The last time I checked, Christianity was not founded on the Book of Mormon, nor was the Book of Mormon canonized! Last time I checked, the Father, Son and the Holy Ghost all referred to the triunal nature of God in Christianity, whereas in Mormonism they actually refer to three separate Gods. The last time I checked, Mormons believe in the existance of multiple Gods. In fact, Mormon men (never women, mind you) have a chance of becoming Gods in the after-life, and ruling over their own kingdom! You may want to believe that Mormons are Christian, but your belief is not founded on the plain-truth statements made by canonized Mormon literature, which includes the various bullshit prophecies revealed by the various LDS living prophets (equivalent to fortune-tellers for those of you not in-the-know).
Dude, I worked with him for several months back in 85. Care to jump to any other conclusions?
I was unfortunate enough to be involved in several conferences with him, as well as hanging out with him during his temporary stint in Santa Monica (where he gave some speech at some "brand-new concept at the time" Internet Cafe). Back then, an Internet Cafe was simply a place that had any type of hard-wired net connection, hardly anyone had laptop computers, and there was no such thing as WiFi. The best part was when I dated Nancy Shorr. Apparently Draper had tried to disrobe her younger brother, and she caught on to it. They were best of enemies after that, and she spared no words (or details) when it came to exposing Draper for what he really was - a sexual predator with a propensity for young boys.
I also had the misfortune of running into him again when both he and I were living in Fremont, CA. I took him and some other friends to Sizzler, and he was an embarrassment to sit near. Anyone unfortunate enough to sit across from him (assuming you could stand the smell) at the dinner table would soon find themselves under constant attack by a barrage of food particles as Draper constantly attempted to speak and chew at the same time. The spaces missing teeth acted as his launch pad. Also, in the middle of the meal, Draper would stand up and shout across the restaurant... "waitress, I need more shrimp" with total disregard for the patrons around him.
No wonder he eventually went overseas... where young boys are a commodity (and the norm for tourists). But don't take it from me... ask Lenny DiCicco.
It took a couple of weeks for the blistering and peeling to clear up.
That's only because he refuses to use soap and water, which he probably didn't use even when the ashtray spilled on him.
when he was in jail, he got beaten severely because he refused to tell the mob how to make blue boxes.
Glad you were there to relay the "real" story to us. It couldn't have had anything to do with his attitude toward others, could it?
He has severe back problems to this day because of it.
That's just his excuse for having young boys disrobe and do "back exercises" with him. Several people who have met him can confirm this propensity to be true.
That's hardly the choice that would be made by someone who thinks none of the rules apply to him.
This just serves to prove that when you're devoid of facts, you can rationalize and paint any picture you want. Interpretation - Your interpretation is so far removed from the truth it doesn't even merit a "1:funny" moderation point. Unless you wish to dispute these facts with someone who has actually met Draper several times, and has known both his friends and enemies (such as Nancy Shorr of the SIG-GRAPH group, who can tell quite a bit of stories about Draper herself).
I think this device is ridiculously primitive, and an example of useless technology. All one has to do is dress up to look like a tree, and they won't be recognized. Or, just draping yourself in a light-weight reflective mylar mirror would totally confuse the system. Hunters have done this for ages... hiding behind a mirror that is tilted toward the ground, so that your subject only sees a reflection of the ground when looking at you.
"... robot modeled on a worm to crawl through your intestines made by European researchers"
What makes you think my intestines are made by European researchers?
Continuation of Coffee Breaks and Rude Service
on
Back to the Bunker
·
· Score: 5, Funny
"...to ensure that 'essential' government functions continue undisrupted in an emergency."
So now they're going to practice their coffee breaks, giving rude service to the public and wasting our tax dollars on dubious projects... all from underneath a fortified bunker, to ensure this very fine tradition is not lost in the event of a nuclear attack?
This is very true... and the person who points out such blatant illiteracy generally becomes the target of insults from said illiterates. It's a shame these so-called computer gurus lack even basic grammar skills. Imagine if they were inputting coordinates into some targeting system... "I must have gotten some digits wrong... no big deal... you're an asshole for pointing my typo out!"
It seems like the only way for citizens to ensure privacy these days is to subscribe to a satellite internet provider, and make sure that internet provider is in another country (including their mail servers). Someone (here in the USA) should seize the opportunity and begin promoting this, earning commissions in the process.
