Coding Dilema
Onideus Mad Hatter
stuff that my server comes with and so I want to make my own. Peachy.
I want to track the following variables:
ip_address
time
day
month
year
referring_url
current_url
language
browser
browser_version
operating_system
screen_width
screen_height
cookies_enabled
java_enabled
flash_enabled
flash_version
color_depth
Now, with PHP I can get about half of 'em. But the rest I can only
get through javascri-
*checks something*
Huh, never mind.
I was gonna ask how to transfer javascript variables to php without
having to reload the page, but then I remember I already went through
this with the perfect liquid site.
Solution is simple, just call a php file as if it were an image, like:
<img src='blah.php?details=whatever'>
You can construct the image tag and such with document writes to get
the javascript variables into it. After which, when the page loads,
it'll simultaneously launch that php page with the transferred
javascript variables (done via post). That php page can then write
the relevant data to the database and can even spit back out an image
for the original site.
...hrmmm...*contemplates on how such a form could be exploited*
I wonder if that's how a lot of those browser exploits operate.
*shrugs*
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
http://www.backwater-productions.net
http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog
Hatter Quotes
-------------
"You're only one of the best if you're striving to become one of the
best."
"I didn't make reality, Sunshine, I just verbally bitch slapped you
with it."
"I'm not a professional, I'm an artist."
"Your Usenet blinders are my best friend."
"Usenet Filters - Learn to shut yourself the fuck up!"
"Drugs killed Jesus you know...oh wait, no, that was the Jews, my
bad."
"There are clingy things in the grass...burrs 'n such...mmmm..."
"The more I learn the more I'm killing my idols."
"Is it wrong to incur and then use the hate ridden, vengeful stupidity
of complete strangers in random Usenet froups to further my art?"
"Freedom is only a concept, like race it's merely a social construct
that doesn't really exist outside of your ability to convince others
of its relevancy."
"Next time slow up a lil, then maybe you won't jump the gun and start
creamin yer panties before it's time to pop the champagne proper."
"Reality is directly proportionate to how creative you are."
"People are pretty fucking high on themselves if they think that
they're just born with a soul. *snicker*...yeah, like they're just
givin em out for free."
"Quible, quible said the Hare. Quite a lot of quibling...everywhere.
So the Hare took a long stare and decided at best, to leave the rest,
to their merry little mess."
"There's a difference between 'bad' and 'so earth shatteringly
horrible it makes the angels scream in terror as they violently rip
their heads off, their blood spraying into the faces of a thousand
sweet innocent horrified children, who will forever have the terrible
images burned into their tiny little minds'."
"How sad that you're such a poor judge of style that you can't even
properly gauge the artistic worth of your own efforts."
"Those who record history are those who control history."
"I am the living embodiment of hell itself in all its tormentive rage,
endless suffering, unfathomable pain and unending horror...but you
don't get sent to me...I come for you."
"Ideally in a fight I'd want a BGM-109A with a W80 250 kiloton
tactical thermonuclear fusion based war head."
"Tell me, would you describe yourself more as a process or a
function?"
"Apparently this group has got the market cornered on stupid.
Intelligence is down 137 points across the board and the forecast
indicates an increase in Webtv users."
"Is my .sig delimiter broken? Really? You're sure? Awww,
gee...that's too bad...for YOU!" `, )
Onideus Mad Hatter
<use...@backwater-productions.net> wrote:
>Okay, so here's the deal...I'm tired of the shitty user data tracking
>stuff that my server comes with and so I want to make my own. Peachy.
>I want to track the following variables:
>
>ip_address
>time
>day
>month
>year
>referring_url
>current_url
>language
>browser
>browser_version
>operating_system
>screen_width
>screen_height
>cookies_enabled
>java_enabled
>flash_enabled
>flash_version
>color_depth
Woot!
It's finished!
Tada:
http://www.backwater-productions.net/_test_platform/system_info.html
All you should see is an image and I gets all yer user data. ^_^
Next I need to make some pages that can take the database info and
construct various graphs and stats from it.
The only thing I'm a little fuzzy on is geographical location. My
current server stat tracking chit seems to be able to track by
location, but I'm not sure how it's doing that. I mean is it actually
checking the IP addy or is it just going by the language setting? And
if it is by the IP addy is there some kind of reference guide or
something that can determine location or would some kind of server
side WHOIS be needed to run on each IP to check? Or is it something
else entirely?
Jerry Stuckle
As long as you know that many users (current estimate about 10%) run
with JS turned off. And even if it's on, anything supplied by the
browser (i.e referer, browser/system info, etc.) is questionable.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstu...@attglobal.net
==================
Onideus Mad Hatter
<jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>As long as you know that many users (current estimate about 10%) run
>with JS turned off. And even if it's on, anything supplied by the
>browser (i.e referer, browser/system info, etc.) is questionable.
Actually current estimates are below 4% (and dropping 2% every six
months) and really, none of my sites, like nearly EVERY site these
days will work without javascript. In some cases I'll have them
retard back to a plain text version of the site if
javascript/flash/etc has been disabled, but that's about all the
effort I'm willing to invest for the Amish of the Internet.
Essentially your concern is that people without computers won't be
able to see my site. And my response is, "No, really?! Who the fuck
woulda guessed?"
I mean you don't go bitching to a car manufacturer that his product
isn't going to sell very well to the Amish. Of course it's not gonna
fuckin sell to 'em, THEY'RE AMISH! What the fuck man, what are you
Captain Jesus Raping Obvious?
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ą x ą
Jerry Stuckle
> On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 07:21:31 -0400, Jerry Stuckle
> <jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> As long as you know that many users (current estimate about 10%) run
>> with JS turned off. And even if it's on, anything supplied by the
>> browser (i.e referer, browser/system info, etc.) is questionable.
>
> Actually current estimates are below 4% (and dropping 2% every six
> months) and really, none of my sites, like nearly EVERY site these
> days will work without javascript. In some cases I'll have them
> retard back to a plain text version of the site if
> javascript/flash/etc has been disabled, but that's about all the
> effort I'm willing to invest for the Amish of the Internet.
>
Not from any reliable source I've seen. 10% and rising. Too many
popups and lots of other things. It's not the Amish - it's the smart
people who know how to turn off javascript who do it.
Javascript should always be used to enhance the experience - but never
be required for the experience.
> Essentially your concern is that people without computers won't be
> able to see my site. And my response is, "No, really?! Who the fuck
> woulda guessed?"
>
Bullshit. But if you want to turn away 10% of all internet users (and
the business they bring), it's your loss, not mine. Or at least I
*hope* it's your loss, and not some client who doesn't have a clue.
> I mean you don't go bitching to a car manufacturer that his product
> isn't going to sell very well to the Amish. Of course it's not gonna
> fuckin sell to 'em, THEY'RE AMISH! What the fuck man, what are you
> Captain Jesus Raping Obvious?
>
You really have no clue, do you?
> --
>
> Onideus Mad Hatter
> mhm น x น
> http://www.backwater-productions.net
> http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog
>
--
SpaceGirl
The pair of you are generalising horribly. JS and Flash usages can be
measured 100 different ways if you look at 100 different markets. Over
all, most people have JS and 98% of people have Flash 9. However how
many of those people actually have it enabled varies considerably
depending on where you look, who you ask, who your audience is. It's
perfectly fine to turn away x% of an *potential* audience if they are
not likely to be interested in the subject/market your site is for.
Loose 10-20% of all WWW users to meet 99% of the needs of your
specific audience? I'd rather create more focused experiences than
dilute web site content so everyone can access it.*
*this is also a poor generalisation, oh well! :)
Tim Streater
Jerry Stuckle <jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote:
Almost none of my pages will work without javascript being enabled. And
if the users encounter a problem, they have my phone number and e-mail
address. Why? Because this is a service to a closed group of our
customer engineers.
You shouldn't assume that all web sites are available to all internet
users.
Steve
"Jerry Stuckle" <jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:aZKdneyFD7odb2Hb...@comcast.com...
> Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
>> On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 07:21:31 -0400, Jerry Stuckle
>> <jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> As long as you know that many users (current estimate about 10%) run
>>> with JS turned off. And even if it's on, anything supplied by the
>>> browser (i.e referer, browser/system info, etc.) is questionable.
jerry,
fair warning...OMH is certifiably crazy. i am not exagerating. to respond
further only means he'll keep coming back to masturbate his enormous ego
with the hands of his own stupidity.
the guy is seriously into infinilism. google OMH...laugh at what you come up
with.
btw, the guy thinks flash is the shit! to him, all web dev should be done in
flash. the guy can't program his way outta a fucking box. the entirety of
alt.php had to explain what bits and bytes were and what shifting and
masking were and how they worked and could be used. that was to keep his
arrogant distain for php turned at himself - blamed php due to his own
stupidity.
anyway, you've been warned.
cheers jerry.
btw, all of his posts include alt.2600. i've always wondered WTF that shit
has to do with php. hmmmm...nothing.
Steve
"Tim Streater" <tim.st...@dante.org.uk> wrote in message
news:tim.streater-D02A...@news.individual.net...
well. you can certainly dictate just about everything to a 'closed group',
can't you.
> You shouldn't assume that all web sites are available to all internet
> users.
he didn't. since nothing was said about the venue and since the internet is
usually put in the context of 'open to the public', he made statements to
that context.
get off your high-horse, cad.
Steve
"Onideus Mad Hatter" <use...@backwater-productions.net> wrote in message
news:3fepf3ppd2ocihitk...@4ax.com...
> Okay, so here's the deal...I'm tired of the shitty user data tracking
> stuff that my server comes with and so I want to make my own. Peachy.
ah matthew...i've enjoyed not seeing your posts for quite some time now.
how's walmart working out for you? busted for masturbating on the job yet? i
suppose they don't say much about the diapers for fear of a discrimination
law suit.
why not go find another suitable blog of your choosing and harrass them? we
both know you'll get banned in about a day, but hey, go have fun somewhere
else.
btw, is this all current and correct:
matthew moulton
sa...@backwater-productions.net
anyt...@backwater-productions.net
phone: 1 509 301 4485
fax : 1 509 301 4485
313 south east j street, apt a
grants pass, or 97526
now run along and play somewhere else.
Onideus Mad Hatter
<jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>> Actually current estimates are below 4% (and dropping 2% every six
>> months) and really, none of my sites, like nearly EVERY site these
>> days will work without javascript. In some cases I'll have them
>> retard back to a plain text version of the site if
>> javascript/flash/etc has been disabled, but that's about all the
>> effort I'm willing to invest for the Amish of the Internet.
>Not from any reliable source I've seen.
Yeah, because the W3Schools site, boy THAT'S not a reliable source:
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
*nods*
>10% and rising.
Cite your source, Doofy.
>Too many popups and lots of other things.
I'm sorry, but your stupid ass seems to be trapped in 2002, be sure
and let us all know when you catch up with the rest of reality.
> It's not the Amish - it's the smart
>people who know how to turn off javascript who do it.
You mean the retards. I mean, let's think about this...if you shut
off javascript...pretty much 90%+ of ALL content on the web would
magically become beyond your reach. Pretty much ALL major websites
from CNN to TV Guide all rely heavily on javascripts (amongst other
languages).
>Javascript should always be used to enhance the experience - but never
>be required for the experience.
I'm sorry, but reality seems to bitch slap you otherwise. You might
not like it, Sunshine...but that doesn't make it any less of a
reality.
>> Essentially your concern is that people without computers won't be
>> able to see my site. And my response is, "No, really?! Who the fuck
>> woulda guessed?"
>Bullshit. But if you want to turn away 10% of all internet users (and
>the business they bring), it's your loss, not mine.
Just like the car manufacturer...I'm not worried about the "loss" in
sales from the Amish.
>Or at least I
>*hope* it's your loss, and not some client who doesn't have a clue.
Oh so now you're claiming that 94%+ of the Internet doesn't have a
clue, eh?
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
There's that fun link again, bitch slapping you up long side yer fat
fuckin head with reality.
>> I mean you don't go bitching to a car manufacturer that his product
>> isn't going to sell very well to the Amish. Of course it's not gonna
>> fuckin sell to 'em, THEY'RE AMISH! What the fuck man, what are you
>> Captain Jesus Raping Obvious?
>You really have no clue, do you?
You wear a tin foil hat, don't you?
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
http://www.backwater-productions.net
http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog
Onideus Mad Hatter
wrote:
>jerry,
>
>fair warning...OMH is certifiably crazy.
Oh look, a Hatter Addict, how cute.
>i am not exagerating.
Woah, sounds like serious fucking Internet business, Steve. *nods*
>to respond
>further only means he'll keep coming back to masturbate his enormous ego
>with the hands of his own stupidity.
Translation: "He'll make you feel REALLY stupid by bitch slapping you
with reality!"
