Firefox 3.6 beta version 5 Released
Saxman
John Corliss
> Saxman wrote:
>>
>> Firefox 3.6 beta version 5 Released
>
> So what?
That's pretty harsh, Yrrah, and you don't speak for the group. I, for
one am interested in knowing that there's progress towards a new version
of Firefox. If it's a beta version 5, then I would guess that it won't
be long before release candidates start appearing.
You can be awful rude sometimes. I wish you'd mellow out a little.
--
John Corliss BS206. Using News Proxy, I block all Google Groups posts
due to Googlespam, and as many posts from anonymous remailers (like
x-privat.org for eg.) as possible due to forgeries posted through them.
No ad, cd, commercial, cripple, demo, nag, share, spy, time-limited,
trial or web wares OR warez for me, please.
bay...@gmail.com
wrote:
> http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all-beta.html
I am sticking with v.2; it allows some control of cookies. & I am
using Iron a good bit nowadays also.
Poutnik
@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, bay...@gmail.com says...
When noticing FF 3.0 had implemented intelligent and fast
on the fly bookmark and history searching in address bar,
I knew I would never return back.
With decent cookie managing addons like e.g. CS Lite,
cookies are not problem.
--
Poutnik
The best depends on how the best is defined.
Man-wai Chang to The Door (24000bps)
> On Dec 18, 3:49 pm, Saxman<john.h.williamsREMOVET...@btinternet.com>
> wrote:
>> http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all-beta.html
>
> using Iron a good bit nowadays also.
Your Honor, are you sure that there is no add-on for that job?
--
@~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
/( _ )\ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.32.1
^ ^ 20:40:01 up 3 days 10:18 1 user load average: 2.51 2.52 2.53
不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa
Saxman
> That's pretty harsh, Yrrah, and you don't speak for the group.
I agree, but then it's happened before.
> I, for one am interested in knowing that there's progress towards a new version
> of Firefox. If it's a beta version 5, then I would guess that it won't
> be long before release candidates start appearing.
There are over 100 bug fixes since the last release, but then Yrrah
doesn't want to know that. It's his prerogative though.
s|b
> I am sticking with v.2; it allows some control of cookies. & I am
> using Iron a good bit nowadays also.
Do they even support Fx 2.x anymore?
--
s|b
Dave U. Random
> Saxman <john.h.willi...@btinternet.com>:
>
> > There are over 100 bug fixes since the last release, but then Yrrah
> > doesn't want to know that. It's his prerogative though.
>
> Correct. I am not all interested in Firefox. You only posted a link in
> your original posting, no info, no recommendation or whatever.
So you're saying you're too fucking stupid to read a Subject:
header and undersatand what the link means from that?
I'd keep that sort of information to myself I I were you.
Samuel Luter
ha ha harry
s|b
> > Correct. I am not all interested in Firefox. You only posted a link in
> > your original posting, no info, no recommendation or whatever.
> So you're saying you're too fucking stupid to read a Subject:
> header and undersatand what the link means from that?
I'm thinking he's saying that the OP could have put a little more effort
to it. Now it seems the only reason why the OP posted it was to be "the
first". A little more information isn't too much to ask, is it?
--
s|b
»Q«
s|b <m...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> Do they even support Fx 2.x anymore?
No. They supported it until a year ago, which was 6 months after Fx
3.0 was released. They've never made a public announcement promising
to always handle it that way, but they seem committed to supporting
obsolete versions for 6 months each time.
Fx 3.0.x should be near its support end-of-life now; I expect 3.0.16
was the last update, but I haven't looked for an announcement to that
effect. (Usually it's in the announcement of the last version's
release, but no announcement has shown up in mozilla.announce for
3.0.16 yet.)
Craig
> "s|b"<m...@privacy.invalid>:
>
>> I'm thinking he's saying that the OP could have put a little more effort
>> to it. Now it seems the only reason why the OP posted it was to be "the
>> first". A little more information isn't too much to ask, is it?
>
Silly man
--
-Craig
Craig
> Craig<netbu...@REMOVEgmail.com>:
>
>
>>>> I'm thinking he's saying that the OP could have put a little more effort
>>>> to it. Now it seems the only reason why the OP posted it was to be "the
>>>> first". A little more information isn't too much to ask, is it?
>>>
>>> Exactly.
>>
>> Silly man
>
Colostomy bag leaking again Harry?
--
-Craig
Craig
> Craig<netbu...@REMOVEgmail.com>:
>
>
>
> Yrrah
W/e Harry.
Piss on posters if it makes you feel good. It's alt after all.
--
-Craig
Samuel Luter
cat fite between tow pussies. wow
Guillaume Le Franklin-Internet Terrorist-Stubbings
>Saxman <john.h.willi...@btinternet.com>:
>
>> There are over 100 bug fixes since the last release, but then Yrrah
>> doesn't want to know that. It's his prerogative though.
>
>Correct. I am not all interested in Firefox.
