As usual the K*nt is trying to start yet another fight. Messr. scum-bag
is wrong on two counts, one, the DNSO.NET exists and has been
continuously operational since 18Dec98. Two, it is a real tax deduction
for MHSC.NET. The IRS recognizes it as a bonefide non-profit activity.
There are rules I have to abide by, but none to onerous.
> >Roeland's attempt to shoehorn in a commercial entity in disguise is
> >just a little dishonest, don't you think?
>
> I guess that depends on his intentions, which you would have NO way of
> knowing. I think your coloring of both my comments and his in this
> response of your is rather inappropriate, but it is the type of
> conclusion jumping and criticism without merit that we have come to
> expect from you.
No, the scum-bag engages in an extremely dishonest form of debate,
called "coloring". The Jack-ass is attacking my honesty directly. Its a
smear tactic, expected from such feeble minded polecats. The fact that
he is here under less than honest terms is an example of what he really
stands for. He simply sees an opportunity to smear and he takes it.
> >In any case, your discussion of this on the IDNO list is certainly
> >off topic (though strangely, the list police have not said anything
> >about it), so I won't continue this thread.
>
> As a non-member fo the IDNO, I don't think it is your place to make
> any such conclusion. But this is just another example of your
> presuming to make conclusions for others.
Actually, I didn't think that discussing membership criteria was
off-topic, for one nominated to the membership committee (me). Of
course, I would look at what other constituencies are doing. However,
the other point you make is also correct, Kent is not a member. In fact,
if he were a member, he could no longer be in the NCDNHC.
BTW William, if you don't reprint shit-head's posts, I won't see them
and the K*nt's rantings won't piss me off. My filters work pretty good.