"Apple, it's this simple: Get your shit together."
Steve Mackay
Just a few quotes...
"My first iMac arrived with a jaundiced screen, so Apple sent me a
replacement. After unpacking, it took only moments for me to diagnose
this one as being flawed in the exact same manner. Yes friends, I'm two
for two!"
"And there's absolutely no reason that a consumer should be paying
$2000+ ($2200 in my case) on any product that's anything but perfect."
"Personally speaking, this setback means I'll have gone a month after
dropping a few grand from my bank account without anything to show for it"
C Lund
Steve Mackay <mackay...@att.net> wrote:
Apple's shit is together in a way that is the envy of the entire
computer industry (yes, including MS).
As for the writer's complaint, I sometimes have the impression that
most of Apple's customers get stuff that "just works," while some
people � like the unlucky writer � gets nothing but lemons.
Not sure why that is.
--
C Lund
Edwin
"C Lund" <christop...@getmailSPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in message
news:christopher.lund-3E...@adsl-065-015-208-084.sip.ilm.bellsouth.net...
He lives in the real world, you don't.
I'm glad I could clear that up for you. You're welcome.
> --
> C Lund
Snit
christopher.lund-3E...@adsl-065-015-208-084.sip.ilm.bellsout
h.net on 12/28/09 2:50 PM:
Let's say 99 out of 100 machines arrive just fine. That means 1 out of 100
people are going to get something bad... and 1 on 1000 will have this happen
two times in a row. With tools as complex as computers, a certain level of
defect cannot be avoided, though I do think Apple has allowed the level to
be too high (just from anecdotes and personal experience - no stats to back
that up).
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Edwin
"Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
news:C75E79FA.5B636%use...@gallopinginsanity.com...
Why bother looking up facts when your imagination can create whatever you
prefer, eh, Snit?
> --
> [INSERT .SIG HERE]
>
>
Snit
If you have access to actual stats them by all means share them. Thanks!
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Edwin
Until then you'll make due with the figures you pulled out of your arse?
> --
> [INSERT .SIG HERE]
>
>
Snit
Not sure what you are getting at. It is not like I claimed a specific
number for Apple... or anyone. Or even compared Apple to other hardware
makers. Maybe you can explain where you are bothered by my comments a
little better.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Maurice
"C Lund" <christop...@getmailSPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in message
news:christopher.lund-3E...@adsl-065-015-208-084.sip.ilm.bellsouth.net...
> Steve Mackay <mackay...@att.net> wrote:
>
>> http://gizmodo.com/5435561/my-second-imac-is-busted-too
>>
>> Just a few quotes...
>>
>> "My first iMac arrived with a jaundiced screen, so Apple sent me a
>> replacement. After unpacking, it took only moments for me to diagnose
>> this one as being flawed in the exact same manner. Yes friends, I'm two
>> for two!"
>>
>> "And there's absolutely no reason that a consumer should be paying
>> $2000+ ($2200 in my case) on any product that's anything but perfect."
>>
>> "Personally speaking, this setback means I'll have gone a month after
>> dropping a few grand from my bank account without anything to show for
>> it"
>
> Apple's shit is together in a way that is the envy of the entire
> computer industry (yes, including MS).
I'm sure MS is green with envy and it's 97% world market share.
>
> As for the writer's complaint, I sometimes have the impression that
> most of Apple's customers get stuff that "just works," while some
> people < like the unlucky writer < gets nothing but lemons.
>
> Not sure why that is.
Somebody has to get the dogs.
C Lund
"Maurice" <Mauric...@aol.com> wrote:
> "C Lund" <christop...@getmailSPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in message
> news:christopher.lund-3E...@adsl-065-015-208-084.sip.ilm.bells
> outh.net...
> > In article <hhb8a4$ji6$1...@news.albasani.net>,
> > Steve Mackay <mackay...@att.net> wrote:
> >
> >> http://gizmodo.com/5435561/my-second-imac-is-busted-too
> >>
> >> Just a few quotes...
> >>
> >> "My first iMac arrived with a jaundiced screen, so Apple sent me a
> >> replacement. After unpacking, it took only moments for me to diagnose
> >> this one as being flawed in the exact same manner. Yes friends, I'm two
> >> for two!"
> >>
> >> "And there's absolutely no reason that a consumer should be paying
> >> $2000+ ($2200 in my case) on any product that's anything but perfect."
> >>
> >> "Personally speaking, this setback means I'll have gone a month after
> >> dropping a few grand from my bank account without anything to show for
> >> it"
> >
> > Apple's shit is together in a way that is the envy of the entire
> > computer industry (yes, including MS).
>
> I'm sure MS is green with envy and it's 97% world market share.
Knowing that everybody uses Windows because everybody uses Windows
(and for games) can't be comfortable. Vista, after all, turned out to
be a total dog.
> > As for the writer's complaint, I sometimes have the impression that
> > most of Apple's customers get stuff that "just works," while some
> > people < like the unlucky writer < gets nothing but lemons.
> > Not sure why that is.
> Somebody has to get the dogs.
Sure, but why always the same people?
--
C Lund
C Lund
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
No new sock puppet for us, edwin?
> "C Lund" <christop...@getmailSPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in message
> news:christopher.lund-3E...@adsl-065-015-208-084.sip.ilm.bells
> outh.net...
> > Apple's shit is together in a way that is the envy of the entire
> > computer industry (yes, including MS).
> >
> > As for the writer's complaint, I sometimes have the impression that
> > most of Apple's customers get stuff that "just works," while some
> > people < like the unlucky writer < gets nothing but lemons.
> >
> > Not sure why that is.
> He lives in the real world, you don't.
Yeah, I'm only imagining that everything I've bought from Apple so far
has worked out of the box. (so far, anyway)
> I'm glad I could clear that up for you. You're welcome.
Cleared up what?
--
C Lund
Mike
You mean the ones that come out of yours� the ones you routinely post here?
Yeah, edwin, you do.
--
Mike
Maurice
"C Lund" <christop...@getmailSPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in message
Didn't you know Vista has been replaced by a World Class OS called Windows
7, which makes Snow Leopard look anemic? But since Apple is only doing
minimal work on computers, you will never see a new Apple OS, only the same
patched up eleven year old dog.
>> > As for the writer's complaint, I sometimes have the impression that
>> > most of Apple's customers get stuff that "just works," while some
>> > people < like the unlucky writer < gets nothing but lemons.
>> > Not sure why that is.
>> Somebody has to get the dogs.
>
> Sure, but why always the same people?
Thousands of the same people? Any proof of your statement?