HTH! ^_^
>the guy is seriously
Srsly you guys...srsly.
>into infinilism.
Infinilism, eh? It's like nihilistic infinity, huh?
>google OMH...laugh at what you come up with.
*searches for "OMH" in Google*
The Office of Minority Health...huh...that's um...that's not really
very funny, Stevie.
>btw,
Btw you guys...btw.
>the guy thinks flash is the shit!
It's the SHIT, Dawg! Yo, yo, yo, what up, Stevie the Wonder Retard in
the hizzouse!
>to him, all web dev should be done in
>flash.
Only the user front end, Spittles.
>the guy can't program his way outta a fucking box.
No need to program myself out of something I was never in, Sparkles.
>the entirety of
>alt.php had to explain what bits and bytes were and what shifting and
>masking were and how they worked and could be used. that was to keep his
>arrogant distain for php turned at himself - blamed php due to his own
>stupidity.
Yer just ridin that lil red trolley all the way on into Make Believe
Land, aren'tcha kiddo?
>anyway, you've been warned.
Oooo...he's been "warned"...scary stuff there, Stevie. Steve's all
like, "Stand aside Internet citizen...serious business here!"
>cheers jerry.
>
>btw, all of his posts include alt.2600. i've always wondered WTF that shit
>has to do with php. hmmmm...nothing.
Maybe you should just save yerself the brain aneurysm and stop reading
my posts, Stevie...might do you some good...ya fuckin Hatter Addict.
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
http://www.backwater-productions.net
http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog
Onideus Mad Hatter
wrote:
>ah ma<COCK SLAP>
Another day, another Hatter Addict wanting to suck on my cock. This
one calls himself "Steve"! Boy, that sure is original...well, I guess
no ever accused Hatter Addicts of being very creative. LOL
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ą x ą
Onideus Mad Hatter
wrote:
>> Almost none of my pages will work without javascript being enabled. And
>> if the users encounter a problem, they have my phone number and e-mail
>> address. Why? Because this is a service to a closed group of our
>> customer engineers.
>well. you can certainly dictate just about everything to a 'closed group',
>can't you.
Much in the way that you try...oh, except when you do it, no one
really listens, huh Sparkles? Tsch, tsch, tsch...sucks to be you.
>> You shouldn't assume that all web sites are available to all internet
>> users.
>he didn't. since nothing was said about the venue and since the internet is
>usually put in the context of 'open to the public', he made statements to
>that context.
>
>get off your high-horse, cad.
Hey Steve, are you gonna stop sucking Jerry's cock any time soon? I
mean, okay, obviously the boi is too damn stupid to reply for himself,
but really, yer not exactly the ideal replacement. Why don't you just
sit the fuck down and wait for someone more intelligent to come along,
before you embarrass yourself...again.
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
http://www.backwater-productions.net
http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog
Jerry Stuckle
Yea, so I see. He really is a prick, isn't he.
Naw, I'm not going to bother to respond to him until he grows up. I
know three-year-olds who act better than he does.
Steve
you haven't seen the half of it yet. ignoring it seems to make it go
away...eventually. you know how trolls are.
btw, you may be waiting an infinitude. ;^)
Onideus Mad Hatter
<jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote:
Oh no, please, whatever you do, don't shut yourself the fuck up and
stop retarding up my threads with your banal idiocy! Why gosh, that'd
just be fuckin TERRIBLE!
...oh, wait, no I guess it really wouldn't. ^_^
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
http://www.backwater-productions.net
http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog
Onideus Mad Hatter
wrote:
You two homo bitches really do need to get a room already. Nobody
wants to see you two fags suckin each other off around here, trust me.
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
http://www.backwater-productions.net
http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog
Jerry Stuckle
It's pretty obvious he's a closet queer. And I don't mean homosexual.
His obsession with homosexual behavior really is sick, isn't it?
He must really be frustrated - can't get a girlfriend or a boyfriend :-)
Rev Turd Fredericks
usenet just shows how much that person owns you. There are other ways to
win an argument you know.
--
Geeks may inherit the earth,
but they have no desire to rule it
-Robert Stevens (the Geek Squad founder)
Onideus Mad Hatter
Now, let's be honest, in this particular case...no, there really
isn't. I mean...
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
Unless they can come up with a website that's got stats like that,
with an Alexia rating just as high:
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.w3schools.com
...no, no there really isn't any way they could win this argument.
They lost before they even began...they were just too damn stupid to
notice.
Even if they could manage to formulate a site with faux stats to
support their idiotic Amish ruling the Interwebs theory, what the fuck
do you think that site's Alexia rating is gonna look like? Yeah,
probably somewhere the fuck in the TENS OF MILLIONS. o_O
Fact is these kiddies are just stupid fuckin Hatter Addicts and as
such they'll constantly take every and any opportunity to try and
obsess over their favoritest person on the whole Internet (me), even
if it means they wind up lookin like fuckin retards in the process.
Trust me, they've LONG since lost perspective over quantity vs
quality.
Onideus Mad Hatter
<use...@backwater-productions.net> wrote:
>Now, let's be honest, in this particular case...no, there really
>isn't. I mean...
>http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
>
>Unless they can come up with a website that's got stats like that,
>with an Alexia rating just as high:
>http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.w3schools.com
>
>...no, no there really isn't any way they could win this argument.
>They lost before they even began...they were just too damn stupid to
>notice.
>
>Even if they could manage to formulate a site with faux stats to
>support their idiotic Amish ruling the Interwebs theory, what the fuck
>do you think that site's Alexia rating is gonna look like? Yeah,
>probably somewhere the fuck in the TENS OF MILLIONS. o_O
>
>Fact is these kiddies are just stupid fuckin Hatter Addicts and as
>such they'll constantly take every and any opportunity to try and
>obsess over their favoritest person on the whole Internet (me), even
>if it means they wind up lookin like fuckin retards in the process.
>Trust me, they've LONG since lost perspective over quantity vs
>quality.
I love my new stat checker, I've already got it setup on a few of my
sites and the data is flowing in.
I gotta make a really cool lookin graphic UI for viewing/graphing the
data though.
One very interesting thing though that I just noticed, is that there
are a few repeat IPs showing up. You wanna know what's interesting
about them? Same browser version and OS...but the first time it shows
up it says Flash isn't installed, then in the next entry they've got
it installed and the latest version.
So even for the doorknobs who want to try and argue that there's a
percentage of the net.populous who don't have Flash installed...you
really have to wonder what percentage of that percentage is installing
Flash at the moment of entry. So far the few stats I've got show that
every single person who visited my sites without Flash
installed...installed it at that very same moment and then refreshed
the page. ^_^
SpaceGirl
> >> Actually current estimates are below 4% (and dropping 2% every six
> >> months) and really, none of my sites, like nearly EVERY site these
> >> days will work without javascript. In some cases I'll have them
> >> retard back to a plain text version of the site if
> >> javascript/flash/etc has been disabled, but that's about all the
> >> effort I'm willing to invest for the Amish of the Internet.
> >Not from any reliable source I've seen.
>
> Yeah, because the W3Schools site, boy THAT'S not a reliable source:http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
>
> *nods*
Who visits that site other than developers and designers? So, how are
their stats even vaguely representative of average users?
>
> >10% and rising.
>
> Cite your source, Doofy.
Cite yours. The W3CSchools site is not relevant.
I actually thing you are right, but it very much depends on your
market.
> You mean the retards. I mean, let's think about this...if you shut
> off javascript...pretty much 90%+ of ALL content on the web would
> magically become beyond your reach. Pretty much ALL major websites
> from CNN to TV Guide all rely heavily on javascripts (amongst other
> languages).
Cite your source. 90%? The worlds most popular sites (bbc.co.uk and
google.com) both work without JS. While not all of their content is
visible without JS, they don't "magically become beyond reach".
> >Or at least I
> >*hope* it's your loss, and not some client who doesn't have a clue.
>
> Oh so now you're claiming that 94%+ of the Internet doesn't have a
> clue, eh?
>
> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
How often do people in cyber cafe's visit that site? Or school kids,
or office workers, or people on library computers, or folks at home
doing online shopping etc etc. The site is not in the least bit
representative of general users - it only represents people who are
likely to visit their site (and the other technical sites they gather
stats from).
"You cannot - as a web developer - rely only on statistics. Statistics
can often be misleading.
Global averages may not always be relevant to your web site. Different
sites attract different audiences. Some web sites attract professional
developers using professional hardware, while other sites attract
hobbyists using old low spec computers." -- W3CSchools own statistics
page.
Onideus Mad Hatter
<nothespac...@subhuman.net> wrote:
>> Yeah, because the W3Schools site, boy THAT'S not a reliable source:http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
>>
>> *nods*
>Who visits that site other than developers and designers? So, how are
>their stats even vaguely representative of average users?
Oh Spacey, you have GOT to be completely the fuck out of yer head
today:
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.w3schools.com
I mean, what the fuck girl? Check the shit out before you run at the
mouth, that's like rule number one in the tech biz.
>> >10% and rising.
>>
>> Cite your source, Doofy.
>Cite yours. The W3CSchools site is not relevant.
Yeah, an Alexia ranking of SIX HUNDRED THIRTY FIVE...boy THAT'S not a
relevant site. Oh hey, why don't we check YOUR Alexia rating!
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.bitesizedjapan.com
Uh oh, you seem to be floating up there around FOUR MILLION. *nods*
>I actually thing you are right, but it very much depends on your
>market.
No, it REALLY the fuck doesn't.
Just in case reality hasn't penetrated yer thick fuckin skull yet,
here's that link, ONE MORE TIME:
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.w3schools.com
Fuckin DUH!
>> You mean the retards. I mean, let's think about this...if you shut
>> off javascript...pretty much 90%+ of ALL content on the web would
>> magically become beyond your reach. Pretty much ALL major websites
>> from CNN to TV Guide all rely heavily on javascripts (amongst other
>> languages).
>Cite your source. 90%? The worlds most popular sites (bbc.co.uk and
>google.com) both work without JS. While not all of their content is
>visible without JS, they don't "magically become beyond reach".
Even MY site will "work" without javascript (do note the lack of
capitals, amateur). In case you were too damn thick to notice there's
actually a whole gawd damn shit load of javascript on pretty much ALL
of Google's sites. Oh but I bet they just put that in there for the
fun of it, it doesn't really do anything, huh Spacey? *nods*
BTW, I don't think I properly bitch slapped you the last time you
tried to claim that javascript is capitalized, so please, try and
claim otherwise again and I'll go ahead and slap you up long side yer
head with what a fuckin n00b level miscomprehension that is. ^_^
>> >Or at least I
>> >*hope* it's your loss, and not some client who doesn't have a clue.
>>
>> Oh so now you're claiming that 94%+ of the Internet doesn't have a
>> clue, eh?
>>
>> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
>
>How often do people in cyber cafe's visit that site? Or school kids,
>or office workers, or people on library computers, or folks at home
>doing online shopping etc etc. The site is not in the least bit
>representative of general users - it only represents people who are
>likely to visit their site (and the other technical sites they gather
>stats from).
Here's reality!
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.w3schools.com
Bitch slapping you the fuck across yer face since birth. *nods*
>"You cannot - as a web developer - rely only on statistics. Statistics
>can often be misleading.
Uh, not this one, Kiddo. This is pretty much the fuck set in stone.
>Global averages may not always be relevant to your web site.
And amazingly enough Alexia can actually track by country, isn't that
neat? ^_^
SpaceGirl
>> Who visits that site other than developers and designers? So, how are
>> their stats even vaguely representative of average users?
>
> Oh Spacey, you have GOT to be completely the fuck out of yer head
> today:
> http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.w3schools.com
So?
You really think your mom would visit a W3C site? No. So her "vote"
(hit" would not count. Just how many people are likely to go to these
site who aren't involved in the industry in some way? What percentage of
the 300,000,000 internet users there are actually go to this site?
>
> I mean, what the fuck girl? Check the shit out before you run at the
> mouth, that's like rule number one in the tech biz.
>
>>>> 10% and rising.
>>> Cite your source, Doofy.
>
>> Cite yours. The W3CSchools site is not relevant.
>
> Yeah, an Alexia ranking of SIX HUNDRED THIRTY FIVE...boy THAT'S not a
You moron... Alexia is even worse! :D It only counts people who have the
Alexia bar installed... which is practically nobody LOL.
> relevant site. Oh hey, why don't we check YOUR Alexia rating!
>
> http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.bitesizedjapan.com
> Uh oh, you seem to be floating up there around FOUR MILLION. *nods*
LOL Amazed it's even that good, seeing as it's not launched.
>> I actually thing you are right, but it very much depends on your
>> market.
>
> No, it REALLY the fuck doesn't.
Of course it does. Get stats from universities you're likely to see very
high numbers for Linux and other off-beat OS's and browsers. Different
markets are more/less likely to use different platforms, so will always
sway your stats.