>Yrrah
why don't you fuck off then...in the nicest possible way.
--
Guillaume Le Stubbings.
Anything posted through x-privat.org or anonymous mail2news servers
like dizum.com, reece.net and others in my name is NOT a FORGERY,
In ACF, I post through news.sunsite.dk, x-privat.org and frell.
In other groups, only via eternal-september, unless I use a remailer.
Craig
> Craig<netbu...@REMOVEgmail.com>:
>
>> Piss on posters
>
> No, on shitty postings...
OK, you're right. I mis-characterized that. Please accept my apology.
You don't piss on posters but shitty posts. How? By posting:
> So what?
Your post was considerably more inscrutable than the OP's. Then we get
into this discussion and you post:
> [You]... attack people who prefer to see informative
> postings.
As if "So what?" counts as an informative posting. Or were you just
being a "lazy f*cker," to use your words?
But have at it, Harry: stick to your guns. You & I both know there was
a better way to address your concerns. You didn't. Whether you do...
<shrug>.
--
-Craig
Zombie Elvis
wrote:
>Saxman <john.h.willi...@btinternet.com> wrote on Fri, 18 Dec
>2009 20:49:26 +0000:
>
>> Firefox 3.6 beta version 5 Released
>
>So what?
>
Because it's the next version of a very popular freeware browser?
--
Cause, really, nothing says "I'm a counter culture
rebel, fighting the establishment" like an Aibo on
a skateboard.
- Seen on Slashdot
Roberto Castillo
roberto...@ameritech.net
http://mind-grapes.blogspot.com/
http://zombie-gulch.myminicity.com/
»Q«
Yrrah <Yrra...@acf.invalid> wrote:
> Saxman <john.h.willi...@btinternet.com> wrote on Fri, 18 Dec
> 2009 20:49:26 +0000:
>
> > Firefox 3.6 beta version 5 Released
> > http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all-beta.html
>
> So what?
So anybody who's interested in the beta could go read the release notes
for it, download it for testing, &c. The link you snipped leads to a
lot of info. Posting links to info about freeware is viewed by
non-morons as a good thing here in a.c.freeware.
In <news:ohopi55l3mrgp59ml...@net.com>,
Yrrah <Yrra...@acf.invalid> wrote:
> I am not all interested in Firefox.
Most people aren't interested in K-Meleon, but the non-morons among
them wouldn't object to posting a link to information about it.
Nomen Nescio
> On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 18:49:15 +0100 (CET), Dave U. Random wrote:
>
> > > Correct. I am not all interested in Firefox. You only posted a link in
> > > your original posting, no info, no recommendation or whatever.
>
> > So you're saying you're too fucking stupid to read a Subject:
> > header and undersatand what the link means from that?
>
> I'm thinking he's saying that the OP could have put a little more effort
Oh buh-fukin-loney. It was a damned revision release announcement.
It's self explanitory if you're not a total asstard. It doesn't
REQUIRE anything but a link.
Your butt buddy Yrrah was just being a douche, and got spanked over
it. Now it's YOUR turn for a lesson.
> to it. Now it seems the only reason why the OP posted it was to be "the
> first". A little more information isn't too much to ask, is it?
*laughing*
What "information" do you need, dimbulb?
Free Clue: Follow the link. I'll bet it's there.
Jeffrey Bloss
> 'Yrrah' wrote thus:
>
>>Craig <netbu...@REMOVEgmail.com>:
>>
>>> Piss on posters
>>
>>No, on shitty postings, like the Soxman's. You defend the lazy
>>f*ckers who post them and attack people who prefer to see
>>informative postings.
>>
>>Yrrah
>
> Bullshit.
>
> All you are doing is trying to impose what OTHER people must
> post to pass YOUR personal acceptability test. That makes you
> a self-appointed netkop AS WELL as a $Pricelessware Freak.
>
> Jeeeeez, you've got problems...live with it.
We're the only posters allowed to do that. :)
Criminals and market manupulators hiding behind the Pricelessware
cult don't deserve rights.
--
_?_ Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend.
(@ @) Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.
-oOO-(_)--OOo-------------------------------[ Groucho Marx ]--
grok! Devoted Microsoft User
»Q«
You *still* haven't figured out how to killfile me?
[this space left blank for hummingbird to insert another explanation of
why he reads every post written by everyone he's "killfiled"]
In <news:78031a1e71dc1a9d...@aracari.127.0.0.1>,
hummingbird <hummingbír...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> But by the same token, non-morons would not download unlawful CD.ISOs
> from here:
>
> <http://aracari.redirectme.net [snip]
I can't guess what unlawful stuff you might be pointing to with your
redirects, but the Pricelessware CD ISOs are distributed legally.
People without paranoid fantasies about gangs of fictitious criminals
can get them from <http://downloads.remarqs.net/pl/>, among other
places.
hummingbird
There's nothing paranoid about me, Franklin-Stubbings. I know who you
are and you can't fool me by calling yourself »Q«.
