Lame LN excuses

[Martin Weidmann]

Reply to yourself as if you are two people. Nice

Next tact, take the pressure off and make an identical claim with the nearest Lner you can find.
 

Yeah, after Bill and I caught out Roger Collins, he said Bill and I were the same person, lightning strikes twice.

That achieves absolutely nothing?, but having two members here simultaneously supporting each other, now that's an entirely different situation. Muhahaha!

Paranoia hits a new low, this is a public Forum and besides members with multiple aliases there is no secret what goes on here. Baxter's first post contains nothing ground breaking, if I was allowed to join the ED Forum my first post would clearly indicate I was not a newcomer, how is that evidence?

JohnM

Next tact, take the pressure off and make an identical claim with the nearest Lner you can find.

What pressure? You are blowing hot air and you know it. And this Baxter thing is nothing new. I figured that out some time ago.   Unlike you, though, I merely found it pathetically funny and sad at the same time.

Yeah, after Bill and I caught out Roger Collins, he said Bill and I were the same person, lightning strikes twice.

Why don't you just show that rather than just claiming it? You do know you've got zero credibility, right?

That achieves absolutely nothing?, but having two members here simultaneously supporting each other, now that's an entirely different situation. Muhahaha!

Says one of several LNs who do nothing else but supporting eachother. Go figure....

Care to compare your posting record with that of Baxter?

Paranoia hits a new low, this is a public Forum and besides members with multiple aliases there is no secret what goes on here. Baxter's first post contains nothing ground breaking, if I was allowed to join the ED Forum my first post would clearly indicate I was not a newcomer, how is that evidence?

Paranoia? As in Roger Collins (who is not even a member) is Martin Weidmann who in turn is Otto Beck and so on?

Baxter's first post contains nothing ground breaking, if I was allowed to join the ED Forum my first post would clearly indicate I was not a newcomer, how is that evidence?

Who needs evidence? You have been claiming falsely that I am Roger Collins and have never presented a shred of evidence for it other than your pathetic opinion. But a far better question to ask is; why aren't you allowed to join the ED Forum? Could it be they've got your number over there?

Another good question would be; why are you desperately defending Baxter who rarely posts on this forum?

[John Mytton]

Next tact, take the pressure off and make an identical claim with the nearest Lner you can find.

What pressure? You are blowing hot air and you know it.

Yeah, after Bill and I caught out Roger Collins, he said Bill and I were the same person, lightning strikes twice.

Stop lying. I never said anything of the kind, so prove me wrong.

That achieves absolutely nothing?, but having two members here simultaneously supporting each other, now that's an entirely different situation. Muhahaha!

Says one of several LNs who do nothing else but supporting eachother. Go figure....

Care to compare your posting record with that of Baxter?

Paranoia hits a new low, this is a public Forum and besides members with multiple aliases there is no secret what goes on here. Baxter's first post contains nothing ground breaking, if I was allowed to join the ED Forum my first post would clearly indicate I was not a newcomer, how is that evidence?

Paranoia? As in Roger Collins (who is not even a member) is Martin Weidmann who in turn is Otto Beck and so on?

Baxter's first post contains nothing ground breaking, if I was allowed to join the ED Forum my first post would clearly indicate I was not a newcomer, how is that evidence?

Who needs evidence? You have been claiming falsely that I am Roger Collins and have never presented a shred of evidence for it other than your pathetic opinion. But a far better question to ask is; why aren't you allowed to join the ED Forum? Could it be they've got your number over there?

What pressure?

You're sweating bricks.

You are blowing hot air and you know it.

C'mon Marty, the more you fight, the more you expose.

Stop lying. I never said anything of the kind, so prove me wrong.

You know full well that was the old Forum, but in the following post you are trying to take the pressure off yourself by accusing me of being Mark Connors.

And that "Mark Connors", wasn't/isn't that you? If memory serves, he never joined in any kind of discussion and only popped up once in a while to post an attack on non-LN member only to disappear as quickly as he appeared.

Says one of several LNs who do nothing else but supporting eachother. Go figure....

Chalk and cheese, just like CT's, LNers all share a common philosophy but when patterns of behaviour break the status quo, then suspicions arise.

