Way to go Adobe!
Sandman
Master Collection bundle, which I have ordered, hasn't been released
yet. D'oh!
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
Sandman <m...@sandman.net> wrote:
> The serial for the Adobe Photoshop CS3 beta has now expired. The
> Master Collection bundle, which I have ordered, hasn't been released
> yet. D'oh!
Talked to Adobe, they don't have an alternate serial number for us
that ordered the Master Collection. Pretty stupid.
I had to cancel my Master Collections order and buy the Design Premium
Collection and opt for a downloadable package in order to continue
using Photoshop today. I'll talk to them when the Master Collection is
release and they'll give me a rebate on upgrading to the Master
Collection.
You'd think they'd at least have another serial number available for
us.
--
Sandman[.net]
John
"Sandman" <m...@sandman.net> wrote in message
news:mr-E64CAE.09...@News.Individual.NET...
No problem at all on this end. Had you ordered Design Premium there would
be no problem. Sounds like your usual technical incompetence.
Steve Carroll
"John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
His beta software serial number has run out and you're blaming him, Snit Jr.?
Why am I not surprised...
--
"None of you can be honest... you are all pathetic." - Snit
"I do not KF people" - Snit
"Not only do I lie about what others are claiming,
I show evidence from the records".-Snit
"You should take one of my IT classes some day." - Snit
John
"Steve Carroll" <no...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:noone-182013....@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> In article <166dnaGpKPvb36bb...@netlojix.com>,
> "John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> "Sandman" <m...@sandman.net> wrote in message
>> news:mr-E64CAE.09...@News.Individual.NET...
>> > The serial for the Adobe Photoshop CS3 beta has now expired. The
>> > Master Collection bundle, which I have ordered, hasn't been released
>> > yet. D'oh!
>> >
>> > --
>> > Sandman[.net]
>> \
>>
>> No problem at all on this end. Had you ordered Design Premium there
>> would
>> be no problem. Sounds like your usual technical incompetence.
>
> His beta software serial number has run out and you're blaming him, Snit
> Jr.?
> Why am I not surprised...
>
As usual you are technically clueless about what is going on. It was
clearly stated that the suite he ordered wouldn't be available for awhile
yet he ordered it anyhow and is complaining because his beta serial number
expired. Adobe all along had stated that the beta would expire upon
Photoshop CS3 release.
Snit
TPidnVYVwcpsyqbb...@netlojix.com on 5/4/07 8:57 AM:
Still, if Sandman is right in the middle of some lessons on how to use the
programs, or something like that, I can see where it would be frustrating
for him.
--
€ It is OK to email yourself files and store them there for a few weeks
€ No legislation supercedes the Constitution (unless it amends it)
€ Apple's video format is not far from NTSC DVD and good enough for most
John
"Snit" <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
news:C260A71B.7F492%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com...
The problem is all his fault. Design Premium was available Apr 20 and that
is all he needs for his trolling.
Sandman
Steve Carroll <no...@nowhere.net> wrote:
> In article <166dnaGpKPvb36bb...@netlojix.com>,
> "John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> > "Sandman" <m...@sandman.net> wrote in message
> > news:mr-E64CAE.09...@News.Individual.NET...
> > > The serial for the Adobe Photoshop CS3 beta has now expired. The
> > > Master Collection bundle, which I have ordered, hasn't been released
> > > yet. D'oh!
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sandman[.net]
> > \
> >
> > No problem at all on this end. Had you ordered Design Premium there would
> > be no problem. Sounds like your usual technical incompetence.
>
> His beta software serial number has run out and you're blaming him, Snit Jr.?
> Why am I not surprised...
Haha, John is priceless. And he keeps replying to me in spite of
knowing that I have had him killfiled for a long time. :-D
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Still, if Sandman is right in the middle of some lessons on how to use the
> programs, or something like that, I can see where it would be frustrating
> for him.
Stop baiting me, please.
Code of Honesty:
1) Be specific. Use the specific example of what it is you that is
bothering you. Vague complaints are hard to agree on, especially
in a forum like this.
2) Don't generalize. Avoid words like "never" or "always." Such
generalizations are usually inaccurate and will heighten tensions.
3) Don't stockpile. Storing up lots of grievances over time is
counterproductive. It's almost impossible to deal with numerous old
problems for which interpretations may differ. Try to deal with
problems as they arise.
4) Agree to let the past go...