You're confusing insight with paranoia. All lesser mortals confuse
that but I don't.
Who worked out why we woke up to slightly damp streets after there had
been 2 metres of snow in the night? I did. The govt seeded the clouds
to produce torrential rain (which we were going to get anyway because
of global warming) to wash away all sign of the deep snow.
Teams of men posing as street sweepers took away the bodies which had
been hidden in the snowdrifts. Vital organs from the bodies were sold
for unauthorised transplants to an international gang of criminals who
also sell freeware CDs on behalf of Pricelessware.
That's called insight.
hb
--
ACF.FAQ download: http://www.datafilehost.com/download-d375213f.html
Freeware resources: http://bearware.info
ACF <zero tolerance> policy: http://zer0tolerance.notlong.com
John Stubbings sock list: http://is.gd/5gLnB
"All truth passes through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed,
and third, it is accepted as self-evident"
(Arthur Schopenhauer)
Saxman
> Who worked out why we woke up to slightly damp streets after there had
> been 2 metres of snow in the night? I did. The govt seeded the clouds
> to produce torrential rain (which we were going to get anyway because
> of global warming) to wash away all sign of the deep snow.
>
> Teams of men posing as street sweepers took away the bodies which had
> been hidden in the snowdrifts. Vital organs from the bodies were sold
> for unauthorised transplants to an international gang of criminals who
> also sell freeware CDs on behalf of Pricelessware.
I just love your literature;-)
Have your ever thought about becoming an author?
Craig
> YOU host the ISOs but are unable to provide material evidence
> that each program on the ISOs is fully authorised by its author.
> That means you are unlawfully hosting CD.ISOs on your server.
Just in case anyone still out there believes the forger, nym-shifter and
liar HB: Each program on the Pricelessare ISO is fully authorized by
its author. But you don't have to believe me, you can reference this
for yourselves via the message-id below.
hth,
> From: "B. R. 'BeAr' Ederson"
> Subject: Pricelessware CD 2008 license checking summary
> Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 14:01:00 +0200
> Message-ID: <97fwmjs6treg$.d...@br.ederson.news.arcor.de>
>
> =====================================================================
> *Please snip as much as possible, if you feel inclined to follow-up!*
> *Please link to this message rather than posting it, again*
> =====================================================================
>
>
> As can be seen from those threads, some people devoted much of their spare
> time of more than two weeks to *ensure*, that only programs where included
> in the PL CD creation, whose authors permitted it either by license file,
> program messages, help file, on the website, and so on. If necessary (or
> in uncertain cases) authors where asked for explicit permission.
--
-Craig
»Q«
to the continued kookery about "criminal activity".
People without paranoid fantasies about gangs of fictitious criminals
can get the PL ISOs from <http://downloads.remarqs.net/pl/>, among other
places.
In <news:add42a978502f9b0...@aracari.127.0.0.1>,
hummingbird <hummingbír...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> $Pricelessware Cultist and hoster of unlawful $Pricelessware
> CD.ISOs: "»Q«" wrote thus:
>
> >You *still* haven't figured out how to killfile me?
>
> Wrong.
Congrats on figuring it out after all these years. Are you planning to
actually do it or will you spend several more years reading all my
posts?
> >[this space left blank for hummingbird to insert another explanation
> >of why he reads every post written by everyone he's "killfiled"]
> I have explained to you ad nauseam how Hamster works.
You're well aware that I understand Hamster better than you do. You
have indeed explained how you use it to insure you read every post from
anyone you claim to have killfiled. IIRC, you first filter them, then
pore through the filter log to make sure you spot all of them, setting
Hamster to get them each of them for you. I've suggested it would be
simpler for you to assign them all a high score so Hamster would just
download them without you having to waste time examining the log line
by line, but you seem to prefer your method of making sure you read
every "killed" post.
> It's not my fault if you don't understand.
It's your fault you made the erroneous claim that you've killfiled
people whose posts you make sure always to read.
> >> But by the same token, non-morons would not download unlawful
> >> CD.ISOs from here:
> >>
> >> <http://aracari.redirectme
> >I can't guess what unlawful stuff you might be pointing to with your
> >redirects, but the Pricelessware CD ISOs are distributed legally.
>
> It has all been explained to you before, ad nauseam.
I'm not interested in downloading anything you redirect to, so I
haven't paid any attention to whatever you've said about your content
being unlawful.
We've covered your strange notion that the PL ISOs are unlawful before
though, and you were only ever able to convince one sockpuppet of it.
> YOU host the ISOs but are unable to provide material evidence
> that each program on the ISOs is fully authorised by its author.
You've said that before, and then you usually make the giant leap to
your conclusion that there's something unlawful happening.
> That means you are unlawfully hosting CD.ISOs on your server.
There's that leap again. You'd need to find something on the ISOs
which its author doesn't want on them in order to back up your
fantasies; you've had years to do that, yet you haven't managed to
come up with anything.
