Yet another piece of brilliant F/OSS software: Nagios
TomB
am running at work, but with the constantly increasing number of
servers (well, I think they are servers - apparently I am not very
knowledgable on the subject) under my supervision I had to look out
for a tool to help me keep an eye on their status.
It took only a couple of Google queries to lead me to Nagios, an open
source network monitoring package. I heard of it before, but never
gave it a try, simply because I didn't need it in the past.
As the package is available from the Debian repositories, installing
it was a matter of seconds.
After quickly skimming through the documentation I felt confident
enough to set up a couple of hosts and services to monitor. It took
about 30 minutes to set up basic monitoring on 10 or so hosts. Nagios
now keeps an eye on those hosts, and notifies me whenever
irregularities occur. The nice web interface enebles me to actively
monitor my hosts myself:
http://www.drumscum.be/linux/nagios.png
In its most basic set-up, Nagios keeps an eye on publicly accessible
services such as http, ftp, mail and ssh. In its more advanced form,
it can also monitor running processes, disk usage, system load and
number of users on a system, regardless of the operating system.
Wonderful.
Other features of Nagios include generatic statistical reports and
scheduling of downtime.
I have a feeling that this will be a favorite of mine for years to
come.
--
Q: Why do the police always travel in threes?
A: One to do the reading, one to do the writing, and the other keeps
an eye on the two intellectuals.
Snit
PM:
> Until recently I never felt the need to actively monitor the network I
> am running at work, but with the constantly increasing number of
> servers (well, I think they are servers - apparently I am not very
> knowledgable on the subject) under my supervision I had to look out
> for a tool to help me keep an eye on their status.
What do you mean you are not sure if they are servers? Where does your
confusion come from?
> It took only a couple of Google queries to lead me to Nagios, an open
> source network monitoring package. I heard of it before, but never
> gave it a try, simply because I didn't need it in the past.
>
> As the package is available from the Debian repositories, installing
> it was a matter of seconds.
>
> After quickly skimming through the documentation I felt confident
> enough to set up a couple of hosts and services to monitor. It took
> about 30 minutes to set up basic monitoring on 10 or so hosts. Nagios
> now keeps an eye on those hosts, and notifies me whenever
> irregularities occur. The nice web interface enebles me to actively
> monitor my hosts myself:
>
> http://www.drumscum.be/linux/nagios.png
>
> In its most basic set-up, Nagios keeps an eye on publicly accessible
> services such as http, ftp, mail and ssh. In its more advanced form,
> it can also monitor running processes, disk usage, system load and
> number of users on a system, regardless of the operating system.
> Wonderful.
>
> Other features of Nagios include generatic statistical reports and
> scheduling of downtime.
>
> I have a feeling that this will be a favorite of mine for years to
> come.
If you cannot even tell if the computers are acting as servers, though, I
doubt you will be able to use the product well.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Hadron
As you are aware, the usual morons in COLA suggest I am a windows using
idiot. I tried nagios yonks ago and advocated it here. But moved to Zabbix.
,----
| > Just installed the necessary modules for dynamic clock scaling on my
| > mailserver. Also installed Zabbix for monitoring my systems.
| >
| > The mailserver now clocks at a fraction of the CPU normal speed when its
| > idle (polls for mail every 10 minutes and acts as an ftp server and ssh
| > shell).
| >
| > Zabbix : nice. Much easier than Nagios.
`----
:-;
TomB
> TomB <tommy.b...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> It took only a couple of Google queries to lead me to Nagios, an open
>> source network monitoring package. I heard of it before, but never
>> gave it a try, simply because I didn't need it in the past.
>
> idiot. I tried nagios yonks ago and advocated it here. But moved to Zabbix.
>
>
> http://www.archivum.info/comp.os.linux.advocacy/2008-01/06932/Re:_And_today%27s_quot_well_done_Linux_quot
>
>
> ,----
>| > Just installed the necessary modules for dynamic clock scaling on my
>| > mailserver. Also installed Zabbix for monitoring my systems.
>| >
>| > The mailserver now clocks at a fraction of the CPU normal speed when its
>| > idle (polls for mail every 10 minutes and acts as an ftp server and ssh
>| > shell).
>| >
>| > Zabbix : nice. Much easier than Nagios.
> `----
Zabbix lools cool too. Any particular advantages over Nagios except
ease of use (not that I think Nagios is hard)? The site mentions
something about auto discovery of services. That sounds nice. Judged
from the screenshots the UI is a bit more polished.
Might give this one a spin too.
--
A tall, dark stranger will have more fun than you.
Chris Ahlstrom
> Zabbix lools cool too. Any particular advantages over Nagios except
> ease of use (not that I think Nagios is hard)? The site mentions
> something about auto discovery of services. That sounds nice. Judged
> from the screenshots the UI is a bit more polished.
>
> Might give this one a spin too.
How many machines are you monitoring?
--
You will receive a legacy which will place you above want.
TomB
> TomB pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> Zabbix lools cool too. Any particular advantages over Nagios except
>> ease of use (not that I think Nagios is hard)? The site mentions
>> something about auto discovery of services. That sounds nice. Judged
>> from the screenshots the UI is a bit more polished.