Dishonesty examples:
- Creative snipping
- Deliberate misinterpretation
- Diversion
- Having an agenda
- Lying
- Role Reversal
- Insults
- Forging posts and material
- Thread hijacking
- Projection
- Unsubstantiated accusations
- Antagonizing through other media
- Antagonizing threads
- Ignoring evidence
- Obfuscation
It should be clear that this agreement is valid for all posts made by
the signers, not merely those between the signers. Agreeing to this
displays ones commitment to "end the BS" (as worded by one possible
signer) and end ongoing and past disputes to embrace common
understanding, patience and tolerance.
After signing, the signers should refrain from entering discussions
that are, and opt-out of discussion that are becoming, offensive or
destructive, regardless of who is the instigator. This unless the
signer feels confident that he or she can continue participation
without engaging in the elevated level of argumentation.
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
>>> As usual you are technically clueless about what is going on. It was
>>> clearly stated that the suite he ordered wouldn't be available for awhile
>>> yet he ordered it anyhow and is complaining because his beta serial number
>>> expired. Adobe all along had stated that the beta would expire upon
>>> Photoshop CS3 release.
>>>
>> Still, if Sandman is right in the middle of some lessons on how to use the
>> programs, or something like that, I can see where it would be frustrating for
>> him.
>
> The problem is all his fault. Design Premium was available Apr 20 and that
> is all he needs for his trolling.
Give him more credit than that - I think he is actually trying to learn to
use the suite. If he can do that *and* learn some of the basics of web
development that I have been teaching him (such as the recent lesson on
alt-text and the previous ones on validation) I think he has potential. His
sites are not *that* bad... just not professional quality. He even seems to
have a pretty good eye for general layout and color.
--
€ A partial subset is not synonymous with the whole
€ A person's actions speak more about him than what others say
€ Apple doesn't provide as many options as the rest of the PC industry
Snit
mr-B16ED9.18...@News.Individual.NET on 5/4/07 9:37 AM:
> In article <C260A71B.7F492%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> Still, if Sandman is right in the middle of some lessons on how to use the
>> programs, or something like that, I can see where it would be frustrating
>> for him.
>
> Stop baiting me, please.
I was *defending* the fact that your frustration makes sense... when you are
in the midst of learning something, as you are with the Adobe suite, it can
be annoying to have to stop for a while.
Oh, and a lesson on Usenet signatures - not only is your excessively long,
you forgot the two dashes and a space before it. See mine for a more
appropriate example.
--
€ Different viruses are still different even if in the same "family"
€ Dreamweaver and GoLive are professional web development applications
€ Dreamweaver, being the #1 pro web design tool, is used by many pros
Sandman
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> Still, if Sandman is right in the middle of some lessons on how to use the
> >> programs, or something like that, I can see where it would be frustrating
> >> for him.
> >
> > Stop baiting me, please.
>
> I was *defending* the fact that your frustration makes sense...
No, you were baiting me. Please stop.
Sandman
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Give him more credit than that - I think he is actually trying to learn to
> use the suite.
Stop baiting me, please.
Snit
> In article <C260B240.7F4A2%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Still, if Sandman is right in the middle of some lessons on how to use the
>>>> programs, or something like that, I can see where it would be frustrating
>>>> for him.
>>>
>>> Stop baiting me, please.
>>
>> I was *defending* the fact that your frustration makes sense...
>
> No, you were baiting me. Please stop.
What you snipped:
I was *defending* the fact that your frustration makes
sense... when you are in the midst of learning something, as
you are with the Adobe suite, it can be annoying to have to
stop for a while.
Oh, and a lesson on Usenet signatures - not only is your
excessively long, you forgot the two dashes and a space
before it. See mine for a more appropriate example.
Your signature is still incredibly long... do you need help correcting that?
Despite your dishonorable behavior directed at me I am still happy to help
you with it... though I may not know the software you are using.
PS: I know we recently had a discussion on baiting where you ended up,
presumably, feeling bad for your actions, but please do not try to lash out
to deal with your own weaknesses. Just accept that you made a mistake and
move on. We all make mistakes, it is not that big of a deal... though it is
funny how Carroll jumped in to "borrow" your baiting techniques. I find
that funny.
--
€ OS X is partially based on BSD (esp. FreeBSD)
€ OS X users are at far less risk of malware then are XP users
€ Photoshop is an image editing application
Snit
> In article <C260B196.7F49D%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> Give him more credit than that - I think he is actually trying to learn to
>> use the suite.
>
> Stop baiting me, please.