At this point, you've so firmly established that you're a crackpot that
I doubt anyone would bother listening to you if you claimed anything
that might substantiate your longstanding allegations; you'd be
better off just going straight to law enforcement, if you can find any
officers who don't already recognize you as a crackpot.
People without paranoid fantasies about gangs of fictitious criminals
can get the PL ISOs from <http://downloads.remarqs.net/pl/>, among other
places.
»Q«
hummingbird <hummingbír...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> '»Q«' wrote thus:
> > <http://downloads.remarqs.net/pl/>
> "Each year, the alt.comp.freeware newsgroup puts together a list
> of "the best of the best in Freeware", the Pricelessware List."
The ISOs don't all the freeware that a.c.f put on the lists, just the
stuff whose authors gave permission to redistribute. In case you're
interested in more information, see
<http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/2008/2008PL-CD-about.php>.
�Ari�
> On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 14:54:47 GMT, hummingbird wrote:
>
>> 'Yrrah' wrote thus:
>>
>>>Craig <netbu...@REMOVEgmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> Piss on posters
>>>
>>>No, on shitty postings, like the Soxman's. You defend the lazy
>>>f*ckers who post them and attack people who prefer to see
>>>informative postings.
>>>
>>>Yrrah
>>
>> Bullshit.
>>
>> All you are doing is trying to impose what OTHER people must
>> post to pass YOUR personal acceptability test. That makes you
>> a self-appointed netkop AS WELL as a $Pricelessware Freak.
>>
>> Jeeeeez, you've got problems...live with it.
>
> We're the only posters allowed to do that. :)
>
> Criminals and market manupulators hiding behind the Pricelessware
> cult don't deserve rights.
Hello JB. Fancy seeing you here again.
--
Ari's Fun Times!
http://is.gd/4Ulfo
Motto: Run, rabbit, Run!
Samuel Luter
> YOU host the ISOs but are unable to provide material evidence
> that each program on the ISOs is fully authorised by its author.
> That means you are unlawfully hosting CD.ISOs on your server.
>
> Simple as that really.
Kan't provide which don't 'xist.
Samuel Luter
>> That means you are unlawfully hosting CD.ISOs on your server.
>
> There's that leap again. You'd need to find something on the ISOs
> which its author doesn't want on them
We ain'tt the FBI, that probby is yours to solve afor the FBI has to do
it fer ya'
Samuel Luter
> you'd be
> better off just going straight to law enforcement,
done
Samuel Luter
> 'Jeffrey Bloss' wrote thus:
>
>>On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 14:54:47 GMT, hummingbird wrote:
>>
>>> 'Yrrah' wrote thus:
>>>
>>>>Craig <netbu...@REMOVEgmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>>> Piss on posters
>>>>
>>>>No, on shitty postings, like the Soxman's. You defend the lazy
>>>>f*ckers who post them and attack people who prefer to see
>>>>informative postings.
>>>>
>>>>Yrrah
>>>
>>> Bullshit.
>>>
>>> All you are doing is trying to impose what OTHER people must
>>> post to pass YOUR personal acceptability test. That makes you
>>> a self-appointed netkop AS WELL as a $Pricelessware Freak.
>>>
>>> Jeeeeez, you've got problems...live with it.
>>
>>We're the only posters allowed to do that. :)
>>
>>Criminals and market manupulators hiding behind the Pricelessware
>>cult don't deserve rights.
>
> Nor much respect :-)
>
So you say.
Samuel Luter
> 'Jack D. Russell, Sr.' wrote thus:
>
>>=?UTF-8?B?wrtRwqs=?= <box...@gmx.net> wrote in
>>news:20091220204...@bellgrove.remarqs.net:
>>Geez...is Hummingbird still around? Would have thought someone
>>killed him by now. What a maroon.
>
> Oh look! Here we have Jack Russell, one of the
> "I-never-post-on-ACF-about-Freeware" socks who participated in
> Ron May's 2009 Pricelessware List farce. What a joke you are.
>
> lol.
>
jest jok ?
Samuel Luter
> 'Samuel Luter' wrote thus:
> Indeed, but little old Craigee is still peddling the line that the
> material has been provided. I guess someone believes him.
>
Qwit the bellyaching, ya donut! :)
Dave U. Random
> Geez...is Hummingbird still around? Would have thought someone killed
> him by now. What a maroon.
I'm surprised the pathetic fuck hasn't killed itself, what with the
way it embarrasses itself day in and day out.
Proof that people with absolutely no self respect at all actually
DO exist.
Craig
> the material has been provided
Correct. It's a matter of record:
Message-ID: <97fwmjs6treg$.d...@br.ederson.news.arcor.de>
hth,
--
-Craig
Dave U. Random
> '=C2=BBQ=C2=AB' wrote thus:
>=20
> >In <news:41b77eefcf08293f...@aracari.127.0.0.1>,
> >hummingbird <hummingb=C3=AD...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> >
> >> '=C2=BBQ=C2=AB' wrote thus:
> >> > <http://downloads.remarqs.net/pl/> =20
> >
> >> "Each year, the alt.comp.freeware newsgroup puts together a list
> >> of "the best of the best in Freeware", the Pricelessware List."