Alan Baker
"Maurice" <Mauric...@aol.com> wrote:
> "C Lund" <christop...@getmailSPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in message
> news:christopher.lund-64...@adsl-065-015-208-084.sip.ilm.bells
Ohhhh...
*You* think Windows 7 is a brand new OS and not another warmed over redo
of Windows NT! How cute!
--
"The iPhone doesn't have a speaker phone" -- "I checked very carefully" --
"I checked Apple's web pages" -- Edwin on the iPhone
"It is Mac OS X, not BSD.' -- 'From Mac OS to BSD Unix." -- "It's BSD Unix with Apple's APIs and GUI on top of it' -- 'nothing but BSD Unix' (Edwin on Mac OS X)
'[The IBM PC] could boot multiple OS, such as DOS, C/PM, GEM, etc.' --
'I claimed nothing about GEM other than it was available software for the
IBM PC. (Edwin on GEM)
'Solaris is just a marketing rename of Sun OS.' -- 'Sun OS is not included
on the timeline of Solaris because it's a different OS.' (Edwin on Sun)
Tim Murray
> Thousands of the same people? Any proof of your statement?
Steve, for one.
C Lund
> outh.net...
> >> > Apple's shit is together in a way that is the envy of the entire
> >> > computer industry (yes, including MS).
> >> I'm sure MS is green with envy and it's 97% world market share.
> > Knowing that everybody uses Windows because everybody uses Windows
> > (and for games) can't be comfortable. Vista, after all, turned out to
> > be a total dog.
> Didn't you know Vista has been replaced by a World Class OS called Windows
> 7, which makes Snow Leopard look anemic?
Sorry, but a warmed up version of Vista is hardly a "world-class OS."
Still, MS have been trying to make a macOS ever since 1984, so there's
always the chance that they've finally succeeded.
> But since Apple is only doing
> minimal work on computers, you will never see a new Apple OS, only the same
> patched up eleven year old dog.
Unlike the patched-up Vista you're blooking over?
> >> > As for the writer's complaint, I sometimes have the impression that
> >> > most of Apple's customers get stuff that "just works," while some
> >> > people < like the unlucky writer < gets nothing but lemons.
> >> > Not sure why that is.
> >> Somebody has to get the dogs.
> > Sure, but why always the same people?
> Thousands of the same people? Any proof of your statement?
Thousands? Which thousands?
--
C Lund
MuahMan
wrote:
> In article <5yo_m.12184$mr6.6...@newsfe08.iad>,
>
> "Maurice" <Maurice504...@aol.com> wrote:
> > "C Lund" <christopher.l...@getmailSPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in message
Millions
http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1GGLS_enUS345US345&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=27%22+imac+problems
Maurice
"Tim Murray" <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote in message
news:hhdb9g$kcs$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> Maurice wrote:
>> Thousands of the same people? Any proof of your statement?
>
> Steve, for one.
Guess you couldn't comprehend.
Maurice
"C Lund" <christop...@getmailSPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in message
The thousands who are complaining.
Maurice
"MuahMan" <mua...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ad2c9a33-baa0-428d...@f5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
Millions
http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1GGLS_enUS345US345&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=27%22+imac+problems
Hmmmmm - this one is going to be tough to spin into a favorable light for
Apple.
C Lund
"Maurice" <Mauric...@aol.com> wrote:
> Millions
>
> http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1GGLS_enUS345US345&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
> &q=27%22+imac+problems
> Hmmmmm - this one is going to be tough to spin into a favorable light for
> Apple.
Really? How would you spin this then:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1C1GGLS_enUS345US345&q=windows+7
+problems&aq=0c&oq=windows+problems&aqi=g-c10
google is not your friend, wintrolls.
--
C Lund
Maurice
"C Lund" <christop...@getmailSPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in message
No one I know has had any issues. Everyone I know loves Windows 7.
Can you come up with anything recent?
Windows 7 has double the market share of OSX in all its iterations - in only
a couple of months.
C Lund
"Maurice" <Mauric...@aol.com> wrote:
> "C Lund" <christop...@getmailSPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in message
> news:christopher.lund-E9...@adsl-065-015-208-084.sip.ilm.bells
> outh.net...
> >> http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1GGLS_enUS345US345&sourceid=chrome&ie=UT
> >> F-8
> >> &q=27%22+imac+problems
> >> Hmmmmm - this one is going to be tough to spin into a favorable light for
> >> Apple.
> > Really? How would you spin this then:
> > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1C1GGLS_enUS345US345&q=windows+7
> > +problems&aq=0c&oq=windows+problems&aqi=g-c10
> No one I know has had any issues. Everyone I know loves Windows 7.
Anecdotal. Here's another anecdote: Everybody I know who hates
computers, use Windows at work, and have no experience with OS X.
> Can you come up with anything recent?
My google results were just as recent as yours.
> Windows 7 has double the market share of OSX in all its iterations - in only
> a couple of months.
McDonald's has a higher market share than any gourmet restaurant you
can think of � probably even more than all the world's gourmet
restaurants put together. Does that make the crap they serve better?
Market share is not an indication of quality.
Or to put it this way; 1 million billion flies can't be wrong: eat
shit.
--
C Lund
Maurice
"C Lund" <christop...@getmailSPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in message
> In article <P_w_m.96440$We2....@newsfe09.iad>,
> "Maurice" <Mauric...@aol.com> wrote:
>> "C Lund" <christop...@getmailSPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in message
>> news:christopher.lund-E9...@adsl-065-015-208-084.sip.ilm.bells
>> outh.net...
>> >> Millions
>> >> http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1GGLS_enUS345US345&sourceid=chrome&ie=UT
>> >> F-8
>> >> &q=27%22+imac+problems
>> >> Hmmmmm - this one is going to be tough to spin into a favorable light
>> >> for
>> >> Apple.
>> > Really? How would you spin this then:
>> > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1C1GGLS_enUS345US345&q=windows+7
>> > +problems&aq=0c&oq=windows+problems&aqi=g-c10
>> No one I know has had any issues. Everyone I know loves Windows 7.
>
> Anecdotal. Here's another anecdote: Everybody I know who hates
> computers, use Windows at work, and have no experience with OS X.
Good thing they don't use OSX, they might go postal.
>
>> Can you come up with anything recent?
>
> My google results were just as recent as yours.
No, they weren't.
>> Windows 7 has double the market share of OSX in all its iterations - in
>> only
>> a couple of months.
>
> McDonald's has a higher market share than any gourmet restaurant you
> can think of < probably even more than all the world's gourmet
> restaurants put together. Does that make the crap they serve better?
> Market share is not an indication of quality.
