> And especially those of you who told me it was pointless to respond to
> Scarff.

> Yes, engaging in exchanges with Scarff is pointless if one expects a
> resultant change in his behaviour.  His interest is in seeing his name
> in the author field of as many top-level threads as possible.  A
> number of people told me to simply ignore him, and in many respects
> that advice was correct.

> But I don't think it was entirely correct.  By goading Scarff into
> engaging in what can only be described as a series of rabid
> defamations and libels I did accomplish my goal, which was to show him
> as a shameless liar who will say anything his feeble imagination
> brings to the level of what I will generously refer to as his
> conscious awareness.

> Scarff _is_ a liar, plain and simple.  This has been amply
> demonstrated in a number of ways, including his repeated posts wherein
> he claims that I'm persecuting him because he's a homosexual with
> aids.

> He will no doubt respond to this post with another flurry of new
> topics that have my name in them.  Naturally I won't be responding to
> all of them, or maybe not any.  I offer that little bit of hope to him
> so he can make my prediction about his behaviour true, and despite
> having told him that he will nevertheless do exactly as I predict.  He
> has no choice, apparently driven by an all-consuming narcisism.

> As usual I wish Scarff a short life, not because he's fascinated with
> Rinder's ass, and not because he has aids, but simply because he's one
> of the most worthless sacks of shit I've ever seen posting on ars.

> Zane

> ps.  Scarff:  Be sure to send your complaint to netcom, I'm sure they
> like to have a good laugh once in a while too.