Care to compare your posting record with that of Baxter?

Go ahead and compare away and take special note of ALL the times where I directly supported Vincent Baxter and then cross reference these results with all the other members I directly supported and let's see where that gets us?

Paranoia? As in Roger Collins (who is not even a member) is Martin Weidmann who in turn is Otto Beck and so on?

Yes, yes and yes!

But a far better question to ask is; why aren't you allowed to join the ED Forum? Could it be they've got your number over there?

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

You're sweating bricks.

C'mon Marty, the more you fight, the more you expose.

You know full well that was the old Forum, but in the following post you are trying to take the pressure off yourself by accusing me of being Mark Connors.

Chalk and cheese, just like CT's, LNers all share a common philosophy but when patterns of behaviour break the status quo, then suspicions arise.

Go ahead and compare away and take special note of ALL the times where I directly supported Vincent Baxter and then cross reference these results with all the other members I directly supported and let's see where that gets us?

Yes, yes and yes!



JohnM

You know full well that was the old Forum, but in the following post you are trying to take the pressure off yourself by accusing me of being Mark Connors.

Amazing. I had completely forgotten about Connors, but it is very telling that you haven't.
I can only wonder what happened to Connors... He was only here for a short period and I haven't seen him for some time.
Oh, hang on... that fits perfectly the profile I described earlier.

Go ahead and compare away and take special note of ALL the times where I directly supported Vincent Baxter and then cross reference these results with all the other members I directly supported and let's see where that gets us?

A lot of talk but no denial. Very telling indeed.

Btw, I wasn't the only one who figured it out early on;

Vincent Baxter is obviously John Mytton.

[John Mytton]

Go ahead and compare away and take special note of ALL the times where I directly supported Vincent Baxter and then cross reference these results with all the other members I directly supported and let's see where that gets us?

A lot of talk but no denial. Very telling indeed.

A lot of talk but no denial.

Huh? I gave you an open invitation "go ahead and compare away" all what you desire is in the public domain, what's stopping you?

Very telling indeed.

Yes, your recent posts are indeed quite telling.

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

Huh? I gave you an open invitation "go ahead and compare away" all what you desire is in the public domain, what's stopping you?

Yes, your recent posts are indeed quite telling.

JohnM

Vincent Baxter is obviously John Mytton.

[John Mytton]

Huh? I gave you an open invitation "go ahead and compare away" all what you desire is in the public domain, what's stopping you?

Yes, your recent posts are indeed quite telling.

JohnM

Quote from: Peter Goth on November 09, 2019, 03:59:46 PM
Vincent Baxter is obviously John Mytton.

Peter Goth came and went in a short time and didn't even make 100 posts yet he formed a neato supporting friendship with guess who, wait for it,... "Martin Weidmann", as I keep saying, you can't make this up, Comedy Gold!

Peter Goth was quite obsessed with helping out poor Weidmann.



And again, Peter Goth is desperate to get that answer for Marty.



And Gothy Baby even bumped a Weidmann post maybe he thought he was posting for Weidmann.



And here's Peter Goth supporting Otto.



Thanks for the link Marty, any more?

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

Peter Goth came and went in a short time and didn't even make 100 posts yet he formed a neato supporting friendship with guess who, wait for it,... "Martin Weidmann", as I keep saying, you can't make this up, Comedy Gold!

Peter Goth was quite obsessed with helping out poor Weidmann.



And again, Peter Goth is desperate to get that answer for Marty.



And Gothy Baby even bumped a Weidmann post maybe he thought he was posting for Weidmann.



And here's Peter Goth supporting Otto.



Thanks for the link Marty, any more?

JohnM

The mere fact that you feel the need to defend yourself is telling all by itself. "Mytton" doth protest too much, methinks   

Now, let's see if you want to put your money where your mouth is....  I will pay you $100.000 when you prove Otto and I are the same person. But when Otto and I prove beyond a reasonable doubt that we are not, will you compensate us both with $50.000? It's either that or admit you are blowing hot air.... What's it going to be "Mytton"?

I can't wait watching "Mytton" running away from this one....