The kinds of people who visit W3C related sites are not average users.
> Just in case reality hasn't penetrated yer thick fuckin skull yet,
> here's that link, ONE MORE TIME:
> http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.w3schools.com
So?
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.bbc.co.uk
There are around 300 million web users in the world. I doubt even 10% of
them visit Alexa (I don't know, happy to be given a real figure), and I
bet not even 1% of them visit w3schools.com. So, you are basing your
stats on a tiny fraction of the world audience.
However, if you were to measure the percentage of all the web designers
in the world, it'd be much higher obviously, as they have an interest in
the site - so they will visit it, their hits get counted.
>> Cite your source. 90%? The worlds most popular sites (bbc.co.uk and
>> google.com) both work without JS. While not all of their content is
>> visible without JS, they don't "magically become beyond reach".
>
> Even MY site will "work" without javascript
So your site is not one of the 90% that you said will disappear if there
was no JS. Good for you.
> (do note the lack of
> capitals, amateur).
Damn you got me. You better tell ECMA then, the people behind the
standard (JS is an ECMA standard, like AS3):
And Microsoft:
http://search.microsoft.com/results.aspx?mkt=en-US&form=MSHOME&setlang=en-US&q=javascript&x=0&y=0
And Adobe:
http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/search/index.cfm?loc=en_us&term=javascript
And Mozilla:
And W3Schools:
http://www.google.com/search?sitesearch=www.w3schools.com&as_q=javascript
Need I go on?
http://searchwebservices.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid26_gci212418,00.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=javascript&fulltext=fulltext&sourceid=mozilla-search
Seems the entire world has it wrong, but I'm sure you'll fix it for them.
> In case you were too damn thick to notice there's
> actually a whole gawd damn shit load of javascript on pretty much ALL
> of Google's sites. Oh but I bet they just put that in there for the
> fun of it, it doesn't really do anything, huh Spacey? *nods*
Yes. There are plenty of sites that won't work without JS. But not the
90% you claim. Almost all the sites we do have JS all over them too.
Some of them may not work without it :)
> BTW, I don't think I properly bitch slapped you the last time you
> tried to claim that javascript is capitalized, so please, try and
> claim otherwise again and I'll go ahead and slap you up long side yer
> head with what a fuckin n00b level miscomprehension that is. ^_^
I just gave you a list of the people behind the language, who all refer
to it as JavaScript. List me similar official sites or standards
agencies that conflict with it please?
>> How often do people in cyber cafe's visit that site? Or school kids,
>> or office workers, or people on library computers, or folks at home
>> doing online shopping etc etc. The site is not in the least bit
>> representative of general users - it only represents people who are
>> likely to visit their site (and the other technical sites they gather
>> stats from).
>
> Here's reality!
>
> http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.w3schools.com
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.bbc.co.uk
The worlds 2nd busy web site... (and works without JS)
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.google.com
The worlds busiest site (and works without JS)
> Bitch slapping you the fuck across yer face since birth. *nods*
Only in your wet dreams :)
>> "You cannot - as a web developer - rely only on statistics. Statistics
>> can often be misleading.
>
> Uh, not this one, Kiddo. This is pretty much the fuck set in stone.
They say that on their own site! You really do earn your handle :)
>> Global averages may not always be relevant to your web site.
>
> And amazingly enough Alexia can actually track by country, isn't that
> neat? ^_^
Doesn't every stats package?
--
x theSpaceGirl (miranda)
-.-
Kammy has a new home: http://www.bitesizedjapan.com
SpaceGirl
> It's pretty obvious he's a closet queer. And I don't mean homosexual.
>
> His obsession with homosexual behavior really is sick, isn't it?
>
> He must really be frustrated - can't get a girlfriend or a boyfriend :-)
>
He likes to verbally masturbate when I'm around. It's the only action he
gets, poor little mite. He hasn't quite grasped yet that everyone is
laughing at him :)
Is it wrong to pick on people like him?
Drew
> He likes to verbally masturbate when I'm around. It's the only action he
> gets, poor little mite. He hasn't quite grasped yet that everyone is
> laughing at him :)
>
> Is it wrong to pick on people like him?
>
When it's the only attention they can get? Nope.
Drew
Drew
Now that was a fun read.
D
Jerry Stuckle
Not just when you're around - he seems to like to do it any time.
> Is it wrong to pick on people like him?
>
I don't know... If he weren't so pathetic, I would say no. But he's so
far off the wall it's hard not to.
Onideus Mad Hatter
<nothespac...@subhuman.net> wrote:
>> Oh Spacey, you have GOT to be completely the fuck out of yer head
>> today:
>> http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.w3schools.com
>So?
>
>You really think your mom would visit a W3C site?
Well, yeah, actually. What better source is there for beginner and
advanced web design tutorials/guides?
>No. So her "vote"
>(hit" would not count. Just how many people are likely to go to these
>site who aren't involved in the industry in some way? What percentage of
>the 300,000,000 internet users there are actually go to this site?
Did you just miss the fuckin link, Spacey? I mean, okay, you've been
taking some serious dumbfuck pills here lately, but really, take
fuckin notes or something:
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.w3schools.com
>>>>> 10% and rising.
>>>> Cite your source, Doofy.
>>> Cite yours. The W3CSchools site is not relevant.
>> Yeah, an Alexia ranking of SIX HUNDRED THIRTY FIVE...boy THAT'S not a
>You moron... Alexia is even worse! :D It only counts people who have the
>Alexia bar installed... which is practically nobody LOL.
You really are a dumbfuck.
"Alexa's data come from a large sample of several million Alexa
Toolbar users; however, this is not large enough to accurately
determine the rankings of sites with fewer than roughly 1,000 total
monthly visitors. Generally, Traffic Rankings of 100,000+ should be
regarded as not reliable because the amount of data we receive is not
statistically significant. Conversely, the more traffic a site
receives (the closer it gets to the number 1 position), the more
reliable its Traffic Ranking becomes."
Yeah, several million is "practically nobody".
Further, in your idiocy you didn't even realize you just contradicted
yer own argument. First you tried to claim that the W3School's stats
would be inaccurate because they represent only TECHNICAL USERS and
not idle dumbfucks like your mom (apparently), however Alexia's
toolbar is marketed primarily to those idle dumbfuck users and NOT to
highly technical users, most of which consider the toolbar to be a
spamish accessory.
So if the site gets such an incredibly high rating on Alexia, a site
that caters primarily to idle dumbfucks...durr, er, there goes yer
whole argument you fuckin retard.
>> relevant site. Oh hey, why don't we check YOUR Alexia rating!
>>
>> http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.bitesizedjapan.com
>> Uh oh, you seem to be floating up there around FOUR MILLION. *nods*
>LOL Amazed it's even that good, seeing as it's not launched.
Pffft, don't make excuses. I don't even advertise Backwater, I act
like a fuckin bastard to pretty much everyone under the sun, half the
gawd damn Internet has every reason to hate my fuckin guts and I
*STILL* manage to bounce around in the 200 to 600 thousand range.
>>> I actually thing you are right, but it very much depends on your
>>> market.
>> No, it REALLY the fuck doesn't.
>Of course it does. Get stats from universities you're likely to see very
>high numbers for Linux and other off-beat OS's and browsers. Different
>markets are more/less likely to use different platforms, so will always
>sway your stats.
The problem here Spacey is that you're trying to compare apples to
circuit boards. Now not everybody in the world likes apples and there
are certainly going to be exclusive markets (like health nuts),
however with circuit boards...no. With that, there is no "market" as
far as consumers are concerned, it's a construct, it's hardware that
runs market specific products, but the circuit board in and of itself
doesn't have a particular market since it can be utilized in every
market. It's the same with javascript. My Care Bear site may be
targeted towards tweenage muppet fucks, nostalgic 20 somethings and
ankle biters, but that doesn't mean javascript is ONLY relevant to
those markets since javascript can be utilized for ANY site that can
cater to ANY market. Because of that fact nearly every market that
exists has more than a handful of sites that either rely or are nearly
wholly dependent upon javascript in order to function. That in turn
forces EVERY SINGLE LAST NICHE MARKET to enable javascript.
It is essentially the YouTube Principal. If you have a popular site,
or a site with exclusive content, etc, that is wholly dependant upon a
specific technology (in YouTube's case it's Flash), it will
automatically force a significant portion of the net.populous to
download and enable that technology. The more sites that exist the
greater the chance of that forced upgrading being exerted upon
Internet users, so the more people who go online and the more sites
that are created the more existing technologies like Flash and
javascript become solidified as de facto standards of browsing,
essential requirements. And that fact is VERY clearly seen on the
ever increasing W3School's stats.
...speaking of which, you stupid fuckin retards never did post any
counter stats that contradict the data on the W3School's site...not
that I would expect so much from you droolers. Fact is, you formulate
NONpinions and then run the fuck at the mouth with NOTHING to back
yourself up, where as whenever *I* say something it is *ALWAYS* based
upon some relevant, irrefutable, hard facts:
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.w3schools.com
You claim the contrary...so I ask...what the fuck is your claim based
upon? Yeah, shit you pulled out of yer stupid ass, you dumbfuck.
>The kinds of people who visit W3C related sites are not average users.
And yet the "kinds of people" who download and use the Alexia toolbar
ARE "average users"...so, dum de dum, looks like you just contradicted
yer own idiotic argument. You uh...you didn't even realize it, did
you? LOL...how pathetic. I swear, the more you talk the more you
disappoint me.
>> Just in case reality hasn't penetrated yer thick fuckin skull yet,
>> here's that link, ONE MORE TIME:
>> http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.w3schools.com
>So?
>
>http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.bbc.co.uk
>
>There are around 300 million web users in the world. I doubt even 10% of
>them visit Alexa (I don't know, happy to be given a real figure), and I
>bet not even 1% of them visit w3schools.com. So, you are basing your
>stats on a tiny fraction of the world audience.
You never took a stats class, did you? It shows. *nods*
>>> Cite your source. 90%? The worlds most popular sites (bbc.co.uk and
>>> google.com) both work without JS. While not all of their content is
>>> visible without JS, they don't "magically become beyond reach".
>> Even MY site will "work" without javascript
>So your site is not one of the 90% that you said will disappear if there
>was no JS. Good for you.
It won't "disappear", however much of the form, design and some of the
content/functionality won't be available to you. And that's the way
most sites are, including many of Google's sites. You can "see" them
without javascript, but you can't utilize those sites to their full
potential without the technology. It's sort of like a car with no
wheels can run...but it can't go anywhere.
>> (do note the lack of
>> capitals, amateur).
>Damn you got me. You better tell ECMA then, the people behind the
>standard (JS is an ECMA standard, like AS3):
>
>http://www.ecma.com
...you dumbfuck. *shakes head*
Look here kiddo, it's time for a history lesson. One day, back ought
in '95 there was a bloaty, pasty fat man by the name of Brendan Eich,
who developed a language called Mocha...which he then later called
LiveScript, which he then later called JavaScript.
Now, here's the trick, Stupid. Later, along came Microsoft who
developed THEIR OWN RENDITION of the language and they called it
JScript.
So that created conflicts because then there were essentially two
different languages, JavaScript and JScript.
In order to "fix" the situation, a THIRD PARTY, ECMA came along and
introduced a "standard" form of the language called ECMAscript.
Both JavaScript and JScript aim to be compatible with the ECMAscript
"standard", however both of them ARE NOT exactly ECMAscript.
So you see, Doorknob, people needed a way of describing all these
different forms as one, hence "javascript" (do note the lack of
capitals) was formulated BY THE DEVELOPERS as a means of talking about
and including ALL FORMS (JavaScript, JScript, ECMAscript, etc).
The problem is that at some point the whole "AJAX" fuckwit bandwagon
came along and you along with all the other n00b level college flunkie
retards started capitalizing the fuckin word out of stupidity, not
comprehending the history behind the word and why it SHOULDN'T be
capitalized (because if you do you're only referring to one
sub-language).
Essentially every time you say JavaScript instead of javascript you're
referring ONLY to the NETSCAPE implementation of the language.
...fuckin DUH!
>>> How often do people in cyber cafe's visit that site? Or school kids,
>>> or office workers, or people on library computers, or folks at home
>>> doing online shopping etc etc. The site is not in the least bit
>>> representative of general users - it only represents people who are
>>> likely to visit their site (and the other technical sites they gather
>>> stats from).
>> Here's reality!
>>
>> http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.w3schools.com
>http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.bbc.co.uk
>
>The worlds 2nd busy web site... (and works without JS)
>
>http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.google.com
>
>The worlds busiest site (and works without JS)
You don't get to utilize all of the potential functionality that those
sites/domains have to offer without javascript, you idiot fuck.