Um, Sandman, I am *defending* you. Are you *not* working on learning CS3?
If you are not then I stand corrected. Feel free to clear that up.
Also, please fix your .sig.
--
€ The tilde in an OS X path does *not* mean "the hard drive only"
€ Things which are not the same are not "identical"
€ The word "ouch" is not a sure sign of agreement.
Sandman
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> I was *defending* the fact that your frustration makes sense...
> >
> > No, you were baiting me. Please stop.
>
> What you snipped:
What you snipped first:
Sandman
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> Give him more credit than that - I think he is actually trying to learn to
> >> use the suite.
> >
> > Stop baiting me, please.
>
> Um, Sandman, I am *defending* you.
No, you are baiting me. Please stop.
> Are you *not* working on learning CS3?
> If you are not then I stand corrected. Feel free to clear that up.
>
> Also, please fix your .sig.
Code of Honesty:
Snit
> In article <C260B523.7F4A9%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>>>> I was *defending* the fact that your frustration makes sense...
>>>
>>> No, you were baiting me. Please stop.
>>
>> What you snipped:
>
> What you snipped first:
I snipped your excessively long signature. Get over it. You snipped
content you could not handle and them dishonestly pretended it did not
exist.
You are once again showing you cannot hold up your end of a conversation. I
*mentioned* you in a response to comments about you - and I *defended*
you... noting that if you are trying to learn the CS3 suite then your
frustration with having to take a break makes sense.
Are you working on learning the CS3 suite (all or even just some of the
programs?)
--
€ There is no known malware that attacks OS X in the wild
€ There are two general types of PCs: Macs and PCs (odd naming conventions!)
€ Mac OS X 10.x.x is a version of Mac OS
Snit
> In article <C260B567.7F4AA%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Give him more credit than that - I think he is actually trying to learn to
>>>> use the suite.
>>>
>>> Stop baiting me, please.
>>
>> Um, Sandman, I am *defending* you.
>
> No, you are baiting me. Please stop.
>
>> Are you *not* working on learning CS3?
>> If you are not then I stand corrected. Feel free to clear that up.
The question at hand:
Are you *not* working on learning CS3?
How much will you obfuscate and show yourself to be very evasive before
finally answering the question?
--
€ Nuclear arms are arms
€ OS X's Command+Scroll wheel function does not exist in default XP
€ Technical competence and intelligence are not the same thing
Jolly Roger
> The serial for the Adobe Photoshop CS3 beta has now expired. The
> Master Collection bundle, which I have ordered, hasn't been released
> yet. D'oh!
Well Adobe never said they would supply you with uninterrupted access
to Photoshop CS3 until release, did they? Didn't think so.
--
(If you send an email to this address, please notify me ahead of time
so I can watch for it among the sea of SPAM that gets filtered out
daily.)
JR
Jolly Roger
> Also, please fix your .sig.
There's nothing wrong with his signature AFAICT.
Jolly Roger
> I snipped your excessively long signature.
That wasn't his signature. ; )
Snit
2007050413513545438-jollyroger@poboxcom on 5/4/07 11:51 AM:
> On 2007-05-04 12:37:35 -0500, Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> said:
>
>> I snipped your excessively long signature.
>
> That wasn't his signature. ; )
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.sig>
-----
A signature block (often abbreviated as signature, sig block,
sig file, .sig, dot sig, siggy, or just sig) is a block of
text automatically appended at the bottom of an e-mail
message, Usenet article, or forum post.
-----
He is, apparently, automatically appending that to every post of his - at
least to the ones he posts that are directed at me. This is *after* has has
promised to be honest and honorable... and after I told him quite clearly I
had no interest in discussing that repeated text with him... and after he
suggested people should be open to doing so! I even used wording very
similar to what he suggested.
Then again, he might just be trolling and baiting (with me merely mocking
his BS)... but you don't think Sandman would do *that*, do you? :)
--
€ Pros aren't beginners in their field (though there are new pros)
€ Similarly configured Macs and Win machines tend to cost roughly the same
€ Some people do use the term "screen name" in relation to IRC
Snit
> On 2007-05-04 02:45:23 -0500, Sandman <m...@sandman.net> said:
>
>> The serial for the Adobe Photoshop CS3 beta has now expired. The
>> Master Collection bundle, which I have ordered, hasn't been released
>> yet. D'oh!
>
> Well Adobe never said they would supply you with uninterrupted access
> to Photoshop CS3 until release, did they? Didn't think so.
Still, in Sandman's defense, if he is just learning to use the Adobe suite
it can be quite a pain for him to be interrupted. This would also be true
if he were dependant on some new feature, but that is quite unlikely in his
case.
--
€ If A = B then B = A (known as the "symmetric property of equality")
€ Incest and sex are not identical (only a pervert would disagree)
€ One can be actually guilty of a crime but neither tried nor convicted
Steve Carroll
"John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
And yet, here you are, blaming Sandman for the expiration. How Snittish of you.
Feel free to point out the part where I'm "technically clueless" any time you'd
like. Speaking of "technically clueless"... you're an idiot for suggesting
Sandman order something he didn't want. Strange that you're even aware that
Adobe was going to expire the beta program while you simultaneously blame the
occurrence of it on Sandman's "technical incompetence"... how Snittish of you.
John
being blamed for the expiration but is being blamed for knowlingly buying
the wrong product even though ADOBE MADE CLEAR it would not be delivered
until long after the CS3 beta expired.
Steve Carroll
> "John" <nos...@nospam.com> stated in post
> lrKdnU7zgvXuw6bb...@netlojix.com on 5/4/07 9:25 AM:
>
> >>> As usual you are technically clueless about what is going on. It was
> >>> clearly stated that the suite he ordered wouldn't be available for awhile
> >>> yet he ordered it anyhow and is complaining because his beta serial
> >>> number
> >>> expired. Adobe all along had stated that the beta would expire upon
> >>> Photoshop CS3 release.
> >>>
> >> Still, if Sandman is right in the middle of some lessons on how to use the
> >> programs, or something like that, I can see where it would be frustrating
> >> for
> >> him.
> >
> > The problem is all his fault. Design Premium was available Apr 20 and
> > that
> > is all he needs for his trolling.
>
> Give him more credit than that - I think he is actually trying to learn to
> use the suite. If he can do that *and* learn some of the basics of web
> development that I have been teaching him (such as the recent lesson on
> alt-text and the previous ones on validation) I think he has potential. His
> sites are not *that* bad... just not professional quality. He even seems to
> have a pretty good eye for general layout and color.
Of course, his stuff pales compared to your pirated chickens;)
Snit
noone-131586....@newsgroups.comcast.net on 5/4/07 2:26 PM:
>> As usual you are technically clueless about what is going on. It was
>> clearly stated that the suite he ordered wouldn't be available for awhile yet
>> he ordered it anyhow and is complaining because his beta serial number
>> expired. Adobe all along had stated that the beta would expire upon
>> Photoshop CS3 release.
>>
> And yet, here you are, blaming Sandman for the expiration. How Snittish of
> you. Feel free to point out the part where I'm "technically clueless" any time
> you'd like. Speaking of "technically clueless"... you're an idiot for
> suggesting Sandman order something he didn't want. Strange that you're even
> aware that Adobe was going to expire the beta program while you simultaneously
> blame the occurrence of it on Sandman's "technical incompetence"... how
> Snittish of you.
Where, Steve, do you think John blamed Sandman for the expiration?
When you fail to quote John ever doing so, Steve, are you more comfortable
having your false statement called a lie, a delusion, or a sign you cannot
understand what you read? My how you do get all bent out of shape when
people do not characterize your false statements in a way that pleases you!
--
€ Different version numbers refer to different versions
€ Macs are Macs and Apple is still making and selling Macs
€ The early IBM PCs and Commodores shipped with an OS in ROM
Snit
>>> As usual you are technically clueless about what is going on. It was
>>> clearly stated that the suite he ordered wouldn't be available for awhile
>>> yet he ordered it anyhow and is complaining because his beta serial number
>>> expired. Adobe all along had stated that the beta would expire upon
>>> Photoshop CS3 release.
>>>
>> And yet, here you are, blaming Sandman for the expiration. How Snittish of
>> you. Feel free to point out the part where I'm "technically clueless" any
>> time you'd like.
Oh! Oh! Is that open to all? How about when you got confused and thought
I could not upgrade a router's firmware? There are others, of course, but
let's start with that one... we can move on from there if you do not run.
This can be fun!
>> Speaking of "technically clueless"... you're an idiot for suggesting Sandman
>> order something he didn't want.
Do you think Sandman wanted the product he ordered to expire before he could
replace it? If not, well, then he *did* order something he did not want!
>> Strange that you're even aware that Adobe was going to expire the beta
>> program while you simultaneously blame the occurrence of it on Sandman's
>> "technical incompetence"... how Snittish of you.