>>
>> Might give this one a spin too.
>
> How many machines are you monitoring?
About 20. Service availability and disk space are my main concerns.
--
My only love sprung from my only hate!
Too early seen unknown, and known too late!
-- William Shakespeare, "Romeo and Juliet"
cc
> TomB stated in post 20091112014718....@usenet.drumscum.be on 11/11/09 6:27
You're an idiot. He was obviously joking.
Snit
5a6fecd6-a8c7-4f7d...@b2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com on 11/12/09
11:02 AM:
> On Nov 11, 9:02�pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> TomB stated in post 20091112014718....@usenet.drumscum.be on 11/11/09 6:27
>> PM:
>>
>>> Until recently I never felt the need to actively monitor the network I
>>> am running at work, but with the constantly increasing number of
>>> servers (well, I think they are servers - apparently I am not very
>>> knowledgable on the subject) under my supervision I had to look out
>>> for a tool to help me keep an eye on their status.
>>
>> What do you mean you are not sure if they are servers? �Where does your
>> confusion come from?
...
>>> I have a feeling that this will be a favorite of mine for years to
>>> come.
>>
>> If you cannot even tell if the computers are acting as servers, though, I
>> doubt you will be able to use the product well.
>
> You're an idiot. He was obviously joking.
Can you explain the joke?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Terry Porter
<snip>
> http://www.drumscum.be/linux/nagios.png
>
> In its most basic set-up, Nagios keeps an eye on publicly accessible
> services such as http, ftp, mail and ssh. In its more advanced form, it
> can also monitor running processes, disk usage, system load and number
> of users on a system, regardless of the operating system. Wonderful.
>
> Other features of Nagios include generatic statistical reports and
> scheduling of downtime.
>
> I have a feeling that this will be a favorite of mine for years to come.
You may be interested in a project by a friend of mine:
http://auxesis.github.com/cucumber-nagios/
--
This machine running Gnu/Linux Ubuntu 9.10 and posting via Pan.
Get your Free copy NOW! http://www.ubuntu.com/
Chris Ahlstrom
> On 2009-11-12, the following emerged from the brain of Chris Ahlstrom:
>> TomB pulled this Usenet boner:
>>
>>> Zabbix lools cool too. Any particular advantages over Nagios except
>>> ease of use (not that I think Nagios is hard)? The site mentions
>>> something about auto discovery of services. That sounds nice. Judged
>>> from the screenshots the UI is a bit more polished.
>>>
>>> Might give this one a spin too.
>>
>> How many machines are you monitoring?
>
> About 20. Service availability and disk space are my main concerns.
Cool! I only have 4 to worry about, and two are laptops.
How does Nagios work for you? What is most helpful about it for your setup?
Just curious.
--
You will attract cultured and artistic people to your home.
cc
> cc stated in post
> 5a6fecd6-a8c7-4f7d-a707-103430270...@b2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com on 11/12/09
I'm assuming that in some other thread, probably a while ago, someone
accused TomB of not knowing what a server was. Or maybe there was some
sort of argument over the proper definition of a server. Happened in
clc recently. Basically you can tell from the way he wrote it that he
definately thinks he knows what servers are, and someone else thinks
he doesn't. So maybe "joking" isn't the correct term, but he was
definately being sarcastic. If you didn't understand that, then you
have problems.
Snit
d34ee7ea-3391-4655...@n35g2000yqm.googlegroups.com on
11/12/09 3:22 PM:
> On Nov 12, 3:29�pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> cc stated in post
>> 5a6fecd6-a8c7-4f7d-a707-103430270...@b2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com on 11/12/09
>> 11:02 AM:
>>
>>> On Nov 11, 9:02�pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>> TomB stated in post 20091112014718....@usenet.drumscum.be on 11/11/09 6:27
>>>> PM:
>>
>>>>> Until recently I never felt the need to actively monitor the network I
>>>>> am running at work, but with the constantly increasing number of
>>>>> servers (well, I think they are servers - apparently I am not very
>>>>> knowledgable on the subject) under my supervision I had to look out
>>>>> for a tool to help me keep an eye on their status.
>>
>>>> What do you mean you are not sure if they are servers? �Where does your
>>>> confusion come from?
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>>> I have a feeling that this will be a favorite of mine for years to
>>>>> come.
>>
>>>> If you cannot even tell if the computers are acting as servers, though, I
>>>> doubt you will be able to use the product well.
>>
>>> You're an idiot. He was obviously joking.
>>
>> Can you explain the joke?
>
> I'm assuming that in some other thread, probably a while ago, someone
> accused TomB of not knowing what a server was.
I was in a thread with him where he admitted he did not understand the
meaning of the term "server OS" as anything other than a marketing term, but
that is not quite the same as saying he cannot tell what a server is at all.
Maybe he has had similar debates with others. Could be. But, yes, I knew
he was being silly.
> Or maybe there was some sort of argument over the proper definition of a
> server. Happened in clc recently. Basically you can tell from the way he wrote
> it that he definately thinks he knows what servers are, and someone else
> thinks he doesn't. So maybe "joking" isn't the correct term, but he was
> definately being sarcastic. If you didn't understand that, then you have
> problems.