McDonalds food is better than what most of the word eats, including those in
your country. My guess, if you wen't into a "gourmet" resturant, and they
served you a Mickey Dees under a different name at ten times the price, you
would gush how truly exceptional it tasted.
> Or to put it this way; 1 million billion flies can't be wrong: eat
> shit.
Be my guest. In fact, have seconds.
C Lund
> outh.net...
> > Anecdotal. Here's another anecdote: Everybody I know who hates
> > computers, use Windows at work, and have no experience with OS X.
> Good thing they don't use OSX, they might go postal.
Strange how none of the OS X users I know have gone postal.
> >> Can you come up with anything recent?
> > My google results were just as recent as yours.
> No, they weren't.
How so?
> >> Windows 7 has double the market share of OSX in all its iterations - in
> >> only
> >> a couple of months.
> > McDonald's has a higher market share than any gourmet restaurant you
> > can think of < probably even more than all the world's gourmet
> > restaurants put together. Does that make the crap they serve better?
> > Market share is not an indication of quality.
> McDonalds food is better than what most of the word eats, including those in
> your country.
Bullshit. McDonalds tastes like wax. The potato chips aren't even
biodegradable.
> My guess, if you wen't into a "gourmet" resturant, and they
> served you a Mickey Dees under a different name at ten times the price, you
> would gush how truly exceptional it tasted.
Your guess is wrong.
> > Or to put it this way; 1 million billion flies can't be wrong: eat
> > shit.
> Be my guest. In fact, have seconds.
Why should I? I'm not the one who uses Windows.
--
C Lund
Tim Murray
> McDonalds food is better than what most of the word eats, including those in
> your country.
You tried that sorry argument before and lost.
Fa-groon
(in article <hhg3td$6iv$2...@news.eternal-september.org>):
All the zara socks use that argument. In fact all zara socks use the same
arguments all the time, the same turns of phrase, have the same politics, the
same platform biases, the same opinions about everything, yet they aren't
zara. Strange, huh? ;->
Maurice
"C Lund" <christop...@getmailSPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in message
Doesn't change the fact, McDonalds food is better than what most of the word
eats, including those in
your country.
>> My guess, if you wen't into a "gourmet" resturant, and they
>> served you a Mickey Dees under a different name at ten times the price,
>> you
>> would gush how truly exceptional it tasted.
>
> Your guess is wrong.
Oh- I don't think so.
>> > Or to put it this way; 1 million billion flies can't be wrong: eat
>> > shit.
>> Be my guest. In fact, have seconds.
>
> Why should I? I'm not the one who uses Windows.
No - but you're the one who claims to eat shit. In fact, you are the one who
recommended it.
Maurice
Here, Moron. Get educated.
http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htm
Maurice
"Fa-groon" <fa-g...@mad.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.C760D58B...@news.giganews.com...
Well yes. Strange. To a Fathead like you.
Tim Murray
> "Tim Murray" <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote:
>> Maurice wrote:
>>> McDonalds food is better than what most of the word eats, including
>>> those in your country.
>>
>> You tried that sorry argument before and lost.
>
> Here, Moron. Get educated.
>
> http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htm
>
And that has what to do with your argument?
Maurice
Sorry you're inept.
C Lund
> >> McDonalds food is better than what most of the word eats, including those
> >> in
> >> your country.
> > Bullshit. McDonalds tastes like wax. The potato chips aren't even
> > biodegradable.
> Doesn't change the fact, McDonalds food is better than what most of the word
> eats,
No.
> including those in
> your country.
Really? Care to tell me what people in my country eat that's worse
than McDonalds?
> >> My guess, if you wen't into a "gourmet" resturant, and they
> >> served you a Mickey Dees under a different name at ten times the price,
> >> you
> >> would gush how truly exceptional it tasted.
> > Your guess is wrong.
> Oh- I don't think so.
You don't think at all.
> >> > Or to put it this way; 1 million billion flies can't be wrong: eat
> >> > shit.
> >> Be my guest. In fact, have seconds.
> > Why should I? I'm not the one who uses Windows.
> No - but you're the one who claims to eat shit. In fact, you are the one who
> recommended it.
Is that you, edwin?
--
C Lund
MuahMan
>
> Is that you, edwin?
>
> --
> C Lund
What is it with the Mactards and trying to guess who everyone is all
the time. It's really fucking weird.
Chance Furlong
<29922a86-0262-40d6...@n38g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
MuahMan <mua...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Is that you, Edwin?
> >
> > --
> > C Lund
>
> What is it with the Mac users and trying to guess who everyone is all
> the time. It's really fucking weird.
What is it with Wintrolls who constantly post here, Pratt?
Maurice
"C Lund" <christop...@getmailSPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in message
No, you stupid fuck. It's "you know who".
Maurice
"Chance Furlong" <T-B...@megakatcity.com> wrote in message
news:T-Bone-3C42DD....@news.giganews.com...
It's all about fish. Get it, Fish.
Snit
Voldemort?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Fa-groon
(in article <B1S_m.2985$VT3....@newsfe13.iad>):
>
> "C Lund" <christop...@getmailSPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in message
>
news:christopher.lund-8665BF.00311331122009@adsl-065-015-208-
084.sip.ilm.bells
Zara calls people a "stupid fuck" and yet, I'M the one who is mean-spirited.
Makes a lot of sense....... NOT!
Fa-groon
(in article <D9N_m.11752$Iz5....@newsfe05.iad>):
Zara calls people "Fathead", yet he calls ME mean spirited. The irony is
incredible!
Fa-groon
(in article <IvP_m.15765$Gf3....@newsfe18.iad>):
Sorry that you're zara.
Maurice
Happy you're a Fathead.
Maurice
Are you now begging Snit's opinion. He might be too much of a gentleman to
tell you the truth. You are a mean spirited Fathead. Fathead George Graves.
MuahMan
>
> McDonald's has a higher market share than any gourmet restaurant you
> can think of ‹ probably even more than all the world's gourmet
> restaurants put together. Does that make the crap they serve better?
> Market share is not an indication of quality.
>
> Or to put it this way; 1 million billion flies can't be wrong: eat
> shit.
>
MuahMan
> In article
> <29922a86-0262-40d6-8375-c7ddb5b88...@n38g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
>
> MuahMan <muah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Is that you, Edwin?
>
> > > --
> > > C Lund
>
> > What is it with the Mac users and trying to guess who everyone is all
> > the time. It's really fucking weird.
>
> What is it with Wintrolls who constantly post here, Pratt?
I own more Apple products than you. LOL I just know what piece of
shit they are.
C Lund
That's what you wintrolls get for using sockpuppets all the time,
pratt.
--
C Lund
Logic
<b6e11807-ad80-40a2...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
MuahMan <mua...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey "MuahMan," every time I visit csma you're here making an ass of
yourself. Can't you find something better to do with your life besides
express your transparently bitter jealousy of Macs and Mac users in a
newsgroup?
Just trying to help,
L
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---
Edwin
"C Lund" <christop...@getmailSPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in message
> In article <zT9_m.14745$ft1....@newsfe10.iad>,
> "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> No new sock puppet for us, edwin?
>
>> "C Lund" <christop...@getmailSPAMBLOCK.no> wrote in message
>> outh.net...
>> > Apple's shit is together in a way that is the envy of the entire
>> > computer industry (yes, including MS).
>> >
>> > As for the writer's complaint, I sometimes have the impression that
>> > most of Apple's customers get stuff that "just works," while some
>> > people < like the unlucky writer < gets nothing but lemons.
>> >
>> > Not sure why that is.
>
>> He lives in the real world, you don't.
>
> Yeah, I'm only imagining that everything I've bought from Apple so far
> has worked out of the box. (so far, anyway)
Okay, if you say so, but you're forgetting all the other stuff above that
you imagined too.
>> I'm glad I could clear that up for you. You're welcome.
>
> Cleared up what?
C Lund says "duh... whaddya mean?"
Edwin
"Mike" <mi...@nononccfaba.org> wrote in message
news:mike-A7C9B2.0...@news.newsguy.com...
> In article <Kda_m.5641$5i2....@newsfe14.iad>, "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com>
> wrote:
>
>> "Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
>> news:C75E7D9F.5B63B%use...@gallopinginsanity.com...
>> > Edwin stated in post d1a_m.702$yy2...@newsfe01.iad on 12/28/09 3:10
>> > PM:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> "Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:C75E79FA.5B636%use...@gallopinginsanity.com...
>> >>> C Lund stated in post
>> >>> christopher.lund-3E...@adsl-065-015-208-084.sip.ilm.bellso
>> >>> ut
>> >>> h.net on 12/28/09 2:50 PM:
>> >>>
>> >>>> In article <hhb8a4$ji6$1...@news.albasani.net>,
>> >>>> Steve Mackay <mackay...@att.net> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> http://gizmodo.com/5435561/my-second-imac-is-busted-too
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Just a few quotes...
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "My first iMac arrived with a jaundiced screen, so Apple sent me a
>> >>>>> replacement. After unpacking, it took only moments for me to
>> >>>>> diagnose
>> >>>>> this
>> >>>>> one as being flawed in the exact same manner. Yes friends, I'm two
>> >>>>> for
>> >>>>> two!"
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "And there's absolutely no reason that a consumer should be paying
>> >>>>> $2000+
>> >>>>> ($2200 in my case) on any product that's anything but perfect."
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "Personally speaking, this setback means I'll have gone a month
>> >>>>> after
>> >>>>> dropping a few grand from my bank account without anything to show
>> >>>>> for
>> >>>>> it"
>> >>>>>
>> >>>> Apple's shit is together in a way that is the envy of the entire
>> >>>> computer
>> >>>> industry (yes, including MS).
>> >>>>
>> >>>> As for the writer's complaint, I sometimes have the impression that
>> >>>> most of
>> >>>> Apple's customers get stuff that "just works," while some people <
>> >>>> like
>> >>>> the
>> >>>> unlucky writer < gets nothing but lemons.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Not sure why that is.
>> >>>>
>> >>> of
>> >>> 100
>> >>> people are going to get something bad... and 1 on 1000 will have this
>> >>> happen
>> >>> two times in a row. With tools as complex as computers, a certain
>> >>> level
>> >>> of
>> >>> defect cannot be avoided, though I do think Apple has allowed the
>> >>> level
>> >>> to be
>> >>> too high (just from anecdotes and personal experience - no stats to
>> >>> back
>> >>> that
>> >>> up).
>> >>>
>> >> Why bother looking up facts when your imagination can create whatever
>> >> you
>> >> prefer, eh, Snit?
>> >
>> > If you have access to actual stats them by all means share them.
>> > Thanks!
>>
>> Until then you'll make due with the figures you pulled out of your arse?
>>
>> > --
>> > [INSERT .SIG HERE]
>> >
>> >
>
> You mean the ones that come out of yours< the ones you routinely post
> here?
>
> Yeah, edwin, you do.
> --
> Mike
Quote them, Mike.
Edwin
> Edwin stated in post Kda_m.5641$5i2....@newsfe14.iad on 12/28/09 3:23 PM:
Did you have a brain tumor for breakfast?
> It is not like I claimed a specific
> number for Apple... or anyone.
99 out of 100, and 1 out of a thousand aren't specific figures? You must
"teach" at a liberal arts school! LOL
> Or even compared Apple to other hardware
> makers.
How did you forget what's a few sentences up in your own words?
> Maybe you can explain where you are bothered by my comments a
> little better.
Why should I be bothered? You're the one with the sore arse! Stop
pulling stuff out of it to post here and maybe it'll heal.
Snit
>>>>>> Let's say 99 out of 100 machines arrive just fine. That means 1 out of
>>>>>> 100 people are going to get something bad... and 1 on 1000 will have this
>>>>>> happen two times in a row. With tools as complex as computers, a certain
>>>>>> level of defect cannot be avoided, though I do think Apple has allowed
>>>>>> the level to be too high (just from anecdotes and personal experience -
>>>>>> no stats to back that up).
>>>>>>
>>>>> Why bother looking up facts when your imagination can create whatever you
>>>>> prefer, eh, Snit?
>>>>>
>>>> If you have access to actual stats them by all means share them. Thanks!
>>>>
>>> Until then you'll make due with the figures you pulled out of your arse?
>>>
>> Not sure what you are getting at.
>>
> Did you have a brain tumor for breakfast?
>
>> It is not like I claimed a specific number for Apple... or anyone.
>>
> 99 out of 100, and 1 out of a thousand aren't specific figures? You must
> "teach" at a liberal arts school! LOL
The term "let's say" has meaning. Really.
>> Or even compared Apple to other hardware makers.
>>
> How did you forget what's a few sentences up in your own words?
What other hardware makers do you think I referenced?
>> Maybe you can explain where you are bothered by my comments a little better.
>>
> Why should I be bothered? You're the one with the sore arse! Stop pulling
> stuff out of it to post here and maybe it'll heal.
Please try to make a point with your next post. Thanks!
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
850,000,000 workstations...
--
"The iPhone doesn't have a speaker phone" -- "I checked very carefully" --
"I checked Apple's web pages" -- Edwin on the iPhone
"It is Mac OS X, not BSD.' -- 'From Mac OS to BSD Unix." -- "It's BSD Unix with Apple's APIs and GUI on top of it' -- 'nothing but BSD Unix' (Edwin on Mac OS X)
'[The IBM PC] could boot multiple OS, such as DOS, C/PM, GEM, etc.' --
'I claimed nothing about GEM other than it was available software for the
IBM PC. (Edwin on GEM)
'Solaris is just a marketing rename of Sun OS.' -- 'Sun OS is not included
on the timeline of Solaris because it's a different OS.' (Edwin on Sun)
Edwin
In your case is says you're pulling stuff out of your arse, as usual.
>>> Or even compared Apple to other hardware makers.
>>>
>> How did you forget what's a few sentences up in your own words?
>
> What other hardware makers do you think I referenced?
You need me to explain your own words to you?
>>> Maybe you can explain where you are bothered by my comments a little
>>> better.
>>>
>> Why should I be bothered? You're the one with the sore arse! Stop
>> pulling
>> stuff out of it to post here and maybe it'll heal.
>
> Please try to make a point with your next post. Thanks!
I don't think I can talk down enough to make a point you're capable of
understanding, given how you ask for people to explain the meaning of things
you wrote yourself.
Snit
Please try to make a point when you post. Thanks!
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Edwin
"Alan Baker" <alang...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:alangbaker-9C9E6...@news.shawcable.com...
I didn't write "make up something," I wrote "quote them."
The group awaits your references. I call you a bald-faced liar, and your
failure to produce a quote with references will prove you are.
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
You claimed that 850,000,000 workstations were being sold every 6 months.
This is fact.
Edwin
I never claimed anything like that.
> This is fact.
It is a lie. Repeating that lie for years has branded you so deeply as a
liar nothing you can do will remove the mark.
Your failure to produce a reference has proved you're a bald-faced liar.
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
Yes: you did. I can provide the quotes if you like...
OK, you actually said 830 million, but...
:-)
>
> > This is fact.
>
> It is a lie. Repeating that lie for years has branded you so deeply as a
> liar nothing you can do will remove the mark.
LOL
>
> Your failure to produce a reference has proved you're a bald-faced liar.
So you want a reference, do you? OK:
<http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b95b9e131c5450
ac>
Your post, right?
Snit
alangbaker-9FEAF...@news.shawcable.com on 1/4/10 2:48 PM:
>>> You claimed that 850,000,000 workstations were being sold every 6 months.
>>
>> I never claimed anything like that.
>
> Yes: you did. I can provide the quotes if you like...
>
> OK, you actually said 830 million, but...
>
> :-)
>
>>
>>> This is fact.
>>
>> It is a lie. Repeating that lie for years has branded you so deeply as a
>> liar nothing you can do will remove the mark.
>
> LOL
>
>>
>> Your failure to produce a reference has proved you're a bald-faced liar.
>
> So you want a reference, do you? OK:
>
> <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b95b9e131c5450
> ac>
>
> Your post, right?
LOL! Like Adams and crew, Edwin will deny the Google record says what it
does.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Edwin
Actually you're lying yet again.
> :-)
>
>>
>> > This is fact.
>>
>> It is a lie. Repeating that lie for years has branded you so deeply as
>> a
>> liar nothing you can do will remove the mark.
>
> LOL
>
>>
>> Your failure to produce a reference has proved you're a bald-faced liar.
>
> So you want a reference, do you? OK:
>
> <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b95b9e131c5450
> ac>
Your reference does not show me saying anything that you claim I said.
Nowhere in that post do I say 850,000,000 or even 830,000,000 workstations
are shipped every six months, and not even the people I quoted said that.
> Your post, right?
My post which proves you're a bald-faced liar. Thanks for that.
Snit
>>> It is a lie. Repeating that lie for years has branded you so deeply as
>>> a
>>> liar nothing you can do will remove the mark.
>>
>> LOL
>>
>>>
>>> Your failure to produce a reference has proved you're a bald-faced liar.
>>
>> So you want a reference, do you? OK:
>>
>> <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b95b9e131c5450
>> ac>
>
> Your reference does not show me saying anything that you claim I said.
> Nowhere in that post do I say 850,000,000 or even 830,000,000 workstations
> are shipped every six months, and not even the people I quoted said that.
>
>> Your post, right?
>
> My post which proves you're a bald-faced liar. Thanks for that.
So the Google record is wrong, eh?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
LOL
>
> > :-)
> >
> >>
> >> > This is fact.
> >>
> >> It is a lie. Repeating that lie for years has branded you so deeply as
> >> a
> >> liar nothing you can do will remove the mark.
> >
> > LOL
> >
> >>
> >> Your failure to produce a reference has proved you're a bald-faced liar.
> >
> > So you want a reference, do you? OK:
> >
> > <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b95b9e131c5450
> > ac>
>
> Your reference does not show me saying anything that you claim I said.
> Nowhere in that post do I say 850,000,000 or even 830,000,000 workstations
> are shipped every six months, and not even the people I quoted said that.
LOL
Let's go to the post:
'"The semi-annual JPR Workstation Report found that 830 million
workstations were shipped in the first half of 2004."'
How is that not saying precisely that? You're going to hang your hat on
"every" now, are you? Alright: I retract "every". You claimed that 830
million workstations were shipped in the first half of 2004.
>
> > Your post, right?
>
> My post which proves you're a bald-faced liar. Thanks for that.
LOL
Edwin
Your lies are funny to you?
>>
>> > :-)
>> >
>> >>
>> >> > This is fact.
>> >>
>> >> It is a lie. Repeating that lie for years has branded you so deeply
>> >> as
>> >> a
>> >> liar nothing you can do will remove the mark.
>> >
>> > LOL
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Your failure to produce a reference has proved you're a bald-faced
>> >> liar.
>> >
>> > So you want a reference, do you? OK:
>> >
>> > <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b95b9e131c5450
>> > ac>
>>
>> Your reference does not show me saying anything that you claim I said.
>> Nowhere in that post do I say 850,000,000 or even 830,000,000
>> workstations
>> are shipped every six months, and not even the people I quoted said that.
>
> LOL
You're laughing because you were proved to be a bald-faced liar?
> Let's go to the post:
>
> '"The semi-annual JPR Workstation Report found that 830 million
> workstations were shipped in the first half of 2004."'
>
> How is that not saying precisely that?
By not saying it at all, and *I* never said it either!
> You're going to hang your hat on
> "every" now, are you?
Even without the "every" you're still a bald-faced liar. But you don't
forget years worth of saying I claimed that number of workstations shipped
every six months. Years worth of lies from you, lying every time you
repeated that.