>>
> As usual you have not been able to comprehend reality. Sandaman is not being
> blamed for the expiration but is being blamed for knowlingly buying the wrong
> product even though ADOBE MADE CLEAR it would not be delivered until long
> after the CS3 beta expired.
Note how now that Sandman's baiting of me has been pointed out Steve is now
jumping up and down to get a piece of the action... he just cannot stop
himself from making comments about me. In this case he may have a point:
Steve accused you of something you did not do... that makes you, in that
way, like me - Steve blames me of all sorts of things I do not do. Heck, I
have a partial list:
* Posting as CSMA Moderator (he has admitted he lied here)
* Saying I wanted USB 2.0 to replace Firewire (he has admitted
he just thought I had implied that but cannot point to any
evidence)
* Lying when I tell him my argument against Bush is well supported,
even though I have pointed him to the support and he cannot find
any honest refutation
* Using illegal recreational drugs. Steve's excuse for this one is
that he only makes up stories about me inhaling legal substances;
in other words he is ignorant about the illegality of huffing and
is lying about the drugs he has accused me of using.
(Steve has since admitted he lies when he accuses me of this)
* Parroting the above referenced Bush argument.
* He has accused me of not being a teacher even though others have
posted support. Please note he does not merely say he doubts, he
makes the "absolute statement" that I am not.
* Making inappropriate sexual advances.
* E-mailing his "wife", a person who may or may not exist
(Steve has now admitted he has no proof for this fantasy of his)
* Of believing the only possible sex is sex that is sanctioned by the
government (he based this off my stating the fact that incest and sex
are so different only a pervert would consider then synonymous. Steve
and the other trolls have done lots and lots of trolling over this one!
* Forging IDs of other posters
And on and on... welcome to the club. How very "Snittish" of you to be on
the receiving end of Steve's hatred and lies.
Steve Carroll
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> "Steve Carroll" <no...@nowhere.net> stated in post
> noone-131586....@newsgroups.comcast.net on 5/4/07 2:26 PM:
>
> >> As usual you are technically clueless about what is going on. It was
> >> clearly stated that the suite he ordered wouldn't be available for awhile
> >> yet
> >> he ordered it anyhow and is complaining because his beta serial number
> >> expired. Adobe all along had stated that the beta would expire upon
> >> Photoshop CS3 release.
> >>
> > And yet, here you are, blaming Sandman for the expiration. How Snittish of
> > you. Feel free to point out the part where I'm "technically clueless" any
> > time
> > you'd like. Speaking of "technically clueless"... you're an idiot for
> > suggesting Sandman order something he didn't want. Strange that you're even
> > aware that Adobe was going to expire the beta program while you
> > simultaneously
> > blame the occurrence of it on Sandman's "technical incompetence"... how
> > Snittish of you.
>
> Where, Steve, do you think John blamed Sandman for the expiration?
Where, Snit, did I ever give you the idea that I have any confidence in your
ability to comprehend the answer if I bothered to show you?
Steve Carroll
"John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
I obviously did comprehend that. Of course, you, being too stupid to understand
what you just replied to, missed it. The people here that are 'technically
incompetent' are the people from Adobe for not having a bit of overlap on their
beta releases of pro products. If you were an "actual" professional you'd
understand why... but you're not... so you don't... and you blamed it on Sandman
instead. That you have Snit standing next to you is all the clue you really
should need to realize your error. Oh well.
Gee, maybe this reality thing is going to be too hard for you after all...
Snit
> In article <C260F5E4.7F50A%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> "Steve Carroll" <no...@nowhere.net> stated in post
>> noone-131586....@newsgroups.comcast.net on 5/4/07 2:26 PM:
>>
>>>> As usual you are technically clueless about what is going on. It was
>>>> clearly stated that the suite he ordered wouldn't be available for awhile
>>>> yet
>>>> he ordered it anyhow and is complaining because his beta serial number
>>>> expired. Adobe all along had stated that the beta would expire upon
>>>> Photoshop CS3 release.
>>>>
>>> And yet, here you are, blaming Sandman for the expiration. How Snittish of
>>> you. Feel free to point out the part where I'm "technically clueless" any
>>> time
>>> you'd like. Speaking of "technically clueless"... you're an idiot for
>>> suggesting Sandman order something he didn't want. Strange that you're even
>>> aware that Adobe was going to expire the beta program while you
>>> simultaneously
>>> blame the occurrence of it on Sandman's "technical incompetence"... how
>>> Snittish of you.