Ok, I did... and was just razzing him back. Did you not understand that?
:)
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
TomB
> TomB pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> On 2009-11-12, the following emerged from the brain of Chris Ahlstrom:
>>> TomB pulled this Usenet boner:
>>>
>>>> Zabbix lools cool too. Any particular advantages over Nagios except
>>>> ease of use (not that I think Nagios is hard)? The site mentions
>>>> something about auto discovery of services. That sounds nice. Judged
>>>> from the screenshots the UI is a bit more polished.
>>>>
>>>> Might give this one a spin too.
>>>
>>> How many machines are you monitoring?
>>
>> About 20. Service availability and disk space are my main concerns.
>
> Cool! I only have 4 to worry about, and two are laptops.
It's a small corporate network I'm monitoring, a mish mash of Windows,
Linux and FreeBSD servers.
> How does Nagios work for you? What is most helpful about it for your setup?
I recently discovered that my MySQL back-up machine (replication and
scheduled dumps) had been down for over 4 months without me knowing it.
I was very lucky nothing happened to the production server in that
period. This made me realize I needed a monitoring system. Nagios
serves this need. Whenever a host or service goes tits up, It notifies
me by email, so I can act on it immediately.
> Just curious.
Curiousity killed the cat!
--
You will lose your present job and have to become a door to door mayonnaise
salesman.
TomB
> On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 01:27:57 +0000, TomB wrote:
>
><snip>
>> http://www.drumscum.be/linux/nagios.png
>>
>> In its most basic set-up, Nagios keeps an eye on publicly accessible
>> services such as http, ftp, mail and ssh. In its more advanced form, it
>> can also monitor running processes, disk usage, system load and number
>> of users on a system, regardless of the operating system. Wonderful.
>>
>> Other features of Nagios include generatic statistical reports and
>> scheduling of downtime.
>>
>> I have a feeling that this will be a favorite of mine for years to come.
>
> You may be interested in a project by a friend of mine:
> http://auxesis.github.com/cucumber-nagios/
Nifty. Thanks for the pointer. Bookmarked his blog too. Very
interesting stuff on there.
--
You may my glories and my state dispose,
But not my griefs; still am I king of those.
-- William Shakespeare, "Richard II"
Chris Ahlstrom
> On 2009-11-12, the following emerged from the brain of Chris Ahlstrom:
>
>
>> Just curious.
>
> Curiousity killed the cat!
Naw, it keeps old guys like me learning, and useful.
Recently been getting into Boost, after all these years. Neat stuff!
Spellbinding! (Get it? Get it?)
--
Excellent day for putting Slinkies on an escalator.
cc
>
>
> Ok, I did... and was just razzing him back. Did you not understand that?
> :)
>
Since I did not participate in that thread, and since you gave no
additional context, and since it was completely stupid, not sarcastic
or funny, and since it was written in your typical dumbass style of
writing, no I didn't understand that.
Snit
1995e4c2-74b5-4ce2...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com on
11/13/09 6:37 AM:
Good: you admit you did not understand it.
Bad: you had to toss in some insults to deal with your embarrassment.
Two stars for you. At best.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
cc
I'm not embarrassed at your idiocy. On top of that you wrote "Can you
explain the joke?" which makes absolutely no sense, given what you've
posted after. Don't get mad when you try to be funny or sarcastic and
it doesn't come out that way. Learn to write correctly. TomB did.
The fact is that Roy, Homer, HPT, 7, chrisv, and you are all dumb as
shit. The fortunate (unfortunate?) side effect being that you retards
are proof of God(s). Evolution, if it existed, would have taken care
of you shitstains.
My point is, my lack of understanding has nothing to do with me, and
everything to do with you. I have no problem understanding other
people on here, even other stupid people like Peter. But the two posts
you made were so mind-numbingly retarded, that they were beyond
comprehension. Learn to write at least as well as a fourth-grader,
please. Comprende?
Chris Ahlstrom
> The fact is that Roy, Homer, HPT, 7, chrisv, and you are all dumb as
> shit. The fortunate (unfortunate?) side effect being that you retards
> are proof of God(s). Evolution, if it existed, would have taken care
> of you shitstains.
Thought you'd like to know.
Ezekiel
"Chris Ahlstrom" <ahls...@launchmodem.com> wrote in message
news:hdke09$q9l$6...@news.eternal-september.org...
Feel free to show any intelligent posts that 7, HPT or chrisv have made.
cc
Well, you were wrong. I don't even know what pulling a Hadron means. I
just know that I'm 100% right in what you quoted.
John Fuhrer
Well seeing as Chris Ahlstrom seems interested in men's pee pee's, I can
only imagine what pulling a Hadron could mean...
Hadron
Ignore him. He's a sycophantic little fraud. So eager to please his COLA
masters, he would widdle himself with excitement at the thought of them
referring to him as their techie genius. Hell, even 7 got lauded before
Ahlstrom.
Hadron
chrisv
Yeah, I don't see too many of ccretin's posts quoted, so it's good to
be reminded, once in a while, of why he is worthy of a place in my
bozo bin.