Department stores already have product ads running on flat-screen TV's (especially in the perfume section). MacDonald's has TV ads running at the order line. My post office has stupid TV ads running while waiting in line. Now my grocery store too?
| > If you looked up STUPID in the dictionary it wouldn't have the eBay logo | | and that logo would be just bellow allmusic.com's, right?
Seems to me that "nazsco" would qualify in the "illiterate" category, using his "bellow" (as in accordian or glass blower) example as supporting evidence.
Now I've heard everything... maybe quadraplegics should sue video game makers because the games are not ADA compliant. While we're at it, the families of coma patients should sue as well since it is unfair to the person laying there in a coma. Kids should get into the act also, and sue the makers of "adult" or "not for kids" video games for discrimination. Women firefighters (who took a more relaxed version of the firefighter physical abilities test) should sue also, saying the game discriminated against them because it doesn't have a built-in handicap system for women. Hell, let's all sue everyone...
"You could have given a brief summary of your interactions with the EFF. You know, the interactions that constitute the factual basis for all the opinion you've been spewing. Instead, you prefer to expend orders of magnitude more effort defending your refusal to relate your own personal experiences."
For someone who supposedly said, "nor do I care whether I ever find out what the EFF did to piss you off" you certainly seem to contradict yourself. In the above paragraph, you even go so far as to state what I could have done to quench your [supposedly] nonexistent thirst for said information. Now that you've triggered my dissonance detector, I realize you're just a frustrated chump who relieves himself by throwing online fits when he can't have his way. You're quite a character.
"No original sources I could get from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals could ever give me what I would need to know to discuss your personal experiences."
Incorrect... transcripts of all cases are available, for an administrative fee. Perhaps you confuse "public documents" with "online" documents.
"it still wouldn't tell me what mistakes YOU thought the EFF made, it still wouldn't tell me what behaviors YOU found unprofessional."
If you're so dense as to not equate my cause of action, as found by a reading of the complaint, to the grievances I have against the EFF then I believe any form of communication with you is futile and beyond your comprehension level.
"This entire thread has been about your opinions, and so long as you won't say why you hold them, the only thing here we can discuss is why you're behaving like such a buffoon."
I suggest you examine your own behavior. A quick reading of your own statements reveals that you too have opined in this thread, over and over again. To claim that I'm the only one who has opined is simply ludicrous and disingenuous.
"The longer you keep stonewalling, the more worthless your opinion appears. The longer I keep feeding your trollish behavior, the dumber I look. I don't care, though. At this point, I just want to win."
You know what's really funny? The fact that I've already provided the information (via links) in one of the other thread branches to my post. You've just been so obsessed with getting the information without having to do *any* research at all that you missed it. But that doesn't surprise me, coming from an armchair researcher like you.
"[by win,] I mean, 'getting the last post.' I have the time to waste on this thoroughly pointless exchange. Do you?"
We obviously share different ideas of what "win" means. You can have the last post... that's fine with me (consider it your "win"). I, on the other hand, shall have the HLS award (my "win").
Here... I'll throw you a bone... the information you seek can be found in this post:
"This is really how you spend your life? Trolling, living on the last fumes of fame coming off your friendship with Kevin Mitnick, telling people how important your opinion is but fuck 'em if they ask why?"
This is how you spend yours... replying to trolls? LOL.
"You, a seasoned adult? I'm adding that to the list of claims you never substantiated."
While you're at it... remember that I also did not substantiate my identity.
"You claim it's not up to you to provide any information to substantiate your opinion, but it apparently irritates you that I don't take your opinion seriously. Get over yourself."
Face the facts -- You're the one posting into my thread. Obviously, it irritates you that I don't take your request for me to do your research for you seriously, otherwise you would have stopped responding long ago.
"Anyway, you refer [slashdot.org] to EFF involvement in the Kevin Mitnick case (Google: lew payne mitnick [google.com]) and to an FBI wiretapping case (Google: lew payne wiretapping [google.com]). If you could link to transcripts of briefs or arguments in those cases (or even the right search engine and the right query) and point out the specific places where EFF screwed up, that would help everybody learn."
I agree... it would help everyone learn. But then again, I'm not here to be your teacher, no matter how much you protest or attempt to convince me otherwise. As to your nonsensical paragraph regarding the "normal rule of discourse in the Western world" I suggest you study the evolution of language and customs. Once you realize we've gotten where we are today by modifying the norm, you'll see how silly and hollow your argument really is.