> >
> >The ISOs don't all the freeware that a.c.f put on the lists, just the
> >stuff whose authors gave permission to redistribute. In case you're
> >interested in more information, see
> ><http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/2008/[snip]>
>=20
>=20
> Irrelevant, but a good try at diversion...
> Clue: I made no mention of what's on the ISOs.
You're a lying asshole...
Message-ID: <add42a978502f9b0...@aracari.127.0.0.1>
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 20:54:49 +0000 (UTC)
"Once more for the hard of hearing:
YOU host the ISOs but are unable to provide material evidence
that each program on the ISOs is fully authorised by its author.
That means you are unlawfully hosting CD.ISOs on your server."
You not only said it, you admitted you've said it repeatedly.
> Here's what I previously wrote:
Sorry asshole, XNA won't save you.
*snicker*
And just so you know, asshole, I'm archiving all your posts and WILL
start reposting them with complete headers if you deny your own
bullshit again. All of them. Automatically. So your lying ass can't
touch them.
I suggest you drop the XNA. It might dissuade your lying ass from
playing your childish "didn't say that" games in the future.
OTOH, you're so immature it probably won't. In fact I'm waiting to
be amuse by whatever bullshit lie your tiny little mind can come up
with to deny THIS incident.
[This space reserved for typical humpingturd snip and run routine]
Samuel Luter
> Jack
whothefuckRU?
REM
> hummingbird <hummingb�r...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> YOU host the ISOs but are unable to provide material evidence
> that each program on the ISOs is fully authorised by its author.
> That means you are unlawfully hosting CD.ISOs on your server.
Proof positive that if you repeat a lie long enough... well, it's
still a lie.
Samuel Luter
> still a lie. I only accept donations over $19.95
ok
Flann O'Connor
> $Pricelessware unlawful ISO hoster: 'ￜQￜ' wrote thus:
>
>> Since the Subject is PL CD downloads,
>
> Enjoy :-)
>
>> I'll put the link above my reply
>
>> places.
>
> This one's much better: http://preview.xrl.in/42sc
> it contains this:
> ________________________________________________
> Pricelesswarehome Website CD.ISOs available for download
> by anybody, anywhere in the world from ￜQￜ's server:
>
> PL2008:
> http://downloads.remarqs.net/pl/PL2008CD1.iso
> http://downloads.remarqs.net/pl/PL2008CD2.iso
> MD5 checksums:
> http://downloads.remarqs.net/pl/PL2008CDs.md5
>
> PL2007: http://downloads.remarqs.net/pl/PL2007CD.iso
> PL2006: http://downloads.remarqs.net/pl/PL2006CD.iso
> PL2005: http://downloads.remarqs.net/pl/PL2005CD.iso
> PL2004: http://downloads.remarqs.net/pl/PL2004CD.iso
> MD5 checksums:
> http://downloads.remarqs.net/pl/PL2004567CDs.md5
> ________________________________________________
>
>>>
>>> Wrong.
>>
>> Congrats on figuring it out after all these years.
>
> a comprehension problem, as previously explained.
>
>> Are you planning to
>> actually do it or will you spend several more years reading all my
>> posts?
>
>
>>> I have explained to you ad nauseam how Hamster works.
>>
>> You're well aware that I understand Hamster better than you do.
>
> Your many comments over many months make it quite clear you
> do not know how Hamster works ...nor how I use it. But it is
> a bit complicated, so one has to show sympathy :-)
>
> [rest binned unread]
Why be you so negatory.
»Q«
hummingbird <hummingbír...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> Irrelevant, but a good try at diversion...
I'm a bit surprised you find it irrelevant that the ISOs have only
freeware whose authors gave permission.
I'd never try to use the ISOs to divert you from your hate-on for
Pricelessware in general. What do you hate worse, the List or the
ISOs? Just curious.
»Q«
other places.
Read on only if you enjoy hummingbird's kookery.
In <news:7a70eb08f385de45...@aracari.127.0.0.1>,
hummingbird <hummingbír...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> '»Q«' wrote thus:
>
> >Since the Subject is PL CD downloads,
>
> Em. Only because you changed it last time.
No, not last time. Try to keep up.
> I've changed it back.
You've reached a new level of idiocy, changing the Subject of a thread
about PL CD downloads back to something about a Firefox beta, which is
no longer even being mentioned in this branch of the thread.
> This one's much better: http://preview.xrl.in/42sc
That one leads to an 'aracari' domain that you've claimed has some kind
of unlawful content. Also, that domain cannot be reached -- perhaps
Scotland Yard has come by and shut it down based on your
allegations about it? ;)
> >> >You *still* haven't figured out how to killfile me?