Snit
df8f30e2-8acb-4e38...@s31g2000yqs.googlegroups.com on
11/13/09 11:12 AM:
> On Nov 13, 12:26锟絧m, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> cc stated in post
>> 1995e4c2-74b5-4ce2-81b1-83d3e8c73...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com on
>> 11/13/09 6:37 AM:
>>
>>> On Nov 12, 5:36锟絧m, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Ok, I did... and was just razzing him back. 锟紻id you not understand that?
>>>> :)
>>
>>> Since I did not participate in that thread, and since you gave no
>>> additional context, and since it was completely stupid, not sarcastic
>>> or funny, and since it was written in your typical dumbass style of
>>> writing, no I didn't understand that.
>>
>> Good: you admit you did not understand it.
>> Bad: 锟統ou had to toss in some insults to deal with your embarrassment.
>>
>> Two stars for you. 锟紸t best.
>>
>
> I'm not embarrassed at your idiocy.
You fail to get a joke so you call me a name.
How sad for you. Really. No big deal that you did not get I was joking...
no harm in that. But for you to react with such name calling is just
absurd... speaks very poorly of you.
> On top of that you wrote "Can you explain the joke?" which makes absolutely no
> sense, given what you've posted after. Don't get mad when you try to be funny
> or sarcastic and it doesn't come out that way. Learn to write correctly. TomB
> did.
I wanted to see your take on the joke. I appreciate that you gave it. I
then gave you more background. Not sure why this makes you whine and spew
insults... but it does.
> The fact is that Roy, Homer, HPT, 7, chrisv, and you are all dumb as
> shit. The fortunate (unfortunate?) side effect being that you retards
> are proof of God(s). Evolution, if it existed, would have taken care
> of you shitstains.
See how you just lash out! You made a mistake. No big deal... move on and
stop humiliating yourself over it.
> My point is, my lack of understanding has nothing to do with me, and
> everything to do with you. I have no problem understanding other
> people on here, even other stupid people like Peter. But the two posts
> you made were so mind-numbingly retarded, that they were beyond
> comprehension. Learn to write at least as well as a fourth-grader,
> please. Comprende?
I understand your frustration at your not understanding the joke. No big
deal. Your reaction, though, is deplorable.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
John Fuhrer
Heheheh!
Sick isn't it?
Snit
efcc5b53-52df-4b5e...@k4g2000yqb.googlegroups.com on 11/13/09
1:13 PM:
Oh! Oh! Oh! And in your next post you will try to show support... or is
that something that only "dumb" people do... completely below you.
LOL!
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
cc
Sure, I'll support it.
Click on any post total from any month. Click on any post listed. QED.
Snit
214c38d5-d75d-4b7e...@o9g2000vbj.googlegroups.com on 11/13/09
7:52 PM:
Sad to see you fail... not just fail to show your point, but fail to even
really try. Seriously, is that the best you can do to support your
accusations? Are you publicly stating you are *that* incompetent?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
cc
> 11/13/09 11:12 AM:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 13, 12:26 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> cc stated in post
> >> 1995e4c2-74b5-4ce2-81b1-83d3e8c73...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com on
> >> 11/13/09 6:37 AM:
>
>
> >>>> Ok, I did... and was just razzing him back. Did you not understand that?
> >>>> :)
>
> >>> Since I did not participate in that thread, and since you gave no
> >>> additional context, and since it was completely stupid, not sarcastic
> >>> or funny, and since it was written in your typical dumbass style of
> >>> writing, no I didn't understand that.
>
> >> Good: you admit you did not understand it.
>
> >> Two stars for you. At best.
>
> > I'm not embarrassed at your idiocy.
>
> You fail to get a joke so you call me a name.
>
> How sad for you. Really. No big deal that you did not get I was joking...
> no harm in that. But for you to react with such name calling is just
> absurd... speaks very poorly of you.
>
That you continue to think you made a joke speaks volumes of you.
> > On top of that you wrote "Can you explain the joke?" which makes absolutely no
> > sense, given what you've posted after. Don't get mad when you try to be funny
> > or sarcastic and it doesn't come out that way. Learn to write correctly. TomB
> > did.
>
> I wanted to see your take on the joke. I appreciate that you gave it. I
> then gave you more background. Not sure why this makes you whine and spew
> insults... but it does.
You completely miss the point of why I spew insults at you. The fact
that you miss the point, is indeed the point.
> > The fact is that Roy, Homer, HPT, 7, chrisv, and you are all dumb as
> > shit. The fortunate (unfortunate?) side effect being that you retards
> > are proof of God(s). Evolution, if it existed, would have taken care
> > of you shitstains.
>
> See how you just lash out! You made a mistake. No big deal... move on and
> stop humiliating yourself over it.
I made no mistake, and you're confusing a completely rational argument
for lashing out.
> > My point is, my lack of understanding has nothing to do with me, and
> > everything to do with you. I have no problem understanding other
> > people on here, even other stupid people like Peter. But the two posts
> > you made were so mind-numbingly retarded, that they were beyond
> > comprehension. Learn to write at least as well as a fourth-grader,
> > please. Comprende?
>
> I understand your frustration at your not understanding the joke. No big
> deal. Your reaction, though, is deplorable.