"You don't have the hipness down, but you've certainly shown the ability to not say anything substantiative."
Were that actually true, you would have mistaken me for one of your own. Instead, you felt a compelling need to single me out from the typical slashdot crowd (which you describe perfectly in your reply).
"I find your behavior bizarre."
Likewise, juveniles find the behavior of seasoned adults odd, too.
"...and congratulate yourself on being so much more informed than the Slashdot masses."
That is always cause for celebration, though I can understand you being a bit jealous.
"...and it would be the single most informative post in this entire story."
I don't generally set my sights so low. Just about anything that's thought out qualifies as the most informative post on slashdot... and posts like that are truly rare. That's why I felt it was time to speak up and give you boys a treat.
"...and you certainly haven't given me enough to make me want to buy a Lexis/Nexis subscription."
What type of vehicle you choose to drive is immaterial to this discussion. If you want to impress someone, how about sticking to the topic at hand and saying something informative.
"I remember a guy from Basic Training who reminds me of you. Kept claiming that he'd been a sergeant before, and was just re-enlisting. He never convinced me either."
That sounds very relevant... thank you for sharing. I recall this beggar who kept insisting he was Jesus Christ. We scorned and ridiculed him, spat on him and turned him away. It turns out He was Jesus Christ, and we foolishly acted just like you. There's a lesson to be learned in that story, my son... and I hope some day you'll learn the true lesson (as opposed to what you so foolishly think the lesson was).
"You demand credibility for "being well known" and for "having first-hand experience", but you don't give any personally identifiable information that would allow to figure out who you are, or find out about the "numerous legal battles" you've fought."
You mean other than my real name?
I think the problem here is that, when communicating with you, I assumed I was addressing someone with at least an average adult intellect. My mistake for not resorting to pre-pubescent "hip" chatter devoid of substance so you could relate better.
"All that you're proving is that you're quick with insults, but short on substance."
Sometimes, tit for tat is appropriate (and entertaining). As to your comment about substance, the same can be said of my detractors as well as the opposing stance in general. However, my "substance" was filed in 9th Circuit Court and the Attorney General's Office, among other places. I need not accomodate you simply because you'll cry if I don't.
"I don't have time to retrace....."
Exactly. Few of you have time to do any research at all. But you're all very quick to yell, "feed me... feed me... spoon feed me your research because I'm too lazy... I don't have time..."
"So far, your posts have given me no reason to expect enlightment from finding out answers to these questions."
When did you first begin to assume I was interested in enlightening you? Surely someone as astute and erudite as yourself cannot be bothered with enlightenment.
"Actually, from the amount of vitriol you're spewing around, I'd say you have a massive ego, little time for educating people and are mad that no one is taking you more seriously. All grounds for ignoring ever more of your statements."
Well, hopefully your self-serving conclusion will support your departure. You wouldn't want to be considered a hypocrite, would you?
"Slashdot's search feature won't... "You can't because Slashdot won't let conforming search engines..."
"In order to avoid being labeled as a troll in the future, how would you suggest that I work around these limitations?"
I suggest that, unless constraints were specified, you not look at phrases with such a narrow scope. SlashDot is not the only service with a "search" feature. The fact that Google cannot crawl certain portions of SlashDot does not mean you have to limit your search to SlashDot (or that I meant you limit your search to SlashDot). Do not add nor remove from the context, and you'll be okay.
Slashdot Mirror
"Guess I'll go back to holding my breath."
Better yet... hold your penis.
You're baffled as to why some people keep saying that Mormons aren't Christians?
http://www.carm.org/lds/compare.htm
http://www.godandscience.org/cults/mormdiff.html
The last time I checked, Christianity was not founded on the Book of Mormon, nor was the Book of Mormon canonized! Last time I checked, the Father, Son and the Holy Ghost all referred to the triunal nature of God in Christianity, whereas in Mormonism they actually refer to three separate Gods. The last time I checked, Mormons believe in the existance of multiple Gods. In fact, Mormon men (never women, mind you) have a chance of becoming Gods in the after-life, and ruling over their own kingdom! You may want to believe that Mormons are Christian, but your belief is not founded on the plain-truth statements made by canonized Mormon literature, which includes the various bullshit prophecies revealed by the various LDS living prophets (equivalent to fortune-tellers for those of you not in-the-know).
Did you, or are you just posturing as it appears?
The information you're requesting is exempt from the disclosure requirements of the Public Records Act. As such, you are not entitled to receive same.
I've heard those rumors about John, too. I do notice however, that none of the people (like you) who repeat them have ever filed a charge.
Only the victim or the district attorney can "file a charge" in a criminal case. Witnesses can only report the incident to authorities.
Now, if you know of a crime, you have moral duty to report it to the relevant authorities. Until and unless you do so, I see no reason to believe you.
Do you know for a fact that I didn't report it, or are you just operating on assumption again? HAND.
Dude, I worked with him for several months back in 85. Care to jump to any other conclusions?
I was unfortunate enough to be involved in several conferences with him, as well as hanging out with him during his temporary stint in Santa Monica (where he gave some speech at some "brand-new concept at the time" Internet Cafe). Back then, an Internet Cafe was simply a place that had any type of hard-wired net connection, hardly anyone had laptop computers, and there was no such thing as WiFi. The best part was when I dated Nancy Shorr. Apparently Draper had tried to disrobe her younger brother, and she caught on to it. They were best of enemies after that, and she spared no words (or details) when it came to exposing Draper for what he really was - a sexual predator with a propensity for young boys.
I also had the misfortune of running into him again when both he and I were living in Fremont, CA. I took him and some other friends to Sizzler, and he was an embarrassment to sit near. Anyone unfortunate enough to sit across from him (assuming you could stand the smell) at the dinner table would soon find themselves under constant attack by a barrage of food particles as Draper constantly attempted to speak and chew at the same time. The spaces missing teeth acted as his launch pad. Also, in the middle of the meal, Draper would stand up and shout across the restaurant... "waitress, I need more shrimp" with total disregard for the patrons around him.
No wonder he eventually went overseas... where young boys are a commodity (and the norm for tourists). But don't take it from me... ask Lenny DiCicco.
It took a couple of weeks for the blistering and peeling to clear up.
That's only because he refuses to use soap and water, which he probably didn't use even when the ashtray spilled on him.
when he was in jail, he got beaten severely because he refused to tell the mob how to make blue boxes.
Glad you were there to relay the "real" story to us. It couldn't have had anything to do with his attitude toward others, could it?
He has severe back problems to this day because of it.
That's just his excuse for having young boys disrobe and do "back exercises" with him. Several people who have met him can confirm this propensity to be true.
That's hardly the choice that would be made by someone who thinks none of the rules apply to him.
This just serves to prove that when you're devoid of facts, you can rationalize and paint any picture you want. Interpretation - Your interpretation is so far removed from the truth it doesn't even merit a "1:funny" moderation point. Unless you wish to dispute these facts with someone who has actually met Draper several times, and has known both his friends and enemies (such as Nancy Shorr of the SIG-GRAPH group, who can tell quite a bit of stories about Draper herself).
I think this device is ridiculously primitive, and an example of useless technology. All one has to do is dress up to look like a tree, and they won't be recognized. Or, just draping yourself in a light-weight reflective mylar mirror would totally confuse the system. Hunters have done this for ages... hiding behind a mirror that is tilted toward the ground, so that your subject only sees a reflection of the ground when looking at you.
"... robot modeled on a worm to crawl through your intestines made by European researchers"
What makes you think my intestines are made by European researchers?
"...to ensure that 'essential' government functions continue undisrupted in an emergency."
So now they're going to practice their coffee breaks, giving rude service to the public and wasting our tax dollars on dubious projects... all from underneath a fortified bunker, to ensure this very fine tradition is not lost in the event of a nuclear attack?
This is very true... and the person who points out such blatant illiteracy generally becomes the target of insults from said illiterates. It's a shame these so-called computer gurus lack even basic grammar skills. Imagine if they were inputting coordinates into some targeting system... "I must have gotten some digits wrong... no big deal... you're an asshole for pointing my typo out!"
It seems like the only way for citizens to ensure privacy these days is to subscribe to a satellite internet provider, and make sure that internet provider is in another country (including their mail servers). Someone (here in the USA) should seize the opportunity and begin promoting this, earning commissions in the process.
"Heck, looking at pr0n is "playing solitaire", if you know what I mean... "
Huh? That's not what the bitch underneath my desk thinks when I surf for porn...
Department stores already have product ads running on flat-screen TV's (especially in the perfume section). MacDonald's has TV ads running at the order line. My post office has stupid TV ads running while waiting in line. Now my grocery store too?
THANK HEAVENS FOR TV-B-GONE!
A long-term PKAL solution is available...
http://pkal.com/
| you give too much importance to a humble 'l'.
| maybe freud can toy with this fact for a while.
You give too little importance to basic literacy.
Proper nouns begin with a capital letter.
Thus, it should be "Freud."
| > If you looked up STUPID in the dictionary it wouldn't have the eBay logo
|
| and that logo would be just bellow allmusic.com's, right?
Seems to me that "nazsco" would qualify in the "illiterate" category, using
his "bellow" (as in accordian or glass blower) example as supporting evidence.
Now I've heard everything... maybe quadraplegics should sue video game makers because the games are not ADA compliant. While we're at it, the families of coma patients should sue as well since it is unfair to the person laying there in a coma. Kids should get into the act also, and sue the makers of "adult" or "not for kids" video games for discrimination. Women firefighters (who took a more relaxed version of the firefighter physical abilities test) should sue also, saying the game discriminated against them because it doesn't have a built-in handicap system for women. Hell, let's all sue everyone...
"You could have given a brief summary of your interactions with the EFF. You know, the interactions that constitute the factual basis for all the opinion you've been spewing. Instead, you prefer to expend orders of magnitude more effort defending your refusal to relate your own personal experiences."
2 00213#14200343
For someone who supposedly said, "nor do I care whether I ever find out what the EFF did to piss you off" you certainly seem to contradict yourself. In the above paragraph, you even go so far as to state what I could have done to quench your [supposedly] nonexistent thirst for said information. Now that you've triggered my dissonance detector, I realize you're just a frustrated chump who relieves himself by throwing online fits when he can't have his way. You're quite a character.
"No original sources I could get from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals could ever give me what I would need to know to discuss your personal experiences."
Incorrect... transcripts of all cases are available, for an administrative fee. Perhaps you confuse "public documents" with "online" documents.
"it still wouldn't tell me what mistakes YOU thought the EFF made, it still wouldn't tell me what behaviors YOU found unprofessional."
If you're so dense as to not equate my cause of action, as found by a reading of the complaint, to the grievances I have against the EFF then I believe any form of communication with you is futile and beyond your comprehension level.
"This entire thread has been about your opinions, and so long as you won't say why you hold them, the only thing here we can discuss is why you're behaving like such a buffoon."
I suggest you examine your own behavior. A quick reading of your own statements reveals that you too have opined in this thread, over and over again. To claim that I'm the only one who has opined is simply ludicrous and disingenuous.
"The longer you keep stonewalling, the more worthless your opinion appears. The longer I keep feeding your trollish behavior, the dumber I look. I don't care, though. At this point, I just want to win."
You know what's really funny? The fact that I've already provided the information (via links) in one of the other thread branches to my post. You've just been so obsessed with getting the information without having to do *any* research at all that you missed it. But that doesn't surprise me, coming from an armchair researcher like you.
"[by win,] I mean, 'getting the last post.' I have the time to waste on this thoroughly pointless exchange. Do you?"
We obviously share different ideas of what "win" means. You can have the last post... that's fine with me (consider it your "win"). I, on the other hand, shall have the HLS award (my "win").
Here... I'll throw you a bone... the information you seek can be found in this post:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=170322&pid=14
Merry Christmas. Jesus loves you. Joseph Smith loves you even more.
"This is really how you spend your life? Trolling, living on the last fumes of fame coming off your friendship with Kevin Mitnick, telling people how important your opinion is but fuck 'em if they ask why?"
This is how you spend yours... replying to trolls? LOL.
"You, a seasoned adult? I'm adding that to the list of claims you never substantiated."
While you're at it... remember that I also did not substantiate my identity.
"Wow. I really want my money back."
Sorry sucker... no refunds allowed.
---
This has been a public service message.
"You claim it's not up to you to provide any information to substantiate your opinion, but it apparently irritates you that I don't take your opinion seriously. Get over yourself."
Face the facts -- You're the one posting into my thread. Obviously, it irritates you that I don't take your request for me to do your research for you seriously, otherwise you would have stopped responding long ago.
"Anyway, you refer [slashdot.org] to EFF involvement in the Kevin Mitnick case (Google: lew payne mitnick [google.com]) and to an FBI wiretapping case (Google: lew payne wiretapping [google.com]). If you could link to transcripts of briefs or arguments in those cases (or even the right search engine and the right query) and point out the specific places where EFF screwed up, that would help everybody learn."
