder.