PC World & Mac World
Snit
of me two magazines: PC World (February 2004) and Macword (April 2004).
Just happens to be the ones I have... I have no others handy.
Ok... A quick look at the cover stories:
PC World
* BONUS: PC Maintenance Guide
* The Trouble Free PC: unbeatable tools to help you
protect data, remove junk, stop crashes
Macworld
* Panther Secrets: uncover 51 hidden features and productivity
boosters
* Protect your Mac and watch your back: Mac based home security
camera and tools to fight laptop thieves
Now I did not enter all of the cover stories... but the others, for both,
are not relevant to my point. Both do offer reviews of new software or
hardware, etc.
What I have noticed, though, is how often, very often it seems, PC mags
focus, at least largely, on how to stop your machine from crashing, how to
fix it, how to prevent viruses, etc.
Mac mags focus on productivity tips, new features, new Apple hardware.
Why do you think that is? My guess: they are doing their best to serve
their readers. Mac users focus on getting work done - so they are shown
more productive ways of doing so (the "secrets" referred to on the cover are
just Tips and Tricks... not really secrets. Examples: how to best use
labels, title bar proxies, one-click printing, etc.)
Oh, the PC maintenance guide includes such necessities as:
EVERY DAY
* update virus definitions
* do an incremental backup (in case your machine fails you)
* reboot when programs crash (this is in the EVERY DAY section!)
"failed programs can cause other programs to falter. Restart
your system after every crash to clear it out"
WOW. Anyone have any reputable source that suggests such things for OS X?
Yuck! Moving on...
EVERY WEEK
* perform a full virus scan
* do a complete backup
* Run Windows update "get the latest patches from Microsoft to secure
your system"
* Run spyware and adware removal program
Ok... I get the backups... good idea. Maybe, just maybe the running of the
updater... but can you *imagine* the rest being suggested for the Mac? LOL.
Not hardly!
EVERY MONTH
* Update your programs
* Check for new drivers
* Use a one-click utility-suite chechup program (such as the ones found
here: http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,86934,00.asp)
Check for drivers *every month*. That and use some sort of 3rd party
utility to give your computer a checkup.
-----
I am just flabbergasted at the amount of suggested maintenance for a Windows
XP machine. More than was needed for OS 9, and *far* mote than is needed
for OS X.
I welcome anyone to show me *any* reputable list that shows OS X needs
anything comparable to *daily* downloads of virus definitions and should be
rebooted on any application crash. Or, for that matter, suggests a weekly
spyware check or an update to get newest patches to protect against security
problems.
leo
news:BC760CA9.430E5%sn...@nospam-cableone.net...
Then please suggest to MacWorld how to minimize the occurrence of
"application unexpectly quit" issue on my powerbook.
Alan Baker
"leo" <som...@somewhere.net> wrote:
> > I am just flabbergasted at the amount of suggested maintenance for a
> Windows
> > XP machine. More than was needed for OS 9, and *far* mote than is needed
> > for OS X.
> >
> > I welcome anyone to show me *any* reputable list that shows OS X needs
> > anything comparable to *daily* downloads of virus definitions and should
> be
> > rebooted on any application crash. Or, for that matter, suggests a weekly
> > spyware check or an update to get newest patches to protect against
> security
> > problems.
>
> Then please suggest to MacWorld how to minimize the occurrence of
> "application unexpectly quit" issue on my powerbook.
What's the app?
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect
if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
Snit
4q34c.15589$%06....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net on 3/11/04 12:50 PM:
Talk to John, he can point you in the right direction.
Have you ever seen any serious list suggest you should reboot after any
application crash on OS X? I am not saying that crashes to apps do not
happen, and you may have something going on to make them more common, but
the idea of having to reboot when an app does crash would be considered
absurd on today's Mac for most crashes.
leo
yes, I learned that from experience. Once there's an app crashes, something
weired would follow, so I reboot.
John
Snit
3/11/04 1:20 PM:
I cannot find any recommendations there for the things I list for XP.
Thanks for supporting the idea that OS X is more trouble free and requires
less maintenance.
George Graves
Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
> This may or may not be representative, but it seems common. I have in front
> of me two magazines: PC World (February 2004) and Macword (April 2004).
> Just happens to be the ones I have... I have no others handy.
>
> Ok... A quick look at the cover stories:
>
> PC World
> * BONUS: PC Maintenance Guide
> * The Trouble Free PC: unbeatable tools to help you
> protect data, remove junk, stop crashes
>
> Macworld
> * Panther Secrets: uncover 51 hidden features and productivity
> boosters
> * Protect your Mac and watch your back: Mac based home security
> camera and tools to fight laptop thieves
>
> Now I did not enter all of the cover stories... but the others, for both,
> are not relevant to my point. Both do offer reviews of new software or
> hardware, etc.
>
> What I have noticed, though, is how often, very often it seems, PC mags
> focus, at least largely, on how to stop your machine from crashing, how to
> fix it, how to prevent viruses, etc.
>
> Mac mags focus on productivity tips, new features, new Apple hardware.
I was about to post something along these lines myself. Well, you know
what they say about great minds.....
I recently had an opportunity to get a year's subscription to MacAddict
for free (sans the CD, of course) and after not having looked at a Mac
magazine since OS9 days, I was amazed at the wealth of OSX tips and
techniques contained in just one issue. Nothing about troubleshooting,
just hidden features, articles about how to do things (like record
streaming radio using iTunes) etc. Yet, every PC mag I see is nothing
but troubleshooting, virus protection, preventing crashes, etc - and
that's just on the cover!
In the light of such overwhelming evidence, I simply do not see how some
of the Windows fanatics here in this NG can live in the constant state
of denial that they inhabit with regard to computer reliability. It
should be apparent to even the most casual observer, given the number of
venues devoted SOLELY to Windows problem issues, that the Windows
environment is a house of cards. Daily TV shows, weekly radio call-ins,
magazines filled with troubleshooting articles, constant security
alerts, endless virus scares, hundreds of "PC Fix it" web sites, the
list goes on and on. Is there anybody who TRULY believes the stuff they
shovel in this NG about XP being flawless? And they call Mac users
fanatics, "living in the RFD" and "delusional."
But the Windows fanatics don't ever see any of this. To them it's always
just incompetent editors and writers (funny that all the incompetent
ones seem to gravitate to the Windows publications. I'm sure that's
indicitive of something; not sure what), delusional "Maccies" (these
magazines don't really contain all of this troubleshooting and
maintenance falderall, we just imagine that they do), etc. In other
words, none of this is important nor do any of the problems covered ever
affect anybody. Mac problems, OTOH, now they're a different story. They
make the platform unusable :->
--
George Graves
------------------
My Three Favorite Words WRT Women, Wine, food, cars and motorcycles:
"Made in Italy"
George Graves
"John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
You are so delusional and stupid that you defy all understanding.
Jim Lee Jr.
> info.apple.com
> www.macfixit.com
Ms. macfixit.com fetish has posted again, I see.
Now she has added info.apple.com to her list of goodies.
Snit
gmgravesnos-A63C...@news.sf.sbcglobal.net on 3/11/04 3:11 PM:
> In article <BC760CA9.430E5%sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
> Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
>
>> This may or may not be representative, but it seems common. I have in front
>> of me two magazines: PC World (February 2004) and Macword (April 2004).
>> Just happens to be the ones I have... I have no others handy.
>>
>> Ok... A quick look at the cover stories:
>>
>> PC World
>> * BONUS: PC Maintenance Guide
>> * The Trouble Free PC: unbeatable tools to help you
>> protect data, remove junk, stop crashes
>>
>> Macworld
>> * Panther Secrets: uncover 51 hidden features and productivity
>> boosters
>> * Protect your Mac and watch your back: Mac based home security
>> camera and tools to fight laptop thieves
>>
>> Now I did not enter all of the cover stories... but the others, for both,
>> are not relevant to my point. Both do offer reviews of new software or
>> hardware, etc.
>>
>> What I have noticed, though, is how often, very often it seems, PC mags
>> focus, at least largely, on how to stop your machine from crashing, how to
>> fix it, how to prevent viruses, etc.
>>
>> Mac mags focus on productivity tips, new features, new Apple hardware.
>
> I was about to post something along these lines myself. Well, you know
> what they say about great minds.....
Great minds think alike... and so do ours. Well, about computers, anyway.
>
> I recently had an opportunity to get a year's subscription to MacAddict
> for free (sans the CD, of course) and after not having looked at a Mac
> magazine since OS9 days, I was amazed at the wealth of OSX tips and
> techniques contained in just one issue. Nothing about troubleshooting,
> just hidden features, articles about how to do things (like record
> streaming radio using iTunes) etc. Yet, every PC mag I see is nothing
> but troubleshooting, virus protection, preventing crashes, etc - and
> that's just on the cover!
If you read them they do have the occasional review - often telling you how
bad the software is.
>
> In the light of such overwhelming evidence, I simply do not see how some
> of the Windows fanatics here in this NG can live in the constant state
> of denial that they inhabit with regard to computer reliability. It
> should be apparent to even the most casual observer, given the number of
> venues devoted SOLELY to Windows problem issues, that the Windows
> environment is a house of cards. Daily TV shows, weekly radio call-ins,
> magazines filled with troubleshooting articles, constant security
> alerts, endless virus scares, hundreds of "PC Fix it" web sites, the
> list goes on and on. Is there anybody who TRULY believes the stuff they
> shovel in this NG about XP being flawless? And they call Mac users
> fanatics, "living in the RFD" and "delusional."
Funny thing is most Mac users are pretty open about the down sides of the
Mac. Most. :) Then again, when you can honestly say you made the right
choice, there is less problem with being honest.
To be fair, though, most of these mags are made on Macs. :)
C Lund
> discussions.info.apple.com
> www.macfixit.com
You are soo predictable..
--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund
Ron Parsons
George Graves <gmgra...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>I recently had an opportunity to get a year's subscription to MacAddict
>for free (sans the CD, of course) and after not having looked at a Mac
>magazine since OS9 days, I was amazed at the wealth of OSX tips and
>techniques contained in just one issue. Nothing about troubleshooting,
>just hidden features, articles about how to do things (like record
>streaming radio using iTunes) etc. Yet, every PC mag I see is nothing
>but troubleshooting, virus protection, preventing crashes, etc - and
>that's just on the cover!
If you walk down the isles of a CompUSA or MicroCenter type computer
store, you will find the same preponderance troubleshooting, virus
protection, crash prevention, etc. software. That seems to pretty much
account of a great portion of those thousands of more available programs
for Windows.
--
Ron
George Graves
Ron Parsons <jr...@gte.net> wrote:
Yeah, Windows is obviously such a house of cards, that they need those
things. Why is it that Windroids can't see this and continue to deny
that the Mac is clearly superior in terms of reliability.
digitaleon
> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
> What I have noticed, though, is how often, very often it seems, PC
> mags focus, at least largely, on how to stop your machine from
> crashing, how to fix it, how to prevent viruses, etc.
>
> Mac mags focus on productivity tips, new features, new Apple hardware.
I've read a number of different Windows PC publications. What you
describe certainly does not appear in every edition. Rather, the
publications generally have a 'super troubleshooting issue' twice a
year, with 'smaller, less flashy' articles appearing in every other
edition relating to various forms of troubleshooting.
This is about double the rate that the same appears in the various Mac
publications. So to some extent, you're right about the amount of
troubleshooting articles that appear in Windows PC publications vs. Mac
publications. To some extent only, however.
> Why do you think that is? My guess: they are doing their best to
> serve their readers.
A good publication will always do this...
> Mac users focus on getting work done - so they are shown more
> productive ways of doing so (the "secrets" referred to on the cover
> are just Tips and Tricks... not really secrets. Examples: how to best
> use labels, title bar proxies, one-click printing, etc.)
Windows PC users are also interested in getting work done. Part of that
involves system maintenance and troubleshooting. Unfortunately, in my
experience, that is a larger proportion of 'getting work done' on a
Windows PC than on a Mac, _except_ where Windows and the included
applications have been sufficiently customised and tested so as to be
as trouble free as possible.
> Oh, the PC maintenance guide includes such necessities as:
> EVERY DAY
> * update virus definitions
I agree this is somewhat excessive. But it's especially necessary with
Novarg, NetSky, Cone, Koce and friends on the loose. Virus e-mails over
the past month or so have exploded to unprecedented levels due to
Windows PCs that have not been secured.
> * do an incremental backup (in case your machine fails you)
Running daily incremental backups of your important files is actually a
very good idea.
Courtesy of StuffIt Deluxe and a little AppleScripting, I have a
customised backup solution for me for certain files I update regularly
that I want to ensure that are not lost. Nothing easier than to run it
each night. It doesn't diff the files, so it's actually more of a full
backup than an incremental one, but still...
> * reboot when programs crash (this is in the EVERY DAY section!)
> "failed programs can cause other programs to falter. Restart
> your system after every crash to clear it out"
Not necessary on systems with proper process and memory separation, such
as Mac OS X, the various BSDs, Windows NT 5.x (ala Windows 2000 and
Windows XP), and systems based on the Linux 2.x series kernel.
> EVERY WEEK
> * perform a full virus scan
I do this, only to ensure that I'm not a carrier for any virii. The fact
that a particular virus can't infect my computer doesn't mean it can't
infect others, and it would be somewhat irresponsible for me to simply
say "they use a different system, not my problem" when there exists the
Internet.
> * do a complete backup
I do this fortnightly. Weekly is too much of an irritation.
> * Run Windows update "get the latest patches from Microsoft to secure
> your system"
I do this (well, Software Update runs automatically).
> * Run spyware and adware removal program
I don't do this. Are there even any such programs for the Mac? I confess
to not having looked for any...
> EVERY MONTH
> * Update your programs
I can do this weekly courtesy of VersionTracker Pro; takes all the
effort and much of the time out of it.
> * Check for new drivers
VersionTracker Pro helps in this regard, too.
> * Use a one-click utility-suite checkup program (such as the ones
> found here: http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,86934,00.asp)
Periodically checking and correcting disk errors is a good idea. The
extent to which some of these programs go in the pursuit of 'system
perfection' is ridiculous though...
> I am just flabbergasted at the amount of suggested maintenance for a
> Windows XP machine. More than was needed for OS 9, and *far* mote than
> is needed for OS X.
None of it is NEEDED. Windows XP won't crash and burn if you do none of
these things. It really depends on how critical the computer is to you,
how much and how often it's used, what it's used for, and how much
maintenance you're prepared to put up with.
The regime I've established isn't necessary for a Mac OS X machine, as
you already pointed out. I doubt I would have any severe issues with my
Mac if I didn't, but because I do, I've never been in the situation to
find out for sure.
digitaleon.
Snit
_Fx4c.10551944$Of.17...@news.easynews.com on 3/12/04 11:15 PM:
> To comp.sys.mac.advocacy subscribers,
>
>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>
>> What I have noticed, though, is how often, very often it seems, PC
>> mags focus, at least largely, on how to stop your machine from
>> crashing, how to fix it, how to prevent viruses, etc.
>>
>> Mac mags focus on productivity tips, new features, new Apple hardware.
>
> I've read a number of different Windows PC publications. What you
> describe certainly does not appear in every edition. Rather, the
> publications generally have a 'super troubleshooting issue' twice a
> year, with 'smaller, less flashy' articles appearing in every other
> edition relating to various forms of troubleshooting.
That is not what I generally see, but I admit I do not pay much attention to
the "general public" computer mags... looking at their web site they do not
have many covers, but there is some support for what you say: one cover
seems focused on "76 Ways To Make Windows Do Everything" (sounds like a tips
and tricks type thing), and the other is "Best New Stuff". It would be
interesting to look at, say, the same 6-12 months of both mags...
Looked at the MacWorld site and their issue is focused on "Hot New Stuff".
Hmmmm, which is better, Best New Stuff or Hot New Stuff. I suppose the PC
mag got the best stuff and the Macs get mere Hot Stuff. :)
>
> This is about double the rate that the same appears in the various Mac
> publications. So to some extent, you're right about the amount of
> troubleshooting articles that appear in Windows PC publications vs. Mac
> publications. To some extent only, however.
Fair enough...
>
>> Why do you think that is? My guess: they are doing their best to
>> serve their readers.
>
> A good publication will always do this...
You are assuming they are both good. :)
>
>> Mac users focus on getting work done - so they are shown more
>> productive ways of doing so (the "secrets" referred to on the cover
>> are just Tips and Tricks... not really secrets. Examples: how to best
>> use labels, title bar proxies, one-click printing, etc.)
>
> Windows PC users are also interested in getting work done. Part of that
> involves system maintenance and troubleshooting. Unfortunately, in my
> experience, that is a larger proportion of 'getting work done' on a
> Windows PC than on a Mac, _except_ where Windows and the included
> applications have been sufficiently customised and tested so as to be
> as trouble free as possible.
Even then you need to do more maintenance and protection... sadly. I do not
envy the Windows users who have to do so much of this...
>
>> Oh, the PC maintenance guide includes such necessities as:
>
>> EVERY DAY
>
>> * update virus definitions
>
> I agree this is somewhat excessive. But it's especially necessary with
> Novarg, NetSky, Cone, Koce and friends on the loose. Virus e-mails over
> the past month or so have exploded to unprecedented levels due to
> Windows PCs that have not been secured.
Yup. It is getting outragious.
>
>> * do an incremental backup (in case your machine fails you)
>
> Running daily incremental backups of your important files is actually a
> very good idea.
Sure...
>
> Courtesy of StuffIt Deluxe and a little AppleScripting, I have a
> customised backup solution for me for certain files I update regularly
> that I want to ensure that are not lost. Nothing easier than to run it
> each night. It doesn't diff the files, so it's actually more of a full
> backup than an incremental one, but still...
I use Carbon Copy Cloner's scheduling... works great.
>
>> * reboot when programs crash (this is in the EVERY DAY section!)
>> "failed programs can cause other programs to falter. Restart
>> your system after every crash to clear it out"
>
> Not necessary on systems with proper process and memory separation, such
> as Mac OS X, the various BSDs, Windows NT 5.x (ala Windows 2000 and
> Windows XP), and systems based on the Linux 2.x series kernel.
I have to say, I was surprised to see this for XP. Why do you think they
have it there? An error?
>
>> EVERY WEEK
>
>> * perform a full virus scan
>
> I do this, only to ensure that I'm not a carrier for any virii. The fact
> that a particular virus can't infect my computer doesn't mean it can't
> infect others, and it would be somewhat irresponsible for me to simply
> say "they use a different system, not my problem" when there exists the
> Internet.
Yes and no. The chance of sending a virus is less on a Mac, and, I refuse
to pay to protect people who chose to get a system they knew has serious
virus problems. If it were something new, maybe I would be more giving.
>
>> * do a complete backup
>
> I do this fortnightly. Weekly is too much of an irritation.
I do it.... um... whenever I am going to do something big like upgrade to
10.3
>
>> * Run Windows update "get the latest patches from Microsoft to secure
>> your system"
>
> I do this (well, Software Update runs automatically).
>
>> * Run spyware and adware removal program
>
> I don't do this. Are there even any such programs for the Mac? I confess
> to not having looked for any...
There is no spyware... so no need. Yet.
>
>> EVERY MONTH
>
>> * Update your programs
>
> I can do this weekly courtesy of VersionTracker Pro; takes all the
> effort and much of the time out of it.
Does that work well... I have considered getting it...
>
>> * Check for new drivers
>
> VersionTracker Pro helps in this regard, too.
How often do you need them?
>
>> * Use a one-click utility-suite checkup program (such as the ones
>> found here: http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,86934,00.asp)
>
> Periodically checking and correcting disk errors is a good idea. The
> extent to which some of these programs go in the pursuit of 'system
> perfection' is ridiculous though...
Yup.
>
>> I am just flabbergasted at the amount of suggested maintenance for a
>> Windows XP machine. More than was needed for OS 9, and *far* mote than
>> is needed for OS X.
>
> None of it is NEEDED. Windows XP won't crash and burn if you do none of
> these things. It really depends on how critical the computer is to you,
> how much and how often it's used, what it's used for, and how much
> maintenance you're prepared to put up with.
>
> The regime I've established isn't necessary for a Mac OS X machine, as
> you already pointed out. I doubt I would have any severe issues with my
> Mac if I didn't, but because I do, I've never been in the situation to
> find out for sure.
You seem quite fair minded about all this. Rare in csma. Thanks...
digitaleon
>>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>> From: digitaleon <thi...@fake.address>,
> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>>> What I have noticed, though, is how often, very often it seems, PC
>>> mags focus, at least largely, on how to stop your machine from
>>> crashing, how to fix it, how to prevent viruses, etc.
>>>
>>> Mac mags focus on productivity tips, new features, new Apple
>>> hardware.
>>
>> I've read a number of different Windows PC publications. What you
>> describe certainly does not appear in every edition. Rather, the
>> publications generally have a 'super troubleshooting issue' twice a
>> year, with 'smaller, less flashy' articles appearing in every other
>> edition relating to various forms of troubleshooting.
>
> That is not what I generally see, but I admit I do not pay much
> attention to the "general public" computer mags... looking at their
> web site they do not have many covers, but there is some support for
> what you say: one cover seems focused on "76 Ways To Make Windows Do
> Everything" (sounds like a tips and tricks type thing), and the other
> is "Best New Stuff". It would be interesting to look at, say, the
> same 6-12 months of both mags...
Exactly. The focus generally orbits the following topics on a bi-annual
basis for the "major" articles: hardware comparisons, software reviews,
operating system useage hints, operating system troubleshooting, games,
and major IT issues. These are generally done en massè to make a good
splash (ala 76 Ways...). It gets a bit boring after awhile; ironically,
publications for the Macintosh and Linux platforms have more
flexibility and more scope to cover a wide range of topics, given the
(arguably) close-knit communities.
They have plenty of interesting content in the other pages of the
Windows PC publications that are 'frighteningly fresh', so it's still
worthwhile reading them, although I usually skip the "major" article
for the month. Hence why I pick up an edition of APC (Australian
Personal Computer) every few months or so.
> Looked at the MacWorld site and their issue is focused on "Hot New
> Stuff". Hmmmm, which is better, Best New Stuff or Hot New Stuff. I
> suppose the PC mag got the best stuff and the Macs get mere Hot Stuff.
> :)
I think Donna Summer would go for the Mac then ;-)
>>> Why do you think that is? My guess: they are doing their best to
>>> serve their readers.
>>
>> A good publication will always do this...
>
> You are assuming they are both good. :)
That's true =) I admit I haven't read Macworld for a bit. Is it still
going strong?
>>> Mac users focus on getting work done - so they are shown more
>>> productive ways of doing so (the "secrets" referred to on the cover
>>> are just Tips and Tricks... not really secrets. Examples: how to
>>> best use labels, title bar proxies, one-click printing, etc.)
>>
>> Windows PC users are also interested in getting work done. Part of
>> that involves system maintenance and troubleshooting. Unfortunately,
>> in my experience, that is a larger proportion of 'getting work done'
>> on a Windows PC than on a Mac, _except_ where Windows and the
>> included applications have been sufficiently customised and tested so
>> as to be as trouble free as possible.
>
> Even then you need to do more maintenance and protection... sadly. I
> do not envy the Windows users who have to do so much of this...
I've certainly found that to be the case with individual installs of
Windows.
In the case of the customised, tested build of Windows, its' been
essentially trouble-free (I get to support it by day...). The same
unfortunately cannot be said in the case of applications running on top
of it (namely, Ybghf Abgrf).
>>> Oh, the PC maintenance guide includes such necessities as:
>>> EVERY DAY
>>> * update virus definitions
>>
>> I agree this is somewhat excessive. But it's especially necessary
>> with Novarg, NetSky, Cone, Koce and friends on the loose. Virus
>> e-mails over the past month or so have exploded to unprecedented
>> levels due to Windows PCs that have not been secured.
>
> Yup. It is getting outrageous.
Absolutely agree. Over the past month, the number of e-mails sent with
virus attachments has jumped by something like 500%. Organisations that
were previously trapping only a few dozen to a few hundred per day are
now trapping thousands per day. Chiefly thanks to the virus families I
mentioned above.
Putting that together with spam and message bounces, it's a wonder
people don't just give up on e-mail...
>> Courtesy of StuffIt Deluxe and a little AppleScripting, I have a
>> customised backup solution for me for certain files I update
>> regularly that I want to ensure that are not lost. Nothing easier
>> than to run it each night. It doesn't diff the files, so it's
>> actually more of a full backup than an incremental one, but still...
>
> I use Carbon Copy Cloner's scheduling... works great.
Groovy. I'll remember that name in case I'm searching for another tool
at some point in the future.
>>> * reboot when programs crash (this is in the EVERY DAY section!)
>>> "failed programs can cause other programs to falter. Restart
>>> your system after every crash to clear it out"
>>
>> Not necessary on systems with proper process and memory separation,
>> such as Mac OS X, the various BSDs, Windows NT 5.x (ala Windows 2000
>> and Windows XP), and systems based on the Linux 2.x series kernel.
>
> I have to say, I was surprised to see this for XP. Why do you think
> they have it there? An error?
Possibly an error, but my guess would be that after a crash there's no
guarantee that the application that crashed would run again until the
user environment has been cleared, either by log out or restart. And
since re-launching the exact application that just crashed is the first
thing people try to do...
>>> EVERY WEEK
>>> * perform a full virus scan
>>
>> I do this, only to ensure that I'm not a carrier for any virii. The
>> fact that a particular virus can't infect my computer doesn't mean it
>> can't infect others, and it would be somewhat irresponsible for me to
>> simply say "they use a different system, not my problem" when there
>> exists the Internet.
>
> Yes and no. The chance of sending a virus is less on a Mac, and, I
> refuse to pay to protect people who chose to get a system they knew
> has serious virus problems. If it were something new, maybe I would
> be more giving.
That's a fair position. I feel that way at times, but having virus
protection, even though I'm very unlikely to ever have a problem, lets
me stand on the moral high ground when dealing with those who just
don't care - generally people with Windows computers at home who think
they're smarter than the virii and don't need protection because
they're careful. It doesn't work with sex, and I don't think it'll ever
work with virii ;-)
Fortunately, the $org I support takes virus prevention very seriously
and has virus protection on everything they can. The best preventative
being that _all_ e-mails in & out are scanned for virii and for
anything executable.
>>> * do a complete backup
>>
>> I do this fortnightly. Weekly is too much of an irritation.
>
> I do it.... um... whenever I am going to do something big like upgrade
> to 10.3
That's how I used to do it, too. I decided I'd get into 'good habits'
and do it on a regular basis. Realistically, they're not really
complete backups, just of documents and packages. Actual full backups
of everything on my Mac I only really do a few times a year, due to the
amount of time they take.
>>> * Run spyware and adware removal program
>>
>> I don't do this. Are there even any such programs for the Mac? I
>> confess to not having looked for any...
>
> There is no spyware... so no need. Yet.
Long may it last! Sadly, I fear this year will be the year the Macintosh
is compromised by this particular breed of scum.
>>> EVERY MONTH
>>
>>> * Update your programs
>>
>> I can do this weekly courtesy of VersionTracker Pro; takes all the
>> effort and much of the time out of it.
>
> Does that work well... I have considered getting it...
It works very well in all respects except one. It lets you view a list
of updated software against what's installed on your computer, the
daily updates, and allows you to search for applications and see the
results all from within the software. Any of the packages in any of
these views can be downloaded (it has a Safari-style download manager)
or some further information looked at without launching the web
browser.
Its' been very helpful especially in regards to ensuring I have the
latest build and minor releases of the software I use.
The one respect where it doesn't work well is that it probably won't
track all of your installed software. I suspect the applications it
won't track are those that aren't submitted to VersionTracker.
>>> * Check for new drivers
>>
>> VersionTracker Pro helps in this regard, too.
>
> How often do you need them?
I confess, so far I have only needed them once (I really don't have much
by the way of hardware needing it). I mentioned VT Pro because it takes
away the need to poke around the vendors' site, provided of course
updates get submitted to VT...
>>> I am just flabbergasted at the amount of suggested maintenance for a
>>> Windows XP machine. More than was needed for OS 9, and *far* mote
>>> than is needed for OS X.
>>
>> None of it is NEEDED. Windows XP won't crash and burn if you do none
>> of these things. It really depends on how critical the computer is to
>> you, how much and how often it's used, what it's used for, and how
>> much maintenance you're prepared to put up with.
>>
>> The regime I've established isn't necessary for a Mac OS X machine,
>> as you already pointed out. I doubt I would have any severe issues
>> with my Mac if I didn't, but because I do, I've never been in the
>> situation to find out for sure.
>
> You seem quite fair minded about all this. Rare in csma. Thanks...
Why thankyou :-) That is a rare compliment in an advocacy group. I'd
like to extend the compliment to you as well, because it's always a
pleasure to discuss a topic like this intelligently and interestingly.
digitaleon.
Snit
2vE4c.10488176$Id.17...@news.easynews.com on 3/13/04 7:01 AM:
> To comp.sys.mac.advocacy subscribers,
>
>>>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>>> From: digitaleon <thi...@fake.address>,
>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>
<Heavy snippage of sections where all I would say is "me too" or simply
thanks you for info>
>>>> Why do you think that is? My guess: they are doing their best to
>>>> serve their readers.
>>>
>>> A good publication will always do this...
>>
>> You are assuming they are both good. :)
>
> That's true =) I admit I haven't read Macworld for a bit. Is it still
> going strong?
Seems to be. I have been getting it for a year based on a free offer. Some
of the reviews can be pretty good - most of the rest I find online via
frequent skimming of http://macsurfer.com
>>>> Mac users focus on getting work done - so they are shown more
>>>> productive ways of doing so (the "secrets" referred to on the cover
>>>> are just Tips and Tricks... not really secrets. Examples: how to
>>>> best use labels, title bar proxies, one-click printing, etc.)
>>>
>>> Windows PC users are also interested in getting work done. Part of
>>> that involves system maintenance and troubleshooting. Unfortunately,
>>> in my experience, that is a larger proportion of 'getting work done'
>>> on a Windows PC than on a Mac, _except_ where Windows and the
>>> included applications have been sufficiently customised and tested so
>>> as to be as trouble free as possible.
>>
>> Even then you need to do more maintenance and protection... sadly. I
>> do not envy the Windows users who have to do so much of this...
>
> I've certainly found that to be the case with individual installs of
> Windows.
>
> In the case of the customised, tested build of Windows, its' been
> essentially trouble-free (I get to support it by day...). The same
> unfortunately cannot be said in the case of applications running on top
> of it (namely, Ybghf Abgrf).
The college where I work uses "Ybghf Abgrf", and nobody seems to like it. I
am only a part time instructor, so I do not get stuck with it. I do get
stuck with no office and no benefits. If I am offered a full time job, is
it worth the trade off? :)
>
>>>> Oh, the PC maintenance guide includes such necessities as:
>
>>>> EVERY DAY
>
>>>> * update virus definitions
>>>
>>> I agree this is somewhat excessive. But it's especially necessary
>>> with Novarg, NetSky, Cone, Koce and friends on the loose. Virus
>>> e-mails over the past month or so have exploded to unprecedented
>>> levels due to Windows PCs that have not been secured.
>>
>> Yup. It is getting outrageous.
>
> Absolutely agree. Over the past month, the number of e-mails sent with
> virus attachments has jumped by something like 500%. Organisations that
> were previously trapping only a few dozen to a few hundred per day are
> now trapping thousands per day. Chiefly thanks to the virus families I
> mentioned above.
>
> Putting that together with spam and message bounces, it's a wonder
> people don't just give up on e-mail...
The sad thing is 99% of this garbage seems to be spread not just from
Windows, but specifically from Outlook or Outlook Express. Maybe Apple can
do the world a favor and port Mail to XP. :)
>
>>> Courtesy of StuffIt Deluxe and a little AppleScripting, I have a
>>> customised backup solution for me for certain files I update
>>> regularly that I want to ensure that are not lost. Nothing easier
>>> than to run it each night. It doesn't diff the files, so it's
>>> actually more of a full backup than an incremental one, but still...
>>
>> I use Carbon Copy Cloner's scheduling... works great.
>
> Groovy. I'll remember that name in case I'm searching for another tool
> at some point in the future.
It is great for making bootable backups also. Highly recommended.
>> Yes and no. The chance of sending a virus is less on a Mac, and, I
>> refuse to pay to protect people who chose to get a system they knew
>> has serious virus problems. If it were something new, maybe I would
>> be more giving.
>
> That's a fair position. I feel that way at times, but having virus
> protection, even though I'm very unlikely to ever have a problem, lets
> me stand on the moral high ground when dealing with those who just
> don't care - generally people with Windows computers at home who think
> they're smarter than the virii and don't need protection because
> they're careful. It doesn't work with sex, and I don't think it'll ever
> work with virii ;-)
Good analogy. :) To be fair, I almost never send anything with an
attachment, other than the occasional jpg, so I figure my chances of
forwarding a virus is pretty slim.
>
> Fortunately, the $org I support takes virus prevention very seriously
> and has virus protection on everything they can. The best preventative
> being that _all_ e-mails in & out are scanned for virii and for
> anything executable.
The college I work at *claims* to do the same, but they still have been hit
a few times.
>
>>>> * do a complete backup
>>>
>>> I do this fortnightly. Weekly is too much of an irritation.
>>
>> I do it.... um... whenever I am going to do something big like upgrade
>> to 10.3
>
> That's how I used to do it, too. I decided I'd get into 'good habits'
> and do it on a regular basis. Realistically, they're not really
> complete backups, just of documents and packages. Actual full backups
> of everything on my Mac I only really do a few times a year, due to the
> amount of time they take.
I do an incremental backup of my User and Application folders once a week.
Of course, since I do this to a second internal hard drive, if my computer
gets stolen, lost in a fire, or something similar that will do me absolutely
no good.
>
>>>> * Run spyware and adware removal program
>>>
>>> I don't do this. Are there even any such programs for the Mac? I
>>> confess to not having looked for any...
>>
>> There is no spyware... so no need. Yet.
>
> Long may it last! Sadly, I fear this year will be the year the Macintosh
> is compromised by this particular breed of scum.
It will happen. I can not say when, but I am surprised it is not already
happening.
>>>> I am just flabbergasted at the amount of suggested maintenance for a
>>>> Windows XP machine. More than was needed for OS 9, and *far* mote
>>>> than is needed for OS X.
>>>
>>> None of it is NEEDED. Windows XP won't crash and burn if you do none
>>> of these things. It really depends on how critical the computer is to
>>> you, how much and how often it's used, what it's used for, and how
>>> much maintenance you're prepared to put up with.
>>>
>>> The regime I've established isn't necessary for a Mac OS X machine,
>>> as you already pointed out. I doubt I would have any severe issues
>>> with my Mac if I didn't, but because I do, I've never been in the
>>> situation to find out for sure.
>>
>> You seem quite fair minded about all this. Rare in csma. Thanks...
>
> Why thankyou :-) That is a rare compliment in an advocacy group. I'd
> like to extend the compliment to you as well, because it's always a
> pleasure to discuss a topic like this intelligently and interestingly.
Thanks. For the opposing view, read just a few posts from Steve or
Elizabot. They slam me in almost every post. It has gotten so bad that I
have asked them to at least place "Flame:" in the subject lines so that
others can ignore them - there have been quite a few complaints.
Steve Carroll
Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
Yes, and many of those complaints recognize that you incite people...
then you complain they are 'attacking' you. You have a pretty serious
case of victim mentality going on. I noticed you didn't mention anything
here about your sexual harrassment of Elizabot. Or your many out of
context attacks on others. Why not point to those? Do you think people
create threads entitled anatomy of a snit-zel for no good reason? Google
is chock full of your strange activity, if this guy wants to find out
the truth all he has to do is read enough of your posts... in this NG
and the anxiety NG... he'll catch on quickly enough. He might be
interested in ShutterBugz assessment of you:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=group:comp.sys.mac.advocacy+insubject:a
natomy+insubject:of+insubject:a+insubject:snit-zel&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=
UTF-8&selm=40449c98_1%40news.iprimus.com.au&rnum=1
For some reason (I believe I know why and I mention it below) you
somehow think you have hidden your disingenuous activity with your 'I'm
a good guy' routine. If you think you are going to be able to tell the
group that you tried to get us to use the 'Flame' idea and we simply
rejected it... all so you can make yourself look good... all I can say
is it's not going to work.. You don't look good, won't look good and
can't look good because you never stop doing what you did right here...
flat out lying. You are 'attacked'(in your mind) because of what you
continually do... habitually lie... and google shows no less than over
a dozen people in here have made mention of it.
I think it's pretty obvious what causes your odd behavior. I read your
posts in the anxiety NG. You stated that you needed medication to be
able to function with your mental problems. I read your posts where you
have had to leave jobs, couldn't attend your own mother's birthday party
and have been housebound... as well as the posts about having phobias to
things like having your blood pressure taken and what not. I read the
posts about all the different medications, as well... the side effects
are well known. I'm sorry but this isn't normal and has GOT to be the
cause of some SERIOUS frustration for you... frustration that it seems
you have seen fit to take out on certain posters in this NG. I'm sorry
for your mental health problems but it's pretty obvious you should have
your dosage re-adjusted or check into a new medication or something
because you are definitely out of whack in terms of reality. I don't
know if it's the drugs at fault or if they are even able to help you at
all... but you NEED to seek help one way or another.
Steve
Steve Mackay
> "digitaleon" <thi...@fake.address> wrote in
> 2vE4c.10488176$Id.17...@news.easynews.com on 3/13/04 7:01 AM:
>
>> To comp.sys.mac.advocacy subscribers,
>>
>>>>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>>>> From: digitaleon <thi...@fake.address>,
>>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>>
<snip>
>>>>> I am just flabbergasted at the amount of suggested maintenance for a
>>>>> Windows XP machine. More than was needed for OS 9, and *far* mote
>>>>> than is needed for OS X.
>>>>
>>>> None of it is NEEDED. Windows XP won't crash and burn if you do none
>>>> of these things. It really depends on how critical the computer is to
>>>> you, how much and how often it's used, what it's used for, and how
>>>> much maintenance you're prepared to put up with.
>>>>
>>>> The regime I've established isn't necessary for a Mac OS X machine,
>>>> as you already pointed out. I doubt I would have any severe issues
>>>> with my Mac if I didn't, but because I do, I've never been in the
>>>> situation to find out for sure.
>>>
>>> You seem quite fair minded about all this. Rare in csma. Thanks...
>>
>> Why thankyou :-) That is a rare compliment in an advocacy group. I'd
>> like to extend the compliment to you as well, because it's always a
>> pleasure to discuss a topic like this intelligently and interestingly.
>
> Thanks. For the opposing view, read just a few posts from Steve or
> Elizabot. They slam me in almost every post. It has gotten so bad that I
> have asked them to at least place "Flame:" in the subject lines so that
> others can ignore them - there have been quite a few complaints.
People slam you, because you're a delusional putz. I'm sure you'll ask for
proof, that has been given on numerous ocassions. But it sure wont stop
you from asking.
Steve Carroll
Steve Mackay <steve_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
It's easy to forget that he's on medication that might tend to make him
that way (seriously). If he is no longer taking it, you can read in the
anxiety NG why he should be back on it. Either way, probably due to his
severe anxiety disorders and the mental anguish likely surrounding them,
it's obvious he has pent up frustrations he's taking out on certain
posters. When they remove themselves from view (even for less than 24
hours) he begs for their attention... and if it isn't immediately
forthcoming, he seeks a fresh target. Somehow, he thinks he has hidden
these facts.
Steve
Snit
pan.2004.03.13....@hotmail.com on 3/13/04 11:00 AM:
Nope... won't ask you for your splendid "proof" (playing those games has
become boring), just thank you for posting the meaningless flames in an
appropriate thread. Thanks!
Snit
fretwizz-FC4606...@netnews.comcast.net on 3/13/04 11:12 AM:
Thanks for posting these lies in an appropriately named thread. You do
realize, don't you, that most, if not all, of what you have stated above is
at best based on sheer ignorance, and, most likely is just a lie.
Snit
Just a few words:
Once again you have managed to elicit a response from me. Good job. Just a
shame that you have had to debase yourself even further to do it. You are
sinking to a new low, even for you.
Ok...
1) I find it amusing that you seem me, the one with the "victim" mentality
also being the one to incite you, and then you claim even greater victim
mentality status for Elizabot. I do not claim to be the victim at all; as I
have clearly been able to get you (and your clique) to be my personal Spin
N' Speaks. And, just so you know, it has been working quite well. I can
not tell you how many laughs I have gotten from you. Thanks.
You refer to posts where someone, possibly you, was trying to yank my chain
and I did not bite. So? Please note: that particular trolling failed.
Well, mostly. I did start to respond, then decided the guy was not worth
it. See what happened... the thread died. Nobody cared. Well, nobody who
is not obsessed with getting revenge against me for pointing out there lies.
For the record, I did try to get you to be reasonable several times. I
failed. You did nothing but Spin N' Speak. And rarely nothing more
valuable than "moo".
2) What "mental problems" do you refer to? Seems you are clearly ignorant
of anxiety disorders in general and my history in particular. Suffice it to
say you are simply wrong. For the record, I have told you about you being
wrong, and you continue to repeat the lie.
You have spent time and effort to dig up old posts of mine dealing with my
health. In what way are they related to anything in here? For that matter,
why the obsession to dig that far into my posting history? You and Elizabot
truly are obsessed. Why try, in an ignorant and even bigoted way, to use
them against me in a Usenet forum. You have claimed not to be an ignorant
bigot. I accepted that from you and told you I would not use your previous
comments that suggested such against you. I have not. But you are using
similar concepts here.
I suppose this is your way of trying to "pull my strings": you have found
out that I have a serious and possibly life altering and even debilitating
disorder and you want to throw that into the mix? You must really be
desperate. Seriously, Steve, I hope you do not sink to that level in your
lies and your obsession to get revenge, but I would not be surprised if you
did.
Are you so morally corrupt as to lie about my unrelated medical history as a
weapon to try to embarrass me? Sorry - anyone can look at my site. Who
cares about your apparent bigotry other than you? If I were embarrassed or
ashamed of my health problems, I would not post about them.
Really Steve, if you were to find out I were a part of some minority group
that ignorant and bigoted people might use as a reason to believe your lies,
would you focus on that as well? Here is some ammo for you: I am part
polish. There are many polish jokes on the web, and you can even find books
filled with them. If you think it will help your wounded ego to use that as
well, let your lies continue to fly.
digitaleon
>>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>> From: digitaleon <thi...@fake.address>,
> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>> I admit I haven't read Macworld for a bit. Is it still going strong?
>
> Seems to be. I have been getting it for a year based on a free offer.
> Some of the reviews can be pretty good - most of the rest I find
> online via frequent skimming of http://macsurfer.com
Cool. Thanks for letting me know.
>> In the case of the customised, tested build of Windows, its' been
>> essentially trouble-free (I get to support it by day...). The same
>> unfortunately cannot be said in the case of applications running on
>> top of it (namely, Ybghf Abgrf).
>
> The college where I work uses "Ybghf Abgrf", and nobody seems to like
> it. I am only a part time instructor, so I do not get stuck with it.
> I do get stuck with no office and no benefits. If I am offered a full
> time job, is it worth the trade off? :)
Yes, certainly. There's nothing really wrong with Abgrf as far as using
it goes, I just wish it was somewhat less buggy and somewhat less crash
prone than it is. I would love there to be a "Copy Into" function in
Mail to create new Calendar and To Do entries in iCal from an e-mail,
or the ability to have a rotating archive system. OTOH, you can't
really filter things to folders in Abgrf because then there's no
immediate way to know which folders have new messages in them. It's
really just a matter of dealing with it differently than you would
Mail.
>> Over the past month, the number of e-mails sent with virus
>> attachments has jumped by something like 500%. Organisations that
>> were previously trapping only a few dozen to a few hundred per day
>> are now trapping thousands per day.
>>
>> Putting that together with spam and message bounces, it's a wonder
>> people don't just give up on e-mail...
>
> The sad thing is 99% of this garbage seems to be spread not just from
> Windows, but specifically from Outlook or Outlook Express. Maybe
> Apple can do the world a favor and port Mail to XP. :)
The continued lack of proper security features in the Outlook and
Exchange product families is not forgivable.
Mail on XP... that would be interesting, especially the Aqua interface
;-)
>> Having virus protection, even though I'm very unlikely to ever have a
>> problem, lets me stand on the moral high ground when dealing with
>> those who just don't care - generally people with Windows computers
>> at home who think they're smarter than the virii and don't need
>> protection because they're careful. It doesn't work with sex, and I
>> don't think it'll ever work with virii ;-)
>
> Good analogy. :) To be fair, I almost never send anything with an
> attachment, other than the occasional jpg, so I figure my chances of
> forwarding a virus is pretty slim.
Same here. I find that there's really no reason to send executables
about the place by e-mail.
>> Fortunately, the $org I support takes virus prevention very seriously
>> and has virus protection on everything they can. The best
>> preventative being that _all_ e-mails in & out are scanned for virii
>> and for anything executable.
>
> The college I work at *claims* to do the same, but they still have
> been hit a few times.
The $org I support has also been hit a few times. It's inevitable. But
having to clean up once or twice a year is better than having to clean
up thrice or quace a fortnight on networks where virus protection is
not taken seriously.
> I do an incremental backup of my User and Application folders once a
> week. Of course, since I do this to a second internal hard drive, if
> my computer gets stolen, lost in a fire, or something similar that
> will do me absolutely no good.
I've been doing them to re-writeable CD, and the full backups onto CD-R.
Will soon have a SuperDrive and can do it onto DVD (finally!).
>>> There is no spyware... so no need. Yet.
>>
>> Long may it last! Sadly, I fear this year will be the year the
>> Macintosh is compromised by this particular breed of scum.
>
> It will happen. I can not say when, but I am surprised it is not
> already happening.
So am I :-(
>>> You seem quite fair minded about all this. Rare in csma. Thanks...
>>
>> Why thankyou :-) That is a rare compliment in an advocacy group. I'd
>> like to extend the compliment to you as well, because it's always a
>> pleasure to discuss a topic like this intelligently and
>> interestingly.
>
> Thanks. For the opposing view, read just a few posts from Steve or
> Elizabot. They slam me in almost every post. It has gotten so bad
> that I have asked them to at least place "Flame:" in the subject lines
> so that others can ignore them - there have been quite a few
> complaints.
I've been watching these threads go back and forth for weeks now. I've
simply been ignoring them (and for that matter, most threads which have
been peripheral to Macintosh advocacy).
digitaleon.
Snit
3dN4c.2452489$9p3.4...@news.easynews.com on 3/13/04 4:56 PM:
> To comp.sys.mac.advocacy subscribers,
>
>>>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>>> From: digitaleon <thi...@fake.address>,
>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>
>>> I admit I haven't read Macworld for a bit. Is it still going strong?
>>
>> Seems to be. I have been getting it for a year based on a free offer.
>> Some of the reviews can be pretty good - most of the rest I find
>> online via frequent skimming of http://macsurfer.com
>
> Cool. Thanks for letting me know.
It, and the sites it points to of course, are really about all I ever need
to know. The only "hard" part is figuring out how much I really want to
read. I generally skim the top links section, click on the ones I want, and
then ignore most of the rest accept macosxhints.com and versiontracker.
One think I *really* like about Safari is I can click on the links with the
scroll wheel button on my mouse and they open in another tab - but keep the
current tab in focus. I end up just scrolling and clicking to get all the
links I want. Has me sold on Safari.
>
>>> In the case of the customised, tested build of Windows, its' been
>>> essentially trouble-free (I get to support it by day...). The same
>>> unfortunately cannot be said in the case of applications running on
>>> top of it (namely, Ybghf Abgrf).
>>
>> The college where I work uses "Ybghf Abgrf", and nobody seems to like
>> it. I am only a part time instructor, so I do not get stuck with it.
>> I do get stuck with no office and no benefits. If I am offered a full
>> time job, is it worth the trade off? :)
>
> Yes, certainly. There's nothing really wrong with Abgrf as far as using
> it goes, I just wish it was somewhat less buggy and somewhat less crash
> prone than it is. I would love there to be a "Copy Into" function in
> Mail to create new Calendar and To Do entries in iCal from an e-mail,
> or the ability to have a rotating archive system. OTOH, you can't
> really filter things to folders in Abgrf because then there's no
> immediate way to know which folders have new messages in them. It's
> really just a matter of dealing with it differently than you would
> Mail.
I am not sure if the college mandates usage or if they just place it on
everyone's machines so it has become the norm. Hopefully, if I ever do get
to full time, I can get a Mac and an XP machine to help stay current on
both.
>
>>> Over the past month, the number of e-mails sent with virus
>>> attachments has jumped by something like 500%. Organisations that
>>> were previously trapping only a few dozen to a few hundred per day
>>> are now trapping thousands per day.
>>>
>>> Putting that together with spam and message bounces, it's a wonder
>>> people don't just give up on e-mail...
>>
>> The sad thing is 99% of this garbage seems to be spread not just from
>> Windows, but specifically from Outlook or Outlook Express. Maybe
>> Apple can do the world a favor and port Mail to XP. :)
>
> The continued lack of proper security features in the Outlook and
> Exchange product families is not forgivable.
>
> Mail on XP... that would be interesting, especially the Aqua interface
> ;-)
Don't hold your breath.
>
>>> Having virus protection, even though I'm very unlikely to ever have a
>>> problem, lets me stand on the moral high ground when dealing with
>>> those who just don't care - generally people with Windows computers
>>> at home who think they're smarter than the virii and don't need
>>> protection because they're careful. It doesn't work with sex, and I
>>> don't think it'll ever work with virii ;-)
>>
>> Good analogy. :) To be fair, I almost never send anything with an
>> attachment, other than the occasional jpg, so I figure my chances of
>> forwarding a virus is pretty slim.
>
> Same here. I find that there's really no reason to send executables
> about the place by e-mail.
As someone who does not write programs, I can not think of a time I have had
a need. If I want to suggest some shareware, I just send a link to the
site. Easier, safer, more fair to the software author, and teaches
independence.
>
>>> Fortunately, the $org I support takes virus prevention very seriously
>>> and has virus protection on everything they can. The best
>>> preventative being that _all_ e-mails in & out are scanned for virii
>>> and for anything executable.
>>
>> The college I work at *claims* to do the same, but they still have
>> been hit a few times.
>
> The $org I support has also been hit a few times. It's inevitable. But
> having to clean up once or twice a year is better than having to clean
> up thrice or quace a fortnight on networks where virus protection is
> not taken seriously.
True. Just annoying that it has to be such a concern on Windows. And it is
amazing that even with the protection you describe, garbage still gets
through.
>
>> I do an incremental backup of my User and Application folders once a
>> week. Of course, since I do this to a second internal hard drive, if
>> my computer gets stolen, lost in a fire, or something similar that
>> will do me absolutely no good.
>
> I've been doing them to re-writeable CD, and the full backups onto CD-R.
> Will soon have a SuperDrive and can do it onto DVD (finally!).
I have a SuperDrive, but the blank media is too expensive for me to use as
frequent backups. Then again, losing my computer would be expensive, too...
>
>>>> There is no spyware... so no need. Yet.
>>>
>>> Long may it last! Sadly, I fear this year will be the year the
>>> Macintosh is compromised by this particular breed of scum.
>>
>> It will happen. I can not say when, but I am surprised it is not
>> already happening.
>
> So am I :-(
I suppose this is one good thing about low market share... that does reduce
the chances.
>
>>>> You seem quite fair minded about all this. Rare in csma. Thanks...
>>>
>>> Why thankyou :-) That is a rare compliment in an advocacy group. I'd
>>> like to extend the compliment to you as well, because it's always a
>>> pleasure to discuss a topic like this intelligently and
>>> interestingly.
>>
>> Thanks. For the opposing view, read just a few posts from Steve or
>> Elizabot. They slam me in almost every post. It has gotten so bad
>> that I have asked them to at least place "Flame:" in the subject lines
>> so that others can ignore them - there have been quite a few
>> complaints.
>
> I've been watching these threads go back and forth for weeks now. I've
> simply been ignoring them (and for that matter, most threads which have
> been peripheral to Macintosh advocacy).
Seems the smartest thing to do... :)
Steve Carroll
Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
I'm sorry, but no matter how much you want it to be so, me, talking
about the likely cause of your often strange behavior, isn't debasing
myself in any way. At this point, I consider this an unpleasant
necessity. If I wanted to 'attack' you with it, as you seem to think, I
could have brought it up in many ways other than this and have done so
long ago. Why would I have waited? This makes no sense.
> Ok...
>
> 1) I find it amusing that you seem me, the one with the "victim" mentality
> also being the one to incite you, and then you claim even greater victim
> mentality status for Elizabot. I do not claim to be the victim at all; as I
> have clearly been able to get you (and your clique) to be my personal Spin
> N' Speaks. And, just so you know, it has been working quite well. I can
> not tell you how many laughs I have gotten from you. Thanks.
But Snit, Elizabot IS a victim... of your sexual harrassment. Your spin
n speak is nothing more than another manifestation of your obsessive
behavior.
> You refer to posts where someone, possibly you, was trying to yank my chain
> and I did not bite. So? Please note: that particular trolling failed.
> Well, mostly. I did start to respond, then decided the guy was not worth
> it. See what happened... the thread died. Nobody cared. Well, nobody who
> is not obsessed with getting revenge against me for pointing out there lies.
I'm sorry... I don't follow all your posts like you seem to think I
should. I really don't know what you are talking about here but I
suggest that if nobody cared it's because they are consciously avoiding
threads you start like that. Can you blame them? In one recent thread I
saw another poster named Wally get involved and you quickly subjected
him to your usual crap and he slammed your for it. When you get to the
point where you're asking where Elizabot, Steve and myself were because
we hadn't posted in a 12 hour period... well... that's just abnormal.
You were looking for an argument at that point. If you noticed, none of
us obliged in any appreciable way... but Wally sure gave you a look at
some reality you quickly denied existed.
> For the record, I did try to get you to be reasonable several times. I
> failed. You did nothing but Spin N' Speak. And rarely nothing more
> valuable than "moo".
>
> 2) What "mental problems" do you refer to? Seems you are clearly ignorant
> of anxiety disorders in general and my history in particular. Suffice it to
> say you are simply wrong. For the record, I have told you about you being
> wrong, and you continue to repeat the lie.
Well... like I said, it's evident that you are in denial about your
frequent delusional behavior on this NG. It doesn't much matter as
people in here have eyes... and memories.
> You have spent time and effort to dig up old posts of mine dealing with my
> health. In what way are they related to anything in here? For that matter,
> why the obsession to dig that far into my posting history? You and Elizabot
> truly are obsessed. Why try, in an ignorant and even bigoted way, to use
> them against me in a Usenet forum. You have claimed not to be an ignorant
> bigot. I accepted that from you and told you I would not use your previous
> comments that suggested such against you. I have not. But you are using
> similar concepts here.
I didn't dig up anything... you pointed me at it. For the longest time I
knew there was a problem with you and as I saw you exhibit the same kind
of behavior with more and more posters, I took your suggestion and read
your site. What I saw there opened my eyes.
> I suppose this is your way of trying to "pull my strings": you have found
> out that I have a serious and possibly life altering and even debilitating
> disorder and you want to throw that into the mix? You must really be
> desperate. Seriously, Steve, I hope you do not sink to that level in your
> lies and your obsession to get revenge, but I would not be surprised if you
> did.
What am I desperate about? Trying to make you look bad? I have no need
to, you do it all by yourself. I'm trying to help you by suggesting you
back off on engaging people because you seem to come apart when the
stress level gets too high. You seem to want to fight as opposed to
argue your points but you are unable to do either effectively.
> Are you so morally corrupt as to lie about my unrelated medical history as a
> weapon to try to embarrass me? Sorry - anyone can look at my site. Who
> cares about your apparent bigotry other than you? If I were embarrassed or
> ashamed of my health problems, I would not post about them.
You have no reason to be ashamed but you cannot pretend that you are not
affected by the medication you take, it's just too obvious there is some
sort of a problem. That is the only reason I even bring this up. You
post a lot of bizarre stuff in here and there is obviously a reason for
it. You cannot hide from this.
> Really Steve, if you were to find out I were a part of some minority group
> that ignorant and bigoted people might use as a reason to believe your lies,
> would you focus on that as well? Here is some ammo for you: I am part
> polish. There are many polish jokes on the web, and you can even find books
> filled with them. If you think it will help your wounded ego to use that as
> well, let your lies continue to fly.
>
My ego, the idea that I am 'desperate' or you being Polish have nothing
to do with anything. Your condition puts you into an entirely different
league as you are on at least one medication (and maybe several more you
haven't mentioned) that has some serious side effects... surely your Dr.
has made you aware... if not:
Paxil - Seroxat (Paroxetine) Side Effects
Frequent - Paxil - Seroxat (Paroxetine) Side Effects
Body as a Whole: Malaise (a vague feeling of bodily discomfort), pain.
Cardiovascular: Hypertension, syncope (a sudden loss of strength, a
temporary suspension of consciousness due to cerebral anemia),
tachycardia (excessive rapidity in the action of the heart).
Dermatological: Pruritus (Intense itching) Gastrointestinal: Nausea and
vomiting. Metabolic and Nutritional: Weight gain, weight loss. Nervous
System: Central Nervous System stimulation, concentration impaired,
depression, emotional lability (emotional instability), vertigo (a
hallucination of movement; a sensation as if the external world were
revolving around the patient or as if he himself were revolving in
space). Respiratory: Cough increased, rhinitis (inflammation of the
mucus membrane of the nose).
There are many more but the ones included above are enough for anyone in
here to realize that you are suffering from at least some of these and
show it regularly in this NG. For you to try and pretend you are just
fine and never exhibit any symptoms is part of an associative disorder
people with anxiety conditions like yours often display, particularly
when they are introduced into what they perceive as a higher stress
level situation. There is no question you are 'concentration impaired'
and you are trying to function at a level your medication prevents you
from functioning at... the result is increased 'emotional instability',
anger and frustration. Along with your obsessive behavior, all of this
is very evident in many of your posts as it manifests itself in the many
strange ways you often show. You got really bizarre with Elizabot... up
until that point I thought you were just being an angry asshole but when
you did that shit I realized something else was going on. Recently, you
told me you had NO health problems (mental or otherwise) ... that is
simply not the case. You need to deal with the anger, figure out ways to
just 'let it go'. Look at the reality of it... who here, other than you,
has a website where they try to publicly make people look like fools
because others disagree with an argument they think they have proven? Is
this healthy behavior for you, with the condition you have? It's
obsession, frustration and anger that drove you to do such a thing. That
you don't see it only exemplifies the problem.
Steve
Snit
(as I have now done so). If you do so, maybe I will give you another round
of flame wars that you so clearly are seeking with me. Maybe not... I have
gotten bored with your style. In any case, please post future flames to an
appropriately named thread.
Even then, showing extreme ignorance and bigotry toward people with health
concerns is *not* something I am going to even humor with detailed responses
to.
"Steve Carroll" <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote in
fretwizz-608A68...@netnews.comcast.net on 3/13/04 6:19 PM:
digitaleon
>> From: digitaleon <thi...@fake.address>,
> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
> One thing I *really* like about Safari is I can click on the links
> with the scroll wheel button on my mouse and they open in another tab
> - but keep the current tab in focus. I end up just scrolling and
> clicking to get all the links I want. Has me sold on Safari.
I didn't know about that. Nice! I'm hoping OW 5 will have the same
feature (since that's my main browser and probably will be for a long
time to come - it's shaping up well, despite being at b3).
> I am not sure if the college mandates [Abgrf] usage or if they just
> place it on everyone's machines so it has become the norm. Hopefully,
> if I ever do get to full time, I can get a Mac and an XP machine to
> help stay current on both.
It depends what your mail system is based on. If it's Qbzvab based, then
Abgrf will be mandatory. If it's based on something more standard like
POP, then you can skip it. Also, note that you can get Abgrf for Mac OS
X, and it essentially works identically to Abgrf for Windows.
>> The continued lack of proper security features in the Outlook and
>> Exchange product families is not forgivable.
>>
>> Mail on XP... that would be interesting, especially the Aqua
>> interface ;-)
>
> Don't hold your breath.
Tell me about it! Having either of these issues resolved would see me
checking on sales of ice skates and thermoses....
> As someone who does not write programs, I can not think of a time I
> have had a need. If I want to suggest some shareware, I just send a
> link to the site. Easier, safer, more fair to the software author,
> and teaches independence.
As someone who does write programs occasionally, I agree with you. I've
only ever had a need once to send executable code via e-mail.
Otherwise, there's simply no advantage to it than just linking to an
FTP or HTTP server.
>> The $org I support has also been hit a few times. It's inevitable.
>> But having to clean up once or twice a year is better than having to
>> clean up thrice or quace a fortnight on networks where virus
>> protection is not taken seriously.
>
> True. Just annoying that it has to be such a concern on Windows. And
> it is amazing that even with the protection you describe, garbage
> still gets through.
All it takes is one weak point. Virii in a sense are semi-systematic in
their finding of weak points through which to infect networks.
Unfortunately they don't bother to let you know how they got in so you
can 'plug the hole'; maybe there'll be a "noble virus" in the future
that does just that...