Again, a car without wheels will run, but you sure the fuck ain't
gonna be goin anywhere you retard.
>> Bitch slapping you the fuck across yer face since birth. *nods*
>Only in your wet dreams :)
Interesting how you edited/read that to infer that *I* was the one
bitch slapping you and not the reality metaphor.
Onideus Mad Hatter
I wonder if my bitch slapping reply will be as fun for you, Drippy.
It's nice to see you slurping for Hatter Points though, you must be
feeling pretty desperate for my attention.
Onideus Mad Hatter
This coming from the rip off artist who plagiarizes the name of some
tweenage muppet fuck on Deviant Art:
http://kammy-chan.deviantart.com/gallery/
*nods*
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ą x ą
Onideus Mad Hatter
<jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote:
Woah, fuckin ICE BURN, baby! YOU ARE TEH GAY! Man, what a comeback!
So amazingly original and fresh! I can see you're REALLY good at this
whole "flaming" thing. You musta like hung out on AOL chat for WEEKS
and took a LOT of notes to get THAT good. *nods*
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
SpaceGirl
> >Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>
> >> It's pretty obvious he's a closet queer. And I don't mean homosexual.
>
> >> His obsession with homosexual behavior really is sick, isn't it?
>
> >> He must really be frustrated - can't get a girlfriend or a boyfriend :-)
>
> >He likes to verbally masturbate when I'm around. It's the only action he
> >gets, poor little mite. He hasn't quite grasped yet that everyone is
> >laughing at him :)
>
> >Is it wrong to pick on people like him?
>
> This coming from the rip off artist who plagiarizes the name of some
> tweenage muppet fuck on Deviant Art:http://kammy-chan.deviantart.com/gallery/
>
> *nods*
Hah! Hadn't seen that :)
Anyway Kameko is a very traditional (if somewhat old-fashioned)
Japanese name. Kame = turtle and ko = girl, which is kinda funny :) In
modern Japan, most girls drop the "ko" from their names when they get
older as it's seen as too... cute. In this case, the origin on *my*
Kammy so a lot more random. She's named after a character in an anime.
It's still a very common name *shrug*.
Jerry Stuckle
Actually, I think I'm wrong about him. He's not a frustrated queer (as
differentiated from a gay).
He's a pimply-faced 11 year old boy with a five year old mind and a
dictionary of obscene words. He's attracted to other boys instead of
girls, but is afraid to let anyone know he's gay. So he expresses his
anger by calling everyone else gay, hoping no one will notice that it is
really he.
His mommy should take his computer away from him.
SpaceGirl
> >> Oh Spacey, you have GOT to be completely the fuck out of yer head
> >> today:
> >>http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.w3schools.com
> >So?
>
> >You really think your mom would visit a W3C site?
>
> Well, yeah, actually. What better source is there for beginner and
> advanced web design tutorials/guides?
I agree, I'm not having a dig at their site at all - I still use it as
quick ref. If your mom is designing web sites then I'd expect her to
have visited that site at some point. I suspect most moms with
internet connections are NOT designing web pages however, so will
never visit it.
> >No. So her "vote"
> >(hit" would not count. Just how many people are likely to go to these
> >site who aren't involved in the industry in some way? What percentage of
> >the 300,000,000 internet users there are actually go to this site?
>
> Did you just miss the fuckin link, Spacey? I mean, okay, you've been
> taking some serious dumbfuck pills here lately, but really, take
> fuckin notes or something:http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.w3schools.com
Doesn't make it any more relevant.
practically nobody LOL.
>
> You really are a dumbfuck.
>
> "Alexa's data come from a large sample of several million Alexa
> Toolbar users; however, this is not large enough to accurately
> determine the rankings of sites with fewer than roughly 1,000 total
> monthly visitors. Generally, Traffic Rankings of 100,000+ should be
> regarded as not reliable because the amount of data we receive is not
> statistically significant. Conversely, the more traffic a site
> receives (the closer it gets to the number 1 position), the more
> reliable its Traffic Ranking becomes."
>
> Yeah, several million is "practically nobody".
Yep. 1 million = 0.3% of all web users. Even if it were 100 million
that would only be 33% of all users, still not a realistic sample.
> Further, in your idiocy you didn't even realize you just contradicted
> yer own argument. First you tried to claim that the W3School's stats
> would be inaccurate because they represent only TECHNICAL USERS and
> not idle dumbfucks like your mom (apparently), however Alexia's
> toolbar is marketed primarily to those idle dumbfuck users and NOT to
> highly technical users, most of which consider the toolbar to be a
> spamish accessory.
This is a good point, but still doesn't validate the stats. Yes
clearly there are a large number of users with Alexa + visiting this
particular site; however both samples are so small you can't really
expand that to represent all users.
> >> relevant site. Oh hey, why don't we check YOUR Alexia rating!
>
> >>http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.bitesizedja...
> >> Uh oh, you seem to be floating up there around FOUR MILLION. *nods*
> >LOL Amazed it's even that good, seeing as it's not launched.
>
> Pffft, don't make excuses. I don't even advertise Backwater, I act
> like a fuckin bastard to pretty much everyone under the sun, half the
> gawd damn Internet has every reason to hate my fuckin guts and I
> *STILL* manage to bounce around in the 200 to 600 thousand range.
I don't advertise any of my sites, anywhere, apart from the handful of
posts I make in here. You post a lot more than me. Plus, sites like
BSJ are less than 6 months old, and completely empty at the moment.
Hardly a surprise :)
Actually a really good argument! I don't disagree.
> ...speaking of which, you stupid fuckin retards never did post any
> counter stats that contradict the data on the W3School's site...not
> that I would expect so much from you droolers. Fact is, you formulate
> NONpinions and then run the fuck at the mouth with NOTHING to back
> yourself up, where as whenever *I* say something it is *ALWAYS* based
> upon some relevant, irrefutable, hard facts:http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.w3schools.com
While I don't trust W3CSchools stats at all, I do think it is
representative of a general trend (but this is based on dealing with
1000s of users, not just stats). I don't trust anything Alexa says at
all, period. I think that most people have JS enabled, and Flash, and
in actual fact it's niche markets that have it turned off, which is
kind of upsidedown (in a good way, at least for people like me).
I would just argue - be careful what you project for a stats from
market specific sites or other commercial services.
> And yet the "kinds of people" who download and use the Alexia toolbar
> ARE "average users"...so, dum de dum, looks like you just contradicted
Yep they are.
> yer own idiotic argument. You uh...you didn't even realize it, did
> you? LOL...how pathetic. I swear, the more you talk the more you
> disappoint me.
:D aww he's so sweet hehe
It is interesting though - I'd love to see where Alexa really get
their stats from, as it is a conflict. Common sense tells you that
very few people outside of designers and the HTML-curious are likely
visit this site, or any other tech site.
> >> Even MY site will "work" without javascript
> >So your site is not one of the 90% that you said will disappear if there
> >was no JS. Good for you.
>
> It won't "disappear", however much of the form, design and some of the
> content/functionality won't be available to you. And that's the way
> most sites are, including many of Google's sites. You can "see" them
> without javascript, but you can't utilize those sites to their full
> potential without the technology. It's sort of like a car with no
> wheels can run...but it can't go anywhere.
Finally! You conceded something :)
> >> (do note the lack of
> >> capitals, amateur).
> >Damn you got me. You better tell ECMA then, the people behind the
> >standard (JS is an ECMA standard, like AS3):
>
> >http://www.ecma.com
>
> ...you dumbfuck. *shakes head*
>
> Look here kiddo, it's time for a history lesson. One day, back ought
> in '95 there was a bloaty, pasty fat man by the name of Brendan Eich,
> who developed a language called Mocha...which he then later called
> LiveScript, which he then later called JavaScript.
I know the history. Note the capitalisation of both LiveScript and
JavaScript.
> Now, here's the trick, Stupid. Later, along came Microsoft who
> developed THEIR OWN RENDITION of the language and they called it
> JScript.
Yep. What does that have to do with it being called JavaScript rather
than javascript?
> So that created conflicts because then there were essentially two
> different languages, JavaScript and JScript.
Yep and there still are.
> In order to "fix" the situation, a THIRD PARTY, ECMA came along and
> introduced a "standard" form of the language called ECMAscript.
>
> Both JavaScript and JScript aim to be compatible with the ECMAscript
> "standard", however both of them ARE NOT exactly ECMAscript.
"Based on". As usual these standards aren't worth that much; they're
just guidelines after all.
> So you see, Doorknob, people needed a way of describing all these
> different forms as one, hence "javascript" (do note the lack of
> capitals) was formulated BY THE DEVELOPERS as a means of talking about
> and including ALL FORMS (JavaScript, JScript, ECMAscript, etc).
Proove it. You call it that, nobody else is. I supplied you with 10
current examples. Match it, or admit you're wrong.
> The problem is that at some point the whole "AJAX" fuckwit bandwagon
> came along and you along with all the other n00b level college flunkie
> retards started capitalizing the fuckin word out of stupidity, not
> comprehending the history behind the word and why it SHOULDN'T be
> capitalized (because if you do you're only referring to one
> sub-language).
It's not relevant, I cited all the official examples and you still
think you're right.
> Essentially every time you say JavaScript instead of javascript you're
> referring ONLY to the NETSCAPE implementation of the language.
Nice argument, but not the case. I'll wait for you to post some
examples.
> You don't get to utilize all of the potential functionality that those
> sites/domains have to offer without javascript, you idiot fuck.
> Again, a car without wheels will run, but you sure the fuck ain't
> gonna be ...
I know. You were the one who said 90% of sites would disappear, not
me. A lot of sites would BREAK. Nothing would disappear.
> >> Bitch slapping you the fuck across yer face since birth. *nods*
> >Only in your wet dreams :)
>
> Interesting how you edited/read that to infer that *I* was the one
> bitch slapping you and not the reality metaphor.
LOL okay.
Drew
>
> I wonder if my bitch slapping reply
Well, you're either slapping your Mother/Landlord or swinging at the
air. I read both your post and her rebuttal and I'd put the score 11 to
2 in her favor.
What gets me is she's the one person from what I've read on this group
that shows you one iota of respect, yet you stoop to such sophomoric
name calling levels to present your self as a total moron.
*shakes head*
Drew
Steve
"Drew" <whoisthat...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:47024fa7$0$32478$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
> Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
>
>>
>> I wonder if my bitch slapping reply
>
> Well, you're either slapping your Mother/Landlord or swinging at the air.
that's m.o.n.k.e.y, dude...monkey.
> What gets me is she's the one person from what I've read on this group
> that shows you one iota of respect
which is more that it deserves. omh is omh's ONLY addict and sustains an
audience of a handful - and those usually are there to just to magnify the
sun on the pathetic ant with the glass.
Onideus Mad Hatter
<nothespac...@subhuman.net> wrote:
>> >Damn you got me. You better tell ECMA then, the people behind the
>> >standard (JS is an ECMA standard, like AS3):
>>
>> >http://www.ecma.com
>> ...you dumbfuck. *shakes head*
>>
>> Look here kiddo, it's time for a history lesson. One day, back ought
>> in '95 there was a bloaty, pasty fat man by the name of Brendan Eich,
>> who developed a language called Mocha...which he then later called
>> LiveScript, which he then later called JavaScript.
>I know the history. Note the capitalisation of both LiveScript and
>JavaScript.
If you know the history why are you using the term JavaScript to
describe ALL ECMAscript language types you fuckin retard?
>> Now, here's the trick, Stupid. Later, along came Microsoft who
>> developed THEIR OWN RENDITION of the language and they called it
>> JScript.
>Yep. What does that have to do with it being called JavaScript rather
>than javascript?
Slow much?
>> So that created conflicts because then there were essentially two
>> different languages, JavaScript and JScript.
>Yep and there still are.
Yep, and your stupid ass is referring to both of them as JavaScript.
Dum, dum, dum, dum...think slow now, don't hurt yourself.
>> In order to "fix" the situation, a THIRD PARTY, ECMA came along and
>> introduced a "standard" form of the language called ECMAscript.
>>
>> Both JavaScript and JScript aim to be compatible with the ECMAscript
>> "standard", however both of them ARE NOT exactly ECMAscript.
>"Based on". As usual these standards aren't worth that much; they're
>just guidelines after all.
Ayup.
>> So you see, Doorknob, people needed a way of describing all these
>> different forms as one, hence "javascript" (do note the lack of
>> capitals) was formulated BY THE DEVELOPERS as a means of talking about
>> and including ALL FORMS (JavaScript, JScript, ECMAscript, etc).
>Proove it. You call it that, nobody else is. I supplied you with 10
>current examples. Match it, or admit you're wrong.
Actually none of the examples you provided proved anything since first
of all search strings ARE NOT CASE SENSITIVE, so if you search for
javascript you'll get results with both spellings and vice versa. The
other problem is that none of the links you provided were situations
in which ALL TYPES were being described.