> Alright: I retract "every".
Not good enough. You repeated that lie for years. Your retraction does
not absolve you. Too little, too late.
> You claimed that 830
> million workstations were shipped in the first half of 2004.
I never claimed any such thing. Your own quote proves that a lie even
before you wrote it.
>>
>> > Your post, right?
>>
>> My post which proves you're a bald-faced liar. Thanks for that.
>
> LOL
You stand proved to be a bald-face liar who's stupid enough to keep lying
even in the midst of being proved a liar.
Edwin
No, it isn't. Who said it was?
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> christopher.lund-3E97BE.22505028122009@adsl-065-015-208-084
You are funny to me, Edwin.
>
> >>
> >> > :-)
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> > This is fact.
> >> >>
> >> >> It is a lie. Repeating that lie for years has branded you so deeply
> >> >> as
> >> >> a
> >> >> liar nothing you can do will remove the mark.
> >> >
> >> > LOL
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Your failure to produce a reference has proved you're a bald-faced
> >> >> liar.
> >> >
> >> > So you want a reference, do you? OK:
> >> >
> >> > <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b95b9e131c5450
> >> > ac>
> >>
> >> Your reference does not show me saying anything that you claim I said.
> >> Nowhere in that post do I say 850,000,000 or even 830,000,000
> >> workstations
> >> are shipped every six months, and not even the people I quoted said that.
> >
> > LOL
>
> You're laughing because you were proved to be a bald-faced liar?
I wasn't proved anything of the sort.
>
> > Let's go to the post:
> >
> > '"The semi-annual JPR Workstation Report found that 830 million
> > workstations were shipped in the first half of 2004."'
> >
> > How is that not saying precisely that?
>
> By not saying it at all, and *I* never said it either!
You used it to support your argument. You cannot to that unless you are
claiming it is true. The fact that you copied and pasted it from
elsewhere does change that.
>
> > You're going to hang your hat on
> > "every" now, are you?
>
> Even without the "every" you're still a bald-faced liar. But you don't
> forget years worth of saying I claimed that number of workstations shipped
> every six months. Years worth of lies from you, lying every time you
> repeated that.
>
> > Alright: I retract "every".
>
> Not good enough. You repeated that lie for years. Your retraction does
> not absolve you. Too little, too late.
That is a lie. Find another place where I said "every" in relation to
your absurd claim about workstations.
>
> > You claimed that 830
> > million workstations were shipped in the first half of 2004.
>
> I never claimed any such thing. Your own quote proves that a lie even
> before you wrote it.
LOL
>
> >>
> >> > Your post, right?
> >>
> >> My post which proves you're a bald-faced liar. Thanks for that.
> >
> > LOL
>
> You stand proved to be a bald-face liar who's stupid enough to keep lying
> even in the midst of being proved a liar.
LOL
Snit
You have denied the accuracy of the Google record.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
>> You claimed that 830
>> million workstations were shipped in the first half of 2004.
>
> I never claimed any such thing. Your own quote proves that a lie even
> before you wrote it.
Nope.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Edwin
IOW, you're a liar and you know you're a liar.
>>
>> >>
>> >> > :-)
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > This is fact.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It is a lie. Repeating that lie for years has branded you so
>> >> >> deeply
>> >> >> as
>> >> >> a
>> >> >> liar nothing you can do will remove the mark.
>> >> >
>> >> > LOL
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Your failure to produce a reference has proved you're a bald-faced
>> >> >> liar.
>> >> >
>> >> > So you want a reference, do you? OK:
>> >> >
>> >> > <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b95b9e131c5450
>> >> > ac>
>> >>
>> >> Your reference does not show me saying anything that you claim I said.
>> >> Nowhere in that post do I say 850,000,000 or even 830,000,000
>> >> workstations
>> >> are shipped every six months, and not even the people I quoted said
>> >> that.
>> >
>> > LOL
>>
>> You're laughing because you were proved to be a bald-faced liar?
>
> I wasn't proved anything of the sort.
Yes you were, liar.
>>
>> > Let's go to the post:
>> >
>> > '"The semi-annual JPR Workstation Report found that 830 million
>> > workstations were shipped in the first half of 2004."'
>> >
>> > How is that not saying precisely that?
>>
>> By not saying it at all, and *I* never said it either!
>
> You used it to support your argument.
I quoted an article. The words of the article remain those of the author.
You lied when you said I made that claim. You have repeated your lies for
years.
> You cannot to that unless you are
> claiming it is true.
You don't get to put words into my mouth, regardless of what rules you think
you have the authority to make. You stand proved a bald-faced liar who's
stupid enough to keep lying in the midst of being proved to be a bald-faced
liar.
> The fact that you copied and pasted it from
> elsewhere does change that.
The fact I quoted an article proves I never said the words your lies claimed
I said.
>>
>> > You're going to hang your hat on
>> > "every" now, are you?
>>
>> Even without the "every" you're still a bald-faced liar. But you don't
>> get to
>> forget years worth of saying I claimed that number of workstations
>> shipped
>> every six months. Years worth of lies from you, lying every time you
>> repeated that.
>>
>> > Alright: I retract "every".
>>
>> Not good enough. You repeated that lie for years. Your retraction
>> does
>> not absolve you. Too little, too late.
>
> That is a lie.
A lie you repeated for YEARS. A separate lie every time you told it. Not
a single lie any longer, but rather a MOUNTAIN of LIES from the dishonest,
amoral Alan Baker, shamed and marked for the rest of his life as a LIAR.
> Find another place where I said "every" in relation to
> your absurd claim about workstations.
No, you don't get to order me to do something after being proved a
bald-faced liar. You repeated it for years, and you know you did! You're
stupid enough to keep lying in the midst of being proved a bald-faced LIAR.
>>
>> > You claimed that 830
>> > million workstations were shipped in the first half of 2004.
>>
>> I never claimed any such thing. Your own quote proves that a lie even
>> before you wrote it.
>
> LOL
You must be one twisted fsck.
>>
>> >>
>> >> > Your post, right?
>> >>
>> >> My post which proves you're a bald-faced liar. Thanks for that.
>> >
>> > LOL
>>
>> You stand proved to be a bald-face liar who's stupid enough to keep lying
>> even in the midst of being proved a liar.
>
> LOL
Let all of CSMA note the proof that Alan Baker is a bald-faced liar.
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> > 850,000,000 workstations...
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> I didn't write "make up something," I wrote "quote them."