>> I've been doing them to re-writeable CD, and the full backups onto
>> CD-R. Will soon have a SuperDrive and can do it onto DVD (finally!).
>
> I have a SuperDrive, but the blank media is too expensive for me to
> use as frequent backups. Then again, losing my computer would be
> expensive, too...
I was actually thinking of the DVD's for the full backups only (so it
doesn't take a stack of CDs each time), and continuing to use CD-RWs
for the periodic backups.
> I suppose this is one good thing about low market share... that does
> reduce the chances [of developers creating adware + spyware].
Good, but in the grand scheme of things entirely too brief.
>> I've been watching these threads go back and forth for weeks now.
>> I've simply been ignoring them (and for that matter, most threads
>> which have been peripheral to Macintosh advocacy).
>
> Seems the smartest thing to do... :)
I thought so ;-)
digitaleon.
Steve Carroll
Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
> Steve, you have been asked to move your flames to reasonably named threads
> (as I have now done so). If you do so, maybe I will give you another round
> of flame wars that you so clearly are seeking with me. Maybe not... I have
> gotten bored with your style. In any case, please post future flames to an
> appropriately named thread.
If and when I get to the point where I decide I want to flame you,
perhaps I'll consider it. Until then, when I find it necessary to point
out the truth of actual reality, not the stuff floating around in your
damaged psyche, I will do just that.
> Even then, showing extreme ignorance and bigotry toward people with health
> concerns is *not* something I am going to even humor with detailed responses
> to.
I see denial is still the order of the day for you, it's a shame...
I didn't really expect you to address any of this but I hope you
seriously consider what I've discussed with you here. I suggest that if
you back off with your paranoid victim mentality, you might find you are
'attacked' with much less frequency. Give it some thought... OK?
Steve
Snit
XnP4c.10627437$Of.17...@news.easynews.com on 3/13/04 7:24 PM:
> To comp.sys.mac.advocacy subscribers,
>
>>> From: digitaleon <thi...@fake.address>,
>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>
>> One thing I *really* like about Safari is I can click on the links
>> with the scroll wheel button on my mouse and they open in another tab
>> - but keep the current tab in focus. I end up just scrolling and
>> clicking to get all the links I want. Has me sold on Safari.
>
> I didn't know about that. Nice! I'm hoping OW 5 will have the same
> feature (since that's my main browser and probably will be for a long
> time to come - it's shaping up well, despite being at b3).
All you need to do for Safari is go to the Safari > Preferences, select
"tabs", and check "Enable Tabbed Browsing". I also select, from the General
options, "Open links from applications: in new tab in the current window".
Safari is far from perfect, but it really is amazingly well done.
>> I am not sure if the college mandates [Abgrf] usage or if they just
>> place it on everyone's machines so it has become the norm. Hopefully,
>> if I ever do get to full time, I can get a Mac and an XP machine to
>> help stay current on both.
>
> It depends what your mail system is based on. If it's Qbzvab based, then
> Abgrf will be mandatory. If it's based on something more standard like
> POP, then you can skip it. Also, note that you can get Abgrf for Mac OS
> X, and it essentially works identically to Abgrf for Windows.
Just out of curiosity, why do you call it "abgrf" instead of... well... I
will not ruin it for those not in the "know".
>
>>> The continued lack of proper security features in the Outlook and
>>> Exchange product families is not forgivable.
>>>
>>> Mail on XP... that would be interesting, especially the Aqua
>>> interface ;-)
>>
>> Don't hold your breath.
>
> Tell me about it! Having either of these issues resolved would see me
> checking on sales of ice skates and thermoses....
LOL. I have a headache tonight... took me a second.
>
>> As someone who does not write programs, I can not think of a time I
>> have had a need. If I want to suggest some shareware, I just send a
>> link to the site. Easier, safer, more fair to the software author,
>> and teaches independence.
>
> As someone who does write programs occasionally, I agree with you. I've
> only ever had a need once to send executable code via e-mail.
> Otherwise, there's simply no advantage to it than just linking to an
> FTP or HTTP server.
Yup. I suppose I have written a few AppleScript programs, and some
FileMaker Pro executables (with the developer edition) but then I just
transferred via a network...
>
>>> The $org I support has also been hit a few times. It's inevitable.
>>> But having to clean up once or twice a year is better than having to
>>> clean up thrice or quace a fortnight on networks where virus
>>> protection is not taken seriously.
>>
>> True. Just annoying that it has to be such a concern on Windows. And
>> it is amazing that even with the protection you describe, garbage
>> still gets through.
>
> All it takes is one weak point. Virii in a sense are semi-systematic in
> their finding of weak points through which to infect networks.
> Unfortunately they don't bother to let you know how they got in so you
> can 'plug the hole'; maybe there'll be a "noble virus" in the future
> that does just that...
I am surprised nobody writes those. Imagine a little pop-up "If you are
reading this message, your firewall is really bad, please check ports ...".
Of course, if people did this, other virus writers would write ones to
lie...
>
>>> I've been doing them to re-writeable CD, and the full backups onto
>>> CD-R. Will soon have a SuperDrive and can do it onto DVD (finally!).
>>
>> I have a SuperDrive, but the blank media is too expensive for me to
>> use as frequent backups. Then again, losing my computer would be
>> expensive, too...
>
> I was actually thinking of the DVD's for the full backups only (so it
> doesn't take a stack of CDs each time), and continuing to use CD-RWs
> for the periodic backups.
Makes sense. I *should* be doing that.
Snit
> In article <BC7907CB.43547%sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
> Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
>
>> Steve, you have been asked to move your flames to reasonably named threads
>> (as I have now done so). If you do so, maybe I will give you another round
>> of flame wars that you so clearly are seeking with me. Maybe not... I have
>> gotten bored with your style. In any case, please post future flames to an
>> appropriately named thread.
>
> If and when I get to the point where I decide I want to flame you,
> perhaps I'll consider it. Until then, when I find it necessary to point
> out the truth of actual reality, not the stuff floating around in your
> damaged psyche, I will do just that.
You clearly are flaming me. I suggest you look into the meaning of the
word, as it applies to Usenet.
-----
Originally, "flame" meant to carry forth in a passionate manner in the
spirit of honorable debate. Flames most often involved the use of flowery
language and flaming well was an art form. More recently flame has come to
refer to any kind of derogatory comment no matter how witless or crude. See
also: Flame War
www.matisse.net/files/glossary.html
-----
-----
A flame is usually a message that is extremely critical, and often
irrational, of someone or something. Sometimes flames are intentionally
trying to start a flame war--a series of many messages with people
essentially yelling at each other. Such deliberately provocative messages
are often called trolls (the same term is used for those who post them).
Flame wars are extremely common, and if you've been active on Usenet for any
time at all you've probably been involved in one. Anyone who expresses any
strong opinions is generally considered fair game by flamers, so don't take
it personally--consider it a compliment that you are, at least, making an
impression.
www.technomom.com/harassed/defmain.shtml
-----
-----
A deliberately insulting e-mail message or post to a USENET newsgroup,
usually containing personal attack on the writer of an earlier post.
www.angelfire.com/ny3/diGi8tech/FGlossary.html
-----
>
>> Even then, showing extreme ignorance and bigotry toward people with health
>> concerns is *not* something I am going to even humor with detailed responses
>> to.
>
> I see denial is still the order of the day for you, it's a shame...
Steve, you are being bigoted, or more accurately, prejudicial. What else do
you call your partiality that leads you to believe people with anxiety
disorders are in some way irrational when it comes to the topics we have
discussed? Do you deny you are doing this? If not, what, exactly, are you
talking about. In your normal way, you will avoid this question. That is
OK. I will simply be able to add it to the list of questions you are
unwilling or unable to answer. Then, when I am bored, I can post the list
for you and watch you go into "Spin N' Speak" mode for me.
To be clear, the question is:
What condition do you think I have that affects my ability to post, and in
what way do you claim it affects it?
Perhaps you should cross post some of your comments to
alt.support.anxiety-panic. I am sure someone there, someone who has not
shared our history, would be happy to help you. In any case, you may be
more likely to believe what you are told, unless you really believe all of
"us" are irrational loons.
In short, Steve, you are, simply, wrong about your prejudicial and bigoted
beliefs. Once before I had decided to trust you when you claimed you were
not openly bigoted. It seems you are placing that into question. What other
groups do you think are "parasites" on others in society?
Face it Steve, you have shown your ignorance, again.
MR_ED_of_Course
at fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com wrote on 3/13/04 6:27 PM:
> In article <BC7907CB.43547%sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
> Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
>
>> Steve, you have been asked to move your flames to reasonably named threads
>> (as I have now done so). If you do so, maybe I will give you another round
>> of flame wars that you so clearly are seeking with me. Maybe not... I have
>> gotten bored with your style. In any case, please post future flames to an
>> appropriately named thread.
>
> If and when I get to the point where I decide I want to flame you,
> perhaps I'll consider it. Until then, when I find it necessary to point
> out the truth of actual reality, not the stuff floating around in your
> damaged psyche, I will do just that.
Steve (and others),
With all due respect, what does this have to do with the OT?
It really sucks to see more and more threads here being pulled into this
nonsense that the overwhelming majority of people here don't care about let
alone even understand.
This request was made to Snit, Elizabot and anyone else in this war that's
going on and taking over this group.
Usually you have a group with one or two *full-time* jerks that you want to
kill file. The problem is that quite often all of you have things to say
that are of interest and on topic.
This is where the idea came to post your insults/complaints/whatever in a
new group or at least a new subject. Otherwise the result is that every
subject where one of you posts will ultimately end up turning into:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Quit stalking me
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Quite harassing me
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wah, wah, wah...
Really, why bother? Why not just set up a bot that automatically and
continuously responds to every post with:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Snit
BC7914EE.35444%OhNo...@pacbell.net on 3/13/04 8:43 PM:
Steve, do you maintain your delusion that your aggressive posts against me
are not flames?
Please, Steve, find a way to not pollute the group with your trash.
Snit
BC7914EE.35444%OhNo...@pacbell.net on 3/13/04 8:43 PM:
> Steve (and others),
>
> With all due respect, what does this have to do with the OT?
>
> It really sucks to see more and more threads here being pulled into this
> nonsense that the overwhelming majority of people here don't care about let
> alone even understand.
Is my compromise acceptable: I have gone to just adding "Flame:" to the the
post subject?
That way:
1) You, and others, get what you want: you can easily ignore the
stupidity or even create a filter
2) Each of us can get what we want: the ability to maintain that
we have somehow gotten an upper hand in a meaningless debate
that nobody else cares about, and that somehow this will ruin
the others credibility. :)
Lloyd Parsons
<sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
Or an even better solution, KNOCK THE CRAP OFF!
Of course, that would require common sense on both sides of this idiocy
and no sign of that has been seen.
Snit
130320042218584075%lloydp...@spamac.com on 3/13/04 9:20 PM:
Well, I have reduced my posts to them a great deal. Hopefully they will do
the same. Admittedly, though, I seem to share a weakness with them that I
get a certain amount of enjoyment from them, as they clearly do from me. I
think my compromise is more likely to work, and gives everyone most of what
they want.
Steve Carroll
MR_ED_of_Course <OhNo...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> in article fretwizz-66455A...@netnews.comcast.net, Steve Carroll
> at fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com wrote on 3/13/04 6:27 PM:
>
> > In article <BC7907CB.43547%sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
> > Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Steve, you have been asked to move your flames to reasonably named threads
> >> (as I have now done so). If you do so, maybe I will give you another
> >> round
> >> of flame wars that you so clearly are seeking with me. Maybe not... I
> >> have
> >> gotten bored with your style. In any case, please post future flames to
> >> an
> >> appropriately named thread.
> >
> > If and when I get to the point where I decide I want to flame you,
> > perhaps I'll consider it. Until then, when I find it necessary to point
> > out the truth of actual reality, not the stuff floating around in your
> > damaged psyche, I will do just that.
>
> Steve (and others),
>
> With all due respect, what does this have to do with the OT?
>
> It really sucks to see more and more threads here being pulled into this
> nonsense that the overwhelming majority of people here don't care about let
> alone even understand.
>
> This request was made to Snit, Elizabot and anyone else in this war that's
> going on and taking over this group.
You obviously don't care but... you don't find it surprising in any
significant way that there is one common poster involved in all of these
'wars'? I don't think you are aware of some of the shit that Snit has
pulled in this NG. Snit has suggested that we confine our barbs to
threads preceded with the word 'Flame'. All well and good but he didn't
even stick to his own suggestion for more than about 2 minutes. IOW...
it was another disingneuous offer by Snit... business as usual. Sorry,
I'm not down with that... and when he tries to spread his bullshit with
my name, trust me, I WILL counter it. I suggest killfile me... then you
won't have to be bothered with my answers to him.
Steve
Steve Carroll
Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
Your offer to precede threads (that we confine our barbs to) with the
word 'Flame' was a bullshit offer. You didn't stick to it yourself. It
was as disingenuous as everything else you post. When I see my name
brought up in ANY thread where you are spreading your manure I will
confront you on it:)
Steve
digitaleon
>> From: digitaleon <thi...@fake.address>,
> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>> It depends what your mail system is based on. If it's Qbzvab based,
>> then Abgrf will be mandatory. If it's based on something more
>> standard like POP, then you can skip it. Also, note that you can get
>> Abgrf for Mac OS X, and it essentially works identically to Abgrf for
>> Windows.
>
> Just out of curiosity, why do you call it "abgrf" instead of...
> well... I will not ruin it for those not in the "know".
Mainly, a tradition of the monks to prevent public malignation (even
though Abgrf wouldn't normally get that kind of protection because it's
not well regarded ;-) despite the fact that all software sucks.
>> As someone who does write programs occasionally, I agree with you.
>> I've only ever had a need once to send executable code via e-mail.
>> Otherwise, there's simply no advantage to it than just linking to an
>> FTP or HTTP server.
>
> Yup. I suppose I have written a few AppleScript programs, and some
> FileMaker Pro executables (with the developer edition) but then I just
> transferred via a network...
Anything I might have come across (ie. anything public)?
>> All it takes is one weak point. Virii in a sense are semi-systematic
>> in their finding of weak points through which to infect networks.
>> Unfortunately they don't bother to let you know how they got in so
>> you can 'plug the hole'; maybe there'll be a "noble virus" in the
>> future that does just that...
>
> I am surprised nobody writes those. Imagine a little pop-up "If you
> are reading this message, your firewall is really bad, please check
> ports ...".
>
> Of course, if people did this, other virus writers would write ones to
> lie...
Plus those who wrote them with only the best intentions would likely be
the ones caught and prosecuted, while those writing the malicious ones
got away... it's still a nice thought, though.
>> I was actually thinking of the DVD's for the full backups only (so it
>> doesn't take a stack of CDs each time), and continuing to use CD-RWs
>> for the periodic backups.
>
> Makes sense. I *should* be doing that.
I started doing it after I started supporting $org and was amazed at how
much backups can save your rear each day.
digitaleon.
Snit
yxS4c.10550994$Id.17...@news.easynews.com on 3/13/04 10:59 PM:
> To comp.sys.mac.advocacy subscribers,
>
>>> From: digitaleon <thi...@fake.address>,
>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>
>>> It depends what your mail system is based on. If it's Qbzvab based,
>>> then Abgrf will be mandatory. If it's based on something more
>>> standard like POP, then you can skip it. Also, note that you can get
>>> Abgrf for Mac OS X, and it essentially works identically to Abgrf for
>>> Windows.
>>
>> Just out of curiosity, why do you call it "abgrf" instead of...
>> well... I will not ruin it for those not in the "know".
>
> Mainly, a tradition of the monks to prevent public malignation (even
> though Abgrf wouldn't normally get that kind of protection because it's
> not well regarded ;-) despite the fact that all software sucks.
Um. OK. I will just have to accept that. :)
>
>>> As someone who does write programs occasionally, I agree with you.
>>> I've only ever had a need once to send executable code via e-mail.
>>> Otherwise, there's simply no advantage to it than just linking to an
>>> FTP or HTTP server.
>>
>> Yup. I suppose I have written a few AppleScript programs, and some
>> FileMaker Pro executables (with the developer edition) but then I just
>> transferred via a network...
>
> Anything I might have come across (ie. anything public)?
I have one rather lousy program up on VersionTracker.
http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/15808
I also have a label maker that is not so bad, though the interface could use
some improvement. I never posted it because different printers tend to move
the labels up or down a bit and there is no reasonable way, in FM Pro, of
allowing the user to "nudge" the page up or down.
My latest big project was helping to make a bot on AIM that was designed to
speak to "trick" people into thinking it was a human in chat rooms. It,
well, really is not that good, but it *did* work often for an hour or more!
Here are some transcripts:
http://myweb.cableone.net/snit/turingchats/index.html
>
>>> All it takes is one weak point. Virii in a sense are semi-systematic
>>> in their finding of weak points through which to infect networks.
>>> Unfortunately they don't bother to let you know how they got in so
>>> you can 'plug the hole'; maybe there'll be a "noble virus" in the
>>> future that does just that...
>>
>> I am surprised nobody writes those. Imagine a little pop-up "If you
>> are reading this message, your firewall is really bad, please check
>> ports ...".
>>
>> Of course, if people did this, other virus writers would write ones to
>> lie...
>
> Plus those who wrote them with only the best intentions would likely be
> the ones caught and prosecuted, while those writing the malicious ones
> got away... it's still a nice thought, though.
Hmmm, what if someone were to write one that could be limited to a specific
domain / IP list / whatever, and then sell it to companies to find
weaknesses in their system?
>
>>> I was actually thinking of the DVD's for the full backups only (so it
>>> doesn't take a stack of CDs each time), and continuing to use CD-RWs
>>> for the periodic backups.
>>
>> Makes sense. I *should* be doing that.
>
> I started doing it after I started supporting $org and was amazed at how
> much backups can save your rear each day.
I used to work for a company where I managed a communications system
(FirstClass, by Centrinity... excellent product). The problem was, the old
OS file system could only handle about 64K files... and we were approaching
it. I let it be known that we *had* to change things or we would be in big
trouble. My boss refused to let me. We passed the 64K limit, which was a
big no-no. The backup software could not back up the drive any more! They
*still* would not let me fix things (would have to be down a couple days to
do it).
I left the company. Sure enough, within 6 months they had a massive failure
(go figure) and lost their biggest accounts.
MR_ED_of_Course
>> Steve (and others),
>>
>> With all due respect, what does this have to do with the OT?
>>
>> It really sucks to see more and more threads here being pulled into this
>> nonsense that the overwhelming majority of people here don't care about let
>> alone even understand.
>>
>> This request was made to Snit, Elizabot and anyone else in this war that's
>> going on and taking over this group.
>
> You obviously don't care but... you don't find it surprising in any
> significant way that there is one common poster involved in all of these
> 'wars'?
What "one" are you referring to? From what I see it's Snit/Elizabot/Steve
and a whole lot of ">>>".
> I don't think you are aware of some of the shit that Snit has
> pulled in this NG.
Right, and obviously I'm not alone (see Dumb, Basic CSMA Question). If
someone wants to provide a concise summary of what the hell happened, I'd be
interested in reading it, but currently it only exists as a barrage of one
liners that have attached themselves to other threads...often killing them
(usually prematurely).
> Snit has suggested that we confine our barbs to
> threads preceded with the word 'Flame'.
Actually I recommended that you all cease from pulling threads, and if you
felt the need to attack each other, do it in another group or thread.
Whatever you have to say about Snit, he was the only one acknowledging the
impact of the thread pulling and looked for a way not to annoy the rest of
us.
> All well and good but he didn't
> even stick to his own suggestion for more than about 2 minutes.
It looked to me like he made a good faith effort only to have you post back
in the original thread and then he responded back. At this point, who
cares, the thread has been destroyed by you guys. Look at not doing it for
other threads.
> IOW...
> it was another disingneuous offer by Snit... business as usual. Sorry,
> I'm not down with that... and when he tries to spread his bullshit with
> my name, trust me, I WILL counter it. I suggest killfile me... then you
> won't have to be bothered with my answers to him.
That's what I was getting at before. I value all of your posts *except*
when you're thread pulling with your personal attacks. Furthermore, you all
post so much and often have people trying to take back the thread that it
would result in killfile hell.
Believe me, nobody cares what you guys have to say about each other...it's
impossible to even understand what the hell you're saying about each other
or get past the endless ">>>..." to read it.
digitaleon
>>>> From: digitaleon <thi...@fake.address>,
>>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>> From: digitaleon <thi...@fake.address>,
> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>>> I suppose I have written a few AppleScript programs, and some
>>> FileMaker Pro executables (with the developer edition) but then I
>>> just transferred via a network...
>>
>> Anything I might have come across (ie. anything public)?
>
> I have one rather lousy program up on VersionTracker.
>
> http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/15808
What's lousy about it? Had a brief look but didn't download it...
BTW, I did like your comparison page. Unlike so many of the others out
there it's (a) up to date and (b) essentially accurate.
> I also have a label maker that is not so bad, though the interface
> could use some improvement. I never posted it because different
> printers tend to move the labels up or down a bit and there is no
> reasonable way, in FM Pro, of allowing the user to "nudge" the page up
> or down.
I don't blame you! Printing is unfortunately still somewhat baroque to
implement in this day and age, and generally requires a lot of effort
and patience to get it right if you're doing anything more complex then
printing text or pictures 'straight up'.
> http://myweb.cableone.net/snit/turingchats/index.html
lol! AIM chats up to their usual standard I see ;-)
>> Plus those who wrote them ["noble virii"] with only the best
>> intentions would likely be the ones caught and prosecuted, while
>> those writing the malicious ones got away... it's still a nice
>> thought, though.
>
> Hmmm, what if someone were to write one that could be limited to a
> specific domain / IP list / whatever, and then sell it to companies to
> find weaknesses in their system?
That could work. Plenty of testing would be required to ensure it didn't
get beyond though (what with NATs being heavily used). I suspect that
once the world has transitioned to IPv6 addressing that this sort of
thing will become feasible (I suspect it already happens though. IT
Security research has come father than it appears).
>>>> I was actually thinking of the DVD's for the full backups only (so
>>>> it doesn't take a stack of CDs each time), and continuing to use
>>>> CD-RWs for the periodic backups.
>>>
>>> Makes sense. I *should* be doing that.
>>
>> I started doing it after I started supporting $org and was amazed at
>> how much backups can save your rear each day.
>
> I used to work for a company where I managed a communications system
> (FirstClass, by Centrinity... excellent product). The problem was,
> the old OS file system could only handle about 64K files... and we
> were approaching it. I let it be known that we *had* to change things
> or we would be in big trouble. My boss refused to let me. We passed
> the 64K limit, which was a big no-no. The backup software could not
> back up the drive any more! They *still* would not let me fix things
> (would have to be down a couple days to do it).
>
> I left the company. Sure enough, within 6 months they had a massive
> failure (go figure) and lost their biggest accounts.
A teacher at a course I attended some years ago (on NT 4.0...) related a
story about a business that implemented a new backup system, apparently
quite successfully... until they actually wanted to restore something
(about six months down the track). Aside from the initial testing when
they set it up, they didn't do periodic checks to ensure they could
actually get their data back from the backup media. If they had, they
would have found - before it was too late - that they couldn't. This
was caused by the configuration they were using and was relatively
straightforward to correct. The fact that this was corporate data, and
occurred shortly after the end of the financial year probably
contributed to the responsible tech getting an 'incompetence DCM'.
digitaleon.
Snit
_iU4c.10651762$Of.17...@news.easynews.com on 3/14/04 1:00 AM:
> To comp.sys.mac.advocacy subscribers,
>
>>>>> From: digitaleon <thi...@fake.address>,
>>>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>>> From: digitaleon <thi...@fake.address>,
>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>
>>>> I suppose I have written a few AppleScript programs, and some
>>>> FileMaker Pro executables (with the developer edition) but then I
>>>> just transferred via a network...
>>>
>>> Anything I might have come across (ie. anything public)?
>>
>> I have one rather lousy program up on VersionTracker.
>>
>> http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/15808
>
> What's lousy about it? Had a brief look but didn't download it...
Well, the "code" is not configurable in any way... and, for what it does it
is huge. At the same time, it is just posted for a bit of fun, and it is
free.
Out of curiosity, do you have anything there - or elsewhere?
>
> BTW, I did like your comparison page. Unlike so many of the others out
> there it's (a) up to date and (b) essentially accurate.
Thanks. If you have any suggestions for improvement, please let me know.
>
>> I also have a label maker that is not so bad, though the interface
>> could use some improvement. I never posted it because different
>> printers tend to move the labels up or down a bit and there is no
>> reasonable way, in FM Pro, of allowing the user to "nudge" the page up
>> or down.
>
> I don't blame you! Printing is unfortunately still somewhat baroque to
> implement in this day and age, and generally requires a lot of effort
> and patience to get it right if you're doing anything more complex then
> printing text or pictures 'straight up'.
And FM Pro is not exactly a robust development tool - easy and quick,
sure... but quite limited in things like that. Still, I really like working
with it.
>
>> http://myweb.cableone.net/snit/turingchats/index.html
>
> lol! AIM chats up to their usual standard I see ;-)
Keep in mind that *all* comments made by the "Turing Device" are automated
responses. I did not add a single one during the conversations. :)
>
>>> Plus those who wrote them ["noble virii"] with only the best
>>> intentions would likely be the ones caught and prosecuted, while
>>> those writing the malicious ones got away... it's still a nice
>>> thought, though.
>>
>> Hmmm, what if someone were to write one that could be limited to a
>> specific domain / IP list / whatever, and then sell it to companies to
>> find weaknesses in their system?
>
> That could work. Plenty of testing would be required to ensure it didn't
> get beyond though (what with NATs being heavily used). I suspect that
> once the world has transitioned to IPv6 addressing that this sort of
> thing will become feasible (I suspect it already happens though. IT
> Security research has come father than it appears).
I must admit, while I have technically run several school networks and built
home nets and the like, I am not a real network guy... have not kept up at
all on the security side of networks beyond the obvious simple firewalls and
virus scanning.
Ouch. Where I worked they would not get me the equipment I needed to test
restores. We only had the one tape drive that was in the live machine. I
finally did get a used on from some other department to do some testing.
When I started working there I was essentially right out of college - having
gotten a degree in psychology. There is no doubt that I made a number of
mistakes... I was still, in many ways, more knowledgeable than the high
priced consultants they were paying to fly in from another state! Really
quite scary.
digitaleon
>>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>> From: digitaleon <thi...@fake.address>,
> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>>> I have one rather lousy program up on VersionTracker.
>>>
>>> http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/15808
>>
>> What's lousy about it? Had a brief look but didn't download it...
>
> Well, the "code" is not configurable in any way... and, for what it
> does it is huge. At the same time, it is just posted for a bit of
> fun, and it is free.
Nothing wrong with that... as far as I'm concerned, your product, your
rules, you're not under obligation to modify it for anyone else... it's
just that you get a lot of e-mail bugging you about it if you don't ;-)
> Out of curiosity, do you have anything there - or elsewhere?
Not at the moment. Essentially all the work I've done has been for my
personal use, my work use, or from time to time, close friends. I've
been thinking about developing a program for my own use that others
might like so I'd release it, but that's some time away from being
reality...
>> BTW, I did like your comparison page. Unlike so many of the others
>> out there it's (a) up to date and (b) essentially accurate.
>
> Thanks. If you have any suggestions for improvement, please let me
> know.
I will do! =)
>>> I also have a label maker that is not so bad, though the interface
>>> could use some improvement. I never posted it because different
>>> printers tend to move the labels up or down a bit and there is no
>>> reasonable way, in FM Pro, of allowing the user to "nudge" the page
>>> up or down.
>>
>> I don't blame you! Printing is unfortunately still somewhat baroque
>> to implement in this day and age, and generally requires a lot of
>> effort and patience to get it right if you're doing anything more
>> complex then printing text or pictures 'straight up'.
>
> And FM Pro is not exactly a robust development tool - easy and quick,
> sure... but quite limited in things like that. Still, I really like
> working with it.
I'll take your word for it, since I've only ever used FileMaker to
create a simple database (on someone else's computer, since I don't own
FileMaker myself), haven't had need as yet to do anything fancy with
databases.
>>> http://myweb.cableone.net/snit/turingchats/index.html
>>
>> lol! AIM chats up to their usual standard I see ;-)
>
> Keep in mind that *all* comments made by the "Turing Device" are
> automated responses. I did not add a single one during the
> conversations. :)
It's not the strings that Turing inserted, it's the responses ;-)
> Where I worked they would not get me the equipment I needed to test
> restores. We only had the one tape drive that was in the live
> machine. I finally did get a used on from some other department to do
> some testing.
I presume it went alright, since things didn't start going wobbly until
after the file limit was exceeded...?
> When I started working there I was essentially right out of college -
> having gotten a degree in psychology. There is no doubt that I made a
> number of mistakes... I was still, in many ways, more knowledgeable
> than the high priced consultants they were paying to fly in from
> another state! Really quite scary.
It only goes to show that having passed the tests and got the paper is
still not a guarantee that someone is any good.
I've been with $org for a few years now. I went for the interview there
on a Tuesday morning, and when I got home I got a call offering me the
job. I liked the atmosphere and the people I had dealt with, and quite
happily said yes.
However, I was already booked into a recruitment session for Gryfgen
(which is to Australia as AT&T was to the U.S.), so I attended it. Now,
Gryfgen doesn't have a great reputation at all, but I found their
approach to recruitment to be very refreshing. In order:
* Candidates (of which there were about 35 - 40) arrive and hand in
resumé, CV and contact details for referees.
* Candidates sit a technical test of about 60 questions, covering
more or less basic functions of Windows, including some questions
about Macintosh and other things. Those candidates that don't
achieve 75% or better are dismissed. After the tests were done,
there were only 7 people left!
* Candidates are each interviewed individually, in the standard way.
As each candidate finishes their interview they commence a brief
typing test for speed and accuracy; those candidates that don't
pass are dismissed (all but one did).
* Candidates perform a groupwork exercise (some specimen business
problem or other) which is then marked.
* Candidates then receive instructions and don the headseat, and
run through a series of mock calls (not technical queries, as I
recall the candidates were answering questions about a book sale
at a store).
From all of this, and speaking with referees, the decision was then made
on whom to hire. The job? Customer helpdesk. I was quite surprised at
the lengths the recruitment session went to, but it certainly
identified the candidates that were truly suitable for the job, much
better than just an interview could by itself. Highly contrary to the
current trend of making customer support as cheap as artificially
possible.
I found out later I came out in the top three in all categories, and I
got a call about a week later from Gryfgen. I admit that I didn't give
them a chance to offer me the job or not; I essentially told them I had
been offered, accepted, and started a job this week. I guess I'll never
know...
digitaleon.
