Hello again, A.
Thanks for responding so quickly. I thank also the entry on your blog. A bit of support is comforting, if only to give more excitement to the game. If you deign to answer school somewhere, which I doubt very much (with me only did it once, in person, briefly, and because there was public hearing), if you go down to the arena, I say, although the arguments are not your thing, is more than likely to do so by bringing up our enmity born a few months ago and raised primarily as a monomania that suffer against him, the victim of nuts. I like your hypothetical story made you doubt the honesty of my intentions, so I heal in health and I offer mine.
(...) I think it took long to deduce that if the above puppet, which I did not know I swallowed even in that bastion of Kafirs was marginal for my opposition to gay marriage and my defense of the Church, at the time the only two political issues that had played at that time. Shortly after his call to ignore, for spite, I made a funny poll in your forum where I asked about the sexual orientation of the blogmaster. Could not stand it. After rinsing so ridiculous, giving credibly my joke, that he was not "that", but that it would be very proud, after a few days and considering that prospered thread (with absolutely all the shares in his defense, of course), deleted the post and the comments that housed a hundred más o menos. Curioso que se ofendiera como con el peor de los insultos, dada su simpatía por el movimiento gay. El movimiento se demuestra andando. Porque el autor de ese blog es un vendedor de humo que quiere dar como frutos sazonados de la historia discursos que no son más que el desenlace gramatical de un cortocircuito en su cerebro. No tolera crítica de ninguna índole, ni siquiera la humorística. No hay acritud válida fuera de la que él exhibe a diario al encabritarse contra lo que detesta, salvo que uno se convierta en servil eco suyo.
(...)
Hasta ahí yo lo consideraba unas tablas, me parecía justo: ofensa por ofensa. Pero el duelo se reabrió semanas más tarde cuando, al escribir critical comment on any entry Escolar.net, Mao was able to identify and, after placing the clamp there too so I would not stir, she turned to me as that is an idiot, making twice-a justification mode censorship-a link to a page that defames me. Since then I had to have it on my enemy. The enemies are owed a decent treatment. So I dedicated a full-scale mock green 'troll' and what a 'troll' is expected, the "ad hominem" gritty.
(...) Finally, and perhaps to his surprise (made public with the story you've read my attendance at the event yesterday, before Nacho intervene in it) we are in the last of days Copyfight Barcelona, \u200b\u200bmy city, announced on his blog in advance. I did not see that anyone excluded from participating by not getting along with one of the speakers or believe that the guy is doing the cocoon. Moreover, he had shown my interest to attend in advance and write on the subject.
It was very brief. It was recognized me, calling my name and see off the stage with feigned cordiality and bitter smile, mine, sardonic. Innocent me, I thought that peace was still possible. But no. After the fit of the hands of commitment dialogue ensued in this way, such and as I remember:
He - Hey, what's wrong you have an obsession with me, I'll follow.
Me: - I have no obsession ...
He - I've been about to sue you for ...
Me: - Go ahead, I'm a lawyer.
He - I ask you to go because (going to a praetorian elastic) I do not want to be with this man. Call security.
Me: - I will not go without giving you prior to the question that had been prepared.
He - cause me now, I will not continue.
Me: - No, I do it after you. I see you follow the strategy of the ban.
He - Yes, I know you worked well.
Well, before I sit back petty girl came to intimidate me again with the security officer . I told him to bring them immediately (never came). I do not know if he said something else, because had sucker lips and the truth is that I paid more attention to form over content.
Well, despite the pressure, I am used to, I returned to my seat and did not leave the room, because this would have to admit that my conscience was not very quiet. I kept calm watching the developments. But Mao was broken during his talk, bushed and drinking water every few minutes as a menopausal. At the final halt. Reproached me to continue this, attributing some threats by email to conceal his ravings. Reproach him after his lie, I covenanted out if I could ask you something before. Agreed. I eventually had pointed questions and he answered as he could. End of story.
if you're interested, the question was:
Irichc: I can not come to understand how someone who so ardently defends music career at the expense of music and canned music, she is not engaged in body and soul now having all the hype in the world, given his reputation on the Internet. School Nacho said: "I know more profitable pirate 100,000 fans fill my original dates to 10,000. "School's blog receives daily around 15,000 visitors and their songs, which he encourages hack, listed on the cover. How come you have not the 100,000 fans still pirates? And, if you come, how come they are not sufficiently profitable to abandon what is now doing and begin with concerts by the piece?.
And his answer with care:
School : I answer very quickly because I am not a musician for two years, I am a journalist.
Irichc: So it was not as vocational. But my opinion is another.
School: I know I better than you.
Irichc: I can give it?
School: Yes
Irichc: My opinion, with all due respect, is that you are a mediocre musician, as the majority. And the same way that copyright does not take away nothing [or little], copyleft has not given you nothing + +.
School: All right. Can you go now?
Irichc: With pleasure. You see I did not need security officer.
And I left.
0 comments:
Post a Comment