>>
>> Where, Steve, do you think John blamed Sandman for the expiration?
>
> Where, Snit, did I ever give you the idea that I have any confidence in your
> ability to comprehend the answer if I bothered to show you?
Come on, Steve! You made an accusation! Try to back it up or... well... do
what you always do - run.
In the end the fact that you have been caught telling another falsehood is
very, very clear.
>> When you fail to quote John ever doing so, Steve, are you more comfortable
>> having your false statement called a lie, a delusion, or a sign you cannot
>> understand what you read? My how you do get all bent out of shape when
>> people do not characterize your false statements in a way that pleases you!
Gee, Steve, I guess you did not like that question - you even snipped it.
Well, then, let's just call your lie a lie. You are a liar, Steve. Period.
Steve Carroll
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> "John" <nos...@nospam.com> stated in post
> e_CdncF4tO2QO6bb...@netlojix.com on 5/4/07 2:30 PM:
>
> >>> As usual you are technically clueless about what is going on. It was
> >>> clearly stated that the suite he ordered wouldn't be available for awhile
> >>> yet he ordered it anyhow and is complaining because his beta serial
> >>> number
> >>> expired. Adobe all along had stated that the beta would expire upon
> >>> Photoshop CS3 release.
> >>>
> >> And yet, here you are, blaming Sandman for the expiration. How Snittish
> >> of
> >> you. Feel free to point out the part where I'm "technically clueless" any
> >> time you'd like.
>
> Oh! Oh! Is that open to all? How about when you got confused and thought
> I could not upgrade a router's firmware?
Are you talking about where you admitted you needed the help of Linksys support
group to accomplish that task? Besides... it wasn't just the firmware, you also
had trouble disabling DHCP. Of course, you tried to pretend it was a bug in
their product (funny how nothing is ever your fault). You even sent me to the
site when I asked you to support that there ever was such a bug that Linksys
would recognize, you said there were people talking about it. That turned out to
be a lie... as was the late issuance of the firmware update you said wasn't
there... but it was.
Steve Carroll
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
I repeat: Where, Snit, did I ever give you the idea that I have any confidence
in your ability to comprehend the answer if I bothered to show you?
--
John
You are one seriously screwed up person Steve. Adobe DID have overlap on
Photoshop CS3. It was released on Apr 20,2007. The beta expired on May 2.
That is 2 weeks of overlap. Yet Sandman ordered product in addition to
Photoshop which he had ZERO use for. It is the usual case of him buying the
most expensive product available so he can brag about it. Next time get
your facts straight before hallucinating about a subject being discussed.
John
Linksys products have HAD MULTIPLE BUGS. As evidenced by multiple firmware
upgrades.
nospamatall
> "Sandman" <m...@sandman.net> stated in post
> mr-AAD73F.18...@News.Individual.NET on 5/4/07 9:55 AM:
>
>> In article <C260B196.7F49D%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
>> Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Give him more credit than that - I think he is actually trying to learn to
>>> use the suite.
>> Stop baiting me, please.
>
> Um, Sandman, I am *defending* you. Are you *not* working on learning CS3?
> If you are not then I stand corrected. Feel free to clear that up.
>
> Also, please fix your .sig.
>
>
even if you can't stop. Maybe something funny?
Andy
Steve Carroll
"John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
Any piece of software that is included in any of their pro suites should not
have beta serials expire before the software is released. This is a situation
where Adobe stepped on their collective dicks... totally unprofessional. No
whining or finger pointing by you can change the reality that Adobe created for
their customers. Adobe charges professional prices... they should act like
professionals. You sound like a kid that Sandman beat up one too many times.
John
As usual you are full of it. Sandman ordered product IN ADDITION to
Photoshop with which NO BETA as of Apr 20 had even been distributed. In
fact the beta versions were not even made available until a short time ago.
Steve Carroll
"John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
Your point? Or did you fail to realize I was talking about a specific bug that
Snit claimed? The firmware upgrade that he said didn't exist was on the site...
very easy to find and its accompanying data sheet didn't say one word about the
bug Snit was referring to. Obviously, Snit didn't expect anyone to call him on
his tale and actually check the site.
Snit
>>>> Feel free to point out the part where I'm "technically clueless" any
>>>> time you'd like.
>>>>
>> Oh! Oh! Is that open to all? How about when you got confused and thought I
>> could not upgrade a router's firmware?
>>
> Are you talking about where you admitted you needed the help of Linksys
> support group to accomplish that task?