>
You do not understand my frustration. I'm frustrated because you're an
idiot who can't put an understandable thought down correctly. You have
no idea what a joke is and isn't. So far my reaction has been
deplorable to you, Chris, and chrisv. Keep holding your breath waiting
for me to give a fuck.
cc
> 7:52 PM:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 13, 4:19 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> cc stated in post
> >> efcc5b53-52df-4b5e-bb2d-dee345d3e...@k4g2000yqb.googlegroups.com on 11/13/09
> >> 1:13 PM:
>
> >>> On Nov 13, 3:09 pm, Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> >>>> cc pulled this Usenet boner:
>
> >>>>> The fact is that Roy, Homer, HPT, 7, chrisv, and you are all dumb as
> >>>>> shit. The fortunate (unfortunate?) side effect being that you retards
> >>>>> are proof of God(s). Evolution, if it existed, would have taken care
> >>>>> of you shitstains.
>
> >>>> Thought you'd like to know.
>
> >>> Well, you were wrong. I don't even know what pulling a Hadron means. I
> >>> just know that I'm 100% right in what you quoted.
>
> >> Oh! Oh! Oh! And in your next post you will try to show support... or is
> >> that something that only "dumb" people do... completely below you.
>
> >> LOL!
>
> > Sure, I'll support it.
>
> > 9E6JXvMAQD-cD5ZFxuGaiAJ5DF-b-xw
>
> > Click on any post total from any month. Click on any post listed. QED.
>
> Sad to see you fail... not just fail to show your point, but fail to even
> really try. Seriously, is that the best you can do to support your
> accusations? Are you publicly stating you are *that* incompetent?
You didn't provide any evidence or counterargument to prove I was
wrong. Pity, that's logic 101.
Snit
f2451650-b72f-4df9...@t18g2000vbj.googlegroups.com on
11/13/09 8:00 PM:
Wow... you really are worked up over your not getting humor. Let it go.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
3fa235f6-d6bf-4e90...@m33g2000vbi.googlegroups.com on
11/13/09 8:02 PM:
> On Nov 13, 9:56嚙緘m, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> cc stated in post
>> 214c38d5-d75d-4b7e-a3e4-a603e505b...@o9g2000vbj.googlegroups.com on 11/13/09
>> 7:52 PM:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 13, 4:19嚙緘m, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>> cc stated in post
>>>> efcc5b53-52df-4b5e-bb2d-dee345d3e...@k4g2000yqb.googlegroups.com on
>>>> 11/13/09
>>>> 1:13 PM:
>>
>>>>> On Nov 13, 3:09嚙緘m, Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>>>>>> cc pulled this Usenet boner:
>>
>>>>>>> The fact is that Roy, Homer, HPT, 7, chrisv, and you are all dumb as
>>>>>>> shit. The fortunate (unfortunate?) side effect being that you retards
>>>>>>> are proof of God(s). Evolution, if it existed, would have taken care
>>>>>>> of you shitstains.
>>
>>>>>> Thought you'd like to know.
>>
>>>>> Well, you were wrong. I don't even know what pulling a Hadron means. I
>>>>> just know that I'm 100% right in what you quoted.
>>
>>>> Oh! Oh! Oh! 嚙璀nd in your next post you will try to show support... or is
>>>> that something that only "dumb" people do... completely below you.
>>
>>>> LOL!
>>
>>> Sure, I'll support it.
>>
>>> http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?hl=en&enc_user=N29CWRwAAAB8Iu...
>>> 9E6JXvMAQD-cD5ZFxuGaiAJ5DF-b-xw
>>
>>> Click on any post total from any month. Click on any post listed. QED.
>>
>> Sad to see you fail... not just fail to show your point, but fail to even
>> really try. 嚙磅eriously, is that the best you can do to support your
>> accusations? 嚙璀re you publicly stating you are *that* incompetent?
>
>
> You didn't provide any evidence or counterargument to prove I was
> wrong. Pity, that's logic 101.
You failed. For goodness sake... if you cannot see that you cannot use
logic at all. You made an accusation and provided *no* support. None. And
now you are getting pissy. Oh well.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
cc
> 11/13/09 8:02 PM:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 13, 9:56 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> cc stated in post
> >> 214c38d5-d75d-4b7e-a3e4-a603e505b...@o9g2000vbj.googlegroups.com on 11/13/09
> >> 7:52 PM:
>
> >>>> cc stated in post
> >>>> efcc5b53-52df-4b5e-bb2d-dee345d3e...@k4g2000yqb.googlegroups.com on
> >>>> 11/13/09
> >>>> 1:13 PM:
>
> >>>>>> cc pulled this Usenet boner:
>
> >>>>>>> The fact is that Roy, Homer, HPT, 7, chrisv, and you are all dumb as
> >>>>>>> shit. The fortunate (unfortunate?) side effect being that you retards
> >>>>>>> are proof of God(s). Evolution, if it existed, would have taken care
> >>>>>>> of you shitstains.
>
> >>>>>> Thought you'd like to know.
>
> >>>>> Well, you were wrong. I don't even know what pulling a Hadron means. I
> >>>>> just know that I'm 100% right in what you quoted.