I agree... it would help everyone learn. But then again, I'm not here to be your teacher, no matter how much you protest or attempt to convince me otherwise. As to your nonsensical paragraph regarding the "normal rule of discourse in the Western world" I suggest you study the evolution of language and customs. Once you realize we've gotten where we are today by modifying the norm, you'll see how silly and hollow your argument really is.
"You don't have the hipness down, but you've certainly shown the ability to not say anything substantiative."
r owse_thread/thread/35cc7cddab433421/547781a96d875f 9c?lnk=st&q=Hook+line+sinker+lewis&rnum=11&hl=en#5 47781a96d875f9ct ology/browse_thread/thread/24d189321502a4ee/0ae364 01a863961b?lnk=st&q=Hook+line+sinker+lewis&rnum=30 &hl=en#0ae36401a863961b
Were that actually true, you would have mistaken me for one of your own. Instead, you felt a compelling need to single me out from the typical slashdot crowd (which you describe perfectly in your reply).
"I find your behavior bizarre."
Likewise, juveniles find the behavior of seasoned adults odd, too.
"...and congratulate yourself on being so much more informed than the Slashdot masses."
That is always cause for celebration, though I can understand you being a bit jealous.
"...and it would be the single most informative post in this entire story."
I don't generally set my sights so low. Just about anything that's thought out qualifies as the most informative post on slashdot... and posts like that are truly rare. That's why I felt it was time to speak up and give you boys a treat.
"...and you certainly haven't given me enough to make me want to buy a Lexis/Nexis subscription."
What type of vehicle you choose to drive is immaterial to this discussion. If you want to impress someone, how about sticking to the topic at hand and saying something informative.
"I remember a guy from Basic Training who reminds me of you. Kept claiming that he'd been a sergeant before, and was just re-enlisting. He never convinced me either."
That sounds very relevant... thank you for sharing. I recall this beggar who kept insisting he was Jesus Christ. We scorned and ridiculed him, spat on him and turned him away. It turns out He was Jesus Christ, and we foolishly acted just like you. There's a lesson to be learned in that story, my son... and I hope some day you'll learn the true lesson (as opposed to what you so foolishly think the lesson was).
http://www.killfile.org/~daemons/kotm/hls.html
and the more informative
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usenet.kooks/b
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.scien
Let that be your final lesson. And so it is ordered, and so it shall be.
"You demand credibility for "being well known" and for "having first-hand experience", but you don't give any personally identifiable information that would allow to figure out who you are, or find out about the "numerous legal battles" you've fought."
You mean other than my real name?
I think the problem here is that, when communicating with you, I assumed I was addressing someone with at least an average adult intellect. My mistake for not resorting to pre-pubescent "hip" chatter devoid of substance so you could relate better.
"All that you're proving is that you're quick with insults, but short on substance."
....."
Sometimes, tit for tat is appropriate (and entertaining). As to your comment about substance, the same can be said of my detractors as well as the opposing stance in general. However, my "substance" was filed in 9th Circuit Court and the Attorney General's Office, among other places. I need not accomodate you simply because you'll cry if I don't.
"I don't have time to retrace
Exactly. Few of you have time to do any research at all. But you're all very quick to yell, "feed me... feed me... spoon feed me your research because I'm too lazy... I don't have time..."
"So far, your posts have given me no reason to expect enlightment from finding out answers to these questions."
When did you first begin to assume I was interested in enlightening you? Surely someone as astute and erudite as yourself cannot be bothered with enlightenment.
"Actually, from the amount of vitriol you're spewing around, I'd say you have a massive ego, little time for educating people and are mad that no one is taking you more seriously. All grounds for ignoring ever more of your statements."
Well, hopefully your self-serving conclusion will support your departure. You wouldn't want to be considered a hypocrite, would you?
"Slashdot's search feature won't...
"You can't because Slashdot won't let conforming search engines..."
"In order to avoid being labeled as a troll in the future, how would you suggest that I work around these limitations?"
I suggest that, unless constraints were specified, you not look at phrases with such a narrow scope. SlashDot is not the only service with a "search" feature. The fact that Google cannot crawl certain portions of SlashDot does not mean you have to limit your search to SlashDot (or that I meant you limit your search to SlashDot). Do not add nor remove from the context, and you'll be okay.
That's my suggestion. Thanks for asking!