> >>
> >> Wrong.
> >
> >Congrats on figuring it out after all these years.
>
> Wrong. I always knew how it works
How strange that you've always been completely unable to do, despite
your claims that you have done it. Here's a test: if you're reading
this now, you've failed again, hummingbird.
> >Are you planning to actually do it or will you spend several more
> >years reading all my posts?
>
> Dear oh dear.
I don't really mind you reading all my posts, but I do wish you
wouldn't call me that.
> >> I have explained to you ad nauseam how Hamster works.
> >
> >You're well aware that I understand Hamster better than you do.
> Your many comments over many months make it quite clear you
> do not know how Hamster works ...nor how I use it.
What's clear to you isn't clear to people who actually know how to
use Hamster. You claim to have killfiled me yet you read all my
posts; good luck holding yourself up as some kind of Hamster expert.
Maybe it would help if you resumed adding "get by mid" to your
replies, to highlight the fact that you go out of your way to read all
the posts you claim to have killed.
> But it is a bit complicated, so one has to show sympathy :-)
It's not terribly complicated; the filtering you can't manage is
particularly simple.
By the way, people without paranoid fantasies about gangs of fictitious
criminals can get the PL ISOs from <http://downloads.remarqs.net/pl>,
among other places.
Nicolaas Hawkins
It's looking increasingly unlikely that there will be an official release of
either for the current season.
--
- Nicolaas
Craig
With each passing day.
By the way, what's your interest? Wanna help?
--
-Craig
Nicolaas Hawkins
>> »Q«<box...@gmx.net> wrote:
Do I need to have 'an intetest' in order to make an observation?
>Wanna help?
The answer is the same as it was last time you asked, and has been for the
last five years.
--
- Nicolaas
Anonymous
> $Pricelessware Treasurer: 'REM' wrote thus:
>=20
>=20
> >> hummingbird <hummingb=C3=AD...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> >
> >> YOU host the ISOs but are unable to provide material evidence
> >> that each program on the ISOs is fully authorised by its author.
> >> That means you are unlawfully hosting CD.ISOs on your server.
> >
> >Proof positive that if you repeat a lie long enough... well, it's
> >still a lie.
>=20
> Well, you should know REM :-)
> btw: how's your sockpuppeting coming along? lol.
>=20
> Apart from that, my comments above were exactly true.
If your deluded mind believes they're true, why did you pretend you
never said them fuckwit.
Samuel Luter
yeah fuck off. heh
REM
> hummingbird <hummingb�r...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>Well, you should know REM :-)
>btw: how's your sockpuppeting coming along? lol.
LIE number 2. I have never used a "sock puppet". Ever.
I had used my real name once (after buying Agent) until I saw the
error in the setup portion, as I told you before. If this is what
you're talking about you are wrong again and spreading malicious
untruths. Surprise... not really.
Craig
> Craig<netbu...@REMOVEgmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/21/2009 10:17 PM, Nicolaas Hawkins wrote:
>
>>> »Q«<box...@gmx.net> wrote:
>
>>>> I'd never try to use the ISOs to divert you from your hate-on for
>>>> Pricelessware in general. What do you hate worse, the List or the
>>>> ISOs? Just curious.
>
>>> It's looking increasingly unlikely that there will be an official release of
>>> either for the current season.
>
>> With each passing day.
>>
>> By the way, what's your interest?
>
> Do I need to have 'an intetest' in order to make an observation?
One doesn't need much of anything to post anything here.
>
>> Wanna help?
>
> The answer is the same as it was last time you asked, and has been for the
> last five years.
Then there's still a chance!
best,
--
-Craig
Franklin
In addition to that, BeAr Ederson also wrote this about freeware
permissions:
Google:
<http://groups.google.com/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/a3180b501500506d>
Message-ID:
<news:1jtv749i9gixq$.d...@br.ederson.news.arcor.de>
Of course, the entire debate about freeware permissions is just a troll set
up a few months ago as a diversary tactic by Hummingbird and "David W"
(also posting as "Bear Bottoms"). It uses a false premise and no one
really believes it. Not even Hummingbird.
--
"Bear Bottoms" and "David W" used to post in synchronization:
<http://h.imagehost.org/view/0696/Bottoms_sock>
<http://h.imagehost.org/view/0227/Bottoms_sock_page2>
Franklin
> humpingturd prattled:
>
>> 'Q' wrote thus:
>> >
>> >In <news:41b77eefcf08293f...@aracari.127.0.0.1>,
>> >hummingbird <hummi...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>> >
>> >> 'Q' wrote thus:
>> >> > <http://downloads.remarqs.net/pl/>
>> >
>> >> "Each year, the alt.comp.freeware newsgroup puts together a list
>> >> of "the best of the best in Freeware", the Pricelessware List."