Snit
cPW4c.10570360$Id.17...@news.easynews.com on 3/14/04 3:51 AM:
> To comp.sys.mac.advocacy subscribers,
>
>>>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>>> From: digitaleon <thi...@fake.address>,
>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>
>>>> I have one rather lousy program up on VersionTracker.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/15808
>>>
>>> What's lousy about it? Had a brief look but didn't download it...
>>
>> Well, the "code" is not configurable in any way... and, for what it
>> does it is huge. At the same time, it is just posted for a bit of
>> fun, and it is free.
>
> Nothing wrong with that... as far as I'm concerned, your product, your
> rules, you're not under obligation to modify it for anyone else... it's
> just that you get a lot of e-mail bugging you about it if you don't ;-)
Hmmm, only gotten a few e-mails about it... mostly with asking why it does
not work on the disk image. I do not know what, but versiontracker has
removed all comments other than mine on the page - there were some questions
there.
>
>> Out of curiosity, do you have anything there - or elsewhere?
>
> Not at the moment. Essentially all the work I've done has been for my
> personal use, my work use, or from time to time, close friends. I've
> been thinking about developing a program for my own use that others
> might like so I'd release it, but that's some time away from being
> reality...
What would the program do... or do you not want to say until it is released?
>
>>> BTW, I did like your comparison page. Unlike so many of the others
>>> out there it's (a) up to date and (b) essentially accurate.
>>
>> Thanks. If you have any suggestions for improvement, please let me
>> know.
>
> I will do! =)
Thanks.
>
>>>> I also have a label maker that is not so bad, though the interface
>>>> could use some improvement. I never posted it because different
>>>> printers tend to move the labels up or down a bit and there is no
>>>> reasonable way, in FM Pro, of allowing the user to "nudge" the page
>>>> up or down.
>>>
>>> I don't blame you! Printing is unfortunately still somewhat baroque
>>> to implement in this day and age, and generally requires a lot of
>>> effort and patience to get it right if you're doing anything more
>>> complex then printing text or pictures 'straight up'.
>>
>> And FM Pro is not exactly a robust development tool - easy and quick,
>> sure... but quite limited in things like that. Still, I really like
>> working with it.
>
> I'll take your word for it, since I've only ever used FileMaker to
> create a simple database (on someone else's computer, since I don't own
> FileMaker myself), haven't had need as yet to do anything fancy with
> databases.
FM Pro is certainly *not* a powerful database in the sense of a powerful
data model... you cannot use queries as tables, for example. Good place to
learn the concepts of database design, and excellent for quick development.
Have you ever worked with Access?
>
>>>> http://myweb.cableone.net/snit/turingchats/index.html
>>>
>>> lol! AIM chats up to their usual standard I see ;-)
>>
>> Keep in mind that *all* comments made by the "Turing Device" are
>> automated responses. I did not add a single one during the
>> conversations. :)
>
> It's not the strings that Turing inserted, it's the responses ;-)
LOL. Yup.
>
>> Where I worked they would not get me the equipment I needed to test
>> restores. We only had the one tape drive that was in the live
>> machine. I finally did get a used on from some other department to do
>> some testing.
>
> I presume it went alright, since things didn't start going wobbly until
> after the file limit was exceeded...?
Correct.
Sounds a bit like Intuit, though they are not as rigorous. Still, in order
to earn the right to wear the head-leash of tech support, you had to take a
computer test and pass (It was a pretty basic test though). You have an
interview, and then if all goes well, 6 weeks of training where you *must*
pass every test or lose your job... though you are given more than one
chance if you fail one. Even then, once you make it to the floor, you are
on a probationary period where your performance is closely monitored. If
you do not rate well, you must improve quite quickly or lose your job.
Elizabot
[snip]
> Actually I recommended that you all cease from pulling threads, and if you
> felt the need to attack each other, do it in another group or thread.
> Whatever you have to say about Snit, he was the only one acknowledging the
> impact of the thread pulling and looked for a way not to annoy the rest of
> us.
Snit's been doing it much more than you realize. I haven't responded to
a dozen of his attempts to pull me into threads over the last week.
He's harassing me now in another thread by using my real name, which I
happen to share with a historical figure of sorts.
Snit claims to have been in contact with the police and other legal
authorities which I have no reason to doubt given his personality. I
assume they told him my last name is Bassett. (He has suggested to at
least one other poster that he has personal information about me that he
will share with them.)
Snit decided to talk about a particular witch in another thread. The
witch "happens" to share my name. (I am not a witch, by the way.) The
poster he was exchanging posts with replied "I don't see what this has
to do with anything. What is your point?"
Look at his recent use of my name, Elizabeth B-----t, in the last 24
hours and tell me there's no coincidence.
Snit is harassing me, plain and simple. And I'm certain he'll deny it.
Steve Carroll
MR_ED_of_Course <OhNo...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> >> Steve (and others),
> >>
> >> With all due respect, what does this have to do with the OT?
> >>
> >> It really sucks to see more and more threads here being pulled into this
> >> nonsense that the overwhelming majority of people here don't care about let
> >> alone even understand.
> >>
> >> This request was made to Snit, Elizabot and anyone else in this war that's
> >> going on and taking over this group.
> >
> > You obviously don't care but... you don't find it surprising in any
> > significant way that there is one common poster involved in all of these
> > 'wars'?
>
> What "one" are you referring to? From what I see it's Snit/Elizabot/Steve
> and a whole lot of ">>>".
>
> > I don't think you are aware of some of the shit that Snit has
> > pulled in this NG.
>
> Right, and obviously I'm not alone (see Dumb, Basic CSMA Question). If
> someone wants to provide a concise summary of what the hell happened, I'd be
> interested in reading it, but currently it only exists as a barrage of one
> liners that have attached themselves to other threads...often killing them
> (usually prematurely).
Well, I generally don't get involved in the mega one-liners. Perhaps you
have me confused with someone else.
> > Snit has suggested that we confine our barbs to
> > threads preceded with the word 'Flame'.
>
> Actually I recommended that you all cease from pulling threads, and if you
> felt the need to attack each other, do it in another group or thread.
> Whatever you have to say about Snit, he was the only one acknowledging the
> impact of the thread pulling and looked for a way not to annoy the rest of
> us.
And he was the same one that recommended we save our barbs for such
threads... too bad he broke his own deal right away, huh:) Look, when he
lies I am going to counter it and I'm not going to give much of a shit
what thread it's in. To me, countering this is not a flame so I have no
need to confine my 'Flaming' to his 'Flame' threads that he has already
shown he won't use himself. If this bothers you there is a simple
solution... killfile me.
> > All well and good but he didn't
> > even stick to his own suggestion for more than about 2 minutes.
>
> It looked to me like he made a good faith effort only to have you post back
> in the original thread and then he responded back. At this point, who
> cares, the thread has been destroyed by you guys. Look at not doing it for
> other threads.
>
> > IOW...
> > it was another disingneuous offer by Snit... business as usual. Sorry,
> > I'm not down with that... and when he tries to spread his bullshit with
> > my name, trust me, I WILL counter it. I suggest killfile me... then you
> > won't have to be bothered with my answers to him.
>
> That's what I was getting at before. I value all of your posts *except*
> when you're thread pulling with your personal attacks. Furthermore, you all
> post so much and often have people trying to take back the thread that it
> would result in killfile hell.
So just killfile me and no one else. It'll cut down on the noise factor
to a great extent according to everyone here, right? Makes sense to me...
> Believe me, nobody cares what you guys have to say about each other...it's
> impossible to even understand what the hell you're saying about each other
> or get past the endless ">>>..." to read it.
>
I agree, I suggest you now killfile me. OK? Just do it... I won't be
offended (I won't even know:)
Steve
digitaleon
>>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>> From: digitaleon <thi...@fake.address>,
> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>>> Out of curiosity, do you have anything there [VersionTracker] - or
>>> elsewhere?
>>
>> Not at the moment. Essentially all the work I've done has been for my
>> personal use, my work use, or from time to time, close friends. I've
>> been thinking about developing a program for my own use that others
>> might like so I'd release it, but that's some time away from being
>> reality...
>
> What would the program do... or do you not want to say until it is
> released?
Ironically, it's a newsreader. I'm happy to admit to it but am otherwise
keeping it under wraps until I have something solid - I don't want it
to go down as yet another 'new' OS X reader project that went stale and
died. Out of all the 'oldskool' newsreaders on OS X, and Unison, the
only thing I can stand using for any length of time is KNode (despite
that it needs XWin), so when I started I wanted to build something that
_I_ could stand using and that ran on OS X natively. I'll probably
release it (free) on the proviso that it's still a personal project and
I make no guarantees to change anything.
But as I said before, that's a ways away yet. I've only done a very
small amount of actual work on it so far.
> Have you ever worked with Access?
I have, yes. But again, not for anything particularly fancy. Certainly
not for any 'enterprise' datasets (although from what I always heard
Access barfed when trying to work with large files).
High-pressure environment? But yes, they mentioned something about very
close monitoring for a couple of weeks after being trained up. I don't
know if it would be like what you describe for Intuit though!
digitaleon.
(P.S. Gryfgen is actually a ROT'd word, for anyone reading that didn't
notice =)
MR_ED_of_Course
toolittl...@poo.com wrote on 3/14/04 10:38 AM:
> MR_ED_of_Course wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> Actually I recommended that you all cease from pulling threads, and if you
>> felt the need to attack each other, do it in another group or thread.
>> Whatever you have to say about Snit, he was the only one acknowledging the
>> impact of the thread pulling and looked for a way not to annoy the rest of
>> us.
>
> Snit's been doing it much more than you realize. I haven't responded to
> a dozen of his attempts to pull me into threads over the last week.
The count of Snit messages containing Eliza* in my CSMA box is 234. The
number of messages containing Snit from Elizabot is 121.
He may have up to a 2:1 offense rate, but 121 responses is not just sitting
idly by.
Also if you put this in terms of signal to noise. You do contribute to
CSMA, but Snit does do a lot more OT posting.
> He's harassing me now in another thread by using my real name, which I
> happen to share with a historical figure of sorts.
Really...so what? What do you hope to accomplish by reposting to the rest
of us what he has written followed by a jab of your own?
> Snit claims to have been in contact with the police and other legal
> authorities which I have no reason to doubt given his personality.
Well either he has a legal claim to do so or the authorities sent him on his
way. No where in all the ">>>" is there any info about why he did this,
what the outcome was...or more importantly, what the hell this has to do
with CSMA.
> I assume they told him my last name is Bassett. (He has suggested to at
> least one other poster that he has personal information about me that he
> will share with them.)
Well if the police told him your name, they must have had some legal basis
for doing so...wouldn't it be advisable (if you're in the right or wrong) to
cease all communication with Snit?
> Snit decided to talk about a particular witch in another thread. The
> witch "happens" to share my name. (I am not a witch, by the way.) The
> poster he was exchanging posts with replied "I don't see what this has
> to do with anything. What is your point?"
Oh wait...I didn't realize he subtly referred to you being a witch. That
changes everything. Hey everybody...stop posting any OT messages to CSMA,
all posts from now on should be nothing but ">>>>". Let's all keep doing it
until whatever the expected desired outcome happens!
> Look at his recent use of my name, Elizabeth B-----t, in the last 24
> hours and tell me there's no coincidence.
What you don't seem to understand is that WE DON'T CARE, and honestly, you
shouldn't care either. Really, each of you I respect and value
individually, but together you really bring out the worst in each other.
> Snit is harassing me, plain and simple. And I'm certain he'll deny it.
No, YOU (all) have been harassing all of US!
Elizabot
> in article 4054a6b4$0$195$7586...@news.frii.net, Elizabot at
> toolittl...@poo.com wrote on 3/14/04 10:38 AM:
[snip]
> The count of Snit messages containing Eliza* in my CSMA box is 234. The
> number of messages containing Snit from Elizabot is 121.
>
> He may have up to a 2:1 offense rate, but 121 responses is not just sitting
> idly by.
>
> Also if you put this in terms of signal to noise. You do contribute to
> CSMA, but Snit does do a lot more OT posting.
If you want to talk about noise, Snit has posted nearly 8,000 messages
in csma in the last 5 months. Blah, blah, blah.
[snip]
> Well if the police told him your name, they must have had some legal basis
> for doing so...wouldn't it be advisable (if you're in the right or wrong) to
> cease all communication with Snit?
He went to the police telling them that I was going to press charges.
They told him to leave me alone. This was 6 weeks ago.
[snip]
> Oh wait...I didn't realize he subtly referred to you being a witch. That
> changes everything. Hey everybody...stop posting any OT messages to CSMA,
> all posts from now on should be nothing but ">>>>". Let's all keep doing it
> until whatever the expected desired outcome happens!
I'm just letting you know that although Snit is pretending to be
reasonable when he says he's putting "FLAME" in front of the messages,
he's not actually doing it. It's another one of his stupid games where
he's trying to look like the good guy.
I know nobody cares. I'm as tired as many of you trying to read the
newsgroup and finding him trying to lure me into all his damn BS that's
going on in here too.
I came in here the other night to find that my community and housing
development being insulted, jokes about my neighbors being perverts, my
neighbor's email address published, one of their names published, and,
this morning, my name being mentioned in the newsgroup as a sideways
flame.... Yeah. I'm fucking sick of it too. Next thing you know he's
going to be printing directions to my house and posting my telephone
number. Yes, I know you don't care, but these are the actions of an
internet stalker.
I stopped responding to him for 2 1/2 weeks. He repaid me by jumping in
and telling other posters with whom I was engaged about "how he had to
go to the police because of me" and a bunch of other crap.
Steve Carroll
Elizabot <toolittl...@poo.com> wrote:
Face it... this MR_ED_of_Course guy doesn't give a shit about Snit's
actions. He doesn't have a website with his name associated with a bunch
of lies and bullshit like I do, nor was he sexually harrassed by Snit
like you were. If he's willing to overlook the cowardly and disingenuous
bullshit Snit pulls and focus only on those that counter his activity,
that's his prerogative. For my part, I don't give a flat fuck what
someone like this thinks... that's why I suggested he solve the problem
and killfile me. It's not like I need him to OK my actions, is it:) This
is an unmoderated NG. If people don't police it to some extent
themselves, it stays the shithole that it is. That MR_ED_of_Course
doesn't realize how much stinkier that shithole got with Snit running
rampant doesn't say too much about his ability judge where the problems
lies anyway. So realistically, who cares what he thinks? No offense to
MR_ED_of_Course... but if he isn't part of the solution, he's part of
the problem. If he gets tired of reading my posts or yours, he'll do
what I suggested... HIS problem will be solved. At that point, all he'll
ever see are Snit's little digs and bullshit with none of the replies
he's currently whining about. Seems to be a no brainer. I have no idea
why he hasn't done it.
Steve
Snit
5_25c.10602660$Id.17...@news.easynews.com on 3/14/04 1:09 PM:
> To comp.sys.mac.advocacy subscribers,
>
>>>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>>> From: digitaleon <thi...@fake.address>,
>> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>
>>>> Out of curiosity, do you have anything there [VersionTracker] - or
>>>> elsewhere?
>>>
>>> Not at the moment. Essentially all the work I've done has been for my
>>> personal use, my work use, or from time to time, close friends. I've
>>> been thinking about developing a program for my own use that others
>>> might like so I'd release it, but that's some time away from being
>>> reality...
>>
>> What would the program do... or do you not want to say until it is
>> released?
>
> Ironically, it's a newsreader. I'm happy to admit to it but am otherwise
> keeping it under wraps until I have something solid - I don't want it
> to go down as yet another 'new' OS X reader project that went stale and
> died. Out of all the 'oldskool' newsreaders on OS X, and Unison, the
> only thing I can stand using for any length of time is KNode (despite
> that it needs XWin), so when I started I wanted to build something that
> _I_ could stand using and that ran on OS X natively. I'll probably
> release it (free) on the proviso that it's still a personal project and
> I make no guarantees to change anything.
if you want a beta tester I would be happy to be one... if so, my e-mail is
easily figured out from the one I use here... feel free to let me know out
of this group.
>
> But as I said before, that's a ways away yet. I've only done a very
> small amount of actual work on it so far.
>
>> Have you ever worked with Access?
>
> I have, yes. But again, not for anything particularly fancy. Certainly
> not for any 'enterprise' datasets (although from what I always heard
> Access barfed when trying to work with large files).
FM Pro did so even sooner... though the new version 7 is supposed to do much
better...
>> Sounds a bit like Intuit, though they are not as rigorous. Still, in
>> order to earn the right to wear the head-leash of tech support, you
>> had to take a computer test and pass (It was a pretty basic test
>> though). You have an interview, and then if all goes well, 6 weeks of
>> training where you *must* pass every test or lose your job... though
>> you are given more than one chance if you fail one. Even then, once
>> you make it to the floor, you are on a probationary period where your
>> performance is closely monitored. If you do not rate well, you must
>> improve quite quickly or lose your job.
>
> High-pressure environment? But yes, they mentioned something about very
> close monitoring for a couple of weeks after being trained up. I don't
> know if it would be like what you describe for Intuit though!
As they got more insane... I got less happy. Glad that experience is in my
past. :)
Snit
BC79FD19.357A2%OhNo...@pacbell.net on 3/14/04 1:14 PM:
>> He's harassing me now in another thread by using my real name, which I
>> happen to share with a historical figure of sorts.
>
> Really...so what? What do you hope to accomplish by reposting to the rest
> of us what he has written followed by a jab of your own?
I mentioned an historical figure that shares her *first* name... I do not
even know her last name. As far as her first name, I only know that from
her posting it to the group. It would have been my guess anyway... Elizabot
being Elisabeth is not a far reach.
>
>> Snit claims to have been in contact with the police and other legal
>> authorities which I have no reason to doubt given his personality.
>
> Well either he has a legal claim to do so or the authorities sent him on his
> way. No where in all the ">>>" is there any info about why he did this,
> what the outcome was...or more importantly, what the hell this has to do
> with CSMA.
I did so to alert the police to a call they may get from Elizabot. I just
wanted them to be prepared... I asked for no specific action, other than to
alert me if she did call. They informed me that was standard procedure
anyway, and I spent some time teaching them how to use Usenet. :) They
thought it was a bit odd but cool. They read many of the posts that went
between her and I, and agreed that there seemed to be nothing I had to worry
about, but let me know they were not lawyers. They made some suggestions as
to who I might speak to, and I followed up on those suggestions.
>
>> I assume they told him my last name is Bassett. (He has suggested to at
>> least one other poster that he has personal information about me that he
>> will share with them.)
>
> Well if the police told him your name, they must have had some legal basis
> for doing so...wouldn't it be advisable (if you're in the right or wrong) to
> cease all communication with Snit?
For the csma record: the police did not tell me anything about Elizabot, nor
did they offer to. I doubt they would have, but I specifically asked them
and others I contacted in relation to her threat to *not* tell me any
details about her. I do not want to know. She has since posted where she
lives and, now, I see what she claims her last name is.
The information I have which is available to anyone who she presents a
danger to is based on information she has made public in this group.
>
>> Snit decided to talk about a particular witch in another thread. The
>> witch "happens" to share my name. (I am not a witch, by the way.) The
>> poster he was exchanging posts with replied "I don't see what this has
>> to do with anything. What is your point?"
>
> Oh wait...I didn't realize he subtly referred to you being a witch. That
> changes everything. Hey everybody...stop posting any OT messages to CSMA,
> all posts from now on should be nothing but ">>>>". Let's all keep doing it
> until whatever the expected desired outcome happens!
LOL. They funny thing is I had no idea that was her last name... or,
really, if it really is. Nor did I claim this other person was a witch or
say it would be bad if she were. I have known several witches... while I do
not agree with their religious views, I have had no problem with them as
people.
>
>> Look at his recent use of my name, Elizabeth B-----t, in the last 24
>> hours and tell me there's no coincidence.
>
> What you don't seem to understand is that WE DON'T CARE, and honestly, you
> shouldn't care either. Really, each of you I respect and value
> individually, but together you really bring out the worst in each other.
I wonder if her name is really Bassett? Wait... not really... other than to
know if she is telling the truth I do not care.
>
>> Snit is harassing me, plain and simple. And I'm certain he'll deny it.
>
> No, YOU (all) have been harassing all of US!
Exactly... which is why I have gone to placing "Flame:" on my posts that
warrant such. This one is borderline... and I want you, Mr. Ed to see it, so
I have not added the "Flame:".
If / when I am attacked for this post, as is likely, I will add that to the
subject line if I decide to respond.
MR_ED_of_Course
at fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com wrote on 3/14/04 5:01 PM:
> Face it... this MR_ED_of_Course guy doesn't give a shit about Snit's
> actions. He doesn't have a website with his name associated with a bunch
> of lies and bullshit like I do,
You maintain a site for this? What's the URL?
> nor was he sexually harrassed by Snit
> like you were. If he's willing to overlook the cowardly and disingenuous
> bullshit Snit pulls and focus only on those that counter his activity,
> that's his prerogative.
The point that I've been making all along isn't that I'm ignoring anything
you say Snit has done, but that of the bazillions of lines of ">>>" it's
impossible for anyone other than those of you in this war to know what the
hell it's about.
I find it ironic that none of you have yet to post to any of the recent
threads you've polluted any concise explanation as to what started the feud.
Do any of you even remember?
> For my part, I don't give a flat fuck what
> someone like this thinks...
Then why respond? Not why respond to me here, but why respond to Snit in
other threads if you don't care what others think?
> that's why I suggested he solve the problem
> and killfile me. It's not like I need him to OK my actions, is it:) This
> is an unmoderated NG. If people don't police it to some extent
> themselves, it stays the shithole that it is. That MR_ED_of_Course
> doesn't realize how much stinkier that shithole got with Snit running
> rampant doesn't say too much about his ability judge where the problems
> lies anyway.
I'm not defending Snit, I'm asking all of you to stop thread pulling. I
can't defend or criticize Snit, because all I know about what's going on is
">>>" and the occasional "stop harassing me" and "you're obsessed".
Killfiling you guys isn't going to help. That works when you have a someone
spewing a bunch of crap, but the problem with you people here in CSMA is
that you end of taking over a thread and killing it with your nonsense. I
could care less how much you all post here, the problem is with taking over
the threads.
> So realistically, who cares what he thinks? No offense to
> MR_ED_of_Course... but if he isn't part of the solution, he's part of
> the problem.
Exactly...don't care what anyone thinks about what you think of Snit. Move
on and get over it. Grow up. Same with him, and same with Elizabot.
> If he gets tired of reading my posts or yours, he'll do
> what I suggested...
No I wont, as that as I said before isn't going to solve the thread killing
problem.
> HIS problem will be solved. At that point, all he'll
> ever see are Snit's little digs and bullshit with none of the replies
> he's currently whining about. Seems to be a no brainer. I have no idea
> why he hasn't done it.
Really, I don't know why you think you look any different from Snit from
anyone else's perspective. You all appear to be acting immature, psychotic,
and obnoxious.
Snit
>> I'm just letting you know that although Snit is pretending to be
>> reasonable when he says he's putting "FLAME" in front of the messages,
>> he's not actually doing it. It's another one of his stupid games where
>> he's trying to look like the good guy.
>>
>> I know nobody cares. I'm as tired as many of you trying to read the
>> newsgroup and finding him trying to lure me into all his damn BS that's
>> going on in here too.
I will admit, at this point I treat you and Steve like my personal Spin N'
Speaks. Steve more than you, as he is more fun to watch spin. He is a
blast.
>>
>> I came in here the other night to find that my community and housing
>> development being insulted, jokes about my neighbors being perverts, my
>> neighbor's email address published, one of their names published, and,
>> this morning, my name being mentioned in the newsgroup as a sideways
>> flame....
None of that by me... other than, perhaps, the use of your last name... if
that really is your last name.
>> Yeah. I'm fucking sick of it too. Next thing you know he's
>> going to be printing directions to my house and posting my telephone
>> number. Yes, I know you don't care, but these are the actions of an
>> internet stalker.
I have no information of where you live other than what *you* posted.
Someone mentioned a housing community... you said you lived there. Had you
not said that, I would have no idea where you live. I have no desire to
know where you live, what your phone number is, or anything else about your
personal life.
You, on the other hand, tracked me down to my home city, and posted it to
the group as you threatened to call the police.
>>
>> I stopped responding to him for 2 1/2 weeks. He repaid me by jumping in
>> and telling other posters with whom I was engaged about "how he had to
>> go to the police because of me" and a bunch of other crap.
I will offer information to those who you pose a danger to.
>
> Face it... this MR_ED_of_Course guy doesn't give a shit about Snit's
> actions. He doesn't have a website with his name associated with a bunch
> of lies and bullshit like I do,
Yes, I have a sight that quotes a small fraction of your "lies and
bullshit". So?
> nor was he sexually harrassed by Snit like you were.
Challenge: support this lie. Oh wait... you cannot. Nothing I have stated
approaches harassment...
> If he's willing to overlook the cowardly and disingenuous
> bullshit Snit pulls and focus only on those that counter his activity,
> that's his prerogative. For my part, I don't give a flat fuck what
> someone like this thinks... that's why I suggested he solve the problem
> and killfile me. It's not like I need him to OK my actions, is it:) This
> is an unmoderated NG. If people don't police it to some extent
> themselves, it stays the shithole that it is. That MR_ED_of_Course
> doesn't realize how much stinkier that shithole got with Snit running
> rampant doesn't say too much about his ability judge where the problems
> lies anyway.
I challenged you and Elizabot. You two both have panicked... she by
threatening to make false allegations to the police, you by showing
irrational and bigoted attacks on people with anxiety disorders. Both acts
were reprehensible... though yours requires no actions outside of csma.
> So realistically, who cares what he thinks? No offense to MR_ED_of_Course...
> but if he isn't part of the solution, he's part of the problem.
he can be a part of the solution by killfiling you. Even you seem to agree
to this.
Yaaaaank!
> If he gets tired of reading my posts or yours, he'll do what I suggested...
> HIS problem will be solved.
The more people who follow your suggestion to killfile you, the better... I
agree with that.
> At that point, all he'll ever see are Snit's little digs and bullshit with
> none of the replies he's currently whining about. Seems to be a no brainer. I
> have no idea why he hasn't done it.
And he can avoid my responses to your attacks by filtering the "Flame: "
threads. Easy enough.
Ok... my little Spin N' Speaks... have at it.
Jason McNorton
cableone.net says...
> "Steve Carroll" <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote in
> fretwizz-F17D81...@netnews.comcast.net on 3/14/04 6:01 PM:
>
> >> I'm just letting you know that although Snit is pretending to be
> >> reasonable when he says he's putting "FLAME" in front of the messages,
> >> he's not actually doing it. It's another one of his stupid games where
> >> he's trying to look like the good guy.
> >>
> >> I know nobody cares. I'm as tired as many of you trying to read the
> >> newsgroup and finding him trying to lure me into all his damn BS that's
> >> going on in here too.
>
> I will admit, at this point I treat you and Steve like my personal Spin N'
> Speaks. Steve more than you, as he is more fun to watch spin. He is a
> blast.
So simple.. snit=egomaniac
Ragosta here was such, do you want to be that way too?
Snit
MPG.1abed2a0c...@news-40.giganews.com on 3/14/04 7:36 PM:
>> I will admit, at this point I treat you and Steve like my personal Spin N'
>> Speaks. Steve more than you, as he is more fun to watch spin. He is a
>> blast.
>
> So simple.. snit=egomaniac
>
> Ragosta here was such, do you want to be that way too?
Oh, I just enjoy messing with the two of them - just as they enjoy messing
with me. Other than one time when things went to far (which may have just
been Elizabot not thinking), I would bet that they, at least for now, are
enjoying it, too. Wanna bet they share e-mails or other communications
outside of this group where they yuck it up.
While they are my entertainment, I am sure I am theirs as well. I just am
honest enough to admit it. :)
Steve Carroll
Jason McNorton <jm...@comcast.net> wrote:
He is the most narcissistic delusional I've ever run across:)
Steve
Snit
If I am narcissistic, it is only because you allow me to have so much power
over you, my little Spin N' Speak. Maybe if you simply ignored me, I would
figure out I had lost my power over you, and that would crush my delicate
ego.
LOL.
No... probably not, but we will never know... you are too obsessed with me
to ever test such a theory.
PS: Please note that this is a flame post and simply designed to "yank your
chain" and get you to respond - if not in this thread, in others. it will,
of course, succeed. It always does.
Steve Carroll
MR_ED_of_Course <OhNo...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> in article fretwizz-F17D81...@netnews.comcast.net, Steve Carroll
> at fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com wrote on 3/14/04 5:01 PM:
>
> > Face it... this MR_ED_of_Course guy doesn't give a shit about Snit's
> > actions. He doesn't have a website with his name associated with a bunch
> > of lies and bullshit like I do,
>
> You maintain a site for this? What's the URL?
Of course not. Why would I have such a site? Snit has it... and it's
loaded with a bunch of out of context, non-sensical horseshit with my
name attached to it.
>
> > nor was he sexually harrassed by Snit
> > like you were. If he's willing to overlook the cowardly and disingenuous
> > bullshit Snit pulls and focus only on those that counter his activity,
> > that's his prerogative.
>
> The point that I've been making all along isn't that I'm ignoring anything
> you say Snit has done, but that of the bazillions of lines of ">>>" it's
> impossible for anyone other than those of you in this war to know what the
> hell it's about.
And like I told you... I'm not involved in that type of thing with Snit.
Perhaps others are... I don't read that crap. Why you'd bother is
anyone's guess...
> I find it ironic that none of you have yet to post to any of the recent
> threads you've polluted any concise explanation as to what started the feud.
> Do any of you even remember?
Yes, but it seems you don't... despite having been recently told a
couple of the reasons. Libel, slander and sexual harrassment don't seem
to account for much in your book. There's nothing I can do about that.
You aren't directly involved so why should you care? You just want your
little chunk of the world to be the way you think it should be for
YOU... right? Well, I'm telling you that you can have it by killfiling.
> > For my part, I don't give a flat fuck what
> > someone like this thinks...
>
> Then why respond? Not why respond to me here, but why respond to Snit in
> other threads if you don't care what others think?
I said I don't care what someone like YOU thinks. It does you no good to
presume you are like every other poster from my perspective. I strongly
suggest you killfile me and anyone else you have a problem with.
> > that's why I suggested he solve the problem
> > and killfile me. It's not like I need him to OK my actions, is it:) This
> > is an unmoderated NG. If people don't police it to some extent
> > themselves, it stays the shithole that it is. That MR_ED_of_Course
> > doesn't realize how much stinkier that shithole got with Snit running
> > rampant doesn't say too much about his ability judge where the problems
> > lies anyway.
>
> I'm not defending Snit, I'm asking all of you to stop thread pulling. I
> can't defend or criticize Snit, because all I know about what's going on is
> ">>>" and the occasional "stop harassing me" and "you're obsessed".