>
> >>>> that something that only "dumb" people do... completely below you.
>
> >>>> LOL!
>
> >>> Sure, I'll support it.
>
> >>>http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?hl=en&enc_user=N29CWRwAAAB8Iu...
> >>> 9E6JXvMAQD-cD5ZFxuGaiAJ5DF-b-xw
>
> >>> Click on any post total from any month. Click on any post listed. QED.
>
> >> Sad to see you fail... not just fail to show your point, but fail to even
> >> accusations? Are you publicly stating you are *that* incompetent?
>
> > You didn't provide any evidence or counterargument to prove I was
> > wrong. Pity, that's logic 101.
>
> You failed. For goodness sake... if you cannot see that you cannot use
> logic at all. You made an accusation and provided *no* support. None. And
> now you are getting pissy. Oh well.
>
I made an accusation. I provided evidence in the form of links. If you
wish to refute that evidence, go ahead. You have still failed to do
so, so it stands.
cc
Failure to counter any of my points noted.
Snit
f9ea5cd3-cc4c-47f0...@l35g2000vba.googlegroups.com on
11/13/09 8:12 PM:
Not only did you fail to offer *any* support... any at all... you now want
to whine about it.
Get the last word in... your crying is absurd. Wow... just wow. You made
silly insults and blew up when you were called on it. How humiliating for
you.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
944126ae-1ea7-4c4d...@x16g2000vbk.googlegroups.com on
11/13/09 8:13 PM:
Your only point is you failed to get the humor and are just whining. Wah
wah. Get the last word in... seriously, your public crying should be
humiliating to you. You will never admit it is though. Whatever. Get the
last word with your grade school insults.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
cc
I did offer support. Failure to counter that support noted.
> Get the last word in... your crying is absurd. Wow... just wow. You made
> silly insults and blew up when you were called on it. How humiliating for
> you.
>
Uh, there was never any doubt that I insulted you, so you can't really
claim you called me on anything. Please provide any sort of support
that proves I am crying.
cc
Failure to get my point noted.
Wah
> wah. Get the last word in... seriously, your public crying should be
> humiliating to you. You will never admit it is though. Whatever. Get the
> last word with your grade school insults.
>
Please prove that I am crying and/or humiliated.
Don Zeigler
> You failed. For goodness sake... if you cannot see that you cannot use
> logic at all. You made an accusation and provided *no* support. None. And
> now you are getting pissy. Oh well.
You sure beg for his attention a lot.
--
Regards,
Don Zeigler
Owner/proprietor, Trollus Amongus, LLC
...Never test for an error you don't know how to handle.
Snit
11/13/09 8:36 PM:
> Snit wrote:
>
>> You failed. For goodness sake... if you cannot see that you cannot use
>> logic at all. You made an accusation and provided *no* support. None. And
>> now you are getting pissy. Oh well.
>
> You sure beg for his attention a lot.
How?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Chris Ahlstrom
> On Nov 13, 10:18?pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
It's fun watching two trolls go at each other.
Like putting a wasp and a spider in a jar.
(Well, those are two wussy bugs in there!)
--
Now we laugh.
<Ha ha ha>
Now we rest.
John Fuhrer
> Snit wrote:
>
>> You failed. For goodness sake... if you cannot see that you cannot use
>> logic at all. You made an accusation and provided *no* support. None. And
>> now you are getting pissy. Oh well.
>
> You sure beg for his attention a lot.
Maybe, but he seems to be getting yours, Don.
Snit
11/13/09 8:49 PM:
> cc pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> On Nov 13, 10:18?pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>
> It's fun watching two trolls go at each other.
>
> Like putting a wasp and a spider in a jar.
>
> (Well, those are two wussy bugs in there!)
Huh? Oh... you are just looking for attention. Whatever.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
11/13/09 8:46 PM:
Don has gone back to begging for my attention a lot. It is weird.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
cc
> John Fuhrer stated in post uy231x4ssgip.a7zqc7as2kjr$....@40tude.net on
> 11/13/09 8:46 PM:
>
> > On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 22:36:28 -0500, Don Zeigler wrote:
>
> >> Snit wrote:
>
> >>> You failed. For goodness sake... if you cannot see that you cannot use
> >>> logic at all. You made an accusation and provided *no* support. None. And
> >>> now you are getting pissy. Oh well.
>
> >> You sure beg for his attention a lot.
>
> > Maybe, but he seems to be getting yours, Don.
>
> Don has gone back to begging for my attention a lot. It is weird.
You have acknowledged that the following quotes/paraphrases are
correct by failing to provide any support against them.
cc:
Snit is an idiot.
Snit:
Prove it.
cc:
[link to Snit's entire posting history] There's your proof.
Snit:
You can have the last word.
You have agreed that this is how the thread went. Why not back your
claims that I am not providing support that you are dumb? Just answer
the following questions:
Did the link I posted not show your entire posting history?
Why do you think that your posting history does not prove that you are
stupid?
What evidence is out there proves unequivocally that your are not dumb?
Snit
2d12fcff-ceb5-4b41...@g23g2000vbr.googlegroups.com on
11/14/09 5:37 AM:
Dude... you failed to support even a shred of evidence for your claim. You
failed.