When do you think I did *that*? Quote me. I bet you run from that, too.
I, on the other hand, am happy to quote some of your comments about routers
(or matters of Internet protocol) where you have shown yourself to spew
clearly false claims - that ol' Google record is no friend of yours, Steve.
Some examples:
Example 1:
I posted a link to my site to which you responded:
Why go there? So they can be accused of "working" on your
router?
I then asked you:
In what way, Steve, would someone going to that web site
have anything to do with my personal router?
You dishonestly tried to turn things around:
You tell me.
I responded:
Easy: it would not. You are simply wrong.
And then you ran, Steve... you never could explain why
someone going to my *website*, which is not even hosted on
my machine, would be in any way related to someone working
on my *router*. You showed no signs of even understanding
what a router is!
Example 2:
I said:
I just checked my IP, that is not it, though mine
does begin with 24.117.
You replied:
Notice the last line where Snit says his IP doesn't
begin with 24.117?
You never did admit to your inability to understand what you
read... or your lie... or your delusion... heck, what term
do you like for your false statements today?
Example 3:
Some quotes from you about Linksys routers:
-----
I have only Macs on there right now with a Linksys
router,(model BEFSR41). I simply lose all internet
connectivity.
I have a Linksys router,(model BEFSR41) and 4 Macs, 3
of them running Jag, one runs 10.1.5 but will soon be
Jagged. The only app that ever seems to kill the
connection,(that I have noticed to date) is MSIE
If I could stomach using it for an length of time, I'd
hook it into my LAN.
Yeah, I have a Linksys. ... Maybe I should change
browsers for awhile and see it that solves it.
-----
But later you flip-flopped and claimed:
-----
I've used Linksys products for years with multiple Macs
and have never had a problem
you're the only person I've sever seen that tried to
use a Linksys with a Mac that required tech support.
Snit is the only person I've ever heard on this NG talk
about having problems with a Linksys unit. I've owned
several and never had a problem. Personally, I prefer
Linksys for this very reason
I own a couple of Linksys routers, one of them
wireless. I've never had a day's trouble with either of
them, in fact, I have only heard of one person (a Mac
user) ever having any trouble with a Linksys...
-----
Gee, Steve, you never made it clear if your offer to point out how you are
technically clueless is open to people other than John. I wonder why? LOL!
> Besides... it wasn't just the firmware, you also had trouble disabling DHCP.
> Of course, you tried to pretend it was a bug in their product (funny how
> nothing is ever your fault). You even sent me to the site when I asked you to
> support that there ever was such a bug that Linksys would recognize, you said
> there were people talking about it. That turned out to be a lie... as was the
> late issuance of the firmware update you said wasn't there... but it was.
And you will quote this conversation... um... a week from never? LOL!
Please note how easy it is to quote you claiming to have problems with a
router (a Linksys, specifically), quote you *later* denying you had any
problems with a Linksys router, watch you show you think someone going to a
website is related to "working on a router", etc. You are clearly
technically and morally lacking, Steve.
Have fun running - you know that is the best you can do.
--
€ Different viruses are still different even if in the same "family"
€ Dreamweaver and GoLive are professional web development applications
€ Dreamweaver, being the #1 pro web design tool, is used by many pros
John
It is STANDARD PROCEDURE for virtually 100% of companies out there not to
list 100% of the bugs corrected in a firmware or software updates release
notes. Had you ever worked as a professional you would know that.
Snit
Steve said to John:
And yet, here you are, blaming Sandman for the expiration.
John replied:
As usual you have not been able to comprehend reality.
Sandaman is not being blamed for the expiration but is being
blamed for [other stuff]
Steve replies back
I obviously did comprehend that.
Come on, Steve, do try to explain this lie of of yours... or do you want to
blame it on your inability to understand what you read... maybe on your
delusions... your drug abuse? How do you explain your obviously
contradictory claims?
Snit
>> Linksys products have HAD MULTIPLE BUGS. As evidenced by multiple firmware
>> upgrades.
>>
> Your point? Or did you fail to realize I was talking about a specific bug that
> Snit claimed? The firmware upgrade that he said didn't exist was on the
> site... very easy to find and its accompanying data sheet didn't say one word
> about the bug Snit was referring to. Obviously, Snit didn't expect anyone to
> call him on his tale and actually check the site.
Come on, Steve: quote me. Show the posts where this happened. You know you
would if you could. LOL!
Snit
Be careful, John, Steve is trying to toss in as much BS as he can to hide
his own errors...