As I've told you... several times now, that's not me.
> Killfiling you guys isn't going to help. That works when you have a someone
> spewing a bunch of crap, but the problem with you people here in CSMA is
> that you end of taking over a thread and killing it with your nonsense. I
> could care less how much you all post here, the problem is with taking over
> the threads.
Killfile the lot of us and it solves your problem.
>
> > So realistically, who cares what he thinks? No offense to
> > MR_ED_of_Course... but if he isn't part of the solution, he's part of
> > the problem.
>
> Exactly...don't care what anyone thinks about what you think of Snit. Move
> on and get over it. Grow up. Same with him, and same with Elizabot.
Thanks for the advice. Now I suggest you take mine.
> > If he gets tired of reading my posts or yours, he'll do
> > what I suggested...
>
> No I wont, as that as I said before isn't going to solve the thread killing
> problem.
Yes... it will. The way I see it you have one of several choices;
1 - keep whining (which isn't really going to do you any good)
2 - killfile me or all the people that bother you,(seems to be the most
logical but for some reason you don't understand why).
3 - leave this NG.
4 - simply ignore all of it.
> > HIS problem will be solved. At that point, all he'll
> > ever see are Snit's little digs and bullshit with none of the replies
> > he's currently whining about. Seems to be a no brainer. I have no idea
> > why he hasn't done it.
>
> Really, I don't know why you think you look any different from Snit from
> anyone else's perspective. You all appear to be acting immature, psychotic,
> and obnoxious.
>
OK, thanks for your input. Now, the big question for you is... what do
you propose to DO about it? I can guarantee you one thing... asking me
to stop countering Snit's lies and bullshit is not an option. So...
where do YOU go from here?
Steve
Snit
4054c818$0$202$7586...@news.frii.net on 3/14/04 2:01 PM:
> MR_ED_of_Course wrote:
>
>> in article 4054a6b4$0$195$7586...@news.frii.net, Elizabot at
>> toolittl...@poo.com wrote on 3/14/04 10:38 AM:
>
> [snip]
>
>> The count of Snit messages containing Eliza* in my CSMA box is 234. The
>> number of messages containing Snit from Elizabot is 121.
>>
>> He may have up to a 2:1 offense rate, but 121 responses is not just sitting
>> idly by.
>>
>> Also if you put this in terms of signal to noise. You do contribute to
>> CSMA, but Snit does do a lot more OT posting.
>
> If you want to talk about noise, Snit has posted nearly 8,000 messages
> in csma in the last 5 months. Blah, blah, blah.
And the funny thing is you have read them all. Your obsession with me is as
extreme as my posting habits. Want to look at the percentage of your posts
during that same time that are related to me? Wanna bet it is over 50%?
> I'm just letting you know that although Snit is pretending to be
> reasonable when he says he's putting "FLAME" in front of the messages,
> he's not actually doing it. It's another one of his stupid games where
> he's trying to look like the good guy.
LOL. I am playing a "game" to look like a "god guy"? No... I am playing a
game, now, with you and Steve to see how often I can get you to be my Spin
N' speak.
The answer seems to be quite a bit.
>
> I know nobody cares. I'm as tired as many of you trying to read the
> newsgroup and finding him trying to lure me into all his damn BS that's
> going on in here too.
At least I am honest and let you know the exact rules of my "game". The
rules are easy... I pull your sting... you Spin and Speak.
Please note it was not always this way. I used to try to trust you and
Steve to be sincere. Steve completely blew it recently. I suppose that has
carried over to you as well. Not a big deal, as you two sometimes hint or
claim that you are the same person.
Yaaaaaaaaaank!
digitaleon
>> From: digitaleon <thi...@fake.address>,
> From: Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>> Ironically, it's a newsreader. I'm happy to admit to it but am
>> otherwise keeping it under wraps until I have something solid - I
>> don't want it to go down as yet another 'new' OS X reader project
>> that went stale and died. Out of all the 'oldskool' newsreaders on OS
>> X, and Unison, the only thing I can stand using for any length of
>> time is KNode (despite that it needs XWin), so when I started I
>> wanted to build something that _I_ could stand using and that ran on
>> OS X natively. I'll probably release it (free) on the proviso that
>> it's still a personal project and I make no guarantees to change
>> anything.
>
> if you want a beta tester I would be happy to be one... if so, my
> e-mail is easily figured out from the one I use here... feel free to
> let me know out of this group.
Thankyou for the offer. I've noted your address down and will keep it in
mind. However, it may be some time off into the future (March and April
are shaping up to be very busy for me).
>> High-pressure environment? But yes, they mentioned something about
>> very close monitoring for a couple of weeks after being trained up. I
>> don't know if it would be like what you describe for Intuit though!
>
> As they got more insane... I got less happy. Glad that experience is
> in my past. :)
Indeed. I found that regardless of whether you like a job or not, you
always breath a sigh of relief when you're finally done with it. The
more insane things were, the bigger the sigh. This possibly explains
how some cyclones get started ;-)
digitaleon.
Wally
----------
In article <BC7A7A73.43702%sn...@nospam-cableone.net>, Snit
<sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
<snip>
> If I am narcissistic, it is only because you allow me to have so much power
> over you, my little Spin N' Speak. Maybe if you simply ignored me, I would
> figure out I had lost my power over you, and that would crush my delicate
> ego.
I doubt that very much, after all you haven't figured out yet just who's
chain is being yanked, you were herded into this "Flame: posting", since
then at this point the actual posters to it are ....
Steve C.....2
Steve M.....1
Jason McNorton.....1
Mike Dee.....1
Now ME.....1
Snit............18
The so called "Yanked" appear to have you talking to yourself most of the
time, no doubt they may pop in from time to time just to keep your spirits
up, but as for Spin N' Speak...sorry the numbers just don't stack up!
> LOL.
>
> No... probably not, but we will never know... you are too obsessed with me
> to ever test such a theory.
See you haven't noticed!
> PS: Please note that this is a flame post and simply designed to "yank your
> chain" and get you to respond - if not in this thread, in others. it will,
> of course, succeed. It always does.
DO THE MATH!
MR_ED_of_Course
at fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com wrote on 3/14/04 8:42 PM:
> In article <BC7A4D36.35823%OhNo...@pacbell.net>,
> MR_ED_of_Course <OhNo...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>> in article fretwizz-F17D81...@netnews.comcast.net, Steve Carroll
>> at fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com wrote on 3/14/04 5:01 PM:
>>
>>> Face it... this MR_ED_of_Course guy doesn't give a shit about Snit's
>>> actions. He doesn't have a website with his name associated with a bunch
>>> of lies and bullshit like I do,
>>
>> You maintain a site for this? What's the URL?
>
> Of course not. Why would I have such a site? Snit has it... and it's
> loaded with a bunch of out of context, non-sensical horseshit with my
> name attached to it.
Sorry, I misread your previous post. I mistakenly interpreted it as "He
doesn't have a website with his (Snit's) name associated with a bunch of
lies and bullshit, like I do." In other words, I thought you had a site
that chronicled your grievances in regards to Snit.
>>> nor was he sexually harrassed by Snit
>>> like you were. If he's willing to overlook the cowardly and disingenuous
>>> bullshit Snit pulls and focus only on those that counter his activity,
>>> that's his prerogative.
>>
>> The point that I've been making all along isn't that I'm ignoring anything
>> you say Snit has done, but that of the bazillions of lines of ">>>" it's
>> impossible for anyone other than those of you in this war to know what the
>> hell it's about.
>
> And like I told you... I'm not involved in that type of thing with Snit.
> Perhaps others are... I don't read that crap. Why you'd bother is
> anyone's guess...
Great, do you want to point to the post where you do explain what started
any of this with Snit, or back up the accusations you've made about him?
You'd like to think you don't ">>>" but I'm going through your posts and
seeing several that I need to scroll past a ton of crap to get to something
that's nothing more than a jab back.
First you accuse me of overlooking what Snit has allegedly done, now you
wonder why I would bother hunting for what the actual allegation is let
alone any proof.
>> I find it ironic that none of you have yet to post to any of the recent
>> threads you've polluted any concise explanation as to what started the feud.
>> Do any of you even remember?
>
> Yes, but it seems you don't... despite having been recently told a
> couple of the reasons. Libel, slander and sexual harrassment don't seem
> to account for much in your book.
What doesn't count for shit in my book is pointing to someone and making
those allegations, but in no way backing it up, providing references or
anything else.
If Snit is the person you say he is, why not point to specific posts or
evidence where he has committed libel, slander or sexual harassment?
> There's nothing I can do about that.
> You aren't directly involved so why should you care? You just want your
> little chunk of the world to be the way you think it should be for
> YOU... right?
Excuse me...I kinda wanted to:
1) Read posts that have to do with Mac Advocacy
2) Read posts about things that affect the Mac community
3) Read posts that debate things Macintosh
You know, stuff we could expect in CSMA.
Off-topics are fine with me, as is letting CSMA become an organic entity
that grows in the direction of those shaping it through their activity.
> Well, I'm telling you that you can have it by killfiling.
I'm telling you that I'm witnessing threads die because of the childish
nonsense going on. Like I said before, killfiling all of you is not going
to prevent you all from continuing to pull the threads.
It really sucks to see a good thread get going and wanting to hear from
people on the Mac and Windows side, but then see the ">>>" and the "stop
harassing" and other bullshit between you guys result in nobody else posting
to the thread. Killfiling the three of you would only result in no more
postings coming through at all because you have already pulled the thread.
No signal and no noise doesn't resolve the problem.
> I said I don't care what someone like YOU thinks. It does you no good to
> presume you are like every other poster from my perspective. I strongly
> suggest you killfile me and anyone else you have a problem with.
And I humbly plead with you to consider your impact on others in this group
as well as others who may come to this group for information and advice.
>> I'm not defending Snit, I'm asking all of you to stop thread pulling. I
>> can't defend or criticize Snit, because all I know about what's going on is
>> ">>>" and the occasional "stop harassing me" and "you're obsessed".
>
> As I've told you... several times now, that's not me.
Those quotes aren't necessarily yours, but you do take part in thread
pulling. Elizabot seems willing to be reasonable, Snit seems willing to use
the Flame prefix, you're the only one not willing to take even the tiniest
of steps to minimize impact on others not involved in whatever is going on
between you all.
>>> If he gets tired of reading my posts or yours, he'll do
>>> what I suggested...
>>
>> No I wont, as that as I said before isn't going to solve the thread killing
>> problem.
>
> Yes... it will. The way I see it you have one of several choices;
>
> 1 - keep whining (which isn't really going to do you any good)
Well at least it's not doing any harm because unlike you all I'm not doing
it on every fucking thread in the group.
> 2 - killfile me or all the people that bother you,(seems to be the most
> logical but for some reason you don't understand why).
Snit, and Elizabot both get this. I wish you would understand...
Look, let's say I make a post:
"What is the Windows equivalent version of ____?"
With luck maybe someone other than one of you will respond, but as soon as
one of you responds, there is a whole chain of >>>, stop stalking, you are
obsessed, blah, blah, blah...
Killfiling you all only results in being able to see my original post and
every other response being blocked.
What good is that?
Now please, thing about this in other contexts and situations and realize
what it is doing to this group. Again, I'm not the only one complaining
here.
> 3 - leave this NG.
Uh, and go where? How about we keep this group CSMA and you all post your
flames to S.S.E.FLAME.FLAME.FLAME?
Please just take a step back and consider others for a second. If you have
a legitimate beef with Snit, then post it in a concise unobtrusive manner
and be done with it. Or follow what Snit at least says he's willing to do
and confine your posts to FLAME prefixes.
> 4 - simply ignore all of it.
How will ignoring it make the posts magically appear in the threads you'd
killed by your pulling?
>> Really, I don't know why you think you look any different from Snit from
>> anyone else's perspective. You all appear to be acting immature, psychotic,
>> and obnoxious.
>>
>
> OK, thanks for your input. Now, the big question for you is... what do
> you propose to DO about it? I can guarantee you one thing... asking me
> to stop countering Snit's lies and bullshit is not an option. So...
> where do YOU go from here?
All I can do is politely ask you to consider the rest of us and what the
purpose of this group is supposed to be.
Ignore my plea, and there's nothing I will do about it, except leave...as I
have before from this group for similar reasons. Others will leave as well,
which is a shame because I have found this group to be a valuable resource
at times.
Steve Carroll
MR_ED_of_Course <OhNo...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> in article fretwizz-FEB04D...@netnews.comcast.net, Steve Carroll
> at fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com wrote on 3/14/04 8:42 PM:
>
> > In article <BC7A4D36.35823%OhNo...@pacbell.net>,
> > MR_ED_of_Course <OhNo...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> >
> >> in article fretwizz-F17D81...@netnews.comcast.net, Steve
> >> Carroll
> >> at fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com wrote on 3/14/04 5:01 PM:
> >>
> >>> Face it... this MR_ED_of_Course guy doesn't give a shit about Snit's
> >>> actions. He doesn't have a website with his name associated with a bunch
> >>> of lies and bullshit like I do,
> >>
> >> You maintain a site for this? What's the URL?
> >
> > Of course not. Why would I have such a site? Snit has it... and it's
> > loaded with a bunch of out of context, non-sensical horseshit with my
> > name attached to it.
>
> Sorry, I misread your previous post. I mistakenly interpreted it as "He
> doesn't have a website with his (Snit's) name associated with a bunch of
> lies and bullshit, like I do." In other words, I thought you had a site
> that chronicled your grievances in regards to Snit.
No problem.
> >>> nor was he sexually harrassed by Snit
> >>> like you were. If he's willing to overlook the cowardly and disingenuous
> >>> bullshit Snit pulls and focus only on those that counter his activity,
> >>> that's his prerogative.
> >>
> >> The point that I've been making all along isn't that I'm ignoring anything
> >> you say Snit has done, but that of the bazillions of lines of ">>>" it's
> >> impossible for anyone other than those of you in this war to know what the
> >> hell it's about.
> >
> > And like I told you... I'm not involved in that type of thing with Snit.
> > Perhaps others are... I don't read that crap. Why you'd bother is
> > anyone's guess...
>
> Great, do you want to point to the post where you do explain what started
> any of this with Snit, or back up the accusations you've made about him?
Will it change anything if I do? If so, what?
> You'd like to think you don't ">>>" but I'm going through your posts and
> seeing several that I need to scroll past a ton of crap to get to something
> that's nothing more than a jab back.
Sorry... I was under the impression you said I was posting the endless
'stop harrassing me' loops. I try not to get involved in that but I WILL
take jabs at him when he posts his bullshit. I told you this, I meant it.
> First you accuse me of overlooking what Snit has allegedly done, now you
> wonder why I would bother hunting for what the actual allegation is let
> alone any proof.
Suppose the accusation is true? Does it change anything in your eyes? I
think not. In any event, I don't wonder why you don't look for proof, in
fact, I don't blame you for not wasting your time... you just want it
all to stop. You care not what causes it and that's where you and I have
a problem. If you can ignore someone who goes about posting lies and
bullshit about you, and putting the same crap on a website, you are a
better man than I.
> >> I find it ironic that none of you have yet to post to any of the recent
> >> threads you've polluted any concise explanation as to what started the
> >> feud.
> >> Do any of you even remember?
> >
> > Yes, but it seems you don't... despite having been recently told a
> > couple of the reasons. Libel, slander and sexual harrassment don't seem
> > to account for much in your book.
>
> What doesn't count for shit in my book is pointing to someone and making
> those allegations, but in no way backing it up, providing references or
> anything else.
>
> If Snit is the person you say he is, why not point to specific posts or
> evidence where he has committed libel, slander or sexual harassment?
Do you know what libel is? As I've told you, he often posts disingenuous
crap. Take a look at his site (which I have previously mentioned to
you). It's got a bunch of out of context bullshit in an attempt to
publicly ridicule or defame me. He suggested to posters they should go
there with THAT as his stated goal. That's libel... in fact, it's libel
without the suggestion because it exists in the context that it does.
Don't forget... you ASKED for this... as with most stuff where Snit is
involved, it's lengthy. Here's one example from a page on his site, a
page Snit often claimed NEVER changes... but that was bullshit, too...
as he kept adding more and more of my text as time went on (I = Snit):
________________________________________________________________
I stated:
"Seems you are arguing that since I agreed there is not 100% proof for
my claim that Bush has broken US and International law, then that in
itself constitutes a valid refutation? Is that what you have been trying
to say? If not, where and how is my characterization wrong?"
Steve responded with
"Seems I am arguing? I HAVE BEEN arguing this... for about a month now."
+++++ NOT BASED ON LACK OF 100% PROOF +++++
When I said:
"your argument can be fairly worded as: since I agreed there is not
100% proof for my claim that Bush has broken US and International law,
then that in itself constitutes a valid refutation"
Steve resonded with:
"Of course I don't agree, that's just another strawman Reality shows
you didn't merely agree there is not 100% proof."
________________________________________________________________
Pay particular attention to the last line he quoted of mine,("Of course
I don't agree..."). The way he presented it, the statement seems at odds
with what came before it... this was accomplished by leaving out what
followed. A brief background... this all came about because Snit posed a
legal argument that purported to show guilt. I subsequently got him to
admit that his evidence attempting to prove that guilt didn't prove
ANYTHING. So much for the history lesson, it's not really relevant to
the game he played here anyway. Why do I say this? Because Snit is
likely to break in here and throw out ANOTHER gigantic, irrelevant
smokescreen and I want you to stay focused on what he DID do. What Snit
is trying to do on his site is to make it appear that I have agreed to
the concept where a -lack of 100% proof- equates to a valid refutation
of an argument. Only one problem with this... it's an irrelevant
strawman and has NOTHING to do whatsoever with a legal argument, which
differ from other arguments in some very specific ways (think 'burden of
proof' and 'reasonable doubt' here). I pointed out to Snit that when he
admitted his evidence didn't prove ANYTHING with respect to his legal
argument, he was, in actuality, admitting he was offering 0% proof (I'd
say that constitutes a reasonable doubt). He PURPOSEFULLY chose to
ignore the clarification between -0% proof- and a -lack of 100% proof-
... for a purpose. Any fool knows that '0% proof' is quite different
than a -lack of 100% proof-. With a lack of 100% proof... any number of
'percentage proof' is still possible,(all the way up to 99.999%). In
other words, Snit tossed out a TOTALLY IRRELEVANT strawman to obscure
reality. Sorry for the length... now, look at the very last line he
quotes of mine. Google will show that he stopped where he did in an
effort to completely change what I am actually conveying, all done with
the purpose of making me look like a fool. What the REAL fool snipped...
actually read:
"Of course I don't agree, that's just another strawman :) Reality shows
you didn't merely agree there is not 100% proof. Reality shows that you
told us there is *** 0% *** proof. I pointed this out in the text you
just snipped from this post. Perhaps you should have read it first. When
I previously argued your admission over your evidence you agreed with me
and told me, point blank, that your evidence "does not offer proof".
That means 0% proof is offered in your evidence. I stated the percentage
was 0% in the snipped text :) Pay attention... :) Legal arguments work
on what proof you DO have, not on the fact that you have less than 100%.
But... if you have 0%... you have NO proof... and that creates
reasaonable doubt. Simple... really."
Here's the google link proving I wrote this to him and he responded with
his usual word twisting style:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=100%25+lack+of+proof+group:comp.sys.mac
.advocacy+author:Steve+author:Carroll&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=fr
etwizz-4893F6.11105507012004%40netnews.comcast.net&rnum=4
What's ironic is... in the post I just sent you to, you can see me
complaining of Snit snipping in IT, too:)
Anyway, here's another example off his site;
________________________________________________________________
DID SNIT CONVICT (ACCORDING TO STEVE)
******************************
+++++ YES +++++
"You labeled a sitting President as a war criminal. That, in itself, is
a conviction."
+++++ NO +++++
"you have no legal power to convict and I defy you to point out to me
where I said you did have such power."
******************************
________________________________________________________________
Above, he is obviously confusing two completely different words and he's
doing it for a specific purpose. The words are:
1 - 'conviction', (as in the HOLDING of a conviction... *The state of
being convinced* ...in this case, Snit holds the conviction that Bush is
a war criminal).
2 - 'convict', (as in to convict a criminal of a crime in a legal sense)
________________________________________________________________
*Conviction*, (as used by me and PARTIALLY quoted by Snit on his site).
Steve Carroll wrote to Snit:
"No... you made your point. You labeled a sitting President as a war
criminal. That, in itself, is a conviction. If you're going to use
certain language in public,(yes, even in a NG) it behooves you to
understand that language and all that its usage can imply."
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=You+labeled+a+sitting+President+as+a+wa
r+criminal.+That,+in+itself,+is+a+conviction+group:comp.sys.mac.advocacy+
author:Steve+author:Carroll&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=fretwizz-0C5
DB1.23291203122003%40netnews.attbi.com&rnum=1
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
*Convict*, (as used by me and PARTIALLY quoted by Snit on his site).
Snit wrote:
"I am fairly well convinced (though open to other information). I have
no legal power to convict. Clear?"
To which Steve Carroll replied:
"Why would you point out something so obvious to me? Perhaps you're
merely projecting and trying to clear it up for yourself? I think
eveyone here is well aware that you have no legal power to convict and I
defy you to point out to me where I said you did have such power."
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=you+have+no+legal+power+to+convict+and+
I+defy+you+to+point+out+to+me+where+I+said+you+did+have+such+power+group:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy+author:Steve+author:Carroll&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=U
TF-8&selm=fretwizz-495284.09221604122003%40netnews.attbi.com&rnum=1
________________________________________________________________
If you knew Snit very well you'd realize that it's obvious what other
goal he tried to accomplish here when he wrote:
"I am fairly well convinced (though open to other information). I have
no legal power to convict. Clear?"
... he did so to make it APPEAR that I was unaware of the reality that
he had no legal power to convict:) Look at his wording. He's asking me
if it's 'Clear' to me that he has no legal power to convict. LOL! I
think my answer to him points out that I was well aware of that fact:)
The real question becomes... why did he point out something so obvious
in the first place? Simple... it's part of his disingenuous game, done
so that he can pretend others are arguing from illogical and
unreasonable positions. If this isn't the case, why did he continue to
argue a legal argument with a person,(for hundreds of posts) knowing
full well that person is unaware of such an obvious reality? That make
sense to you? The way I see it, either way he's delusional. He actually
told me that c.s.m.a. was not a courtroom... as if I needed to be made
aware of that reality, too:) Why did he again state something so
blatantly obvious? Because he tried to assert that HIS legal argument
purporting guilt (conducted in a NG and not a courtroom) didn't bear the
burden of proof. Again, sorry for the length but this is how convoluted
his horseshit gets. These are just a few of the many examples that you
may or may not choose to let convince you how disingenuous (or just
delusional) this guy is but the bottom line is... I am convinced... and
I'm GOING to point it out whenever and wherever I see his bullshit crop
up.
That is incorrect. Snit is a liar, plain and simple:) He has not stuck
to the deal he himself offered. I didn't really expect him to... he has
a history of this.
> Look, let's say I make a post:
>
> "What is the Windows equivalent version of ____?"
>
> With luck maybe someone other than one of you will respond, but as soon as
> one of you responds, there is a whole chain of >>>, stop stalking, you are
> obsessed, blah, blah, blah...
And they are confined to that branch. I don't think you realize how this
works. Maybe you need a better newsreader?
> Killfiling you all only results in being able to see my original post and
> every other response being blocked.
No, it will enable you to still see every post by every other poster you
haven't killfiled. If your newsreader doesn't do this for you I suggest
you find one that can.
> What good is that?
>
> Now please, thing about this in other contexts and situations and realize
> what it is doing to this group. Again, I'm not the only one complaining
> here.
>
> > 3 - leave this NG.
>
> Uh, and go where? How about we keep this group CSMA and you all post your
> flames to S.S.E.FLAME.FLAME.FLAME?
How about you simply get a good newsreader and killfile me and/or all
the people Snit considers his 'attackers'?
> Please just take a step back and consider others for a second. If you have
> a legitimate beef with Snit, then post it in a concise unobtrusive manner
> and be done with it. Or follow what Snit at least says he's willing to do
> and confine your posts to FLAME prefixes.
As I've told you... more than once now, he's ALREADY broken his word.
> > 4 - simply ignore all of it.
>
> How will ignoring it make the posts magically appear in the threads you'd
> killed by your pulling?
Sigh... if people that are bothered killfile me and others they find
offensive, we simply don't exist. Why not killfile all the 'attackers'
and leave Snit active? You've already expressed that you feel he has the
most to say, right? Well, if he sticks to his word and confines his
'attacker' replies to only Flame threads, you won't even see our posts.
I don't understand why this is a problem for you.
> >> Really, I don't know why you think you look any different from Snit from
> >> anyone else's perspective. You all appear to be acting immature,
> >> psychotic,
> >> and obnoxious.
> >>
> >
> > OK, thanks for your input. Now, the big question for you is... what do
> > you propose to DO about it? I can guarantee you one thing... asking me
> > to stop countering Snit's lies and bullshit is not an option. So...
> > where do YOU go from here?
>
> All I can do is politely ask you to consider the rest of us and what the
> purpose of this group is supposed to be.
>
> Ignore my plea, and there's nothing I will do about it, except leave...as I
> have before from this group for similar reasons. Others will leave as well,
> which is a shame because I have found this group to be a valuable resource
> at times.
>
You don't need to leave... unless you want to. If you killfile me it
doesn't affect the thread at all... like you said, all I contribute is a
bunch of >>> and 'stop harrassing me'. So what have you lost? I've told
you my position on this and I don't feel the need to continually hunt up
proof every time Snit's pulls his crap, I've done it enough. I know what
he does and so do several others in here (go ask Wally, ed, George
Graves, Steve Mackay, lefty, John.Q.Public, Sandman, Mike Dee, etc. what
they think of Snit's posting style). I suggest you go read a thread
entitled 'anatomy of a snit-zel' (I think that was the title) by a
poster named ShutterBugz. This will provide the take of someone that
obviously pays a little more attention than do you, despite not spending
very much time on this NG. When you're done with that, go read Snit's
'Duck, Duck, Goose' thread. It's important to note that the 'people' he
claims the 3 of us 'attack' are none other that Snit himself... no one
else. What he calls the two MAIN 'attackers', Elizabot and myself, are
absent from that thread,(yet another of his weak attempts at trolling).
It's when he is in the middle of threads he didn't create that I'm more
likely to respond to his lies and bullshit when I see them. He can troll
all he wants in those and he'll hook me every time I happen to notice,
but the tackle may come flying back in his face. He started talking shit
about Elizabot in another NG... he did this AFTER he stated he was going
to drop things with her and asked her to do the same. He created his
idiotic 'Super Powers' thread as a dig at her AFTER this, and other
threads, too. I'm not complying with the 'Flame' thread idea because
Snit has already broken that himself, within hours of suggesting it...
and from my viewpoint, I don't consider the countering of his lies to be
a flame anyway. He obviously doesn't consider the lying or bullshit to
be a flame. When I say that he is delusional or an lying disingenuous
asshole or whatever... I BELIEVE these things to be true, so, from MY
viewpoint, they are merely truths... not flames.
Steve
Steve Carroll
Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
Then it seems you are doing exactly the opposite of what you would have
everyone believe you are doing. You've said you are the innocent victim
here, many times. It doesn't occur to you that with the statement you
just made, you cease to appear so innocent? For someone who claims to be
a teacher, you don't seem too bright. The idea that you are playing the
game NOW... and haven't been all along... hasn't fooled too many:)
Steve
MR_ED_of_Course
Thanks for taking the time to explain what is going on. I'm on a lunch
break right now and will read it in depth later. I just wanted to point out
something that I think you aren't understanding from my perspective in
regards to why a killfile won't solve the problem here.
HERE'S AN EXAMPLE OF A KILLFILE SOLVING A PROBLEM:
Jack Ass is a spammer who posts to a newsgroup every so often with subjects
that appear on topic, but are nothing more than smut peddling. He also
responds to threads with similar posts.
I killfile Jack Ass and my newsreader does not show any of his spams. I can
even make it so the replies to his spams don't appear.
Threads come in, posts come in, everything looks nice and clean. As far as
I'm concerned, Jack Ass does not exist.
Problem solved as follows...only uppercase text/posts exist as far as I'm
concerned:
1) MR ED - HOW DO I DO THIS IN WINDOWS
HEY, HOW DO I DO THE EQUIVALENT OF A MAC _____?
2) JOHN - RE: HOW DO I DO THIS IN WINDOWS
THIS IS BOTHERING ME TOO, I THINK THERE'S SHAREWARE...
3) Jack Ass - re: how do I do this in windows
see my hairy naked ass!
4) MARY - RE: HOW DO I DO THIS IN WINDOWS
THOSE SHAREWARE APPS REALLY DON'T DO THE SAME THING, YOU NEED _____
5) MARK - RE: HOW DO I DO THIS IN WINDOWS
OUCH, THAT'S EXPENSIVE...LONGHORN IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE IT BUILT IN IF YOU
CAN WAIT A DECADE OR SO. ANOTHER WORK AROUND IS _____.
Ahh...killfiling in action! Works great.
But here's why killfiling you all would not work...
1) MR ED - HOW DO I DO THIS IN WINDOWS
HEY, HOW DO I DO THE EQUIVALENT OF A MAC _____?
2) JOHN - RE: HOW DO I DO THIS IN WINDOWS
THIS IS BOTHERING ME TOO, I THINK THERE'S SHAREWARE...
3) Snit - re: how do I do this in windows
blah blah blah...
4) Elizabot - re: how do I do this in windows
blah blah blah...
5) Steve - re: how do I do this in windows
blah blah blah...
6) Goto 3 until new thread is pulled.
See the thing is in the second example, Mary and Mark never respond. They
see posts 1 and 2 followed by all the garbage and then the thread is dead.
Anyone visiting this group would have little if any interest in spending any
time here due to all these pulled threads.
Likewise when you look up an archived thread, you end up having to play this
game of searching deep enough to get to the answer, but not too far to get
into the flaming death of the thread.
I really was sincere in saying that I do respect and value your on topic
posts to threads in this group...as well as those from Elizabot and Snit.
Even if it wasn't an issue of you guys killing threads, it would be a shame
to miss your OT posts.
This is why I'm politely asking you all to please either cease the flame
war, confine it to a different group, or prefix the posts where you refer or
quote one another off-topic with FLAME:
Steve Carroll
MR_ED_of_Course <OhNo...@pacbell.net> wrote:
I understand what you're trying to say but this presumes the occurrence
of things that I haven't seen happen since I've been on the
internet(well over a dozen years now). Here are some google figures for
c.s.m.a. that show the numbers of c.s.m.a. posts between Nov.1 2003
(around the time Snit got into high gear) and today:
Google reported an approx total of 64,000 posts in that time period.