And there's nothing to prove, it's common fuckin sense. I mean it's
like your stupid ass wants to call every single box of tissues
"Kleenex", when there is ONLY ONE BRAND called "Kleenex", you fuckin
retard.
In the case with javascript types though, there IS NO fall back term,
so it's not like with "Kleenex" where you can just use the generic
term "tissue". javascript types didn't have a generic term outside of
"web scripting languages", which was verbose and wordy. So the SMART
developers started using the phrase "javascript", purposefully
uncapitalized to show a distinction from the actual JavaScript
language. Again though, the problem is that idiot fucks like you came
along and suddenly started capitalizing the word, not even realizing
that every time you did you were limiting the scope of your message to
just Netscape's javascript type...and boy howdy there are some REALLY
fuckin hilarious examples of retards like yourself talking about
"JavaScript" whilst making reference to JScript specific syntax.
It should probably also be noted that quite a number of employers will
use little things like that as tests, to see if you really know yer
stuff or not. Any competent developer would know not to capitalize
the word in a conversation that includes all ECMAscript types, only a
bumbling amateur college flunkie wouldn't know.
Steve
>>current examples. Match it, or admit you're wrong.
>
> Actually none of the examples you provided proved anything since first
> of all search strings ARE NOT CASE SENSITIVE, so if you search for
> javascript you'll get results with both spellings and vice versa. The
> other problem is that none of the links you provided were situations
> in which ALL TYPES were being described.
hmmm, so because you can't remember where you got your fucked up notion in
your head and because you can't find your own evidence to back up your
insanity, you think you've adequately refuted her argument? lol. what's
next? are you going to next say that it's just common sense?
> And there's nothing to prove, it's common fuckin sense.
ROFLMFAO!
i was wrong! it's just common *fuckin* sense...LOL.
> I mean it's
> like your stupid ass wants to call every single box of tissues
> "Kleenex", when there is ONLY ONE BRAND called "Kleenex", you fuckin
> retard.
more like band-aids almost not being allowed the TM of their name since,
even though there are hundreds of other bandage manufacturers, each is
referred by the public to as 'band-aid'. sorry, the name just kind of covers
the *genre*, not the brand.
get a better example, mental fuckwit.
> In the case with javascript types though, there IS NO fall back term,
> so it's not like with "Kleenex" where you can just use the generic
> term "tissue". javascript types didn't have a generic term outside of
> "web scripting languages", which was verbose and wordy. So the SMART
> developers started using the phrase "javascript", purposefully
> uncapitalized to show a distinction from the actual JavaScript
> language.
omg! only according to the world of lunatic fantasy...yours.
> Again though, the problem is that idiot fucks like you came
> along and suddenly started capitalizing the word, not even realizing
> that every time you did you were limiting the scope of your message to
> just Netscape's javascript type...and boy howdy there are some REALLY
> fuckin hilarious examples of retards like yourself talking about
> "JavaScript" whilst making reference to JScript specific syntax.
here's a clue, unless you specify the exact type and even version, the
browser implements ITS DEFAULT interpreter for javascript. it doesn't matter
in the least how you spell it. netscape's javascript type...LOL.
> It should probably also be noted that quite a number of employers will
> use little things like that as tests, to see if you really know yer
> stuff or not. Any competent developer would know not to capitalize
> the word in a conversation that includes all ECMAscript types, only a
> bumbling amateur college flunkie wouldn't know.
so, in addition to avoiding proving your point with specific examples, you
simply allude to the *possibility* that even more such proof exist - and in
such frequency that you shouldn't have any trouble producing some.
now would be a good time to show your proof rather than skirting the issue
with more of your uninformed, arrogant drivel.
let's see some, flunkie. ;^)
FrozenNorth
pm and wrote the following:
> It should probably also be noted that quite a number of employers will
> use little things like that as tests, to see if you really know yer
> stuff or not. Any competent developer would know not to capitalize
> the word in a conversation that includes all ECMAscript types, only a
> bumbling amateur college flunkie wouldn't know.
>
So how was the conversation about JavaScript/javascript when you interviewed
for a job at WallyWorld?
--
Lits Slut #9
Life would be so much easier if we could just look at the source code.
Onideus Mad Hatter
>> Actually none of the examples you provided proved anything since first
>> of all search strings ARE NOT CASE SENSITIVE, so if you search for
>> javascript you'll get results with both spellings and vice versa. The
>> other problem is that none of the links you provided were situations
>> in which ALL TYPES were being described.
>hmmm, so because you can't remember where you got your fucked up notion in
>your head and because you can't find your own evidence to back up your
>insanity, you think you've adequately refuted her argument? lol. what's
>next? are you going to next say that it's just common sense?
I know yer slow Stevie The Wonder Retard, so I'll explain this again,
REAL slow.
SEARCH ENGINES ARE NOT CASE SENSITIVE
...woah, what a fuckin revelation for you, huh Sunshine?
I mean, it's a lil hard to cite something that can't the fuck be cited
in the first place you idiot fuck.
>> And there's nothing to prove, it's common fuckin sense.
>ROFLMFAO!
He's laughing everybody, he uh, he just wants to make sure we all know
how much of a good time he's having...it's important to him. *nods*
>i was wrong! it's just common *fuckin* sense...LOL.
Uh huh, you just keep referring to all ECMAscript types as JavaScript,
Bumbles, see how many smiles you get from developers beyond your
limited comprehension. Free cl00, they WON'T bother bitch slapping
you with reality. Most high level designers/programmers make it a
point to try and leave amateurs at the amateur level by NOT explaining
certain things to them.
>> I mean it's
>> like your stupid ass wants to call every single box of tissues
>> "Kleenex", when there is ONLY ONE BRAND called "Kleenex", you fuckin
>> retard.
>more like band-aids almost not being allowed the TM of their name since,
>even though there are hundreds of other bandage manufacturers, each is
>referred by the public to as 'band-aid'. sorry, the name just kind of covers
>the *genre*, not the brand.
>
>get a better example, mental fuckwit.
You mental fuckwit, you just PROVED my argument by NOT CAPITALIZING
the word "band-aid". If you had capitalized it, you would be
referring ONLY to Band-Aid brand band-aids in the same way that if you
capitalize javascript you are referring ONLY to Netscape's JavaScript,
you bumbling retard!
>> Again though, the problem is that idiot fucks like you came
>> along and suddenly started capitalizing the word, not even realizing
>> that every time you did you were limiting the scope of your message to
>> just Netscape's javascript type...and boy howdy there are some REALLY
>> fuckin hilarious examples of retards like yourself talking about
>> "JavaScript" whilst making reference to JScript specific syntax.
>here's a clue, unless you specify the exact type and even version, the
>browser implements ITS DEFAULT interpreter for javascript. it doesn't matter
>in the least how you spell it. netscape's javascript type...LOL.
Oh the irony...did you even realize at all, on any level, that you
further proved my argument by using the word exactly like I told you
to? Then again, you don't seem to capitalize the first word of your
sentences, so maybe yer just a dumbfuck all over...or your shift key
is broken (probably has dried spooge stuck in it from all the times
you jacked yerself off to my posts you stupid fuckin Hatter Addict).
>> It should probably also be noted that quite a number of employers will
>> use little things like that as tests, to see if you really know yer
>> stuff or not. Any competent developer would know not to capitalize
>> the word in a conversation that includes all ECMAscript types, only a
>> bumbling amateur college flunkie wouldn't know.
>so, in addition to avoiding proving your point with specific examples, you
>simply allude to the *possibility* that even more such proof exist - and in
>such frequency that you shouldn't have any trouble producing some.
>
>now would be a good time to show your proof rather than skirting the issue
>with more of your uninformed, arrogant drivel.
The next thing you know this retard will be asking me to "prove" that
cars have wheels. *rolls eyes*
>let's see some, flunkie. ;^)
Onideus Mad Hatter called, he says he wants his material back, you
flunkie rip off artist.
Onideus Mad Hatter
<frozenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Onideus Mad Hatter took a can of maroon spray paint on October 2, 2007 05:20
>pm and wrote the following:
>
>> It should probably also be noted that quite a number of employers will
>> use little things like that as tests, to see if you really know yer
>> stuff or not. Any competent developer would know not to capitalize
>> the word in a conversation that includes all ECMAscript types, only a
>> bumbling amateur college flunkie wouldn't know.
>>
>So how was the conversation about JavaScript/javascript when you interviewed
>for a job at WallyWorld?
I never applied for any javascript developer position in Walla Walla,
Frosty, so I dunno what the fuck yer drooling about.
FrozenNorth
pm and wrote the following:
> On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 21:58:22 GMT, FrozenNorth
> <frozenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Onideus Mad Hatter took a can of maroon spray paint on October 2, 2007
>>05:20 pm and wrote the following:
>>
>>> It should probably also be noted that quite a number of employers will
>>> use little things like that as tests, to see if you really know yer
>>> stuff or not. Any competent developer would know not to capitalize
>>> the word in a conversation that includes all ECMAscript types, only a
>>> bumbling amateur college flunkie wouldn't know.
>>>
>>So how was the conversation about JavaScript/javascript when you
>>interviewed for a job at WallyWorld?
>
> I never applied for any javascript developer position in Walla Walla,
> Frosty, so I dunno what the fuck yer drooling about.
>
WallyWorld is slang for Walmart doofus, you admit to working there, I'd
personally be too embarrassed to admit that to anyone who knows my
skillset.
Onideus Mad Hatter
<frozenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Onideus Mad Hatter took a can of maroon spray paint on October 2, 2007 06:03
>pm and wrote the following:
>
>> On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 21:58:22 GMT, FrozenNorth
>> <frozenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Onideus Mad Hatter took a can of maroon spray paint on October 2, 2007
>>>05:20 pm and wrote the following:
>>>
>>>> It should probably also be noted that quite a number of employers will
>>>> use little things like that as tests, to see if you really know yer
>>>> stuff or not. Any competent developer would know not to capitalize
>>>> the word in a conversation that includes all ECMAscript types, only a
>>>> bumbling amateur college flunkie wouldn't know.
>>>>
>>>So how was the conversation about JavaScript/javascript when you
>>>interviewed for a job at WallyWorld?
>>
>> I never applied for any javascript developer position in Walla Walla,
>> Frosty, so I dunno what the fuck yer drooling about.
>>
>WallyWorld is slang for Walmart doofus,
WallyWorld is slang for Walla Walla, you dumbfuck. Has been for long
before Wal*Mart even existed.
Steve
"Onideus Mad Hatter" <use...@backwater-productions.net> wrote in message
news:m7f5g31tf1odltit3...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2007 16:47:20 -0500, "Steve" <no....@example.com> wrote:
>
>>> Actually none of the examples you provided proved anything since first
>>> of all search strings ARE NOT CASE SENSITIVE, so if you search for
>>> javascript you'll get results with both spellings and vice versa. The
>>> other problem is that none of the links you provided were situations
>>> in which ALL TYPES were being described.
>
>>hmmm, so because you can't remember where you got your fucked up notion in
>>your head and because you can't find your own evidence to back up your
>>insanity, you think you've adequately refuted her argument? lol. what's
>>next? are you going to next say that it's just common sense?
>
> I know yer slow Stevie The Wonder Retard, so I'll explain this again,
> REAL slow.
>
> SEARCH ENGINES ARE NOT CASE SENSITIVE
>
> ...woah, what a fuckin revelation for you, huh Sunshine?
>
> I mean, it's a lil hard to cite something that can't the fuck be cited
> in the first place you idiot fuck.
lol. that's like saying 'my dog ate my homework'. by your logic, since a
search engine is case insensitive when searching, you can't find proof for
your argument...so, your point is valid and made.
slow enough for you? rolfmao.
>>> And there's nothing to prove, it's common fuckin sense.
>
>>ROFLMFAO!
>
> He's laughing everybody, he uh, he just wants to make sure we all know
> how much of a good time he's having...it's important to him. *nods*
he's 'nodding' (new term for omh) everybody, he uh, he just wants to make
sure we all know that he does in fact have something attached to his neck -
desipte having proof that there is.
>>i was wrong! it's just common *fuckin* sense...LOL.
>
> Uh huh, you just keep referring to all ECMAscript types as JavaScript,
> Bumbles, see how many smiles you get from developers beyond your
> limited comprehension. Free cl00, they WON'T bother bitch slapping
> you with reality. Most high level designers/programmers make it a
> point to try and leave amateurs at the amateur level by NOT explaining
> certain things to them.
i suppose those would be the ones who have to make long, simple, drawn-out
explanations of bits, bytes, shifting, and masking for the fuckwit noobz
that have no clue what they are. wait, that would be me and a host of others
to had to spoon feed that lesson to your 75 iq having programming wannabe
ass. yeah, i'd take your advice, only it applies to you and not me. there's
your free clue.
