Did Mike Rossi (viral marathon dad) cheat his way into Boston?

Thanks Brojos!!! My faith in you is restored!

I am back to this beautiful thread. I never lost hope (except some 14 or so times).

in time:

http://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/stop_penis_erect_archer.gif

It feels great to be back.

Hitler Diaries wrote:

Trolls need to troll better wrote:

First sign you are not a journalist: no journalist would refer to him/herself as a "journo."

Second sign you are not a journalist: no journalist would confuse "anon" with "annon" - which is sweet pulpy tropical fruit with thick scaly rind and shiny black seeds. Yeah, I looked that one up.

Classic, this always cracks me up, some annonymous trolling arsehole triumphantly declares he's caught another annonymous trolling arsehole and even goes to the bother to look up and post the description of some nondescript abbreviation. Mate, we aren't talking forging of the Hitler Diaries here. Could only happen on MR viral thread. Also, guess what the journos I know call themselves?

hahayeah and guess what the spelling and grammar is like of the journos I know

rojo anyone

While I appreciate the creative energy and output of the no name writer of the article, the article lists only a few circumstantial points that can easily be explained away, with no smoking gun. Without real proof, it comes off as a hit piece on a guy who ran a 3:11 in some marathon somewhere, who has no obligation to prove anything to the writer, whoever he or she is, or to this kangaroo court. If you're going to call a man a cheater in this big of a way, then you really should have real proof.

Each person who posts here should hope that someday they don't come under the crosshairs of the unnamed writer and this finger-pointing mob and feel you have to prove your innocence, when the onus is and always should be on the accusers.

What a bunch of raving psychos

dddffffggg wrote:

While I appreciate the creative energy and output of the no name writer of the article, the article lists only a few circumstantial points that can easily be explained away, with no smoking gun. Without real proof, it comes off as a hit piece on a guy who ran a 3:11 in some marathon somewhere, who has no obligation to prove anything to the writer, whoever he or she is, or to this kangaroo court. If you're going to call a man a cheater in this big of a way, then you really should have real proof.

And therein lies the problem, no conclusive proof, which the article,11208 posts on this thread and an investigation by LVM RD and USATF have failed to come up with.

dddffffggg wrote:

While I appreciate the creative energy and output of the no name writer of the article, the article lists only a few circumstantial points that can easily be explained away, with no smoking gun. Without real proof, it comes off as a hit piece on a guy who ran a 3:11 in some marathon somewhere, who has no obligation to prove anything to the writer, whoever he or she is, or to this kangaroo court. If you're going to call a man a cheater in this big of a way, then you really should have real proof.

Each person who posts here should hope that someday they don't come under the crosshairs of the unnamed writer and this finger-pointing mob and feel you have to prove your innocence, when the onus is and always should be on the accusers.

Yeah, a camera malfunction - at all 7 photo spots? C'mob. How stupid are you? If you know your history cheaters have been DQ'd from other races for a lot less. Mike is going down.

Well said Mike.

you are an idiot wrote:

C'mob. How stupid are you?

As you ask

Judging by your post, not as stupid as you it seems.

Just thought I'd let everyone know that I posted the link to Barb McKeever's business page and paid $1 to get the article directly to her inbox on Facebook.

Because we all know if somebody "known" didn't do it Mike would post anonymously and claim he did it, and then, of course, not do it.

This is the receipt for paying the $1 to Facebook:

http://imgur.com/e09phOg

This fella is going down.

LoserMikeRossi wrote:

Just thought I'd let everyone know that I posted the link to Barb McKeever's business page and paid $1 to get the article directly to her inbox on Facebook.

Because we all know if somebody "known" didn't do it Mike would post anonymously and claim he did it, and then, of course, not do it.

This is the receipt for paying the $1 to Facebook:

http://imgur.com/e09phOg

You do know that good old fashioned e-mail also works, right? Unless she already set up the ruleset that everything from you goes to her trash folder which is likely given your track record. I'd be shocked if you got a response from Barb on FB.

LoserMikeRossi wrote:

Just thought I'd let everyone know that I posted the link to Barb McKeever's business page and paid $1 to get the article directly to her inbox on Facebook.

Because we all know if somebody "known" didn't do it Mike would post anonymously and claim he did it, and then, of course, not do it.

This is the receipt for paying the $1 to Facebook:

http://imgur.com/e09phOg

Ken, where is the other $2499 I paid you?

Oh yeah, HI Mike!

LoserMikeRossi wrote:

Just thought I'd let everyone know that I posted the link to Barb McKeever's business page and paid $1 to get the article directly to her inbox on Facebook.

Because we all know if somebody "known" didn't do it Mike would post anonymously and claim he did it, and then, of course, not do it.

This is the receipt for paying the $1 to Facebook:

http://imgur.com/e09phOg

Ken, did you include the new evidence?, because if you didn't you've just wasted $1 that could have been donated to a worthwhile cause.

What a waste. wrote:

LoserMikeRossi wrote:

Just thought I'd let everyone know that I posted the link to Barb McKeever's business page and paid $1 to get the article directly to her inbox on Facebook.

Because we all know if somebody "known" didn't do it Mike would post anonymously and claim he did it, and then, of course, not do it.

This is the receipt for paying the $1 to Facebook:

http://imgur.com/e09phOg

Ken, did you include the new evidence?, because if you didn't you've just wasted $1 that could have been donated to a worthwhile cause.

Answer for him.

No he didn't.

Mike wins, again.

Hitler Diaries wrote:

Trolls need to troll better wrote:

First sign you are not a journalist: no journalist would refer to him/herself as a "journo."

Second sign you are not a journalist: no journalist would confuse "anon" with "annon" - which is sweet pulpy tropical fruit with thick scaly rind and shiny black seeds. Yeah, I looked that one up.

Classic, this always cracks me up, some annonymous trolling arsehole triumphantly declares he's caught another annonymous trolling arsehole and even goes to the bother to look up and post the description of some nondescript abbreviation. Mate, we aren't talking forging of the Hitler Diaries here. Could only happen on MR viral thread. Also, guess what the journos I know call themselves?

And it always saddens me when someone is told they've spelled a word wrong, and their witty comeback still contains the spelling error.

I guess the work ethic of "journos" has really dropped.

dddffffggg wrote:

While I appreciate the creative energy and output of the no name writer of the article, the article lists only a few circumstantial points that can easily be explained away, with no smoking gun. Without real proof, it comes off as a hit piece on a guy who ran a 3:11 in some marathon somewhere, who has no obligation to prove anything to the writer, whoever he or she is, or to this kangaroo court. If you're going to call a man a cheater in this big of a way, then you really should have real proof.

Each person who posts here should hope that someday they don't come under the crosshairs of the unnamed writer and this finger-pointing mob and feel you have to prove your innocence, when the onus is and always should be on the accusers.

Do you even read?

Thank you, Ken, for your contribution!

Cheating in a marathon must be followed up.