Should I waste my time making up a graphic of the 12 identical comments you sent to me that merited these 12 replies, 11 of which you sent within 65 seconds? I did reply over a period yesterday to 11 different comments of yours in different ways, including that when you made 3 identical comments to me I copied a reply in 4 places. Do you understand what "to the crooked he shows himself shrewd" means?
Do you want me to remind you of how we met because we agreed here a year ago about a third party who also spams multiple copies of things regularly, how well we got along until I showed you the historical meaning of Rev. 2:9 and 3:9 (you inspired this post)?
When he replied to a dozen of my different comments over time, including his copying a charge against me 3 times, I replied over time including replying to the same charge identically 4 times. He woke up and saw 11, mostly different, responsive replies in his inbox at once and apparently got angry and blasted out 11 identical (spam) replies in 65 seconds and a 12th reply that summarized them. I replied to all 12 with the same answer. So I am not committing any more spam than he is. In other cases where two people dispute facts and escalate to many boards and threads, whether or not I was the one involved, I note that this is standard practice. Equal reply rights. The spammer is the one who escalates the copying first IMHO. (He is to be thanked for doing this in public forums rather than in the two forums where he banned me, because sometimes spammers double down and post charges where the respondent can't respond.)
Should I waste my time making up a graphic of the 12 identical comments you sent to me that merited these 12 replies, 11 of which you sent within 65 seconds? I did reply over a period yesterday to 11 different comments of yours in different ways, including that when you made 3 identical comments to me I copied a reply in 4 places. Do you understand what "to the crooked he shows himself shrewd" means?
Do you want me to remind you of how we met because we agreed here a year ago about a third party who also spams multiple copies of things regularly, how well we got along until I showed you the historical meaning of Rev. 2:9 and 3:9 (you inspired this post)?
So wait, instead of just replying to his comment, you thought it would be better to spam new topics?
When he replied to a dozen of my different comments over time, including his copying a charge against me 3 times, I replied over time including replying to the same charge identically 4 times. He woke up and saw 11, mostly different, responsive replies in his inbox at once and apparently got angry and blasted out 11 identical (spam) replies in 65 seconds and a 12th reply that summarized them. I replied to all 12 with the same answer. So I am not committing any more spam than he is. In other cases where two people dispute facts and escalate to many boards and threads, whether or not I was the one involved, I note that this is standard practice. Equal reply rights. The spammer is the one who escalates the copying first IMHO. (He is to be thanked for doing this in public forums rather than in the two forums where he banned me, because sometimes spammers double down and post charges where the respondent can't respond.)