>>> I mean it's
>>> like your stupid ass wants to call every single box of tissues
>>> "Kleenex", when there is ONLY ONE BRAND called "Kleenex", you fuckin
>>> retard.
>
>>more like band-aids almost not being allowed the TM of their name since,
>>even though there are hundreds of other bandage manufacturers, each is
>>referred by the public to as 'band-aid'. sorry, the name just kind of
>>covers
>>the *genre*, not the brand.
>>
>>get a better example, mental fuckwit.
>
> You mental fuckwit, you just PROVED my argument by NOT CAPITALIZING
> the word "band-aid". If you had capitalized it, you would be
> referring ONLY to Band-Aid brand band-aids in the same way that if you
> capitalize javascript you are referring ONLY to Netscape's JavaScript,
> you bumbling retard!
lol. to a browser javascript/JAVASCRIPT/JavaScript/jAvAsCrIpT/etc. are the
same fucking thing. had you a brain, you'd know that no matter HOW Band-Aid
spelled their name, they were almost denied a TM since everyone knew
bandages by 'band-aid'. and following that example, you noticed that their
commercial changed from 'i am stuck on band-aid, cuz band-aid stuck on me'
to 'i am stuck on band-aid brand, cuz band-aid stuck on me'. if you don't
specify the BRAND of javascript you want, you get the default javascript
engine of the browser...i.e. javascript1.2 for instance.
do try and keep up.
>>> Again though, the problem is that idiot fucks like you came
>>> along and suddenly started capitalizing the word, not even realizing
>>> that every time you did you were limiting the scope of your message to
>>> just Netscape's javascript type...and boy howdy there are some REALLY
>>> fuckin hilarious examples of retards like yourself talking about
>>> "JavaScript" whilst making reference to JScript specific syntax.
>
>>here's a clue, unless you specify the exact type and even version, the
>>browser implements ITS DEFAULT interpreter for javascript. it doesn't
>>matter
>>in the least how you spell it. netscape's javascript type...LOL.
>
> Oh the irony...did you even realize at all, on any level, that you
> further proved my argument by using the word exactly like I told you
> to? Then again, you don't seem to capitalize the first word of your
> sentences, so maybe yer just a dumbfuck all over...or your shift key
> is broken (probably has dried spooge stuck in it from all the times
> you jacked yerself off to my posts you stupid fuckin Hatter Addict).
'proving' your argument would etail that you first supply *proof* that
JavaScript is somehow different than javascript. i'm really just reaffirming
my point...not yours. get a grip (of something other than the dick being
thrust in your mouth at present).
>>> It should probably also be noted that quite a number of employers will
>>> use little things like that as tests, to see if you really know yer
>>> stuff or not. Any competent developer would know not to capitalize
>>> the word in a conversation that includes all ECMAscript types, only a
>>> bumbling amateur college flunkie wouldn't know.
>
>>so, in addition to avoiding proving your point with specific examples, you
>>simply allude to the *possibility* that even more such proof exist - and
>>in
>>such frequency that you shouldn't have any trouble producing some.
>>
>>now would be a good time to show your proof rather than skirting the issue
>>with more of your uninformed, arrogant drivel.
>
> The next thing you know this retard will be asking me to "prove" that
> cars have wheels. *rolls eyes*
well, better roll them in big enough circles to avert everyone's attention
to them rather than the fact that you can't prove your point. if i take you
to a car with other people, i could point to the wheels and we'd all say,
that's a wheel. you simply cannot take us to your cite (ANY cite) and show
us the load of shite you'd have us swollow.
>>let's see some, flunkie. ;^)
>
> Onideus Mad Hatter called, he says he wants his material back, you
> flunkie rip off artist.
it's called a 'call-back'. iow, you are the flunkie. your 'material' is not
even amusing. however, seeing the way your 'thought' processes 'work', is.
FrozenNorth
pm and wrote the following:
> On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 22:11:02 GMT, FrozenNorth
> <frozenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Onideus Mad Hatter took a can of maroon spray paint on October 2, 2007
>>06:03 pm and wrote the following:
>>
>>> On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 21:58:22 GMT, FrozenNorth
>>> <frozenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Onideus Mad Hatter took a can of maroon spray paint on October 2, 2007
>>>>05:20 pm and wrote the following:
>>>>
>>>>> It should probably also be noted that quite a number of employers will
>>>>> use little things like that as tests, to see if you really know yer
>>>>> stuff or not. Any competent developer would know not to capitalize
>>>>> the word in a conversation that includes all ECMAscript types, only a
>>>>> bumbling amateur college flunkie wouldn't know.
>>>>>
>>>>So how was the conversation about JavaScript/javascript when you
>>>>interviewed for a job at WallyWorld?
>>>
>>> I never applied for any javascript developer position in Walla Walla,
>>> Frosty, so I dunno what the fuck yer drooling about.
>>>
>>WallyWorld is slang for Walmart doofus,
>
> WallyWorld is slang for Walla Walla, you dumbfuck. Has been for long
> before Wal*Mart even existed.
>
Google says otherwise
http://www.wallyworldlife.com/
http://blogs.usatoday.com/techspace/2006/07/wallyworld_wide.html
Steve
> On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 21:58:22 GMT, FrozenNorth
> <frozenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Onideus Mad Hatter took a can of maroon spray paint on October 2, 2007
>>05:20
>>pm and wrote the following:
>>
>>> It should probably also be noted that quite a number of employers will
>>> use little things like that as tests, to see if you really know yer
>>> stuff or not. Any competent developer would know not to capitalize
>>> the word in a conversation that includes all ECMAscript types, only a
>>> bumbling amateur college flunkie wouldn't know.
>>>
>>So how was the conversation about JavaScript/javascript when you
>>interviewed
>>for a job at WallyWorld?
>
> I never applied for any javascript developer position in Walla Walla,
> Frosty, so I dunno what the fuck yer drooling about.
so you just worked at dq until fired for getting caught beating off, then
went to 'walla walla' as a non-developer? and your 'professional' experience
developing software is from where again, exactly?
lol.
Onideus Mad Hatter
<frozenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
Free cl00, Dipshit, Walla Walla was around LOOOONG before 2006. Duh
uh, slap yerself across yer idiot face and wonder the fuck why.
Maybe next time you can manage to produce a source that isn't some
tweenage muppet fucks blog rant from less than two years ago, Dipshit.
FrozenNorth
Free cl00 Dipshit, I was using a common slang term for Wal*Mart and just
proved it.
Maybe you can produce a source for "javascript", ya think. Dipshit.
asdf
>
> Free cl00, Dipshit, Walla Walla was around LOOOONG before 2006. Duh
> uh, slap yerself across yer idiot face and wonder the fuck why.
>
Read this again, folks, but this time, bring up this in your web browser
first:
http://bestuff.com/images/images_of_stuff/210x600/comic-book-guy-13018.jpg
...suddenly all OMH's posts make sense.
ROFL
Steve
"FrozenNorth" <frozenn...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1359607.q...@frozennorth.to...
well, that's the problem...dipshit DOESN'T think.
Steve
"asdf" <as...@asdf.com> wrote in message
news:4702e5a9$0$3592$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
oh no, no, no...go for broke. google 'mathew moulton' and/or his posting
name. what a kook.
Jerry Stuckle
> Onideus Mad Hatter took a can of maroon spray paint on October 2, 2007 05:20
> pm and wrote the following:
>
>> It should probably also be noted that quite a number of employers will
>> use little things like that as tests, to see if you really know yer
>> stuff or not. Any competent developer would know not to capitalize
>> the word in a conversation that includes all ECMAscript types, only a
>> bumbling amateur college flunkie wouldn't know.
>>
> So how was the conversation about JavaScript/javascript when you interviewed
> for a job at WallyWorld?
>
Right over his head... :-)
Jerry Stuckle
>
> Free cl00, Dipshit, Walla Walla was around LOOOONG before 2006. Duh
> uh, slap yerself across yer idiot face and wonder the fuck why.
>
And it was never known as WallyWorld. Stupid idiot.
Jerry Stuckle
> so you just worked at dq until fired for getting caught beating off, then
> went to 'walla walla' as a non-developer? and your 'professional' experience
> developing software is from where again, exactly?
>
> lol.
>
>
Steve,
Actually, I suspect his experience with "software" is because he can't
get it up.
Onideus Mad Hatter
<jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
>>
>> Free cl00, Dipshit, Walla Walla was around LOOOONG before 2006. Duh
>> uh, slap yerself across yer idiot face and wonder the fuck why.
>>
>
>And it was never known as WallyWorld. Stupid idiot.
...boy you must just HATE Google, huh retard? *nods*
Onideus Mad Hatter
<jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>Steve wrote:
>> so you just worked at dq until fired for getting caught beating off, then
>> went to 'walla walla' as a non-developer? and your 'professional' experience
>> developing software is from where again, exactly?
>>
>> lol.
>>
>>
>
>Steve,
>
>Actually, I suspect his experience with "software" is because he can't
>get it up.
*rimshot*
He'll be here all night folks and we've got half priced drink specials
at the bar!
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ą x ą
Onideus Mad Hatter
<jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>FrozenNorth wrote:
>> Onideus Mad Hatter took a can of maroon spray paint on October 2, 2007 05:20
>> pm and wrote the following:
>>
>>> It should probably also be noted that quite a number of employers will
>>> use little things like that as tests, to see if you really know yer
>>> stuff or not. Any competent developer would know not to capitalize
>>> the word in a conversation that includes all ECMAscript types, only a
>>> bumbling amateur college flunkie wouldn't know.
>>>
>> So how was the conversation about JavaScript/javascript when you interviewed
>> for a job at WallyWorld?
>>
>
>Right over his head... :-)
Jerry, is there ever a moment in which you're NOT sucking man penis?
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ą x ą
Onideus Mad Hatter
LOL, he's laughing everybody! Really!
*nods*
I think it's so cute how much my work history seems to excite all you
drooling Hatter Addicts, clinging onto every detail desperately
looking for anything you can froth over to try and "get back" at dat
mean 'ol Mad Hatter. Very telling. ^_^
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ą x ą
Onideus Mad Hatter
<frozenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
The only thing you "proved" is that you read a lot of shitty, tweenage
muppet fuck blogger boards. Congratulations, yer an idiot fuck, would
you like a slap up long side yer fat head?
>Maybe you can produce a source for "javascript", ya think. Dipshit.
Maybe you can produce a search engine with case sensitive
searching...no? Well then, maybe you should shut yourself the fuck up
then, eh?
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ą x ą
Onideus Mad Hatter
You really should stop talking about yourself in the third
person...although I guess it's a convenient way to try and ignore how
fuckin retarded you are, innt?
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ą x ą
Onideus Mad Hatter
<whoisthat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
>
>>
>> I wonder if my bitch slapping reply
>
>Well, you're either slapping your Mother/Landlord or swinging at the
>air. I read both your post and her rebuttal and I'd put the score 11 to
>2 in her favor.
You're not very convinincing, Dribbles. Try it with a bit less ass
slurping next time.
>What gets me is she's the one person from what I've read on this group
>that shows you one iota of respect, yet you stoop to such sophomoric
>name calling levels to present your self as a total moron.
>
>*shakes head*
Well that's the great thing about Spacey, unlike your stupid ass she
doesn't take this whole Internet thang even remotely as serious as you
do, you fuckin dipshit.
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
Onideus Mad Hatter
<jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>SpaceGirl wrote:
>> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>
>>> It's pretty obvious he's a closet queer. And I don't mean homosexual.
>>>
>>> His obsession with homosexual behavior really is sick, isn't it?
>>>
>>> He must really be frustrated - can't get a girlfriend or a boyfriend :-)
>>>
>>
>> He likes to verbally masturbate when I'm around. It's the only action he
>> gets, poor little mite. He hasn't quite grasped yet that everyone is
>> laughing at him :)
>>
>> Is it wrong to pick on people like him?
>>
>
>Actually, I think I'm wrong about him. He's not a frustrated queer (as
>differentiated from a gay).
>
>He's a pimply-faced 11 year old boy with a five year old mind and a
>dictionary of obscene words. He's attracted to other boys instead of
>girls, but is afraid to let anyone know he's gay. So he expresses his
>anger by calling everyone else gay, hoping no one will notice that it is
>really he.
>
>His mommy should take his computer away from him.
The tweenage muppet fuck whose shown a mastery of the gay lame is
trying to call OTHER people pimple faced 11 year olds...boy I think
the irony meter just fuckin exploded on that one.
Steve
"i know you are, but what am i" ... is that the best you got. ROFLMAO.
Steve
perhaps you should back your claims 'the fuck up' instead of thinking that,
since you say so, that's the way things are. idiot! now, cite your reference
or fucking drop it, numbnuts.