Deal with it. OK. Seriously, you are just humiliating yourself.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
cc
Why are you running from the questions?
Snit
1139cc59-719e-4527...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com on 11/14/09
9:56 AM:
>> Dude... you failed to support even a shred of evidence for your claim. �You
>> failed.
>>
>> Deal with it. �OK. �Seriously, you are just humiliating yourself.
>>
>
> Why are you running from the questions?
I have noted your failure. Your complete and utter failure. Abysmal
failure from you.
What else do you want... a party? Yeah! You are a failure... let's
celebrate.
How absurd!
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
cc
> 9:56 AM:
>
> >> Dude... you failed to support even a shred of evidence for your claim. You
> >> failed.
>
> >> Deal with it. OK. Seriously, you are just humiliating yourself.
>
> > Why are you running from the questions?
>
> I have noted your failure. Your complete and utter failure. Abysmal
> failure from you.
>
You noted, but failed to provide proof of failure. You can note the
sky is green for all I care. Proof is what you require. Please stop
running away from the questions.
Why are you running from the questions?
You have acknowledged that the following quotes/paraphrases are
correct by failing to provide any support against them.
cc:
Snit is an idiot.
Snit:
Prove it.
cc:
[link to Snit's entire posting history] There's your proof.
Snit:
You can have the last word.
You have agreed that this is how the thread went. Why not back your
claims that I am not providing support that you are dumb? Just answer
the following questions:
Did the link I posted not show your entire posting history?
Why do you think that your posting history does not prove that you are
stupid?
What evidence is out there that proves unequivocally that your are not
dumb?
Snit
cbf05b88-71ad-4567...@j19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com on
11/14/09 10:04 AM:
Serious question: do you understand the concept of support? Really...
Anyway... I think I told you to get the last word a while back... and have
allowed you to suck me back in. My mistake. Unless you actually show you
have a clue then get the last clueless word. Seriously, you made an absurd
insult that blew up in your face and now you are crying over it. Deal with
your mistakes like an adult... at least try, ok. Thanks!
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
cc
Your haunting failure to answer any questions blows my mind. Do you
not want to provide proof that you are smart? Can you provide proof?
The lack of an answer from you is telling. Maybe you don't understand
the questions?
Why are you running from the questions?
You have acknowledged that the following quotes/paraphrases are
correct by failing to provide any support against them.
cc:
Snit is an idiot.
Snit:
Prove it.
cc:
[link to Snit's entire posting history] There's your proof.
Snit:
You can have the last word.
You have agreed that this is how the thread went. Why not back your
claims that I am not providing support that you are dumb? Just answer
the following questions:
Did the link I posted not show your entire posting history?
Why do you think that your posting history does not prove that you are
stupid?
What evidence is out there that proves unequivocally that you are not
dumb?
cc
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/support
"6. To furnish corroborating evidence for"
Corroborating evidence that you are incredibly moronic:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/4c2b5e85d539d506?hl=en&dmode=source
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/040cbdbe3e01e9a4?hl=en&dmode=source
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/f0f823d327c3834e?hl=en&dmode=source
Why are those posts not corroborating evidence?
Don Zeigler
> Anyway... I think I told you to get the last word a while back... and have
> allowed you to suck me back in. My mistake. Unless you actually show you
> have a clue then get the last clueless word. Seriously, you made an absurd
> insult that blew up in your face and now you are crying over it. Deal with
> your mistakes like an adult... at least try, ok. Thanks!
You sure beg for cc's attention a lot.
--
Regards,
Don Zeigler
Owner/proprietor, Trollus Amongus, LLC
...Repartee: An insult wearing a suit and tie.
Snit
1:22 PM:
> Snit wrote:
>
>> Anyway... I think I told you to get the last word a while back... and have
>> allowed you to suck me back in. My mistake. Unless you actually show you
>> have a clue then get the last clueless word. Seriously, you made an absurd
>> insult that blew up in your face and now you are crying over it. Deal with
>> your mistakes like an adult... at least try, ok. Thanks!
>
> You sure beg for cc's attention a lot.
Not responding to him is an odd way to do that, eh?
Seriously, he is just freaking out over his failed efforts to support a
mindless insult he spewed. I hope he gets over it soon.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
cc
> Don Zeigler stated in post 1jcmn4j5lq3rn....@this.domain.or.that on 11/14/09
Your haunting failure to answer any questions blows my mind. Do you
not want to provide proof that you are smart? Can you provide proof?
The lack of an answer from you is telling. Maybe you don't understand
the questions?
You have acknowledged that the following quotes/paraphrases are
correct by failing to provide any support against them.
cc:
Snit is an idiot.
Snit:
Prove it.
cc:
[link to Snit's entire posting history] There's your proof.
Snit:
You can have the last word.
You have agreed that this is how the thread went. Why not back your
claims that I am not providing support that you are dumb? Just answer
the following questions:
Did the link I posted not show your entire posting history?
Why do you think that your posting history does not prove that you are
stupid?
What evidence is out there that proves unequivocally that you are not
dumb?