>> >
>> > The ISOs don't all the freeware that a.c.f put on the lists, just
>> > the stuff whose authors gave permission to redistribute. In case
>> > you're interested in more information, see
>> > <http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/2008/>
>> >[snip]
>>
>>
>> Irrelevant, but a good try at diversion... Clue: I made no mention of
>> what's on the ISOs.
>
> You're a lying asshole...
>
> Message-ID: <add42a978502f9b0...@aracari.127.0.0.1>
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 20:54:49 +0000 (UTC)
>
> "Once more for the hard of hearing:
>
> YOU host the ISOs but are unable to provide material evidence
> that each program on the ISOs is fully authorised by its
> author. That means you are unlawfully hosting CD.ISOs on your
> server."
>
> You not only said it, you admitted you've said it repeatedly.
>
>> Here's what I previously wrote:
>
> Sorry asshole, XNA won't save you.
>
> *snicker*
>
> And just so you know, asshole, I'm archiving all your posts and WILL
> start reposting them with complete headers if you deny your own
> bullshit again. All of them. Automatically. So your lying ass can't
> touch them.
>
> I suggest you drop the XNA. It might dissuade your lying ass from
> playing your childish "didn't say that" games in the future.
>
> OTOH, you're so immature it probably won't. In fact I'm waiting to be
> amuse by whatever bullshit lie your tiny little mind can come up with
> to deny THIS incident.
>
> [This space reserved for typical humpingturd snip and run routine]
For a long time Hummingbird has been using X-No-Archive to prevent his
posts going into the archive. FIVE YEARS ago a poster called Billy
complained about what Hummingbird was doing. In the five years since
then Hummingbird hasn't changed his tricks.
Here are some comments Billy made about Hummingbird in uk.politics.misc:
"Using the same old deviousness again? Ask a person
to search in Google and - because you ensure your
postings are not archived - you can then lyingly
claim you made no such comment.
That devious trick you have used before. But it fails
and [that] only goes to show how devious you are."
The above is taken from thread called "For hummingbird".
<http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.politics.misc/msg/a692b1d15083edd9>
Here is what Billy posted to another thread:
"The most important part of the question is *why* [does
Hummingbird keep his posts out of Google Groups] ?
The answer to this must surely be because [Hummingbird]
obviously wanted to remove any evidence of his "folly"
and then be free to accuse the accuser of falsehood. This
constitutes a deceitful act not worthy of a poster with
any integrity.
However, his action seems to echo his political belief
that anything goes and morality is an obstruction to "free"
behaviour. But worse - and in the case of the person in
question:
He is an EVIL BIRD who should "fly away" in shame (if he
has any?) from this and any other newsgroup - and never
return.
But if he persists in staying (because of lack of shame?)
then anyone is entitled to remind him that he is a person
who readily enters into deceit - and is therefore without
credibility and represents a waste of space in any
newsgroup."
Later in the same thread, Billy writes this to Hummingbird:
"Note that I have educated myself to the fact that you
have arranged for all your postings to be deleted from
newsgroup search archives - such as Google.
Do you do this to give yourself "freedom" to lie, cheat,
evade and deceive about what you posted - in the
"security" that no-one can check your deviousness?
What are you afraid of? Why do you want to constantly
hide what you have said?
Is it a sense of insecurity or just a naturally devious
nature?
-------------------
An actual incident: The person with the tag
"hummingbird" ensures that he cannot be held responsible
for any statements or declaration he makes because he
arranges for the purging of all his postings from
the popular newsgroup search facilities such as Google.
By this he avoided admitting that his so called
Libertarianism made him to condone paedophilia,
necrophilia, cannibalism, sadistic brutality and
human sacrifice in his postings.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To verify this devious practice is an actuality,
anyone can do a Google search and see that he has
arrange to have all his postings automatically
deleted so (as he believes) he can never be caught
out.
Important question: What psychopathic impulse makes
him do this?
Above quotations are taken from a thread called "AN EVIL BIRD".
<http://preview.tinyurl.com/ye3uoqg> OR
<http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.politics.misc/browse_thread/thread/
efeda0aee28780cb/91bc17f264f5ebf4>
It's probably a community-minded action to arrange to repost all
Hummingbird's XNA posts in ordr to archive them. Can it be done
automatically? A group like the unused "alt.comp.freeware.discussion"
might be a good home for these reposts.
REM
> hummingbird <hummingb�r...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>Errr, check this out: http://preview.xrl.in/430j
>Not 100% evidence I grant you, but a darned site better than the
>allegations thrown at me by May/Craig when they have accused me
>of socking.
100%? Try zero. Drivel by someone with far too much time on their
hands.
>Most noticeable in your sock posts is that, not only are the
>Headers identical but they appear "in the same sequence" as your
>regular posts. It adds to the evidence that the socks came from
>you.
No, it clearly does NOT, since I have never used a sock puppet.
I have seen myself forged by someone who actually bought Agent and who
posted through Easynews (there is a free three month account after
buying Agent). There is no way to differentiate, as the headers can be
made to look identical.