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> The group awaits your references. I call you a bald-faced
> >> >> >> >> liar,
> >> >> >> >> and
> >> >> >> >> your
> >> >> >> >> failure to produce a quote with references will prove you are.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > You claimed that 850,000,000 workstations were being sold every 6
> >> >> >> > months.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I never claimed anything like that.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Yes: you did. I can provide the quotes if you like...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > OK, you actually said 830 million, but...
> >> >>
> >> >> Actually you're lying yet again.
> >> >
> >> > LOL
> >>
> >> Your lies are funny to you?
> >
> > You are funny to me, Edwin.
>
> IOW, you're a liar and you know you're a liar.
LOL
>
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > :-)
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > This is fact.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> It is a lie. Repeating that lie for years has branded you so
> >> >> >> deeply
> >> >> >> as
> >> >> >> a
> >> >> >> liar nothing you can do will remove the mark.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > LOL
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Your failure to produce a reference has proved you're a bald-faced
> >> >> >> liar.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > So you want a reference, do you? OK:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b95b9e131c5
> >> >> > 450
> >> >> > ac>
> >> >>
> >> >> Your reference does not show me saying anything that you claim I said.
> >> >> Nowhere in that post do I say 850,000,000 or even 830,000,000
> >> >> workstations
> >> >> are shipped every six months, and not even the people I quoted said
> >> >> that.
> >> >
> >> > LOL
> >>
> >> You're laughing because you were proved to be a bald-faced liar?
> >
> > I wasn't proved anything of the sort.
>
> Yes you were, liar.
LOL
>
> >>
> >> > Let's go to the post:
> >> >
> >> > '"The semi-annual JPR Workstation Report found that 830 million
> >> > workstations were shipped in the first half of 2004."'
> >> >
> >> > How is that not saying precisely that?
> >>
> >> By not saying it at all, and *I* never said it either!
> >
> > You used it to support your argument.
>
> I quoted an article. The words of the article remain those of the author.
> You lied when you said I made that claim. You have repeated your lies for
> years.
I quoted a Usenet posting made by you.
>
> > You cannot to that unless you are
> > claiming it is true.
>
> You don't get to put words into my mouth, regardless of what rules you think
> you have the authority to make. You stand proved a bald-faced liar who's
> stupid enough to keep lying in the midst of being proved to be a bald-faced
> liar.
You used that figure to prove that:
"In dollars and in units, Apple trails far behind Sun, IBM, and HP."
^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> > The fact that you copied and pasted it from
> > elsewhere does change that.
>
> The fact I quoted an article proves I never said the words your lies claimed
> I said.
Funny how when you write something you're not responsible for it...
>
> >>
> >> > You're going to hang your hat on
> >> > "every" now, are you?
> >>
> >> Even without the "every" you're still a bald-faced liar. But you don't
> >> get to
> >> forget years worth of saying I claimed that number of workstations
> >> shipped
> >> every six months. Years worth of lies from you, lying every time you
> >> repeated that.
> >>
> >> > Alright: I retract "every".
> >>
> >> Not good enough. You repeated that lie for years. Your retraction
> >> does
> >> not absolve you. Too little, too late.
> >
> > That is a lie.
>
> A lie you repeated for YEARS. A separate lie every time you told it. Not
> a single lie any longer, but rather a MOUNTAIN of LIES from the dishonest,
> amoral Alan Baker, shamed and marked for the rest of his life as a LIAR.
It is a lie that I ever lied about it.
>
> > Find another place where I said "every" in relation to
> > your absurd claim about workstations.
>
> No, you don't get to order me to do something after being proved a
> bald-faced liar. You repeated it for years, and you know you did! You're
> stupid enough to keep lying in the midst of being proved a bald-faced LIAR.
LOL
>
> >>
> >> > You claimed that 830
> >> > million workstations were shipped in the first half of 2004.
> >>
> >> I never claimed any such thing. Your own quote proves that a lie even
> >> before you wrote it.
> >
> > LOL
>
> You must be one twisted fsck.
LOL
>
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > Your post, right?
> >> >>
> >> >> My post which proves you're a bald-faced liar. Thanks for that.
> >> >
> >> > LOL
> >>
> >> You stand proved to be a bald-face liar who's stupid enough to keep lying
> >> even in the midst of being proved a liar.
> >
> > LOL
>
> Let all of CSMA note the proof that Alan Baker is a bald-faced liar.
I'm willing to accept the judgement of CSMA, Edwin. Are you?
Edwin
Take your freak show on the road.
Edwin
You're even more of a liar than Alan Baker is, and he's a tough act to
follow.
Tim Adams
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
More trolling by the idiot michael glasser. so typical.
--
regarding Snit "You are not flamed because you speak the truth,
you are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting
the newsgroup." Andrew J. Brehm
Snit
teadams$2$0$0$3-3FF44F.20...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net on
1/4/10 6:25 PM:
...
>>> So you want a reference, do you? OK:
>>>
>>> <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b95b9e131c5450
>>> ac>
>>>
>>> Your post, right?
>>
>> LOL! Like Adams and crew, Edwin will deny the Google record says what it
>> does.
>
> More trolling by the idiot michael glasser. so typical.
"Re: OT: Challenge of the wits against Tim Adams: Scorecard"
You do not recall that thread at all, eh?
LOL!
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
As I have noted: you just spew insults when you have nothing of value to
say.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
More insults from Edwin... you do that a lot when you have nothing of value
Tim Adams
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Tim Adams stated in post
> teadams$2$0$0$3-3FF44F.20...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net on
> 1/4/10 6:25 PM:
>
> ...
> >>> So you want a reference, do you? OK:
> >>>
> >>> <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b95b9e131c5450
> >>> ac>
> >>>
> >>> Your post, right?
> >>
> >> LOL! Like Adams and crew, Edwin will deny the Google record says what it
> >> does.
> >
> > More trolling by the idiot michael glasser. so typical.
>
> "Re: OT: Challenge of the wits against Tim Adams: Scorecard"
Why - did you post more of your LIES in it? BTW, I'll respond in that thread in
due time.
>
> You do not recall that thread at all, eh?
>
> LOL!
Yet more trolling by the idiot michael glasser. so typical.
Snit
1/5/10 4:32 AM:
> In article <C76800C4.5CAAC%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> Tim Adams stated in post
>> teadams$2$0$0$3-3FF44F.20...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net on
>> 1/4/10 6:25 PM:
>>
>> ...
>>>>> So you want a reference, do you? OK:
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b95b9e131c5450
>>>>> ac>
>>>>>
>>>>> Your post, right?
>>>>
>>>> LOL! Like Adams and crew, Edwin will deny the Google record says what it
>>>> does.
>>>
>>> More trolling by the idiot michael glasser. so typical.