Of those, I wrote approx. 1290, Elizabot wrote approx. 946 and Snit
wrote approx. 7900.
For the same period of time (in length) that precedes the one above and
ends on Oct. 31, 2003, google reports a total of approx. 62,700 posts.
Of those, I wrote approx. 163, Elizabot wrote approx. 448 and Snit wrote
approx. 235.
Factor out all of our posts and what do you have by all other posters?
Looks like a pretty significant increase in posts to me. I'm telling
you... I have never seen what you suggest, especially in advocacy NG's:)
In any event, Snit made the suggestion to use the word FLAME, stating HE
was going to do it... and he immediately broke his word. Because he
regularly pulls shit like this, at this point, I'll only accept the use
of the word SNIT in the title of a post where the tossing of barbs will
be the dominant activity. That's all I'll agree to... but if I see him
spewing his lies in other threads, all bets are off and he's fair game
no matter where he sits. Now, you seem to want to play mediator here
(and seriously, I DO commend you for it, really... I'm not being
flippant) let's see if you can get him to agree to these terms. One
point I think needs to be made very clear, though... if I see Snit post
something that I consider to be ridiculous, disingenuous, or a flat out
lie... I will state as much... just like I would for any other poster I
felt was doing the same thing. IOW, I have no intention of walking on
eggshells for anyone... not for you, not for the entire NG... and
definitely not for Snit. If he goes off half cocked and breaks his word
to confine personal attacks to posts preceded by the word SNIT, I am
simply not going to care at that point, I'll be on him again. If he is
genuine with his offer to 'save the newsgroup from all this garbage',
none of this should bother him. As a request made to someone that is
posting a disproportionate amount of posts in this NG in the last few
months, I don't think this is all that unfair. I say this because from
MY viewpoint... you are talking to the wrong guy. I don't have a webpage
crammed with lies... I don't have people accusing me of sexual
harrassment... I don't have people calling me delusional(other than
Snit). I also don't quote my own words and try to pretend others have
written them. Yes, he does this kind of bullshit, too... in fact, he
once MISQUOTED himself and attributed that misquote to another poster (I
think it was ed)... all so he could continue to argue against him with
his usual strawman. If he is not doing this stuff on purpose, then his
poor reading comprehension skills are not the worst of his problems...
Steve
Steve Mackay
<snip>
>
> attack by steve
You think you're fooling anyone Snit?
Steve Carroll
sig...@mad.scientist.com (sigmond) wrote:
> Steve Carroll <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote in message
> news:<fretwizz-2B4DB8...@netnews.comcast.net>...
> attack by steve
OK... Snit:)
Steve
MR_ED_of_Course
at fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com wrote on 3/15/04 3:15 PM:
> I understand what you're trying to say but this presumes the occurrence
> of things that I haven't seen happen since I've been on the
> internet(well over a dozen years now).
[snip]
I guess maybe I'm more sensitive/aware of it based on differences of
newsgroup browsing habits. I've been on the Internet/Arpanet for a really
long time, and find myself having gone through some newsgroups off and on
for a long time as well. Thread pulling is definitely the #1 reason why
I'll leave a group or decide not to return. A great group to see thread
pulling in action is alt.fan.cecil.adams. There are some incredible people
in there with diverse backgrounds, but they tear threads to shreds every
single time.
> In any event, Snit made the suggestion to use the word FLAME, stating HE
> was going to do it... and he immediately broke his word. Because he
> regularly pulls shit like this, at this point, I'll only accept the use
> of the word SNIT in the title of a post where the tossing of barbs will
> be the dominant activity. That's all I'll agree to...
[snip]
Interesting...sounds like the ball is in Snit's court now.
Snit, what say you? Are you willing to compromise your alias to coin a new
term in order to begin a new era of netiquette?
You know I kinda like it for general purpose thread pulling. You have a
thread that has gone off topic...attach a SNIT: prefix. It sure beats those
"blah blah blah (was re: blah blah blah)".
Might I also add that Elizabot and Steve appear to be saying (correct me if
I'm wrong) that they are in a "response mode". Snit, while you appear to be
willing to work towards a solution to the problem, could you also make an
effort towards being in "response mode" as well?
If everyone forgets about what posting habits occurred previously, broken
agreements, allegations, etc... And just looks and the here and now, things
will be a lot better.
BTW: One thing that did happen regarding Elizabot that I noticed was very
much not cool. That *is* the type of thing that premeditates things that
require legal action or protection. I'm not exactly sure how malicious the
intent was of the poster, but it should serve as one example of why it's not
worth escalating what was anonymous petty nonsense.
Steve Carroll
Steve Carroll <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote:
I made a mistake up above. There is a significant decrease in the
numbers of posts by others posters. The numbers show they have
essentially been replaced by Snit's posts. As I've shown above,
according to google, Snit posted approx. 1/8 of all the posts in
c.s.m.a. from the time period between Nov. 1 2003 and today. In all the
years I've been here I've never seen anyone come remotely close to such
a huge amount. Hmmm... maybe we should consider renaming this NG after
him. Note that this doesn't change how I feel about things one bit.
Steve
Snit
It would change a lot if you actually could support your claims. Why do you
question this simple idea?
>
>> You'd like to think you don't ">>>" but I'm going through your posts and
>> seeing several that I need to scroll past a ton of crap to get to something
>> that's nothing more than a jab back.
>
> Sorry... I was under the impression you said I was posting the endless
> 'stop harrassing me' loops. I try not to get involved in that but I WILL
> take jabs at him when he posts his bullshit. I told you this, I meant it.
You will take jabs at me whenever you can - you are clearly obsessed with
getting revenge for my pointing out your lies. And, below, you try to claim
these are not flames. Do you really see your posts, which are clearly meant
to attack me, as not being flames.
Look at this post, I tell the truth from top to bottom... but I am man
enough to admit it is a flame... or to "criticize harshly".
More than that, though, you have been throwing around prejudicial comments
about people with anxiety disorders... is that not a flame in your eyes?
>
>> First you accuse me of overlooking what Snit has allegedly done, now you
>> wonder why I would bother hunting for what the actual allegation is let
>> alone any proof.
>
> Suppose the accusation is true? Does it change anything in your eyes? I
> think not. In any event, I don't wonder why you don't look for proof, in
> fact, I don't blame you for not wasting your time... you just want it
> all to stop. You care not what causes it and that's where you and I have
> a problem. If you can ignore someone who goes about posting lies and
> bullshit about you, and putting the same crap on a website, you are a
> better man than I.
I will place your lies on the website for all to see. I may even add the
ones you have made below. We shall see. In any case, quoting you is not a
form of libel, even if you do not like what you have stated in the past or
want to flip flop on your views... which you always do.
For example: can you now answer how someone can be guilty of breaking a law
but not in a legal way?
LOL... did not think so...
>
>>>> I find it ironic that none of you have yet to post to any of the recent
>>>> threads you've polluted any concise explanation as to what started the
>>>> feud.
>>>> Do any of you even remember?
>>>
>>> Yes, but it seems you don't... despite having been recently told a
>>> couple of the reasons. Libel, slander and sexual harrassment don't seem
>>> to account for much in your book.
>>
>> What doesn't count for shit in my book is pointing to someone and making
>> those allegations, but in no way backing it up, providing references or
>> anything else.
>>
>> If Snit is the person you say he is, why not point to specific posts or
>> evidence where he has committed libel, slander or sexual harassment?
>
> Do you know what libel is? As I've told you, he often posts disingenuous
> crap. Take a look at his site (which I have previously mentioned to
> you). It's got a bunch of out of context bullshit in an attempt to
> publicly ridicule or defame me. He suggested to posters they should go
> there with THAT as his stated goal. That's libel... in fact, it's libel
> without the suggestion because it exists in the context that it does.
> Don't forget... you ASKED for this... as with most stuff where Snit is
> involved, it's lengthy. Here's one example from a page on his site, a
> page Snit often claimed NEVER changes... but that was bullshit, too...
> as he kept adding more and more of my text as time went on (I = Snit):
My *argument* never changed (actually, it finally did - and I noted it when
it did). You are clearly lying here. It is your norm.
Feel free to prove me wrong: show the quote where I say I will not change
the *site* at all? I never claimed that - I simply stated I had not
changed the argument in question. Since that time, the argument has had one
minor change... someone found a flaw so I corrected it. That someone, for
the record, was not you.
Depends on how you are using the word proof:
In a mathematical sense, you have either full proof or no proof. In that
way, my argument has no proof. It is not a mathematical proof, and I have
never claimed it was. Still, even if it were a mathematical concept, such
as 2+2=4, a lack of proof is not a disproof. I cannot prove that 2+2=4, but
few would argue that it is not correct, and my lack of proof (0% proof) is
certainly not a disproof.
In that sense my argument has no proof. That is all that was ever stated.
You have been spinning that concept for a long time, and even claimed that
you "tricked" me into admitting there was no proof.
>
> Anyway, here's another example off his site;
> ________________________________________________________________
>
> DID SNIT CONVICT (ACCORDING TO STEVE)
> ******************************
> +++++ YES +++++
> "You labeled a sitting President as a war criminal. That, in itself, is
> a conviction."
> +++++ NO +++++
> "you have no legal power to convict and I defy you to point out to me
> where I said you did have such power."
> ******************************
> ________________________________________________________________
>
> Above, he is obviously confusing two completely different words and he's
> doing it for a specific purpose. The words are:
>
> 1 - 'conviction', (as in the HOLDING of a conviction... *The state of
> being convinced* ...in this case, Snit holds the conviction that Bush is
> a war criminal).
>
> 2 - 'convict', (as in to convict a criminal of a crime in a legal sense)
You were playing with the word "conviction" trying to make a Usenet
discussion look like a court case... something you did in many ways at many
times. I was having fun shoving your game in your face.
Even above, you kept trying to use the word "proof" as it is used in a court
case... even then, however, you are wrong...
I can just imagine you on a jury:
A man is accused of killing 2 people one day, then 2 people the next. All
in all, he is accused of killing 4 people. You decide the man is not
guilty, because the prosecution did not prove that 2 people + 2 people = 4
people. After all, this is a court of law (not Usenet, the hypothetical
court I am in reference to) and since there was no proof that 2+2=4, then
there can be no conviction. Or should I say that can not convict. I do not
want to confuse you with the words "conviction" and "convict".
Oh, read below... seems I am too late. You already are confused.
I point of the obvious to you... and you still deny it. You kept trying to
treat my argument as a court case, as if there were a judge and jury and a
right to a legal defense that includes the presumption of innocence. You
repeatedly referred to the "defendant" when there is none in a Usenet
discussion. Yes - it is obvious that csma is not a court room... please
stop pretending like it is.
Look at the name of this thread. Someone else started counting the number
of "flame" posts and stating that I was in some sort of exile or some other
BS. Mr. Ed is clearly right on this. You are choosing to do harm to
others... in other words you are attacking them. I am not. Fits our
patterns well, wouldn't you say?
More than that, you are *removing* the "flame" from the subjects of my posts
as you respond. Not only are you not honoring a system to help the group,
you are actively working to subvert it in your thirst to attack me. Of
course, most people see that this is a clear sign of you being the
aggressor... so it really works to hurt you more than it hurts me.
Actually kinda nice... you are at a point where you are being sunk by your
own attacks against me. I do not have to say a word, just let you
repeatedly shoot yourself in the foot. And you are too proud to use the
"Flame:" posts simply because I am. You have no other reason not to...
>
>> Look, let's say I make a post:
>>
>> "What is the Windows equivalent version of ____?"
>>
>> With luck maybe someone other than one of you will respond, but as soon as
>> one of you responds, there is a whole chain of >>>, stop stalking, you are
>> obsessed, blah, blah, blah...
>
> And they are confined to that branch. I don't think you realize how this
> works. Maybe you need a better newsreader?
You are now attacking the whole group, and want to blame the victims for not
having a better news reader? That is like a thief blaming the store owner
for not having a better security system.
>
>> Killfiling you all only results in being able to see my original post and
>> every other response being blocked.
>
> No, it will enable you to still see every post by every other poster you
> haven't killfiled. If your newsreader doesn't do this for you I suggest
> you find one that can.
In other words, he can find ways of dealing with your attack on the group,
so your attacks are OK?
>
>> What good is that?
>>
>> Now please, thing about this in other contexts and situations and realize
>> what it is doing to this group. Again, I'm not the only one complaining
>> here.
>>
>>> 3 - leave this NG.
>>
>> Uh, and go where? How about we keep this group CSMA and you all post your
>> flames to S.S.E.FLAME.FLAME.FLAME?
>
> How about you simply get a good newsreader and killfile me and/or all
> the people Snit considers his 'attackers'?
Ditto above. You do not even acknowledge the attacks you are making. You
simply want others to find ways to deal with them. Well, I did... I have
found many ways to deal with your attacks. You do not seem to like those
ways. Seems you not only want to define how you can attack, but what the
appropriate responses are to your attacks.
You really are an aggressive, controlling, little Spin N' Speak...
>
>> Please just take a step back and consider others for a second. If you have
>> a legitimate beef with Snit, then post it in a concise unobtrusive manner
>> and be done with it. Or follow what Snit at least says he's willing to do
>> and confine your posts to FLAME prefixes.
>
> As I've told you... more than once now, he's ALREADY broken his word.
I may have posted a flame message without the flame labeling... cannot find
it myself. Can you? In any case, it is clear you are working to not only
not follow the simple system, but to subvert it. Why is that? Oh, the ol'
"He is doing it so I can, too!" defense. "yeah, Mom, but he did it first!"
LOL. As I keep saying, you are one funny guy.
>
>>> 4 - simply ignore all of it.
>>
>> How will ignoring it make the posts magically appear in the threads you'd
>> killed by your pulling?
>
> Sigh... if people that are bothered killfile me and others they find
> offensive, we simply don't exist. Why not killfile all the 'attackers'
> and leave Snit active? You've already expressed that you feel he has the
> most to say, right? Well, if he sticks to his word and confines his
> 'attacker' replies to only Flame threads, you won't even see our posts.
> I don't understand why this is a problem for you.
Of course you do not understand his perspective... the aggressor rarely
understands the viewpoint of the attacked.
Well, all I do is post what I see as the truth... so I guess from your view
point neither of us is flaming.
Clearly you do not understand the meaning of the word "flame"
Snit
> I understand what you're trying to say but this presumes the occurrence
> of things that I haven't seen happen since I've been on the
> internet(well over a dozen years now). Here are some google figures for
> c.s.m.a. that show the numbers of c.s.m.a. posts between Nov.1 2003
> (around the time Snit got into high gear) and today:
>
> Google reported an approx total of 64,000 posts in that time period.
>
> Of those, I wrote approx. 1290, Elizabot wrote approx. 946 and Snit
> wrote approx. 7900.
Where did you get these stats? I have been posting, on and off, to Usenet
since the 80's, and the sum total of posts made by "Snit" is listed as
7,580. Your approximate number of posts for me during this relatively short
time is higher than the total number of posts I have made in the last
decade, as least as recorded on Google.
>
> For the same period of time (in length) that precedes the one above and
> ends on Oct. 31, 2003, google reports a total of approx. 62,700 posts.
>
> Of those, I wrote approx. 163, Elizabot wrote approx. 448 and Snit wrote
> approx. 235.
>
> Factor out all of our posts and what do you have by all other posters?
> Looks like a pretty significant increase in posts to me. I'm telling
> you... I have never seen what you suggest, especially in advocacy NG's:)
You have never seen people bale from threads because you or anyone else has
polluted them with off topic attacks? I see it happen often. I suppose you
are not very observant.
> In any event, Snit made the suggestion to use the word FLAME, stating HE
> was going to do it... and he immediately broke his word.
I have been using the word Flame quite regularly. If you believe I missed a
post, I would like to see the link. I have no idea what post you are in
reference to.
> Because he regularly pulls shit like this, at this point, I'll only accept the
> use of the word SNIT in the title of a post where the tossing of barbs will be
> the dominant activity.
LOL. I see you are being as fair minded as ever. How about "Carroll".
After all, the word "carrolling" was previously defined as "a verb meaning
trying to win a point on Usenet in an clearly disingenuous way, for example,
through the use of some subset of semantic games, nit picking, logical
errors, side issues, lies, and deceit."
Seems Carroll is a more accurate title than Snit. I do not expect you to
agree to that, so I stick to the suggestion of "Flame"... which is clearly
what you are doing.
> That's all I'll agree to...
Would you agree that 2+2=4?
> but if I see him spewing his lies in other threads, all bets are off and he's
> fair game no matter where he sits.
How would you like me to respond to your repeated lies?
> Now, you seem to want to play mediator here (and seriously, I DO commend you
> for it, really... I'm not being flippant) let's see if you can get him to
> agree to these terms.
Seems he is more just asking you to knock off your garbage and stop
attacking the news group with your flames. As for agreeing to call Flame
posts "Carroll" or "Snit", well, I think that is a clearly inflammatory
thing to do.
> One point I think needs to be made very clear, though... if I see Snit post
> something that I consider to be ridiculous, disingenuous, or a flat out lie...
> I will state as much... just like I would for any other poster I felt was
> doing the same thing.
At least here you acknowledge it is just something *you* consider to be
bad... not something that would reasonably be considered something bad.
> IOW, I have no intention of walking on eggshells for anyone... not for you,
> not for the entire NG... and definitely not for Snit.
Perhaps not, but you will be my little Spin N' Speak, won't you. :)
> If he goes off half cocked and breaks his word to confine personal attacks to
> posts preceded by the word SNIT, I am simply not going to care at that point,
> I'll be on him again.
I do not appreciate the term "half c*cked". It is a form of sexual
harassment. Please stop harassing me, especially in a sexual way.
> If he is genuine with his offer to 'save the newsgroup from all this garbage',
> none of this should bother him.
LOL. You want me to accept calling your Flame posts "Snit" and allow you
break your word any time you want to... just based on your beliefs that may
or may not have anything to do with reality. No thanks.
More disingenuous garbage by Steve. More carrolling.
> As a request made to someone that is posting a disproportionate amount of
> posts in this NG in the last few months, I don't think this is all that
> unfair.
No... I imagine you would not. To understand how it was unfair, you would
have to stop dehumanizing your victims.
> I say this because from MY viewpoint... you are talking to the wrong guy.
You are the one polluting the general group now. The only one of the two of
us.
> I don't have a webpage crammed with lies...
Sure you do. I posted a web page of your lies:
http://myweb.cableone.net/snit/mac_win/bush-defenders/
I am the one who lacks a webpage crammed with my "lies". Care to post one
for me? It would probably be funny.
> I don't have people accusing me of sexual harrassment...
Look up. I accused you just a moment ago, so if this was once true it no
longer is.
> I don't have people calling me delusional(other than Snit).
You don't? Well, maybe not that word... but somehow I do not think you
exactly have a good name on Usenet. How about these gems...from 15
different people... and I am sure there are more:
David Fritzinger
"Now, you have shown that you are not anly an idiot , but a liar
as well. No surprize there."
C'Pi
"Why are you always arguing with people and I am not? Why is that?"
Edwin
"I could also say "that's plain fretwizz , but people might mistake
that for loony instead of just stupid ."
Bob
"Because you are terminally stupid ? That'd be my first guess. ;)"
"Strange you are the one who needs to backpedal - I just won my
point ;) Oh that's right you're only a troll here for the comedy."
"its just a bit more advanced than your itsy bitsy brain can handle."
"You are really really stupid."
David Raoul Derbes
"Steve, let me say at once that I think you are indefatigable, and
have an infinite amount of time to argue this stuff."
Flip
"It's hard to believe that there are people as stupid as him [Steve]
around"
Brian Pratt
"Dude go kill your son before he reproduces. He's already stupid and
probably autistic like you."
Gav
"now Fretwizz slips back into his typical habits of ranting, insulting
the other person and self-aggrandising."
"classic Fretwizz -' you are so stupid you can't even begin to talk with
me on the same level. Everyone is laughing at you'. Pretty typical of
what I've seen from him"
"sorry Fretwizz , you were showing how badly your personality handles
any kind of jibe. I was criticising your habit of playing dumb when
faced with easily comprehendable English ( that typically happened to
contain points which you obviously couldn't address)"
"Do you think theres a pattern between you disliking people and
perceiving them as being stupid and unable to communicate with you?"
"It must be really annoying for you to see all those FOOLS who hold a
different opinion to your own, refusing to admit how stupid and wrong
they are. Such a cross for you to bear. No wonder you're always VERY
VERY ANGRY."
"Condescending as ever I notice."
"I can almost see you fuming at your keyboard, blood pressure rising,
red mist descending, logic going out the window...... "
"I'll take this post as another example of what a sad, angry, little man
you are."
"Its harldy suprising to me that you had to jump into this thread
though, you seem to take every chance you can get to take a dig.
Don't you even have the smarts to pick a subject where you can argue
about concrete points vs making personal attacks? From all the
evidence I see, you just like to bawl and yell at people as opposed to
coming up with any substantive points."
"I guess you should THINK before you post, eh Fretwizz?"
Jacques Distler
"You have repeatedly stated that I have misconstrued your position on
the matter. Fine, I think we've heard you by now."
"I like it! No one can gainsay your hypothesis because you've crafted it
so as to be utterly unfalsifiable."
ed
Steve: "DON'T set yourself up"
reply: "the thing is- the setup is for an argument that i don't disagree
with! it's just stupid !"
Josh McGee
"I would have to conclude that you're intentionally being dense as I
don't think that you're stupid enough not to understand."
"If you can't figure this out then you're probably purposefully being
dense."
Barney Gumble
"Interesting - you seem to insinuate I lack maturity because I respond
to you in kind. It's like someone pointing out how stupid their foe is
because they actually bother to engage them."
Beheader!
"I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he's not that
stupid . I'm just too hopeful, and believe everyone has redeeming
qualities."
C Lund
"You critize my intelligence and then proceed to say something as
fundamentally stupid as the above. You really fit the stereotypical US
American; fat supid ignorant cowboy with no cultural background at
all."
"Right. I no longer have any respect for you at all. You're on the same
low level as the faux mayor and edwin. Shoe scrapings, iow."
Sigmond
"For the love of christ let it go. the man [Snit] showed you to be a
complete ass. Stop proving it for all of us.
"Your verbal diarreah has no quality control at all."
> I also don't quote my own words and try to pretend others have written them.
> Yes, he does this kind of bullshit, too... in fact, he once MISQUOTED himself
> and attributed that misquote to another poster (I think it was ed)... all so
> he could continue to argue against him with his usual strawman.
Not quite... I grabbed an incorrect quote... was questioned about it and got
the right one. I even admitted it was a pretty silly mistake. Nice spin
though. My little Spin N' Speak... you really do earn that name every day.
Seems you forgot to mention that my point was upheld by the corrected quote
and that those who knew the topic at hand (teaching) overwhelming agreed
with my points.
> If he is not doing this stuff on purpose, then his poor reading comprehension
> skills are not the worst of his problems...
Care to try to point to my anxiety disorder as you have done in the past?
How about my Polish ancestry?
Your picture of yourself here as the honest, innocent person is laughable.
Really, it makes me laugh.
Snit
BC7BCA53.35A1B%OhNo...@pacbell.net on 3/15/04 10:02 PM:
> in article fretwizz-2B4DB8...@netnews.comcast.net, Steve Carroll
> at fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com wrote on 3/15/04 3:15 PM:
>
>> I understand what you're trying to say but this presumes the occurrence
>> of things that I haven't seen happen since I've been on the
>> internet(well over a dozen years now).
> [snip]
>
> I guess maybe I'm more sensitive/aware of it based on differences of
> newsgroup browsing habits. I've been on the Internet/Arpanet for a really
> long time, and find myself having gone through some newsgroups off and on
> for a long time as well. Thread pulling is definitely the #1 reason why
> I'll leave a group or decide not to return. A great group to see thread
> pulling in action is alt.fan.cecil.adams. There are some incredible people
> in there with diverse backgrounds, but they tear threads to shreds every
> single time.
>
>
>> In any event, Snit made the suggestion to use the word FLAME, stating HE
>> was going to do it... and he immediately broke his word. Because he
>> regularly pulls shit like this, at this point, I'll only accept the use
>> of the word SNIT in the title of a post where the tossing of barbs will
>> be the dominant activity. That's all I'll agree to...
>
> [snip]
>
> Interesting...sounds like the ball is in Snit's court now.
Sigh... I am not sure how wise it is to rehash all the debates I have had
with Steve... I wrote a response to his post with all the accusations... but
was not going to post it unless you, or someone else, seemed to see the
need.
It is lengthy, but here it is. I will continue responses below it. Please
note that it was originally written for Steve, and would have been in a
"Flame:" post... but I leave it here for your eyes. It clearly is a flame,
for I have no trust in Steve. Several times before he has started to try to
act "reasonable" to continue discussions with me, only to start attacking me
once he saw an opening.
The below responses are snipped... for the full response, look for the
"Flame" posts that will contain my more complete answers. I believe the
following is too long as it is...
---------- START QUOTE
> Do you know what libel is? As I've told you, he often posts disingenuous
> crap. Take a look at his site (which I have previously mentioned to
> you). It's got a bunch of out of context bullshit in an attempt to
> publicly ridicule or defame me. He suggested to posters they should go
> there with THAT as his stated goal. That's libel... in fact, it's libel
> without the suggestion because it exists in the context that it does.
> Don't forget... you ASKED for this... as with most stuff where Snit is
> involved, it's lengthy. Here's one example from a page on his site, a
> page Snit often claimed NEVER changes... but that was bullshit, too...
> as he kept adding more and more of my text as time went on (I = Snit):
My *argument* never changed (actually, it finally did - and I noted it when
it did). You are clearly lying here.
Feel free to prove me wrong: show the quote where I say I will not change
the *site* at all? I never claimed that - I simply stated I had not
changed the argument in question. Since that time, the argument has had one
minor change... someone found a flaw so I corrected it. That someone, for
the record, was not you. The fact that you are lying to make a point here
does not work in your favor.
All of this depends on how you are using the word proof:
In a mathematical sense, you have either full proof or no proof. In that
way, my argument has no proof. It is not a mathematical proof, and I have
never claimed it was. Still, even if it were a mathematical concept, such
as 2+2=4, a lack of proof is not a disproof. I cannot prove that 2+2=4, but
few would argue that it is not correct, and my lack of proof (0% proof) is
certainly not a disproof.
In that sense my argument has no proof. That is all that was ever stated.
You have been spinning that concept for a long time, and even claimed that
you "tricked" me into admitting there was no proof.
Clearly you are playing semantic games with the word "proof" in this case.
I have been pointing out areas where you do this. In many of out arguments
you have played word games to make a "point".
>
> Anyway, here's another example off his site;
> ________________________________________________________________
>
> DID SNIT CONVICT (ACCORDING TO STEVE)
> ******************************
> +++++ YES +++++
> "You labeled a sitting President as a war criminal. That, in itself, is
> a conviction."
> +++++ NO +++++
> "you have no legal power to convict and I defy you to point out to me
> where I said you did have such power."
> ******************************
> ________________________________________________________________
>
> Above, he is obviously confusing two completely different words and he's
> doing it for a specific purpose. The words are:
>
> 1 - 'conviction', (as in the HOLDING of a conviction... *The state of
> being convinced* ...in this case, Snit holds the conviction that Bush is
> a war criminal).
>
> 2 - 'convict', (as in to convict a criminal of a crime in a legal sense)
You were playing with the word "conviction" trying to make a Usenet
discussion look like a court case... something you did in many ways at many
times. I was having fun shoving your game in your face.
Even above, you kept trying to use the word "proof" as it is used in a court
case... even then, however, you are wrong...
I can just imagine you on a jury:
A man is accused of killing 2 people one day, then 2 people the next. All
in all, he is accused of killing 4 people. You decide the man is not
guilty, because the prosecution did not prove that 2 people + 2 people = 4
people. After all, this is a court of law (not Usenet, the hypothetical
court I am in reference to) and since there was no proof that 2+2=4, then
there can be no conviction. Or should I say that can not convict. I do not
want to confuse you with the words "conviction" and "convict".
Oh, read below... seems I am too late. You already are confused.
I point of the obvious to you... and you still deny it. You kept trying to
treat my argument as a court case, as if there were a judge and jury and a
right to a legal defense that includes the presumption of innocence. You
repeatedly referred to the "defendant" when there is none in a Usenet
discussion. Yes - it is obvious that csma is not a court room... yet you
repeatedly pretended like it was.
>> Snit, and Elizabot both get this. I wish you would understand...
>
> That is incorrect. Snit is a liar, plain and simple:) He has not stuck
> to the deal he himself offered. I didn't really expect him to... he has
> a history of this.
Look at the threads I have been posting to you in. Someone else started
counting the number of "flame" posts and stating that I was in some sort of
exile or some other BS. Mr. Ed is clearly right on this. You are choosing
to do harm to others... in other words you are attacking them. I am not.
More than that, you are *removing* the "flame" from the subjects of my posts
as you respond. Not only are you not honoring a system to help the group,
you are actively working to subvert it in your thirst to attack me. Of
course, most people see that this is a clear sign of you being the
aggressor... so it really works to hurt you more than it hurts me.
Actually kinda nice... you are at a point where you are being sunk by your
own attacks against me. I do not have to say a word, just let you
repeatedly shoot yourself in the foot. And you are too proud to use the
"Flame:" posts simply because I am. You have no other reason not to...
>
>> Look, let's say I make a post:
>>
>> "What is the Windows equivalent version of ____?"
>>
>> With luck maybe someone other than one of you will respond, but as soon as
>> one of you responds, there is a whole chain of >>>, stop stalking, you are
>> obsessed, blah, blah, blah...
>
> And they are confined to that branch. I don't think you realize how this
> works. Maybe you need a better newsreader?
You are now attacking the whole group, and want to blame the victims for not
having a better news reader? That is like a thief blaming the store owner
for not having a better security system.
>
>> Killfiling you all only results in being able to see my original post and
>> every other response being blocked.
>
> No, it will enable you to still see every post by every other poster you
> haven't killfiled. If your newsreader doesn't do this for you I suggest
> you find one that can.
In other words, he can find ways of dealing with your attack on the group,
so your attacks are OK?
>
>> Please just take a step back and consider others for a second. If you have
>> a legitimate beef with Snit, then post it in a concise unobtrusive manner
>> and be done with it. Or follow what Snit at least says he's willing to do
>> and confine your posts to FLAME prefixes.
>
> As I've told you... more than once now, he's ALREADY broken his word.
I may have posted a flame message without the flame labeling... cannot find
it myself. Can you? In any case, it is clear you are working to not only
not follow the simple system, but to subvert it. Why is that? Oh, the ol'
"He is doing it so I can, too!" defense. "yeah, Mom, but he did it first!"
LOL. As I keep saying, you are one funny guy.