Steve
"Jerry Stuckle" <jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:uf6dnf-WwM6xk57a...@comcast.com...
> Steve wrote:
>> so you just worked at dq until fired for getting caught beating off, then
>> went to 'walla walla' as a non-developer? and your 'professional'
>> experience developing software is from where again, exactly?
>>
>> lol.
>
> Steve,
>
> Actually, I suspect his experience with "software" is because he can't get
> it up.
that about sums it up.
Steve
he's nodding everybody! LOL...Really!
> I think it's so cute how much my work history seems to excite all you
> drooling Hatter Addicts, clinging onto every detail desperately
> looking for anything you can froth over to try and "get back" at dat
> mean 'ol Mad Hatter. Very telling. ^_^
nah, you're just amusing...in a kind of road-kill way. just can't help but
look on and think "god, it sucks to be you [omh]". but, you just mentally
jack off with whatever dilusion does it for you.
;^)
Steve
> FrozenNorth wrote:
>> Onideus Mad Hatter took a can of maroon spray paint on October 2, 2007
>> 05:20
>> pm and wrote the following:
>>
>>> It should probably also be noted that quite a number of employers will
>>> use little things like that as tests, to see if you really know yer
>>> stuff or not. Any competent developer would know not to capitalize
>>> the word in a conversation that includes all ECMAscript types, only a
>>> bumbling amateur college flunkie wouldn't know.
>>>
>> So how was the conversation about JavaScript/javascript when you
>> interviewed
>> for a job at WallyWorld?
>>
>
> Right over his head... :-)
and out the window...followed by the job opportunity as well. (plus, it
really freaks people out to see grown men in diapers)
Onideus Mad Hatter
No, but it's all the better you deserve, Fuckwit. Do be sure and let
me know when it starts to require any more than that to keep your
stupid ass frothing at the mouth about me, you stupid fuckin Hatter
Addict.
Onideus Mad Hatter
This from the retards who STILL haven't manage to cite their source as
far as their 'NO ONE USES JAVASCRIPT!' claim.
Onideus Mad Hatter
Tell us, how long does it take you, on average, to completely lick
Jerry's ass clean?
Onideus Mad Hatter
It's cute when you try and imitate me, Hatter Addict...but you kinda
fuck it all up in a retard sort of way.
>> I think it's so cute how much my work history seems to excite all you
>> drooling Hatter Addicts, clinging onto every detail desperately
>> looking for anything you can froth over to try and "get back" at dat
>> mean 'ol Mad Hatter. Very telling. ^_^
>nah, you're just amusing...
I think it's sweet that you feel such a need to try and explain and
justify yourself...and to me of all people, huh, funny that.
>in a kind of road-kill way.
Sorry, I guess I'm not so pathetic that I subscribe to whatever brand
of humor it is in which dead animals plastered across the road is
funny. Perhaps you can try and move up to fart jokes or something.
>just can't help but
>look on and think "god, it sucks to be you [omh]". but, you just mentally
>jack off with whatever dilusion does it for you.
You know what I like...the fact that I enjoy every aspect of my
life...and the fact that you just can't seem to shut yourself the fuck
up about it. ^_^
I mean, really, you must lead a VERY sad little pathetic existence if
all the better you have to do is jack yourself off to my daily
schedule. On the bright side though, if anyone ever accuses me of not
having a life I can always say, "Hey man, I've got Steve's life."
*nods*
Onideus Mad Hatter
You having first hand experience, eh diaper bitch?
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
Jerry Stuckle
>
> "i know you are, but what am i" ... is that the best you got. ROFLMAO.
>
>
One thing about him, Steve. It's great to wake up in the morning and
get a laugh :-).
Onideus Mad Hatter
<jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>Steve wrote:
>
>>
>> "i know you are, but what am i" ... is that the best you got. ROFLMAO.
>>
>>
>
>One thing about him, Steve. It's great to wake up in the morning and
>get a laugh :-).
Dumb and Dumber are still laughing everyone, really, honest they are,
otherwise why would they need to keep "reminding" each other in every
other post? *nods*
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
Onideus Mad Hatter
http://www.icca.org/cgi-bin/discus/board-profile.cgi?action=pict&file=3967.jpg
LOL, that's hilarious! I like how you grew a beard just to hide all
yer fat chins.
What's even more interesting is that Jerry apparently works at some
place called "JDS Computer Training Corporation" which from what I've
read is some kind of like fly by night, earn your "degree" at home,
flunkie factory. They're so pathetic they don't even have a domain or
a website. But then, I guess it's understandable, I mean it's not
like that shit faced fat ass Jerry is gonna be up to coding a web
site. Hell the d00d has enough trouble just figuring out how to post
on Usenet.
Hey Jerry, I think I know why I make you so angry...it's cause while
I'm young, talented, creative and produce...yer a fat assed old man
whose practically knockin on death's door every time you eat a
cheeseburger and you've accomplished fuck all throughout your life.
I mean, just look at you, yer postin in a fuckin web programming group
and you don't even have ONE site to call your own. Yer a wannabe (or
a never-will-be), a dribbling flunkie who will never be known for
anything, no accomplishments, no websites, no nothing. You're an
unproducing fuckwit, a talentless poser class shit stain who goes
around trying to nitpick and bitch about other people's code because
you're too damn worthless to produce any of your own.
At best yer a bitter, jealous old coot whose angry at the world for
never being able to accomplish anything worthwhile in life so you go
around trying to tear others down to your pathetic level, not to try
and feel better about yourself, no, you're long past that dream, you
do it just so you don't have to feel so lonely down there on the
bottom of nothingness.
Personally...if I was as pathetic, forgetful, inconsequential and
unproducing as you are...I'd probably have shot myself in the head
already...but you're so damn pathetic and stupid you don't even have
the decency to save your loved ones the burden of your pointless, FAT
existence, do you Jerry? At least we can all take comfort in the fact
that you're so gawd damn baby Jesus raping ugly that you probably
haven't had a chance to breed (thank God for small miracles, eh?).
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
Jerry Stuckle
>
> What's even more interesting is that Jerry apparently works at some
> place called "JDS Computer Training Corporation" which from what I've
> read is some kind of like fly by night, earn your "degree" at home,
> flunkie factory. They're so pathetic they don't even have a domain or
> a website. But then, I guess it's understandable, I mean it's not
> like that shit faced fat ass Jerry is gonna be up to coding a web
> site. Hell the d00d has enough trouble just figuring out how to post
> on Usenet.
Not at all. I don't need a web site.
The training we do is all corporate - Fortune 500, mainly. Our
customers know us. And they know how to contact us.
We have more work than we can handle now, and have to turn some down.
For that we sub work out to other companies (and accept work from them
occasionally). A website would just increase the amount of work we have
to turn away.
Not everyone in this world needs a website, and websites are not
applicable to all businesses. Ours happens to be one of them.
Steve
> Steve wrote:
>
>>
>> "i know you are, but what am i" ... is that the best you got. ROFLMAO.
>
> One thing about him, Steve. It's great to wake up in the morning and get
> a laugh :-).
i know. that's why i actually started posting to him/it.
what's even more funny is watching him kick and scratch to get a response
when we quit responding and the thread dies. he says we're hatter
addicts...we couldn't care less, but we're all he's got - he has no friends
obviously.
Steve
> On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 07:03:52 -0400, Jerry Stuckle
> <jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>
>>Steve wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "i know you are, but what am i" ... is that the best you got. ROFLMAO.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>One thing about him, Steve. It's great to wake up in the morning and
>>get a laugh :-).
>
> Dumb and Dumber are still laughing everyone, really, honest they are,
> otherwise why would they need to keep "reminding" each other in every
> other post? *nods*
ooooh look everybody, omh would have you believe he's got a head attached to
his neck...he's *nodding*
lol
Steve
> Hey Jerry, look I found your picture:
> http://www.icca.org/cgi-bin/discus/board-profile.cgi?action=pict&file=3967.jpg
>
> LOL, that's hilarious! I like how you grew a beard just to hide all
> yer fat chins.
>
> What's even more interesting is that Jerry apparently works at some
> place called "JDS Computer Training Corporation" which from what I've
> read is some kind of like fly by night, earn your "degree" at home,
> flunkie factory. They're so pathetic they don't even have a domain or
> a website. But then, I guess it's understandable, I mean it's not
> like that shit faced fat ass Jerry is gonna be up to coding a web
> site. Hell the d00d has enough trouble just figuring out how to post
> on Usenet.
<snip addict obsession>
hey jerry! omh is now officially a JERRY-ADDICT.
ROFLMFAO!!!
Steve
oh baby, that's YOUR strawman. neither i, jerry, nor space girl claim that.
i'm not surprised that's what you get out of reading our posts...since you
can't fucking read. the more you fail to prove your point yet hopelessly
cling to it, the more idiotic you look - though we're all past the point of
deminishing returns on that certainty. with the amount of time you gave to
researching jerry, you could have found your evidencial support three times
over by now.
since you use the "i can't find my proof b/c search engines are case
insensitive" excuse, why not just try it in a browser with your speeeechul
spelling of javascript and write out the type and version of the js
interpreter used by your browser?
what's that? didn't change at all? hmmmmmm, ok pumpkin, go away then.
you netNoob retard.
Steve
> On Wed, 3 Oct 2007 00:50:25 -0500, "Steve" <no....@example.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Jerry Stuckle" <jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote in message
>>news:uf6dnf-WwM6xk57a...@comcast.com...
>>> Steve wrote:
>>>> so you just worked at dq until fired for getting caught beating off,
>>>> then
>>>> went to 'walla walla' as a non-developer? and your 'professional'
>>>> experience developing software is from where again, exactly?
>>>>
>>>> lol.
>>>
>>> Steve,
>>>
>>> Actually, I suspect his experience with "software" is because he can't
>>> get
>>> it up.
>>
>>that about sums it up.
>
> Tell us, how long does it take you, on average, to completely lick
> Jerry's ass clean?
tell us, how long does it take you, on average, to come up with such snappy
come-backs? your feeble mind keeps regurgitating the same themes, but only
the adjectives change. i suppose a witty retort requires an intelligent
mind...leaving you out of the > 75 iq minimum to produce one.
Onideus Mad Hatter
OMGROFLCOPTERLOLLERCAUST
...tha fuck. It's like Jerry's the mayor of Retard Town and Steve is
his r-tard "yes man".
This guys slurps more ass in one post than all the bidets in France!
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ą x ą
Steve
it's cute when you interpret mockery as immitation...but you're more than
kinda fucked in the head when it comes to inference.
>>> I think it's so cute how much my work history seems to excite all you
>>> drooling Hatter Addicts, clinging onto every detail desperately
>>> looking for anything you can froth over to try and "get back" at dat
>>> mean 'ol Mad Hatter. Very telling. ^_^
>
>>nah, you're just amusing...
>
> I think it's sweet that you feel such a need to try and explain and
> justify yourself...and to me of all people, huh, funny that.
nah, just trying to prolong your mental, delusional masturbation. really,
you should thank me.
>>in a kind of road-kill way.
>
> Sorry, I guess I'm not so pathetic that I subscribe to whatever brand
> of humor it is in which dead animals plastered across the road is
> funny. Perhaps you can try and move up to fart jokes or something.
yeah, it's soooo much better to fixate on diapers and passifiers. however,
though i'd be moving *down*, fart jokes are right up your ally.
>>just can't help but
>>look on and think "god, it sucks to be you [omh]". but, you just mentally
>>jack off with whatever dilusion does it for you.
>
> You know what I like...the fact that I enjoy every aspect of my
> life...and the fact that you just can't seem to shut yourself the fuck
> up about it. ^_^
you need a shrink. were you happy with *most* aspects of your life, you'd
not behave in such an infintile manner...but, if the diaper fits...you'll
find matthew moulton in it.
> I mean, really, you must lead a VERY sad little pathetic existence if
> all the better you have to do is jack yourself off to my daily
> schedule. On the bright side though, if anyone ever accuses me of not
> having a life I can always say, "Hey man, I've got Steve's life."
> *nods*
look everybody, it's nodding again. omh wants us to believe he's got the
equipment it takes to do that.
Steve
> On Wed, 3 Oct 2007 00:54:37 -0500, "Steve" <no....@example.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Jerry Stuckle" <jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote in message
>>news:uf6dnf2WwM76kJ7a...@comcast.com...
>>> FrozenNorth wrote:
>>>> Onideus Mad Hatter took a can of maroon spray paint on October 2, 2007
>>>> 05:20
>>>> pm and wrote the following:
>>>>
>>>>> It should probably also be noted that quite a number of employers will
>>>>> use little things like that as tests, to see if you really know yer
>>>>> stuff or not. Any competent developer would know not to capitalize
>>>>> the word in a conversation that includes all ECMAscript types, only a
>>>>> bumbling amateur college flunkie wouldn't know.