It's curious as to how this forger chose not to have the messages
archived, isn't it? It was not a perfect forgery.
Franklin
> 'REM' wrote thus:
>
>>> hummingbird <hummingb�r...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>>
>>>Well, you should know REM :-)
>>>btw: how's your sockpuppeting coming along? lol.
>>
>>LIE number 2. I have never used a "sock puppet". Ever.
>
>
> Errr, check this out: http://preview.xrl.in/430j
>
> Not 100% evidence I grant you, but a darned site better than the
> allegations thrown at me by May/Craig when they have accused me
> of socking.
>
> Most noticeable in your sock posts is that, not only are the
> Headers identical but they appear "in the same sequence" as your
> regular posts. It adds to the evidence that the socks came from
> you.
>
> Not to worry, there are sockpuppets/forgers galore on ACF, mostly
> done by Pricelessware groupies and wannabes!
Hummingbird, you continue to make wild allegations about other posters
based on wild speculation. Have you forgotten that your own sockpuppets
have actually been proven based on your unique user ID at Aioe? You can
remind yourself with these posts:
(#1) Message from thread "PWH Cult"
28 May 2009
<http://groups.google.com/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/9f8a6f241f247ea9>
(#2) Message from thread "New Webmaster Selection - Status Report"
8 June 2009
<http://groups.google.com/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/aedcee68bfcadb26>
(#3) Message from thread "Childish spats"
1 May 2009
<http://groups.google.com/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/907c28d9a5b368c4>
(#4) Message from thread "On this warm sunny Sunday in the UK"
3 May 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/e7c0c4ff1ba899ef
--
al
> Saxman <john.h.willi...@btinternet.com> wrote on Fri, 18 Dec
> 2009 20:49:26 +0000:
>
>> Firefox 3.6 beta version 5 Released
>
> So what?
>
> Yrrah
>
Backwards Harry is ONLY good for update notifications and being a
wiseass. Ignore him. The updates are available daily at
http://www.freeware-guide.com/html/updates.html
Tiger
Yrrah is helpful. I read his posts cuz his updates are useful.
REM
> hummingbird <hummingb�r...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>la la la. Have you not posted in the name of jimmy scott and REM
>in the same thread? :-)
At work and at home... two PCs setup slightly differently in Agent
settings? Yes, I did until I saw the error.
That is not a sock puppet. That was an error in setting up a new
program.
>Are you saying that you saw forgeries in your name from someone
>using an Agent header? What about the version of Agent used?
>The socks listed in that link all used the exact same version.
Yes. An exact duplicate of my header. Same version, same AV, same time
zone, etc., short of no archive that is.
I don't worry about it much, as the people here that I know can tell
when something is way out of character.
Samuel Luter
>> hummingbird <hummingb�r...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>>la la la. Have you not posted in the name of jimmy scott and REM
>>in the same thread? :-)
>
> At work and at home... two PCs setup slightly differently in Agent
> settings? Yes, I did until I saw the error.
>
> That is not a sock puppet. That was an error in setting up a new
> program.
ru jimmy?
Samuel Luter
>> hummingbird <hummingb�r...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>>la la la. Have you not posted in the name of jimmy scott and REM
>>in the same thread? :-)
>
> At work and at home... two PCs setup slightly differently in Agent
> settings? Yes, I did until I saw the error.
>
> That is not a sock puppet. That was an error in setting up a new
> program.
ru chris?
Dave U. Random
> Are you saying that you saw forgeries in your name from someone
> using an Agent header? What about the version of Agent used?
> The socks listed in that link all used the exact same version.
Never mind the fact that Agent is probably the most popular news
client by far, and the version your delusionally stupid ass thinks
proves your idiotic sock theory - 5.0 build 1171 - was the very
last in the 5 series and around forever.
Never mind that the messages you're besing your delusional
fuckwittery on had marked differences and obviously came from two
different copies of Agent.
Just keep on making a total fool of yourself...
The Horny Goat
<DELETEMETOREPLY...@ameritech.net> wrote:
>On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 00:05:04 +0100, Yrrah <Yrra...@acf.invalid>
>wrote:
>
>>Saxman <john.h.willi...@btinternet.com> wrote on Fri, 18 Dec
>>2009 20:49:26 +0000:
>>
>>> Firefox 3.6 beta version 5 Released
>>
>>So what?
>>
>Because it's the next version of a very popular freeware browser?
... and arguably the most used piece of freeware ever?!? (Nothing
against Irfanview since I love it dearly but I know I use FF more!)
Samuel Luter
> 'Dave U. Random' wrote thus:
>
>>"Never mind"
>
> OK, I won't.
>
> [tripe binned unread]
its ari
Franklin
>
> I am of course referring to Franklin and John Stubbings, who
> changes his posting handle more often than most whores change
> their knickers!
>
Hummingbird, it's nice to see you so confused.