>
Well, all I do is post what I see as the truth... so I guess from your view
point neither of us is flaming.
Clearly you do not understand the meaning of the word "flame"
---------- END QUOTE
Here is another response to one of his recent posts that answers some of the
questions:
---------- START QUOTE
"Steve Carroll" <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote in
fretwizz-2B4DB8...@netnews.comcast.net on 3/15/04 4:15 PM:
> I understand what you're trying to say but this presumes the occurrence
> of things that I haven't seen happen since I've been on the
> internet(well over a dozen years now). Here are some google figures for
> c.s.m.a. that show the numbers of c.s.m.a. posts between Nov.1 2003
> (around the time Snit got into high gear) and today:
>
> Google reported an approx total of 64,000 posts in that time period.
>
> Of those, I wrote approx. 1290, Elizabot wrote approx. 946 and Snit
> wrote approx. 7900.
Where did you get these stats? I have been posting, on and off, to Usenet
since the 80's, and the sum total of posts made by "Snit" is listed as
7,580. Your approximate number of posts for me during this relatively short
time is higher than the total number of posts I have made in the last
decade, as least as recorded on Google.
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_uauthors=sn
it&lr=&num=100&hl=en
>
> For the same period of time (in length) that precedes the one above and
> ends on Oct. 31, 2003, google reports a total of approx. 62,700 posts.
>
> Of those, I wrote approx. 163, Elizabot wrote approx. 448 and Snit wrote
> approx. 235.
>
> Factor out all of our posts and what do you have by all other posters?
> Looks like a pretty significant increase in posts to me. I'm telling
> you... I have never seen what you suggest, especially in advocacy NG's:)
You have never seen people bale from threads because you or anyone else has
polluted them with off topic attacks? I see it happen often. I suppose you
are not very observant.
> In any event, Snit made the suggestion to use the word FLAME, stating HE
> was going to do it... and he immediately broke his word.
I have been using the word Flame quite regularly. If you believe I missed a
post, I would like to see the link. I have no idea what post you are in
reference to.
> Because he regularly pulls shit like this, at this point, I'll only accept the
> use of the word SNIT in the title of a post where the tossing of barbs will be
> the dominant activity.
LOL. I see you are being as fair minded as ever. How about "Carroll".
After all, the word "carrolling" was previously defined as "a verb meaning
trying to win a point on Usenet in an clearly disingenuous way, for example,
through the use of some subset of semantic games, nit picking, logical
errors, side issues, lies, and deceit."
[NOTE: the person who defined the term was me...]
Seems Carroll is a more accurate title than Snit. I do not expect you to
agree to that, so I stick to the suggestion of "Flame"... which is clearly
what you are doing.
> That's all I'll agree to...
Would you agree that 2+2=4?
> but if I see him spewing his lies in other threads, all bets are off and he's
> fair game no matter where he sits.
How would you like me to respond to your repeated lies?
> Now, you seem to want to play mediator here (and seriously, I DO commend you
> for it, really... I'm not being flippant) let's see if you can get him to
> agree to these terms.
Seems he is more just asking you to knock off your garbage and stop
attacking the news group with your flames. As for agreeing to call Flame
posts "Carroll" or "Snit", well, I think that is a clearly inflammatory
thing to do.
> One point I think needs to be made very clear, though... if I see Snit post
> something that I consider to be ridiculous, disingenuous, or a flat out lie...
> I will state as much... just like I would for any other poster I felt was
> doing the same thing.
At least here you acknowledge it is just something *you* consider to be
bad... not something that would reasonably be considered something bad.
> If he is genuine with his offer to 'save the newsgroup from all this garbage',
> none of this should bother him.
LOL. You want me to accept calling your Flame posts "Snit" and allow you
break your word any time you want to... just based on your beliefs that may
or may not have anything to do with reality. No thanks.
> I say this because from MY viewpoint... you are talking to the wrong guy.
You are the one polluting the general group now. The only one of the two of
us.
> I don't have people calling me delusional(other than Snit).
You don't? Well, maybe not that word... but somehow I do not think you
---------- END RESPONSE
Clearly his claim that he has not attacked others is in question. A Google
search shows that quite well. In order to make this look not as bad, Steve
has tried to claim that I am both Josh and Sigmond, two people on the list.
I assure you I am not.
>
> Snit, what say you? Are you willing to compromise your alias to coin a new
> term in order to begin a new era of netiquette?
>
> You know I kinda like it for general purpose thread pulling. You have a
> thread that has gone off topic...attach a SNIT: prefix. It sure beats those
> "blah blah blah (was re: blah blah blah)".
>
Not at all. I will not have my name be made synonymous with the Flames that
Steve instigates. Well, I suppose this is Usenet... I certainly could not
stop it. But I would not support it. The word "Flame:" is clearly
recognized and is a neutral term that honors both my view and Steve's. Why
would that not work for all involved?
>
> Might I also add that Elizabot and Steve appear to be saying (correct me if
> I'm wrong) that they are in a "response mode". Snit, while you appear to be
> willing to work towards a solution to the problem, could you also make an
> effort towards being in "response mode" as well?
I generally have been in response mode, until recently, out of wanting to
turn the tables on them, I have been treating them like Spin N' Speaks...
saying things in the "Flame" posts that are true, but still designed to
illicit responses from them. Actually, Steve does the same thing, even
looking up my health problems and trying to use those against me. I find
that despicable behavior. At least I admit to what I am doing, and do not
use someone's health problems as a weapon. I have seen health problems in
posts related to Steve and/or Elizabot, and have never even mentioned that
fact other than in this sentence.
>
> If everyone forgets about what posting habits occurred previously, broken
> agreements, allegations, etc... And just looks and the here and now, things
> will be a lot better.
I would be willing to do that... and may even be willing to try again, but
Steve and I have tried that before, and in each case he shows he is not
making a genuine effort. He even posted at one time that he thought I might
be right, and all that had to be done was to do a final verification. When
I talked about that and thanked him, he tried to use it against me.
Here are some posts that go through a pretty good history of our debates...
History:
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_umsgid=BC2887DA.3A0A5%25snit@nospam-cable
one.net
Steve thinking I may be right, or have "won"
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_umsgid=BC090978.3686C%25snit-nospam@cable
one.net
Steve completely misusing logic to try to "prove" me wrong... I show how his
"logic" is the equal to stating: "If A = B and B = C then A <> C".
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_umsgid=BC22
BFDC.398D4%25s...@nospam-cableone.net&as_scoring=d&lr=&hl=en
A post where I discuss Steve's game playing:
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_umsgid=BC23
27F5.39A91%25s...@nospam-cableone.net&as_scoring=d&lr=&hl=en
Discussion of Steve trying to claim the debate is a trial:
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_umsgid=BC29
ADD7.3A199%25s...@nospam-cableone.net&as_scoring=d&lr=&hl=en
---------------------------
I realize this is a LOT of information to digest... probably too much... but
it will give you some idea of the silliness that has gone on between us.
I suppose what I want most from Steve, if he wants me to take him seriously
that he is looking to "play nice", is for him to answer the questions he has
been avoiding for a very long time. If he is willing to do that and show
his good faith, then I will try to work with him in some way other than
confining posts to "Flame" subjects.
Here are the questions:
1) Can you differentiate the following ideas? I would be happy with you
even differentiating half of them. You seemed to be basing your arguments
on misusing these words. I believe if you defined what you meant by these
words and concepts, that it will be clear where your arguments fall apart.
* being a criminal AND legally being determined to be a criminal
* an argument AND a statement
* an argument AND a proof
* a judgment AND a adjudication
* a defendant AND a defender
* what an argument is AND what an argument is about
* proof (as in a mathematical proof) AND proof beyond a reasonable doubt (as
in a trial)
* an argument AND evidence supporting an argument
* a legal system AND a judicial system
* an argument that can be categorized as a legal argument AND an argument
that can only be categorized as a legal argument
* defense of an argument AND an argument
* evidence someone broke a law AND a trial
* Snit AND Josh (AND Sigmond)
* an argument that shows guilt of a crime AND a legal conviction
* a lack of proof AND a disproof
* evidence AND proof
* guilt shown by actions AND guilt shown in a court of law
* order of presentation of an argument AND logical order of an argument
2) First asked in the following two posts, I have been trying to get you to
answer some questions about your comments. You have so far refused to do so
in any meaningful way. Here are the posts:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl1311303569d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe
=UTF-8&selm=BC5BAC46.3F6E8%25snit%40nospam-cableone.net
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl1311303569d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe
=UTF-8&selm=BC5C3E56.3F7D6%25snit%40nospam-cableone.net
And the questions from them:
* How can someone be guilty of breaking a law, but not in a legal way?
* Why did you act against your own best interests (as described in the two
posts)?
* Why did you lie about your free flights?
* Why did you lie about not trusting me?
* Why did you want to meet me. The only reason ever stated was to tell you
2+2=4.
If Steve can even make a good faith effort to answer, honestly, those
question... I might believe his good intentions. If he will not, then it is
clear to me that he is continuing his games.
>
> BTW: One thing that did happen regarding Elizabot that I noticed was very
> much not cool. That *is* the type of thing that premeditates things that
> require legal action or protection. I'm not exactly sure how malicious the
> intent was of the poster, but it should serve as one example of why it's not
> worth escalating what was anonymous petty nonsense.
Based on your comments I am not sure if you are looking at Elizabot or
myself as the one one who made the error in escalation. I very much see it
as Elizabot, but I will not assume that is how you see it without you
stating it as such.
Recently Steve has taken to talking about my health problems (I have severe
anxiety attacks based on faulty heart valve and nervous system). He has
been trying to embarrass and humiliate me and has been quite prejudicial and
perhaps even bigoted in his treatment toward those with anxiety disorders. I
find his heading this direction to be despicable behavior below even what he
usually sinks to - it is akin to racial, sexual, or religions slurs as far
as I am concerned.
Here is the my web site:
Snit
BC7BCA53.35A1B%OhNo...@pacbell.net on 3/15/04 10:02 PM:
Sorry for the second reply, but, despite the length of the first one, I left
something I had wanted to mention out. Look at my last, say, 10 or 20
postings. Now look at Steve's. Do a random search on Google for our posts.
Make a reasoned judgment if we are purposely trying to insult someone. I am
confident that you will find that Steve often is attacking people.
That may help to explain the comments that are made about him.... from the
first response...
> I don't have people calling me delusional(other than Snit).
You don't? Well, maybe not that word... but somehow I do not think you
Snit
Just because you have added me to your list of people to attack, that does
not imply I can not have some fun with you when you do attack me. Unlike
some of your other targets, I do not play the victim role well. I fight
back. Oh... and in this case at least... and for now at least... you
clearly are feeling what it is like to have someone fight back. I will say
I am enjoying it.
Look at your recent posts, Steve. Almost all of them are attacks against
someone. Why is that?
> It doesn't occur to you that with the statement you just made, you cease to
> appear so innocent? For someone who claims to be a teacher, you don't seem
> too bright.
Oh no! I have messed up the way I appear to you. And before this you
thought I was a saint!
Steve, do not take this the wrong way - I do not care what you think of me.
Well, perhaps I do... if you were to suddenly like me, I might think less of
myself. No risk of you liking me, though, is there. Let's face it, I have
placed you in a situation to show your true colors and be a huge coward and
liar that everyone can see.
You have shown yourself to be disingenuous too many times for me to trust
you or care what you say. I think I can safely say I am not the only one
who feels that way.
As far as me not wanting to be a meek little victim being attacked by
trolls... well, why *should* I want to look that way to you or anyone?
Forget how I *look*, why would I want to be a meek little victim of trolls?
Oh, that is right, because one of the trolls told me to! LOL. Sorry,
Steve, not gonna happen.
> The idea that you are playing the game NOW... and haven't been all along...
> hasn't fooled too many:)
Well, I have been turning your games around on you for a long time. And it
has been working very well. The best part is I have done it while being
clearly honest... you have had to repeatedly add lie upon lie in order to
try to maintain your attacks... in doing so you have not hurt me at all...
you have amused me. Really, Steve, you are a very funny guy. :)
Elizabot
[snip]
> atack by steve
Skunk attack by siggy!
Steve Carroll
Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
He sees the need, Snit.
> It is lengthy, but here it is. I will continue responses below it. Please
> note that it was originally written for Steve, and would have been in a
> "Flame:" post... but I leave it here for your eyes. It clearly is a flame,
> for I have no trust in Steve. Several times before he has started to try to
> act "reasonable" to continue discussions with me, only to start attacking me
> once he saw an opening.
>
> The below responses are snipped... for the full response, look for the
> "Flame" posts that will contain my more complete answers. I believe the
> following is too long as it is...
>
> ---------- START QUOTE
> > Do you know what libel is? As I've told you, he often posts disingenuous
> > crap. Take a look at his site (which I have previously mentioned to
> > you). It's got a bunch of out of context bullshit in an attempt to
> > publicly ridicule or defame me. He suggested to posters they should go
> > there with THAT as his stated goal. That's libel... in fact, it's libel
> > without the suggestion because it exists in the context that it does.
> > Don't forget... you ASKED for this... as with most stuff where Snit is
> > involved, it's lengthy. Here's one example from a page on his site, a
> > page Snit often claimed NEVER changes... but that was bullshit, too...
> > as he kept adding more and more of my text as time went on (I = Snit):
>
> My *argument* never changed (actually, it finally did - and I noted it when
> it did). You are clearly lying here.
So... DID it change or DIDN'T it? See.. a bunch of other posters
complained that you kept changing it... they must all be as 'delusional'
as I am. Even up above, you just stated two different conditions. Excuse
me if you appear uncertain to some of us.
> Feel free to prove me wrong: show the quote where I say I will not change
> the *site* at all? I never claimed that - I simply stated I had not
> changed the argument in question. Since that time, the argument has had one
> minor change... someone found a flaw so I corrected it. That someone, for
> the record, was not you. The fact that you are lying to make a point here
> does not work in your favor.
Well... I guess you're now talking to me, right? I'm not lying... and
I'm not hunting down what you have been repeatedly shown, either. That's
your MO... to endlessly ask for proof then endlessly deny it.
Well... being that YOU stated your argument was a LEGAL argument... I
figured it meant proof required to prove a legal argument. What WAS I
thinking!?!
> In a mathematical sense, you have either full proof or no proof. In that
> way, my argument has no proof. It is not a mathematical proof, and I have
> never claimed it was. Still, even if it were a mathematical concept, such
> as 2+2=4, a lack of proof is not a disproof. I cannot prove that 2+2=4, but
> few would argue that it is not correct, and my lack of proof (0% proof) is
> certainly not a disproof.
>
> In that sense my argument has no proof. That is all that was ever stated.
>
> You have been spinning that concept for a long time, and even claimed that
> you "tricked" me into admitting there was no proof.
>
> Clearly you are playing semantic games with the word "proof" in this case.
> I have been pointing out areas where you do this. In many of out arguments
> you have played word games to make a "point".
The games are all yours. If you actually had evidence that strove to
PROVE the assertions made in your argument, you should have presented it
as such. In a legal argument, telling me you recognize that your
evidence doesn't prove squat doesn't make your argument look very
strong. It's not MY fault you don't understand something so basic. In a
LEGAL argument this equates to the argument's death. No less than a
dozen people understood this in that thread. You stand alone.
> >
> > Anyway, here's another example off his site;
> > ________________________________________________________________
> >
> > DID SNIT CONVICT (ACCORDING TO STEVE)
> > ******************************
> > +++++ YES +++++
> > "You labeled a sitting President as a war criminal. That, in itself, is
> > a conviction."
> > +++++ NO +++++
> > "you have no legal power to convict and I defy you to point out to me
> > where I said you did have such power."
> > ******************************
> > ________________________________________________________________
> >
> > Above, he is obviously confusing two completely different words and he's
> > doing it for a specific purpose. The words are:
> >
> > 1 - 'conviction', (as in the HOLDING of a conviction... *The state of
> > being convinced* ...in this case, Snit holds the conviction that Bush is
> > a war criminal).
> >
> > 2 - 'convict', (as in to convict a criminal of a crime in a legal sense)
>
> You were playing with the word "conviction" trying to make a Usenet
> discussion look like a court case... something you did in many ways at many
> times. I was having fun shoving your game in your face.
> Even above, you kept trying to use the word "proof" as it is used in a court
> case... even then, however, you are wrong...
Playing with the word conviction? Care to show proof of this assertion?
I proved,(by using google) who did the actual 'playing' with that word
here. So, go ahead... shove my game in my face again... but you're going
to have to use google to do it.
> I can just imagine you on a jury:
>
> A man is accused of killing 2 people one day, then 2 people the next. All
> in all, he is accused of killing 4 people. You decide the man is not
> guilty, because the prosecution did not prove that 2 people + 2 people = 4
> people. After all, this is a court of law (not Usenet, the hypothetical
> court I am in reference to) and since there was no proof that 2+2=4, then
> there can be no conviction. Or should I say that can not convict. I do not
> want to confuse you with the words "conviction" and "convict".
>
> Oh, read below... seems I am too late. You already are confused.
Seems you still don't know that someone can 'hold a conviction'... which
is EXACTLY what my quoted words meant. Look below a couple of
sentences... they are still there. Ask Mr Ed if he can distinguish
between the 'holding' of a conviction and an action where you 'convict'
someone of a crime in a legal sense... I'll bet he can do it. Too bad
you STILL can't. Notice how I cautioned "it behooves you to
understand that language and all that its usage can imply."
You should have heeded that advice or checked with a dictionary. The
quote I just reference is directly below:
I'm not pretending your argument was a court case...that's your strawman
FOR me and it fooled no one. What I AM doing is recognizing that ALL
legal arguments purporting guilt (in court or out) must still bear a
burden of proof. A person isn't guilty because some delusional newsgroup
nitwit merely states it is so... ESPECIALLY when he admits the evidence
purporting to prove it doesn't prove a damned thing!
> >> Snit, and Elizabot both get this. I wish you would understand...
> >
> > That is incorrect. Snit is a liar, plain and simple:) He has not stuck
> > to the deal he himself offered. I didn't really expect him to... he has
> > a history of this.
>
> Look at the threads I have been posting to you in. Someone else started
> counting the number of "flame" posts and stating that I was in some sort of
> exile or some other BS. Mr. Ed is clearly right on this. You are choosing
> to do harm to others... in other words you are attacking them. I am not.
Nice try...
> More than that, you are *removing* the "flame" from the subjects of my posts
> as you respond. Not only are you not honoring a system to help the group,
> you are actively working to subvert it in your thirst to attack me. Of
> course, most people see that this is a clear sign of you being the
> aggressor... so it really works to hurt you more than it hurts me.
You broke your own deal... live with it.
> Actually kinda nice... you are at a point where you are being sunk by your
> own attacks against me. I do not have to say a word, just let you
> repeatedly shoot yourself in the foot. And you are too proud to use the
> "Flame:" posts simply because I am. You have no other reason not to...
Ok... I'll just sit here and keep shooting:)
> >
> >> Look, let's say I make a post:
> >>
> >> "What is the Windows equivalent version of ____?"
> >>
> >> With luck maybe someone other than one of you will respond, but as soon as
> >> one of you responds, there is a whole chain of >>>, stop stalking, you are
> >> obsessed, blah, blah, blah...
> >
> > And they are confined to that branch. I don't think you realize how this
> > works. Maybe you need a better newsreader?
>
> You are now attacking the whole group, and want to blame the victims for not
> having a better news reader? That is like a thief blaming the store owner
> for not having a better security system.
Look, this feeble attempt at trying to turn another against me is
pointless for two reasons:
1 - People just aren't as stupid as you seem to want them to be
2 - and this one exemplifies your real problem here... Reality shows I
didn't 'attack' anyone... I merely suggested he might need a better
newsreader. In fact, I asked it as such... in the form of a question. I
realize that YOU felt it was an attack... that's why I say you have the
worst victim mentality in here.
> >> Killfiling you all only results in being able to see my original post and
> >> every other response being blocked.
> >
> > No, it will enable you to still see every post by every other poster you
> > haven't killfiled. If your newsreader doesn't do this for you I suggest
> > you find one that can.
>
> In other words, he can find ways of dealing with your attack on the group,
> so your attacks are OK?
A question or a suggestion is an attack only in your delusional world,
Snit. If Mr Ed felt 'attacked' by either of these... I'll eat my
television set.
> >> Please just take a step back and consider others for a second. If you
> >> have
> >> a legitimate beef with Snit, then post it in a concise unobtrusive manner
> >> and be done with it. Or follow what Snit at least says he's willing to do
> >> and confine your posts to FLAME prefixes.
> >
> > As I've told you... more than once now, he's ALREADY broken his word.
>
> I may have posted a flame message without the flame labeling... cannot find
> it myself. Can you?
You MAY have? LOL! You know damned well you did it... more than once.
You've even done it in this thread:)
> In any case, it is clear you are working to not only
> not follow the simple system, but to subvert it. Why is that? Oh, the ol'
> "He is doing it so I can, too!" defense. "yeah, Mom, but he did it first!"
> LOL. As I keep saying, you are one funny guy.
I'm not the one that MADE the suggestion to you... YOU made it to ME.
Seems if you wanted it to be taken seriously, you would have honored it
regardless of what I or others do. So tell me... HOW stupid do you still
think everyone is, again? Yeah... and *I'm* the 'funny guy'...
And you don't understand the meaning of the word 'truth'.
> ---------- END QUOTE
>
> Here is another response to one of his recent posts that answers some of the
> questions:
>
> ---------- START QUOTE
>
> "Steve Carroll" <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote in
> fretwizz-2B4DB8...@netnews.comcast.net on 3/15/04 4:15 PM:
>
> > I understand what you're trying to say but this presumes the occurrence
> > of things that I haven't seen happen since I've been on the
> > internet(well over a dozen years now). Here are some google figures for
> > c.s.m.a. that show the numbers of c.s.m.a. posts between Nov.1 2003
> > (around the time Snit got into high gear) and today:
> >
> > Google reported an approx total of 64,000 posts in that time period.
> >
> > Of those, I wrote approx. 1290, Elizabot wrote approx. 946 and Snit
> > wrote approx. 7900.
>
> Where did you get these stats? I have been posting, on and off, to Usenet
> since the 80's, and the sum total of posts made by "Snit" is listed as
> 7,580. Your approximate number of posts for me during this relatively short
> time is higher than the total number of posts I have made in the last
> decade, as least as recorded on Google.
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_uauthors=sn
> it&lr=&num=100&hl=en
This is what google gave me back for c.s.m.a.:
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_ugroup=c
omp.sys.mac.advocacy&as_uauthors=Snit&lr=&hl=en
> > For the same period of time (in length) that precedes the one above and
> > ends on Oct. 31, 2003, google reports a total of approx. 62,700 posts.
> >
> > Of those, I wrote approx. 163, Elizabot wrote approx. 448 and Snit wrote
> > approx. 235.
> >
> > Factor out all of our posts and what do you have by all other posters?
> > Looks like a pretty significant increase in posts to me. I'm telling
> > you... I have never seen what you suggest, especially in advocacy NG's:)
>
> You have never seen people bale from threads because you or anyone else has
> polluted them with off topic attacks? I see it happen often. I suppose you
> are not very observant.
I don't post NEARLY as much as you do... so how do you propose to prove
I'm more guilty than are you?
> > In any event, Snit made the suggestion to use the word FLAME, stating HE
> > was going to do it... and he immediately broke his word.
>
> I have been using the word Flame quite regularly. If you believe I missed a
> post, I would like to see the link. I have no idea what post you are in
> reference to.
No thanks... I'm done providing a continuous stream of evidence for your
continuous stream of disingenuous horseshit. You want evidence that you
do it? Look in this very thread. You've done it several times in the
last few days, too.
> > Because he regularly pulls shit like this, at this point, I'll only accept
> > the
> > use of the word SNIT in the title of a post where the tossing of barbs will
> > be
> > the dominant activity.
>
> LOL. I see you are being as fair minded as ever. How about "Carroll".
> After all, the word "carrolling" was previously defined as "a verb meaning
> trying to win a point on Usenet in an clearly disingenuous way, for example,
> through the use of some subset of semantic games, nit picking, logical
> errors, side issues, lies, and deceit."
>
> [NOTE: the person who defined the term was me...]
>
> Seems Carroll is a more accurate title than Snit. I do not expect you to
> agree to that, so I stick to the suggestion of "Flame"... which is clearly
> what you are doing.
Well... the mediator seems to like SNIT better.
> > That's all I'll agree to...
>
> Would you agree that 2+2=4?
>
> > but if I see him spewing his lies in other threads, all bets are off and
> > he's
> > fair game no matter where he sits.
>
> How would you like me to respond to your repeated lies?
>
> > Now, you seem to want to play mediator here (and seriously, I DO commend
> > you
> > for it, really... I'm not being flippant) let's see if you can get him to
> > agree to these terms.
>
> Seems he is more just asking you to knock off your garbage and stop
> attacking the news group with your flames. As for agreeing to call Flame
> posts "Carroll" or "Snit", well, I think that is a clearly inflammatory
> thing to do.
The mediator doesn't feel this way. Perhaps he feels this is
warranted... I wonder why. 'Reap what you sow' ring a bell to you, yet?
> > One point I think needs to be made very clear, though... if I see Snit post
> > something that I consider to be ridiculous, disingenuous, or a flat out
> > lie...
> > I will state as much... just like I would for any other poster I felt was
> > doing the same thing.
>
> At least here you acknowledge it is just something *you* consider to be
> bad... not something that would reasonably be considered something bad.
As it's obvious I can only speak for myself... this statement is simply
another example where you champion the obvious. Who knows what
delusional reason you're doing it for this time...
> > If he is genuine with his offer to 'save the newsgroup from all this
> > garbage',
> > none of this should bother him.
>
> LOL. You want me to accept calling your Flame posts "Snit" and allow you
> break your word any time you want to... just based on your beliefs that may
> or may not have anything to do with reality. No thanks.
Like I said... your offer was bullshit anyway... You didn't stick to it
when using the word FLAME. Doesn't seem you are as interested in
'helping the group' as you want everyone to believe... Gee, what a
shock:)
> > I say this because from MY viewpoint... you are talking to the wrong guy.
>
> You are the one polluting the general group now. The only one of the two of
> us.
>
> > I don't have people calling me delusional(other than Snit).
>
> You don't? Well, maybe not that word...
That's my point... not THAT word. Doesn't matter anyway... in a few
seconds I'll rip your bullshit evidence to pieces. You know why? Because
it's like MOST of what you post... bullshit.
> but somehow I do not think you
> exactly have a good name on Usenet. How about these gems...from 15
> different people... and I am sure there are more:
>
>
> David Fritzinger
> "Now, you have shown that you are not anly an idiot , but a liar
> as well. No surprize there."
David wrote that to John:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=+%22Now,+you+have+shown+that+you+are+no
t+anly+an+idiot+,+but+a+liar%22+group:comp.sys.mac.advocacy+author:David+
author:Fritzinger&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=dfritzin-6C1B61.195221
06122003%40orngca-news03.socal.rr.com&rnum=1
> C'Pi
> "Why are you always arguing with people and I am not? Why is that?"
This is to Sandman... in a NG I've never even heard of:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=+%22Why+are+you+always+arguing+with+peo
ple+and+I+am+not%3F%22+group:comp.sys.mac.advocacy+author:C%27Pi&hl=en&lr
=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=apicq8%241orcs%241%40ID-111793.news.dfncis.de&rn
um=1
> Edwin
> "I could also say "that's plain fretwizz , but people might mistake
> that for loony instead of just stupid ."
Ask Eddie what he thinks of me, today... right now. Then go ask him what
he thinks of YOU:) I KNOW this won't happen and we BOTH know WHY!
> Bob
> "Because you are terminally stupid ? That'd be my first guess. ;)"
Uh... you didn't actually bother to READ the position Bob held while he
said that to me, did you? Bob was arguing that Apple should have
continued to give away .Mac accounts... even after it had been shown
many people were absuing the free accounts by holding 20 or more each.
Here is a statement by 'Bob' that shows how he felt about the topic:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Listen close - giving out a particular needed thing for free, and then
once the users is dependent on it jacking up the price to $100 a year
is profiteering. It is the philosophy of the drug dealer. It is
immoral. It is unethical. It is wrong. People and corporate
entities that do it should be shunned, chastized, ridiculed and ideally
punished."
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's the link:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl264362312d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&
oe=UTF-8&selm=ahrrch%24k0u%240%40216.39.173.69
"It is the philosophy of the drug dealer."
It's STILL damned funny! Thanks, I'd forgotten about this!
> "Strange you are the one who needs to backpedal - I just won my
> point ;) Oh that's right you're only a troll here for the comedy."
>
> "its just a bit more advanced than your itsy bitsy brain can handle."
>
> "You are really really stupid."
>
> David Raoul Derbes
> "Steve, let me say at once that I think you are indefatigable, and
> have an infinite amount of time to argue this stuff."
Oh yeah... this makes me out a really bad guy, this one does... aimed at
me from someone who posts REAMS of horseshit that often makes no sense
at all. You forgot to mention that David and I parted that thread
amicably. Here is David's final correspondence in that thread:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"I think Snit has conflated Dan with David (me). Never mind. Steve's
explained his misunderstanding, I agree that it might have been
ambiguous, and we are going to (figuratively) kiss and make up. Hey,
it's a new year, let's turn over a new leaf.
May 2004 be better for everyone than 2003 was, if that isn't being
greedy.
David Derbes"
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I DO love the irony here, though... David points out how you "conflated
Dan with David (me)".
Too funny! Thanks for this one, too!
Here's the link:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl2955877110d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8
&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&selm=NlJIb.43%24Y4.23237%40news.uchicago.edu&rnum=218
> Flip
> "It's hard to believe that there are people as stupid as him [Steve]
> around"
Jesus, Snit... your reading comprehension skills absolutely SUCK! Like
the one you began this charade with, Flip responded to me about another
poster... he didn't aim this remark AT me. Read it again. LOL! It's
quite disingenuous of you to have inserted my name into the middle of
Flip's quote, though... but quite typical of you:) Here's what I wrote
followed by Flip's(Joe's) answer:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Joe, we're dealing with someone who is actually too stupid to realize
exactly how stupid he is. Scary, isn't it? Imagine meeting this guy on
the street, in the oncoming flow of traffic? What a nightmare!
Steve"
Here is Flip's reply to me,(not AT me):
"What's even scarier is that he wants me to give him a job. What if he
does get a job some day in a position where other people's safety is at
stake? It's hard to believe that there are people as stupid as him
around, but apparently, Pikey and ted are, too."