>>>
>> "Re: OT: Challenge of the wits against Tim Adams: Scorecard"
>>
> Why - did you post more of your LIES in it? BTW, I'll respond in that thread
> in due time.
>
>>
>> You do not recall that thread at all, eh?
>>
>> LOL!
>>
> Yet more trolling by the idiot michael glasser. so typical.
As with Edwin, when you have nothing of value to say you just spew insults
and accusations... except he is at least sometimes clever about it. You are
not. Really: you present yourself as someone who is not at all intelligent,
creative or clever... just angry at being proved wrong.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Tim Murray
>
> LOL! Like Adams and crew, Edwin will deny the Google record says what
> it does.
Was that really necessary?
Tim Adams
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
point out reality. Yes michael, you're a TROLL! Live with it!
Tim Adams
Tim Murray <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote:
He's just trying to set a 'good' example to an earlier post.
<C75A58F8.5AF8E%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
Snit
1/5/10 5:07 PM:
> In article <hi0cmh$i9o$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Tim Murray <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote:
>
>> Snit wrote:
>>>
>>> LOL! Like Adams and crew, Edwin will deny the Google record says what
>>> it does.
>>
>> Was that really necessary?
>
> He's just trying to set a 'good' example to an earlier post.
>
> <C75A58F8.5AF8E%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
I noted a similarity between trolls - you and Edwin: you both deny the
accuracy of the Google record. The fact you will whine about this being
pointed out is not a surprise.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
2:58 PM:
Probably not. :)
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
1/5/10 3:28 PM:
As noted, the "Re: OT: Challenge of the wits against Tim Adams: Scorecard"
thread pointed out where you - like Edwin - deny the validity of the Google
record. And, like Edwin, you just spew insults and accusations when you are
faced with your BS.
Come on, Tim, at least try to look like you can say or do something even
slightly clever. Do not just snip in shame as you generally do (and as you
did, above).
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Tim Adams
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
I pointed out reality. Yes michael, you're a TROLL! Live with it!
Tim Adams
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Tim Adams stated in post
> teadams$2$0$0$3-D84A1E.19...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net on
> 1/5/10 5:07 PM:
>
> > In article <hi0cmh$i9o$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > Tim Murray <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Snit wrote:
> >>>
> >>> LOL! Like Adams and crew, Edwin will deny the Google record says what
> >>> it does.
> >>
> >> Was that really necessary?
> >
> > He's just trying to set a 'good' example to an earlier post.
> >
> > <C75A58F8.5AF8E%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
>
> I noted
that michael glasser is a troll. Live with it!
Snit
1/6/10 3:45 PM:
>> As noted,
>
> I pointed out reality. Yes michael, you're a TROLL! Live with it!
Has it ever occurred to you that your snipping says a *lot* more than the
comments you actually leave? If not, well, let me assure you it does. :)
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
1/6/10 3:46 PM:
>> I noted
>
> that michael glasser is a troll. Live with it!
Does it bother you to be such a coward or are you just used to it by now?
-----
I noted a similarity between trolls - you and Edwin: you both deny the
accuracy of the Google record. The fact you will whine about this being
pointed out is not a surprise.
-----
Please note: you said nothing to counter my comments, you just ran like the
coward you are... proving me right as you did so. :)
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Tim Adams
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Tim Adams stated in post
> teadams$2$0$0$3-97B751.17...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net on
> 1/6/10 3:45 PM:
>
> >> As noted,
> >
> > I pointed out reality. Yes michael, you're a TROLL! Live with it!
>
> Has it ever occurred to you
that michael glasser is a Troll? Yes it has and someday he'll face reality and
see it for himself!
Tim Adams
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Tim Adams stated in post
> teadams$2$0$0$3-2E5D55.17...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net on
> 1/6/10 3:46 PM:
>
> >> I noted
> >
> > that michael glasser is a troll. Live with it!
>
> Does it bother you
that michael glasser is a troll? no it doesn't. unlike michael, I'm able to face
reality, so I know he is a troll.
Snit
1/7/10 4:19 AM:
> In article <C76A758D.5CFD6%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> Tim Adams stated in post
>> teadams$2$0$0$3-2E5D55.17...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net on
>> 1/6/10 3:46 PM:
>>
>>>> I noted
>>>
>>> that michael glasser is a troll. Live with it!
>>
>> Does it bother you to be such a coward or are you just used to it by now?
>>
>> -----
>> I noted a similarity between trolls - you and Edwin: you both deny the
>> accuracy of the Google record. The fact you will whine about this being
>> pointed out is not a surprise.
>> -----
>>
>> Please note: you said nothing to counter my comments, you just ran like the
>> coward you are... proving me right as you did so. :)
>
> that michael glasser is a troll? no it doesn't. unlike michael, I'm able to
> face
> reality, so I know he is a troll.
You just cannot help but prove me right. But you are boring. Get the last
snip, you coward.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
teadams$2$0$0$3-97B751.17...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net on
1/6/10 3:45 PM:
>> As noted,
>
> I pointed out reality. Yes michael, you're a TROLL! Live with it!
Has it ever occurred to you that your snipping says a *lot* more than the
Tim Adams
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Tim Adams stated in post
> teadams$2$0$0$3-BEA18A.06...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net on
> 1/7/10 4:19 AM:
>
> > In article <C76A758D.5CFD6%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> > Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Tim Adams stated in post
> >> teadams$2$0$0$3-2E5D55.17...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net on
> >> 1/6/10 3:46 PM:
> >>
> >>>> I noted
> >>>
> >>> that michael glasser is a troll. Live with it!
> >>
> >> Does it bother you to be such a coward or are you just used to it by now?
> >>
> >> -----
> >> I noted a similarity between trolls - you and Edwin: you both deny the
> >> accuracy of the Google record. The fact you will whine about this being
> >> pointed out is not a surprise.
> >> -----
> >>
> >> Please note: you said nothing to counter my comments, you just ran like the
> >> coward you are... proving me right as you did so. :)
>
> >
> > that michael glasser is a troll? no it doesn't. unlike michael, I'm able to
> > face
> > reality, so I know he is a troll.
>
> You just cannot help
pointing out that michael glasser is a troll. I know, but then he keeps ignoring
reality, so I keep pointing it out to him.
Tim Adams
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Tim Adams stated in post
> teadams$2$0$0$3-97B751.17...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net on
> 1/6/10 3:45 PM:
>
> >> As noted,
> >
> > I pointed out reality. Yes michael, you're a TROLL! Live with it!
>
> Has it ever occurred to you that
michael glasser is a Troll? Yes it has and someday he'll face reality and