Snit
8fc80b3a-6923-4bac...@b15g2000yqd.googlegroups.com on
11/14/09 1:55 PM:
> On Nov 14, 3:34�pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> Don Zeigler stated in post 1jcmn4j5lq3rn....@this.domain.or.that on 11/14/09
>> 1:22 PM:
>>
>>> Snit wrote:
>>
>>>> Anyway... I think I told you to get the last word a while back... and have
>>>> allowed you to suck me back in. �My mistake. �Unless you actually show you
>>>> have a clue then get the last clueless word. �Seriously, you made an absurd
>>>> insult that blew up in your face and now you are crying over it. �Deal with
>>>> your mistakes like an adult... at least try, ok. �Thanks!
>>
>>> You sure beg for cc's attention a lot.
>>
>> Not responding to him is an odd way to do that, eh?
>>
>> Seriously, he is just freaking out over his failed efforts to support a
>> mindless insult he spewed. �I hope he gets over it soon.
>>
>
> Your haunting failure to answer any questions blows my mind. Do you
> not want to provide proof that you are smart? Can you provide proof?
I, unlike you, am smart enough to know how badly you failed in your effort
to provide evidence. Well, you likely know it to but are just too stubborn
to admit it. And too dishonest.
Now let it go. You failed. Oh well.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
High Plains Thumper
> cc stated:
>> Snit wrote:
>>> Don Zeigler stated:
>>>> Snit wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Anyway... I think I told you to get the last word a while
>>>>> back... and have allowed you to suck me back in. My mistake.
>>>>> Unless you actually show you have a clue then get the last
>>>>> clueless word. Seriously, you made an absurd insult that
>>>>> blew up in your face and now you are crying over it. Deal
>>>>> with your mistakes like an adult... at least try, ok.
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> You sure beg for cc's attention a lot.
>>>
>>> Not responding to him is an odd way to do that, eh?
>>>
>>> Seriously, he is just freaking out over his failed efforts to
>>> support a mindless insult he spewed. I hope he gets over it
>>> soon.
>>
>> Your haunting failure to answer any questions blows my mind. Do you
>> not want to provide proof that you are smart? Can you provide
>> proof?
>
> I, unlike you, am smart enough to know how badly you failed in your
> effort to provide evidence. Well, you likely know it to but are just
> too stubborn to admit it. And too dishonest.
Regarding Snit's dishonesty, yes:
22- Edward Stanfield: "Snit thinks the rules that apply to honest and
honorable people apply to him. That is absurd. He is the biggest
liar in Usenet history. Mackay posted the email to prove Snit was
using sock puppets and he still is. Snit can not give up his socks
puppets and shills. They are the only ones who ever support him." 28
Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5b52494d96d12229
Regarding Snit's stubbornness, yes:
116- Thufir: "You can "prove" that no one has disproved your "proof"?
Again, your assertion that no one has done so is even *less*
convincing than your claim that some PDF "proves" whatever point
you're trying to make precisely because I'm familiar with your MO.
That is, you're a dumb-ass who would claim that that something is
proved when it's not, and who would ignore counter-examples disproving
your contention. I don't know what this *ages old* thread is about,
but I know that you're full of sh*t." 21 Aug 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/5114623055c01092
Regarding Snit's inability to provide evidence, yes:
115- TheLetterK: "That is merely your perception, Sh*t. You're the one
lacking counter evidence, and your arguments basically amount to "I'm
right, nya nya nya." No matter how many examples someone points at to
demonstrate their claim, you blindly continue to insist that they
provide no evidence, or that the evidence given is irrelevant. Worse
still, you fall back on straw men and disingenuous quote mangling to
portray the argument in your favor. You are one of the worst trolls
that inhabit CSMA, Sh*t. *Edwin* is more prone to fits of reason than
you are." 23 Sep 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/d488596b57132124
> Now let it go. You failed. Oh well.
Regarding Snit's inability to know when to quit, act like a man, yes:
5- Andy/news/nospam: "Why do you keep these things up, Snit? Why not
just let them go away and show how responsible a member of CSMA you
are? You could show your enemies up by being better than then, rise
above the low level you so obviously dislike. Anything, just
stop...." 26 Apr 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/d6ffb6b06aa237e5
--
HPT
cc
And yet you can't answer a single question. Not one. How strange. Most
are simple yes or no questions. Just pick one, yes or no. At least you
admit you can't answer the questions, I'll give your dumb head that.
Your haunting failure to answer any questions blows my mind.
Do you not want to provide proof that you are smart?
Can you provide proof?
Chris Ahlstrom
> Snit wrote:
>
>> Anyway... I think I told you to get the last word a while back... and have
>> allowed you to suck me back in. My mistake. Unless you actually show you
>> have a clue then get the last clueless word. Seriously, you made an absurd
>> insult that blew up in your face and now you are crying over it. Deal with
>> your mistakes like an adult... at least try, ok. Thanks!
>
> You sure beg for cc's attention a lot.
He gets the attention.
He even had TomB going for awhile.
What a waste of time. Twattage.
--
Q: Why is it that the more accuracy you demand from an interpolation
function, the more expensive it becomes to compute?
A: That's the Law of Spline Demand.