>>>>>
>>>> So how was the conversation about JavaScript/javascript when you
>>>> interviewed
>>>> for a job at WallyWorld?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Right over his head... :-)
>>
>>and out the window...followed by the job opportunity as well. (plus, it
>>really freaks people out to see grown men in diapers)
>
> You having first hand experience, eh diaper bitch?
yeah, i think the last time i wore one though as when i was about 3. it's
when they get to age 27 and do wear them to satisfy a fettish that people
get really leery. that probably explains your employers being dq and
walmart.
again, where do you get 'professional' programming experience? i love how
half of your site (back-orifice-productions...aka, 'shit') explains it's
lack of function with either "coming soon", "under development", or "busy,
busy, busy"...especially given how long you've had it up saying how great it
is. it's also amusing how you have *no* clients and that your only example
is one you made up...involving none other than (drum roll),
care-fucking-bears. ROFLMAO !!!
Steve
> On Wed, 3 Oct 2007 08:10:32 -0500, "Steve" <no....@example.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Onideus Mad Hatter" <use...@backwater-productions.net> wrote in message
>>news:pav6g3hojot2qeqp9...@4ax.com...
>>> Hey Jerry, look I found your picture:
>>> http://www.icca.org/cgi-bin/discus/board-profile.cgi?action=pict&file=3967.jpg
>>>
>>> LOL, that's hilarious! I like how you grew a beard just to hide all
>>> yer fat chins.
>>>
>>> What's even more interesting is that Jerry apparently works at some
>>> place called "JDS Computer Training Corporation" which from what I've
>>> read is some kind of like fly by night, earn your "degree" at home,
>>> flunkie factory. They're so pathetic they don't even have a domain or
>>> a website. But then, I guess it's understandable, I mean it's not
>>> like that shit faced fat ass Jerry is gonna be up to coding a web
>>> site. Hell the d00d has enough trouble just figuring out how to post
>>> on Usenet.
>>
>><snip addict obsession>
>>
>>hey jerry! omh is now officially a JERRY-ADDICT.
>>
>>ROFLMFAO!!!
>
> OMGROFLCOPTERLOLLERCAUST
>
> ...tha fuck. It's like Jerry's the mayor of Retard Town and Steve is
> his r-tard "yes man".
>
> This guys slurps more ass in one post than all the bidets in France!
yet, you obessed enough to google jerry and write a dissertation. yep, i'd
say that makes you a jerry-addict. was it his beard that did it for ya?
lol
Onideus Mad Hatter
<jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>> What's even more interesting is that Jerry apparently works at some
>> place called "JDS Computer Training Corporation" which from what I've
>> read is some kind of like fly by night, earn your "degree" at home,
>> flunkie factory. They're so pathetic they don't even have a domain or
>> a website. But then, I guess it's understandable, I mean it's not
>> like that shit faced fat ass Jerry is gonna be up to coding a web
>> site. Hell the d00d has enough trouble just figuring out how to post
>> on Usenet.
>Not at all. I don't need a web site.
*pats you on the head*
That's very cute, child. Hear that everyone? He doesn't NEED a Web
site. *nods*
>The training we do is all corporate - Fortune 500, mainly. Our
>customers know us. And they know how to contact us.
Right, it's magic, they phone up Miss Cleo and she connects the new
clients with you via the mystic ether of idiocy.
>We have more work than we can handle now, and have to turn some down.
So much work in fact that Jerry barely even has time to make any posts
on Usenet!
...wait. Uh, plot hole, look out!
>For that we sub work out to other companies
I think you mean "out sourcing", Dumbass. Yeesh, this stupid ass
retard can't even lie without sounding like a dumbfuck!
>(and accept work from them occasionally).
Janitorial services no doubt.
>A website would just increase the amount of work we have
>to turn away.
Work of course meaning you spend all day on Usenet replying to my
posts, huh Jerry? Care to lie some more, Dumbass?
>Not everyone in this world needs a website, and websites are not
>applicable to all businesses. Ours happens to be one of them.
Websites are in fact applicable to ALL business, Dumbass. Even if the
website isn't being used to directly market a product it can serve as
a kind of business card with essential information that can be used by
CURRENT clients and customers. Information like business directory
listings, hours of operation, e-mail forms, client dev tools, etc,
etc. Essentially, if you don't think you need a website...it's
because you're too much of an uncreative, talentless cluster fuck to
come up with any ideas on how you could utilize web development to
better your business . You confuse a lack of need with your own
shortsighted stupidity.
To put it another way, even if yer delusions were real, with the right
creativity and ingenuity you would be able to build web tools for you
and your clients which would allow you to take on MORE clients by
making your existing work load process more efficiently (doing more
with less work, working smarter instead of harder, etc).
And further, if you so firmly believe that web development has no use
for you or your business...what in the fuck is your stupid ass doing
hanging out in gawd damn web development froups? What are you too
damn stupid to find an hobby that actually suits your interests or are
your kids just using these froups as your online adult daycare?
Jerry Stuckle
I must really be getting his goat. I wonder how long it took for him to
find that picture on the internet. I don't hide my presence, but I
don't advertise it, either.
Looks like you are, also. Isn't this fun? :-)
Onideus Mad Hatter
Which took all of three minutes and forty two seconds.
Congratulations, you've managed to hold my attention longer than your
average bug zapper. What the fuck do you want a foot up the ass and a
crotch grab to congratulate your incredible "accomplishment"? Tha
fuck man, you probably get all excited every time you manage to take a
piss without gettin it all the fuck over yer training panties.
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
Jerry Stuckle
Yea, that's great! I always wanted a following!
Onideus Mad Hatter
>
>"Onideus Mad Hatter" <use...@backwater-productions.net> wrote in message
>news:c5v6g31bvk40oj85m...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 07:03:52 -0400, Jerry Stuckle
>> <jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Steve wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "i know you are, but what am i" ... is that the best you got. ROFLMAO.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>One thing about him, Steve. It's great to wake up in the morning and
>>>get a laugh :-).
>>
>> Dumb and Dumber are still laughing everyone, really, honest they are,
>> otherwise why would they need to keep "reminding" each other in every
>> other post? *nods*
>
>oo<COCK SLAP>
You'll be sucking my cock for the rest of the day I think.
*pulls real hard on yer leash*
Good girl! Er, I mean bitch.
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ą x ą
Jerry Stuckle
Of course not. Who would want to be his friend? Maybe someone else in
the asylum, but that's about it.
Onideus Mad Hatter
>oh b<COCK SLAP>
I'm sorry I can't understand your babble, you'll need to take my cock
out of yer mouth first.
Onideus Mad Hatter
>
>"Onideus Mad Hatter" <use...@backwater-productions.net> wrote in message
>news:q3e6g31851ti8itd9...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 3 Oct 2007 00:50:25 -0500, "Steve" <no....@example.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Jerry Stuckle" <jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote in message
>>>news:uf6dnf-WwM6xk57a...@comcast.com...
>>>> Steve wrote:
>>>>> so you just worked at dq until fired for getting caught beating off,
>>>>> then
>>>>> went to 'walla walla' as a non-developer? and your 'professional'
>>>>> experience developing software is from where again, exactly?
>>>>>
>>>>> lol.
>>>>
>>>> Steve,
>>>>
>>>> Actually, I suspect his experience with "software" is because he can't
>>>> get
>>>> it up.
>>>
>>>that about sums it up.
>>
>> Tell us, how long does it take you, on average, to completely lick
>> Jerry's ass clean?
>
>te<COCK SLAP>
Show us all how much you love my cock, Bitch.
Onideus Mad Hatter
>it<COCK SLAP>
Spit or swallow, Bitch?
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
Onideus Mad Hatter
>
>"Onideus Mad Hatter" <use...@backwater-productions.net> wrote in message
>news:pee6g3t2mbhd2ivfn...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 3 Oct 2007 00:54:37 -0500, "Steve" <no....@example.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Jerry Stuckle" <jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote in message
>>>news:uf6dnf2WwM76kJ7a...@comcast.com...
>>>> FrozenNorth wrote:
>>>>> Onideus Mad Hatter took a can of maroon spray paint on October 2, 2007
>>>>> 05:20
>>>>> pm and wrote the following:
>>>>>
>>>>>> It should probably also be noted that quite a number of employers will
>>>>>> use little things like that as tests, to see if you really know yer
>>>>>> stuff or not. Any competent developer would know not to capitalize
>>>>>> the word in a conversation that includes all ECMAscript types, only a
>>>>>> bumbling amateur college flunkie wouldn't know.
>>>>>>
>>>>> So how was the conversation about JavaScript/javascript when you
>>>>> interviewed
>>>>> for a job at WallyWorld?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Right over his head... :-)
>>>
>>>and out the window...followed by the job opportunity as well. (plus, it
>>>really freaks people out to see grown men in diapers)
>>
>> You having first hand experience, eh diaper bitch?
>
>ye<COCK SLAP>
You just can't get enough Hatter cock, huh?
Onideus Mad Hatter
<jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>Yea, that's great! I always wanted a following!
Well it looks like Steve's applyin for the job, Jerry. Make sure you
give the boy a reach around after you fuck him up the ass though, he
deserves it!
Steve
> Steve wrote:
>> "Onideus Mad Hatter" <use...@backwater-productions.net> wrote in message
>> news:c5v6g31bvk40oj85m...@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 07:03:52 -0400, Jerry Stuckle
>>> <jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Steve wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "i know you are, but what am i" ... is that the best you got. ROFLMAO.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> One thing about him, Steve. It's great to wake up in the morning and
>>>> get a laugh :-).
>>> Dumb and Dumber are still laughing everyone, really, honest they are,
>>> otherwise why would they need to keep "reminding" each other in every
>>> other post? *nods*
>>
>> ooooh look everybody, omh would have you believe he's got a head attached
>> to his neck...he's *nodding*
>>
>> lol
>
> I must really be getting his goat. I wonder how long it took for him to
> find that picture on the internet. I don't hide my presence, but I don't
> advertise it, either.
>
> Looks like you are, also. Isn't this fun? :-)
yeah, it doesn't take much. if you say he's wrong when he's wrong, it's
over. it squeels like a banshee and hurls insults - it's like the
exorsist...the reaction of a demon after the priest mentions the big jc.
tsk, tsk, tsk...sad, but highly amusing.
Steve
> On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 08:12:54 -0400, Jerry Stuckle
> <jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>
>>> What's even more interesting is that Jerry apparently works at some
>>> place called "JDS Computer Training Corporation" which from what I've
>>> read is some kind of like fly by night, earn your "degree" at home,
>>> flunkie factory. They're so pathetic they don't even have a domain or
>>> a website. But then, I guess it's understandable, I mean it's not
>>> like that shit faced fat ass Jerry is gonna be up to coding a web
>>> site. Hell the d00d has enough trouble just figuring out how to post
>>> on Usenet.
>
>>Not at all. I don't need a web site.
>
> *pats you on the head*
>
> That's very cute, child. Hear that everyone? He doesn't NEED a Web
> site. *nods*
look everybody, omh thinks it can do the impossible...nod while missing a
cranium.
>>The training we do is all corporate - Fortune 500, mainly. Our
>>customers know us. And they know how to contact us.
>
> Right, it's magic, they phone up Miss Cleo and she connects the new
> clients with you via the mystic ether of idiocy.
hell, if you had *ANY* customers, they might recommend you for other work.
it's called word-of-mouth. however, you have no clients, and even if you did
they'd only condemn you 'work'...and further, you use your mouth for fucking
dicks...not for words, so i'm sure you haven't conceived of the phrase.
>>We have more work than we can handle now, and have to turn some down.
>
> So much work in fact that Jerry barely even has time to make any posts
> on Usenet!
>
> ...wait. Uh, plot hole, look out!
>
>>For that we sub work out to other companies
>
> I think you mean "out sourcing", Dumbass. Yeesh, this stupid ass
> retard can't even lie without sounding like a dumbfuck!
oh no, sub work is in conjuntion with, not the out sourcing of. now had you
a job (walmart barely counts), you'd know the difference.
>>(and accept work from them occasionally).
>
> Janitorial services no doubt.
no, you're projecting your responsibilities you perform for walmart again.
>>A website would just increase the amount of work we have
>>to turn away.
>
> Work of course meaning you spend all day on Usenet replying to my
> posts, huh Jerry? Care to lie some more, Dumbass?
>
>>Not everyone in this world needs a website, and websites are not
>>applicable to all businesses. Ours happens to be one of them.
>
> Websites are in fact applicable to ALL business, Dumbass.
no, blanket-boi. businesses are applicable to their clients and not all
clients use the web. again, you have a grand affinity to sweeping statements
that are only true in your own mind.
<snip jerry obsession>
wow omh, you really have it bad for jerry. :)