--------------------------------------------------------------------
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=flippo-3
E47DF.07225415082002%40nnrp06.earthlink.net&prev=/groups%3Fq%3D%2B%2522It
%27s%2Bhard%2Bto%2Bbelieve%2Bthat%2Bthere%2Bare%2Bpeople%2Bas%2Bstupid%2B
as%2Bhim%2Baround%2522%2Bgroup:comp.sys.mac.advocacy%2Bauthor:Flip%26hl%3
Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26selm%3Dflippo-3E47DF.072254150820
02%2540nnrp06.earthlink.net%26rnum%3D1
> Brian Pratt
> "Dude go kill your son before he reproduces. He's already stupid and
> probably autistic like you."
Pratt?? PRATT???? LOL!!! Did you even bother to read the context this
was made in? Apparently not. I guess you figure the fact that someone
like Pratt merely said it... is all the evidence necessary to prove I'm
the scum of the earth:)
Gav had MORE than his share of idiotic posts and people slamming him.
Guess why? Go read of few of his posts with other people involved.
You'll quickly see how HE was perceived in here by most everyone:) In
any event, he never stated I'm delusional though... did he?
> Jacques Distler
> "You have repeatedly stated that I have misconstrued your position on
> the matter. Fine, I think we've heard you by now."
>
> "I like it! No one can gainsay your hypothesis because you've crafted it
> so as to be utterly unfalsifiable."
Again... you didn't actually READ what this guy was responding to. I
explained to him that the effects of 9/11 were not likely to be so
easily accounted for monetarily. I STILL believe this is true. Jacques
held the view that the monetary amount given by economists could be
considered accurate. I think that is extremely shortsighted. Yeah... he
really made me look bad here, didn't he? LOL! You're reaching, Snit. As
I've already shown, it's apparent that you're not actually reading any
of this 'evidence' that purports to show my 'bad usenet name'. If you
ARE... you have FAR worse problems than even I suspect.
> ed
> Steve: "DON'T set yourself up"
> reply: "the thing is- the setup is for an argument that i don't disagree
> with! it's just stupid !"
Yeah... ed REALLY made me look bad here, too. Telling me how something
that someone ELSE did was stupid:) LOL! Like Edwin... go ask ed what he
thinks about me TODAY and then ask what he thinks about YOU. Yeah... I
KNOW... it ain't gonna happen.
> Josh McGee
> "I would have to conclude that you're intentionally being dense as I
> don't think that you're stupid enough not to understand."
>
> "If you can't figure this out then you're probably purposefully being
> dense."
Josh was on medication... and heavy medication at that. He had a
terrible motorcycle accident that required a lengthy period of
drug-laden recuperation. He posted things almost as delusional as you
do. BTW... did you happen to READ the thread you got this out of? It's
seems you overlooked it:) I sugggest you check it out. It's a thread
where I busted Josh for outright lying and he stead-fastly refused to
admit it. Gee... it reminds me of someone in here:)
> Barney Gumble
> "Interesting - you seem to insinuate I lack maturity because I respond
> to you in kind. It's like someone pointing out how stupid their foe is
> because they actually bother to engage them."
Yeah... he really sullied my name here... with his admission that
whatever level he suggests I stooped to... he was right there with me.
And on an advocacy NG... shocking!
> Beheader!
> "I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he's not that
> stupid . I'm just too hopeful, and believe everyone has redeeming
> qualities."
Again... Beheader! was talking TO me ... about a poster named 'Pikey'.
You really should read some of this damaging evidence, ya know:)
> C Lund
> "You critize my intelligence and then proceed to say something as
> fundamentally stupid as the above. You really fit the stereotypical US
> American; fat supid ignorant cowboy with no cultural background at
> all."
>
> "Right. I no longer have any respect for you at all. You're on the same
> low level as the faux mayor and edwin. Shoe scrapings, iow."
It doesn't bother me too much that a left wing Norwegian socialist with
a swastika on his website thinks I fit the American stereotype... in
fact, I take it as a compliment,
> Sigmond
> "For the love of christ let it go. the man [Snit] showed you to be a
> complete ass. Stop proving it for all of us.
Sigmond is your sock puppet(IOW, you. posing as someone else). You were
busted on this... I can't even believe you have the nerve to use him
here.
> "Your verbal diarreah has no quality control at all."
> ---------- END RESPONSE
>
> Clearly his claim that he has not attacked others is in question. A Google
> search shows that quite well. In order to make this look not as bad, Steve
> has tried to claim that I am both Josh and Sigmond, two people on the list.
> I assure you I am not.
So have others, at least about Sigmond... and I think someone pretty
much proved this was true, that he had NO posting history until you
summoned him from the same IP certainly seems to suggest it. About
Sigmond, when confronted over it, you even suggested that perhaps
someone broke into your house. LOL! Thought I'd forgotten about that
didn't you?
Here's the link:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=into+my+house+group:comp.sys.mac.advoca
cy+author:Snit&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_drrb=b&as_mind=1&as_minm=12
&as_miny=1981&as_maxd=15&as_maxm=3&as_maxy=2004&selm=BC20B927.3972D%25sni
t%40nospam-cableone.net&rnum=1
What I said of you and Josh I clarified... I stated you were very much
LIKE Josh. For all I know, you ARE him. You both post the same kind of
delusional strangeness.
> > Snit, what say you? Are you willing to compromise your alias to coin a new
> > term in order to begin a new era of netiquette?
> >
> > You know I kinda like it for general purpose thread pulling. You have a
> > thread that has gone off topic...attach a SNIT: prefix. It sure beats those
> > "blah blah blah (was re: blah blah blah)".
> >
> Not at all. I will not have my name be made synonymous with the Flames that
> Steve instigates. Well, I suppose this is Usenet... I certainly could not
> stop it. But I would not support it. The word "Flame:" is clearly
> recognized and is a neutral term that honors both my view and Steve's. Why
> would that not work for all involved?
It's already not working because you aren't following it yourself. Give
it a rest... your disingenuous offer fooled no one.
> > Might I also add that Elizabot and Steve appear to be saying (correct me if
> > I'm wrong) that they are in a "response mode". Snit, while you appear to
> > be
> > willing to work towards a solution to the problem, could you also make an
> > effort towards being in "response mode" as well?
>
> I generally have been in response mode, until recently, out of wanting to
> turn the tables on them, I have been treating them like Spin N' Speaks...
> saying things in the "Flame" posts that are true, but still designed to
> illicit responses from them. Actually, Steve does the same thing, even
> looking up my health problems and trying to use those against me.
Regarding your health, you have an obvious problem that works against
you. My involvement isn't required for this to be noticeable. If it were
only me that noticed it, you might have a point but this isn't the case.
> I find
> that despicable behavior.
Yeah... but what YOU do is OK, right? Gotcha...
> At least I admit to what I am doing,
Total bullshit.
> and do not
> use someone's health problems as a weapon. I have seen health problems in
> posts related to Steve and/or Elizabot, and have never even mentioned that
> fact other than in this sentence.
> >
> > If everyone forgets about what posting habits occurred previously, broken
> > agreements, allegations, etc... And just looks and the here and now, things
> > will be a lot better.
>
> I would be willing to do that... and may even be willing to try again, but
> Steve and I have tried that before, and in each case he shows he is not
> making a genuine effort. He even posted at one time that he thought I might
> be right, and all that had to be done was to do a final verification. When
> I talked about that and thanked him, he tried to use it against me.
Yeah... you came off clean as a whistle in all of this, Snit. I'm the
real bastard and you're one great guy:)
> Here are some posts that go through a pretty good history of our debates...
>
> History:
> http://groups.google.com/groups?as_umsgid=BC2887DA.3A0A5%25snit@nospam-cable
> one.net
>
> Steve thinking I may be right, or have "won"
> http://groups.google.com/groups?as_umsgid=BC090978.3686C%25snit-nospam@cable
> one.net
>
> Steve completely misusing logic to try to "prove" me wrong... I show how his
> "logic" is the equal to stating: "If A = B and B = C then A <> C".
> http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_umsgid=BC22
> BFDC.398D4%25s...@nospam-cableone.net&as_scoring=d&lr=&hl=en
>
> A post where I discuss Steve's game playing:
> http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_umsgid=BC23
> 27F5.39A91%25s...@nospam-cableone.net&as_scoring=d&lr=&hl=en
>
> Discussion of Steve trying to claim the debate is a trial:
> http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_umsgid=BC29
> ADD7.3A199%25s...@nospam-cableone.net&as_scoring=d&lr=&hl=en
If Mr Ed hasn't gotten the idea that you are delusional after all of
that... he never will. I can,(and have) knocked down all this crap, just
like I have much of the REAMS of bullshit you posted below. I COULD go
and do it all over again but why bother? I think I've made my point.
> ---------------------------
>
> I realize this is a LOT of information to digest... probably too much... but
> it will give you some idea of the silliness that has gone on between us.
It's a lot of disingenuous horseshit is what it is.
> I suppose what I want most from Steve, if he wants me to take him seriously
> that he is looking to "play nice", is for him to answer the questions he has
> been avoiding for a very long time. If he is willing to do that and show
> his good faith, then I will try to work with him in some way other than
> confining posts to "Flame" subjects.
>
> Here are the questions:
Uh oh... Snit is in his regurgitation spin cycle... better clear out:)
Careful... don't step in it, anyone:) Reality (google) shows I answered
ALL your projections and irrelevant, delusional questions... SEVERAL
times over. Anyone that wants to can pick any of the above and check it
out. It's really not that hard to do, Snit. You're problem is you think
people won't bother because you've laid the smoke trail SO thick...
well, I've got news for you... some people DO bother and that's why a
growing number of people are starting to realize just how big a
disingenuous liar you are.
> > BTW: One thing that did happen regarding Elizabot that I noticed was very
> > much not cool. That *is* the type of thing that premeditates things that
> > require legal action or protection. I'm not exactly sure how malicious the
> > intent was of the poster, but it should serve as one example of why it's
> > not
> > worth escalating what was anonymous petty nonsense.
>
> Based on your comments I am not sure if you are looking at Elizabot or
> myself as the one one who made the error in escalation. I very much see it
> as Elizabot, but I will not assume that is how you see it without you
> stating it as such.
Other people that actually took the time to read through your immense
amount of horseshit seemed to feel the same way Elizabot did.
ShutterBugz, who doesn't come here much, even commented on it... as did
a number of other posters. If you were never worried... why did you go
to the police? A person that was TRULY innocent (and KNEW it) would
never have bothered. Guess that didn't occur to you:)
> Recently Steve has taken to talking about my health problems (I have severe
> anxiety attacks based on faulty heart valve and nervous system). He has
> been trying to embarrass and humiliate me and has been quite prejudicial and
> perhaps even bigoted in his treatment toward those with anxiety disorders. I
> find his heading this direction to be despicable behavior below even what he
> usually sinks to - it is akin to racial, sexual, or religions slurs as far
> as I am concerned.
Yeah... don't show any of the posts where I am talking to you about your
health in a positive light, though, as that'd ruin this fine charade
your victim mentality has drummed up. Let's overlook that you lie all
over the NG and that your reading comprehension skills are
non-existent... all because you have a health problem.
> Here is the my web site:
>
> http://myweb.cableone.net/snit/anxiety/index.html
>
That's it... play the victim role, it is what you do best. Newsflash:
The world doesn't revolve around the narcissistic Snit and his health
problems.
Steve
Steve Carroll
Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
> "MR_ED_of_Course" <OhNo...@pacbell.net> wrote in
> BC7BCA53.35A1B%OhNo...@pacbell.net on 3/15/04 10:02 PM:
>
>
> Sorry for the second reply, but, despite the length of the first one, I left
> something I had wanted to mention out. Look at my last, say, 10 or 20
> postings. Now look at Steve's. Do a random search on Google for our posts.
> Make a reasoned judgment if we are purposely trying to insult someone. I am
> confident that you will find that Steve often is attacking people.
Any particular reason for confining it to the last 10 or 20 posts, Snit?
Seriously, how stupid do you think he is? LOL! This is a computer
advocacy NG... MANY people in here do what you claim on a daily basis...
and prior to the last 10 or 20 posts where you are idiotically trying to
show 'good behavior', this list includes... wait for it... YOU!
I've already addressed how ridiculous this drivel you call evidence is:)
Steve
Steve Carroll
Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
The better question is: Why is that 'someone' is usually Snit? Look,
your game of pretending to be squeaky clean CAN'T work. Why? because
google exists.
> > It doesn't occur to you that with the statement you just made, you cease to
> > appear so innocent? For someone who claims to be a teacher, you don't seem
> > too bright.
>
> Oh no! I have messed up the way I appear to you. And before this you
> thought I was a saint!
>
> Steve, do not take this the wrong way - I do not care what you think of me.
> Well, perhaps I do... if you were to suddenly like me, I might think less of
> myself. No risk of you liking me, though, is there. Let's face it, I have
> placed you in a situation to show your true colors and be a huge coward and
> liar that everyone can see.
>
> You have shown yourself to be disingenuous too many times for me to trust
> you or care what you say. I think I can safely say I am not the only one
> who feels that way.
Yeah... I saw your list of people that think I'm a bad guy:)
> As far as me not wanting to be a meek little victim being attacked by
> trolls... well, why *should* I want to look that way to you or anyone?
> Forget how I *look*, why would I want to be a meek little victim of trolls?
> Oh, that is right, because one of the trolls told me to! LOL. Sorry,
> Steve, not gonna happen.
>
> > The idea that you are playing the game NOW... and haven't been all along...
> > hasn't fooled too many:)
>
> Well, I have been turning your games around on you for a long time. And it
> has been working very well. The best part is I have done it while being
> clearly honest... you have had to repeatedly add lie upon lie in order to
> try to maintain your attacks... in doing so you have not hurt me at all...
> you have amused me. Really, Steve, you are a very funny guy. :)
>
Sure... sure... you've shown how 'honest' you are, too:) That list of
people was the most disingenuous pile of shit to date. Or tell me... are
you now simply going to claim they were all, (each and every individaul
one of them) 'mistakes' that accumulated without your knowledge? LOL!
That IS your usual MO, isn't it? Be kinda tough to do here, though...
huh? It absolutely boggles the mind why you would think anyone would
take you seriously when you pull such horsehit...
Steve
Snit
I have not added "Flame:" to this post because I want you to see it. I will
probably add it to whatever Steve replies with, or just simply igore his
reply.
"Steve Carroll" <fret...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote in
fretwizz-BB4EB4...@netnews.comcast.net on 3/16/04 8:55 AM:
Really, Steve, must you twist things continually and lie all the time?
Please stop. You know as well as I do that the argument did not change at
all during the entire time I stated it did not change. At one point
someone, not you, found a slight flaw, so it was changed.
The original can be found in article BBF22A66.3326C%snit-...@cableone.net
and repeated many, many times in the group... please note that it does not
change, at all, during the time that I state it is not changing.
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=+%22Based+on+the+US+Constitution%22+author
:snit&num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&filter=0
You kept claiming it has changed... look at all the times it has been posted
or referred to - mostly for you...
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=+%22Based+on+the+US+Constitution%22+author
:snit&num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&filter=0
The change, by the way, is even noted on my site - it is shown visually as
underlining, and if you look at the HTML it is clearly markers as <INS>,
which is the correct tag for "inserted".
The *whole* changes is the phrase: treaties are the "supreme law of the
land"
was changed to: treaties are *a part of* the "supreme law of the land"
That is it, Steve. No other change was ever made, and the change that was
made was made very clear, both in csma and in the code itself.
You keep saying the argument changed a lot. Point to the changes.
>
>> Feel free to prove me wrong: show the quote where I say I will not change
>> the *site* at all? I never claimed that - I simply stated I had not
>> changed the argument in question. Since that time, the argument has had one
>> minor change... someone found a flaw so I corrected it. That someone, for
>> the record, was not you. The fact that you are lying to make a point here
>> does not work in your favor.
>
> Well... I guess you're now talking to me, right? I'm not lying... and
> I'm not hunting down what you have been repeatedly shown, either. That's
> your MO... to endlessly ask for proof then endlessly deny it.
I am asking for support of your claim that I have changed my argument in any
other way that is clearly shown on my site with the use if the <INS> tag.
Come on, Steve, you made a claim, and the claim is clearly a lie. A lie
that is at the crux of your complaints about me.
This is another re-hash. Want proof that it is, here is an article that
talks about burden of proof in detail.
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_umsgid=BC24
A016.39C8B%25s...@nospam-cableone.net&lr=&hl=en
You never refuted a word of it, yet still make the same erroneous claims.
>
>> In a mathematical sense, you have either full proof or no proof. In that
>> way, my argument has no proof. It is not a mathematical proof, and I have
>> never claimed it was. Still, even if it were a mathematical concept, such
>> as 2+2=4, a lack of proof is not a disproof. I cannot prove that 2+2=4, but
>> few would argue that it is not correct, and my lack of proof (0% proof) is
>> certainly not a disproof.
>>
>> In that sense my argument has no proof. That is all that was ever stated.
>>
>> You have been spinning that concept for a long time, and even claimed that
>> you "tricked" me into admitting there was no proof.
>>
>> Clearly you are playing semantic games with the word "proof" in this case.
>> I have been pointing out areas where you do this. In many of out arguments
>> you have played word games to make a "point".
>
> The games are all yours. If you actually had evidence that strove to
> PROVE the assertions made in your argument, you should have presented it
> as such. In a legal argument, telling me you recognize that your
> evidence doesn't prove squat doesn't make your argument look very
> strong. It's not MY fault you don't understand something so basic. In a
> LEGAL argument this equates to the argument's death. No less than a
> dozen people understood this in that thread. You stand alone.
Again, you are playing the same game. Noted.
Rest of your BS snipped.... the only point you seem to make worth noting is
that some of the quotes I quickly grabbed from Google may not have been
accurate... it is possible, I only did a quick search. Fine. Say only half
were accurate. So? Even if I made mistakes on half of them, who cares? It
still makes the point.
Steve Carroll
Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
> Mr. Ed,
>
> I have not added "Flame:" to this post because I want you to see it. I will
> probably add it to whatever Steve replies with, or just simply igore his
> reply.
And this is different than the other times you have done it how?
(snip)
>
> Rest of your BS snipped.... the only point you seem to make worth noting is
> that some of the quotes I quickly grabbed from Google may not have been
> accurate... it is possible, I only did a quick search. Fine. Say only half
> were accurate. So? Even if I made mistakes on half of them, who cares? It
> still makes the point.
>
You didn't do anything but make a fool of yourself. The fact that you
made as many 'mistakes' as you did makes MY point! You seem to have a
HELLUVA lot of mistakes in situations like this. I'm not buying that
bullshit anymore, Snit:)
Steve
p.s. Your ORIGINAL legal argument, the one that STILL resides at google,
the one you ORIGINALLY issued a challenge to refute... is NOT the same
as the one posted on your site (hurry... better go change it, like you
have before:). Like I have continually told you, I NEVER used your site
as a referecne because... wait for it... YOU had sole control over its
content! Seriously, do you REALLY think everyone else is so stupid they
wouldn't recognize the value of google over something only ONE poster
had control of... in his own argument, even? Grow a brain, fer Crissakes!
Steve
Steve Mackay
Siggy? You mean Snit's alter ego, dontcha? :)
I think we've stumbled on to Snit's other mental problems... Multiple
personality disorder. One minute, he's Snit, the next, he's sigmond. :)
Steve Carroll
Steve Mackay <steve_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Here's a yuck for ya. This is what Snit wrote when first confronted
about Sigmond:
"Wrong again - I have no idea who Sigmond is. Maybe someone who snuck
into my house.
BTW: I just checked my IP, that is not it, though mine does begin with
24.117.
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=into+my+house+group:comp.sys.mac.advoca
cy+author:Snit&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_drrb=b&as_mind=1&as_minm=12
&as_miny=1981&as_maxd=15&as_maxm=3&as_maxy=2004&selm=BC20B927.3972D%25sni
t%40nospam-cableone.net&rnum=1
Snuck into his house? Is that comedy or WHAT? LOL! Sigmond had never
posted (anywhere) prior to conveniently showing up at just the right
time Snit needed him (hmmm... just like the last couple of days). Funny
how that works out, isn't it? Well, I suppose it could be one of his
'students' :)
Steve
Snit
> In article <pan.2004.03.16....@hotmail.com>,
> Steve Mackay <steve_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 02:24:25 -0700, Elizabot wrote:
>>
>>> sigmond wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>> atack by steve
>>>
>>> Skunk attack by siggy!
>> Siggy? You mean Snit's alter ego, dontcha? :)
>>
>> I think we've stumbled on to Snit's other mental problems... Multiple
>> personality disorder. One minute, he's Snit, the next, he's sigmond. :)
>
> Here's a yuck for ya. This is what Snit wrote when first confronted
> about Sigmond:
>
> "Wrong again - I have no idea who Sigmond is. Maybe someone who snuck
> into my house.
Ahhh, Steve, might I suggest this link for you. It may help you... but I
doubt it. Somehow I think you will keep spreading your lies.
Steve Carroll
Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
Earth to Snit... all I did was quote what YOU wrote here... no lie
involved. Do you deny you wrote the line I quoted from google? Or are
you saying is it a lie that this is funny? Given what he was writing, I
thought Steve M might find it funny so I posted it. Were you previously
confronted about Sigmond before this post? You possibly were... but, if
so, I'm unaware of it... not much of a lie IMO. So where are the lies
I'm spreading here?
Steve
Elizabot
> In article <BC7BECE3.43926%sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
> Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
[snip]
> Yeah... I saw your list of people that think I'm a bad guy:)
I find the fact that Snit had a negative quote about Sandman (from a
different newsgroup, nonetheless) mixed in with yours rather
interesting. Apparently, he's done googling on many posters here.
Snit had a list of negative quotes from other posters about me too.
Here's his original list of people trashing me:
Pikey, Josh AND John Jones, CW, a couple from Tholen, and some Chris guy.
Steve Carroll
Elizabot <toolittl...@poo.com> wrote:
> Steve Carroll wrote:
> > In article <BC7BECE3.43926%sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
> > Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > Yeah... I saw your list of people that think I'm a bad guy:)
>
> I find the fact that Snit had a negative quote about Sandman (from a
> different newsgroup, nonetheless) mixed in with yours rather
> interesting. Apparently, he's done googling on many posters here.
You're not suggesting that Snit might have some sort of 'evidence file'
on all of us where he just extracts stuff as he feels the need, are
you:) Wouldn't surprise me a bit. It certainly was damned obvious he
didn't read any of the 'evidence' he claimed made me look bad. I can gen
up exchanges between so many of the posters in here that look FAR worse
than the crap he drummed up on me that it makes what he pulled totally
laughable.
> Snit had a list of negative quotes from other posters about me too.
>
> Here's his original list of people trashing me:
>
> Pikey, Josh AND John Jones, CW, a couple from Tholen, and some Chris guy.
>
> http://www.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&selm=BC0CFA4F.36F52%2
> 5snit-nospam%40cableone.net&rnum=11
What, no Pratt? LOL!
Steve
Elizabot
> In article <40576fda$0$200$7586...@news.frii.net>,
> Elizabot <toolittl...@poo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Steve Carroll wrote:
>>
>>>In article <BC7BECE3.43926%sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>>> Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>
>>>Yeah... I saw your list of people that think I'm a bad guy:)
>>
>>I find the fact that Snit had a negative quote about Sandman (from a
>>different newsgroup, nonetheless) mixed in with yours rather
>>interesting. Apparently, he's done googling on many posters here.
>
>
> You're not suggesting that Snit might have some sort of 'evidence file'
> on all of us where he just extracts stuff as he feels the need, are
> you:) Wouldn't surprise me a bit.
If there is a more logical reason why Snit would happen to have a year
and a half old post from Sandman which had nothing to do with csma, I'd
like to hear it.
> It certainly was damned obvious he
> didn't read any of the 'evidence' he claimed made me look bad. I can gen
> up exchanges between so many of the posters in here that look FAR worse
> than the crap he drummed up on me that it makes what he pulled totally
> laughable.
I saw it. He played his name insertion trick when the poster was talking
about someone else, etc.
>>Snit had a list of negative quotes from other posters about me too.
>>
>>Here's his original list of people trashing me:
>>
>>Pikey, Josh AND John Jones, CW, a couple from Tholen, and some Chris guy.
>>
>>http://www.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&selm=BC0CFA4F.36F52%2
>>5snit-nospam%40cableone.net&rnum=11
>
>
> What, no Pratt? LOL!
I guess Pratt said things that were too crude for Snit to want to use at
the time. Looks like that's not stopping him now.
Elizabot
> "MR_ED_of_Course" <OhNo...@pacbell.net> wrote in
> BC7BCA53.35A1B%OhNo...@pacbell.net on 3/15/04 10:02 PM:
>
>
> Sorry for the second reply, but, despite the length of the first one, I left
> something I had wanted to mention out. Look at my last, say, 10 or 20
> postings. Now look at Steve's. Do a random search on Google for our posts.
> Make a reasoned judgment if we are purposely trying to insult someone. I am
> confident that you will find that Steve often is attacking people.
[snip]
> C'Pi
> "Why are you always arguing with people and I am not? Why is that?"
Are you stalking Sandman?
Someone said this to Sandman in a totally unrelated newsgroup a year and
a half ago.
How on Earth did this quote find it's way into your post?
[snip]
Snit
>>> Here's a yuck for ya. This is what Snit wrote when first confronted
>>> about Sigmond:
>>>
>>> "Wrong again - I have no idea who Sigmond is. Maybe someone who snuck
>>> into my house.
>>
>> Ahhh, Steve, might I suggest this link for you. It may help you... but I
>> doubt it. Somehow I think you will keep spreading your lies.
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/yu6t8
>>
>
> Earth to Snit... all I did was quote what YOU wrote here... no lie
> involved. Do you deny you wrote the line I quoted from google? Or are
> you saying is it a lie that this is funny? Given what he was writing, I
> thought Steve M might find it funny so I posted it. Were you previously
> confronted about Sigmond before this post? You possibly were... but, if
> so, I'm unaware of it... not much of a lie IMO. So where are the lies
> I'm spreading here?
I stand corrected. Those are my words, and there is no lie there. Just
wanted to make sure you understood they were sarcastic.
Buy the way, I have a web page with your words on it as well. None of those
are lies about what you said - right? They are all quotes:
http://myweb.cableone.net/snit/mac_win/bush-defenders/#Steve
Oh my.... so funny to watch you flip-flip on this one. Really, Steve, did
you not think about how that contradicts your previous claims before posting
it?
Snit
> In article <40576fda$0$200$7586...@news.frii.net>,
> Elizabot <toolittl...@poo.com> wrote:
>
>> Steve Carroll wrote:
>>> In article <BC7BECE3.43926%sn...@nospam-cableone.net>,
>>> Snit <sn...@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> Yeah... I saw your list of people that think I'm a bad guy:)
>>
>> I find the fact that Snit had a negative quote about Sandman (from a
>> different newsgroup, nonetheless) mixed in with yours rather
>> interesting. Apparently, he's done googling on many posters here.
>
> You're not suggesting that Snit might have some sort of 'evidence file'
> on all of us where he just extracts stuff as he feels the need, are
> you:) Wouldn't surprise me a bit. It certainly was damned obvious he
> didn't read any of the 'evidence' he claimed made me look bad. I can gen
> up exchanges between so many of the posters in here that look FAR worse
> than the crap he drummed up on me that it makes what he pulled totally
> laughable.
Any he of have of the us? Didn't wouldn't extracts suggesting stuff. You
the made some the certainly. You're he evidence evidence? You're he that
evidence. Me any the wouldn't all. Evidence made the some. File sort of
on bit you surprise stuff. Feels the me obvious stuff. Didn't it he you
need! Me just he. File surprise claimed stuff on. Read are evidence of
are was feels. Extracts you're evidence file as might he. The me he. Some
stuff he have bit me any where. Of he suggesting on? Just of sort
suggesting evidence might on. File surprise suggesting just. Not obvious
you on claimed not feels need. Might obvious feels bit! He all you he some
he me some. You're stuff of have wouldn't was? Of as as you're extracts he
of. Stuff where didn't might on it might feels. Me made just file you're
file wouldn't! The he some of claimed wouldn't he of. Extracts just all as
might have us. Me you stuff you're! He all feels me. Us extracts wouldn't
have read evidence. Claimed that are. Where feels he! Are evidence he!
File didn't all. Evidence he me. He made a evidence! Bit he might it he
claimed you have. Surprise evidence on all a where some the. File me
suggesting he he file evidence not. It all the evidence file any us
wouldn't. Not was obvious need. As feels of that claimed wouldn't claimed
feels. He read of are any. Certainly evidence of you he the. You're
wouldn't made obvious he of claimed. Read bit the it that as. He
suggesting surprise surprise certainly of of any! Of the some he? Are of
all. It as need obvious us evidence it! Made claimed are the he on me.
Surprise not need me evidence claimed obvious. Read the a feels certainly
he evidence was. Have read extracts feels need didn't he.
Snit
pan.2004.03.16....@hotmail.com on 3/16/04 11:42 AM:
To one dontcha snit's mean the other minute. We've next snit's personality
next. Mean we've think the he's disorder other. Minute snit's he's
problems snit's dontcha. Snit i dontcha on multiple personality the
stumbled? One disorder sigmond. Think disorder ego he's. Mental snit
personality on stumbled sigmond. Think problems problems personality
personality mental! Next other snit one snit's. He's one mental siggy
multiple? Siggy to ego you sigmond minute. The siggy disorder minute.
He's siggy i snit siggy he's mental minute. You siggy i other next on
personality the. Snit's he's on personality on on the snit's. Problems
personality multiple personality siggy. The we've siggy on problems snit's
minute multiple. Siggy he's he's the multiple snit? Personality to snit's
stumbled disorder next personality. He's on the mental. The multiple
other. One mental the snit. Snit sigmond disorder mean? Siggy ego on
siggy mean mental he's snit's. Other snit i he's. Sigmond snit's siggy
dontcha sigmond mental minute siggy. Disorder i problems think personality
ego siggy. He's stumbled sigmond think i. Multiple snit's problems snit's
think think minute siggy. Siggy sigmond siggy. Snit's snit's next? Think
on he's other to multiple minute? Personality mental mean dontcha mean?
Siggy you snit other to snit on. Siggy ego snit dontcha one to the. Snit's
i minute snit stumbled we've think think. Problems dontcha snit's snit's
multiple next snit's snit's. You think multiple multiple siggy the snit
snit's. Think you we've siggy mean. You disorder siggy snit's i. Disorder
the ego he's to mental siggy. He's snit's other on. Disorder think
disorder other stumbled. Think ego siggy dontcha personality personality.
One the snit's dontcha. Ego you you personality disorder minute. Sigmond
the on ego! Snit snit problems snit's to mental on i. Next he's he's
snit's other snit sigmond. Multiple think sigmond snit minute. Snit mental
other on snit's. On snit's problems you. Siggy sigmond dontcha the snit's.
Dontcha siggy dontcha disorder.