Steve said to John:
And yet, here you are, blaming Sandman for the expiration.
John replied:
As usual you have not been able to comprehend reality.
Sandaman is not being blamed for the expiration but is being
blamed for [other stuff]
Steve replies back
I obviously did comprehend that.
Steve completely changed his story and is now trying to bury that. Watch
him run!
--
€ Teaching is a "real job"
€ The path "~/users/username/library/widget" is not common on any OS
€ The term "all widgets" does not specify a specific subgroup of widgets
Snit
>>> Oh! Oh! Is that open to all? How about when you got confused and thought
>>> I could not upgrade a router's firmware?
>>>
>> Are you talking about where you admitted you needed the help of Linksys
>> support group to accomplish that task? Besides... it wasn't just the
>> firmware, you also had trouble disabling DHCP. Of course, you tried to
>> pretend it was a bug in their product (funny how nothing is ever your fault).
>> You even sent me to the site when I asked you to support that there ever was
>> such a bug that Linksys would recognize, you said there were people talking
>> about it. That turned out to be a lie... as was the late issuance of the
>> firmware update you said wasn't there... but it was.
>>
>>
>
> Linksys products have HAD MULTIPLE BUGS. As evidenced by multiple firmware
> upgrades.
Also note where Steve completely fails to show where I did what he claims...
where I happily quote him being an idiot and liar when it comes to routers
and IP info. If Steve had "dirt" on me there is no doubt he would post it.
Here is some "dirt" on him:
Example 1:
I posted a link to my site to which Steve responded:
Why go there? So they can be accused of "working" on your
router?
I then asked Steve:
In what way, Steve, would someone going to that web site
have anything to do with my personal router?
Steve dishonestly tried to turn things around:
You tell me.
I responded:
Easy: it would not. You are simply wrong.
And then Steve ran... he never could explain why someone
going to my *website*, which is not even hosted on my
machine, would be in any way related to someone working on
my *router*. He showed no signs of even understanding what
a router is!
Example 2:
I said:
I just checked my IP, that is not it, though mine
does begin with 24.117.
Steve replied:
Notice the last line where Snit says his IP doesn't
begin with 24.117?
Steve never did admit to his inability to understand what he
read... or his lie... or his delusion... heck, what term
does he like for your false statements these days?
Example 3:
Some quotes from Steve about Linksys routers:
-----
I have only Macs on there right now with a Linksys
router,(model BEFSR41). I simply lose all internet
connectivity.
I have a Linksys router,(model BEFSR41) and 4 Macs, 3
of them running Jag, one runs 10.1.5 but will soon be
Jagged. The only app that ever seems to kill the
connection,(that I have noticed to date) is MSIE
If I could stomach using it for an length of time, I'd
hook it into my LAN.
Yeah, I have a Linksys. ... Maybe I should change
browsers for awhile and see it that solves it.
-----
But later he flip-flopped and claimed:
-----
I've used Linksys products for years with multiple Macs
and have never had a problem
you're the only person I've sever seen that tried to
use a Linksys with a Mac that required tech support.
Snit is the only person I've ever heard on this NG talk
about having problems with a Linksys unit. I've owned
several and never had a problem. Personally, I prefer
Linksys for this very reason
I own a couple of Linksys routers, one of them
wireless. I've never had a day's trouble with either of
them, in fact, I have only heard of one person (a Mac
user) ever having any trouble with a Linksys...
-----
Get ready for Steve to post that nasty dirt on me... and for him to explain
his own clearly false statements.
Oh. Wait. He will just run. LOL!
--
€ It is OK to email yourself files and store them there for a few weeks
€ No legislation supercedes the Constitution (unless it amends it)
€ Apple's video format is not far from NTSC DVD and good enough for most
Snit
5/4/07 4:41 PM:
If Sandman continued his trolling in that thread I did not even read it - no
less reply.
Jolly Roger
> He is, apparently, automatically appending that to every post of his - at
> least to the ones he posts that are directed at me.
Or he was simply pasting the same thing over and over in an attempt to
make you read it.
--
(If you send an email to this address, please notify me ahead of time
so I can watch for it among the sea of SPAM that gets filtered out
daily.)
JR
Jolly Roger
> "Jolly Roger" <jolly...@pobox.com> stated in post
> 2007050413491577178-jollyroger@poboxcom on 5/4/07 11:49 AM:
>
>> On 2007-05-04 02:45:23 -0500, Sandman <m...@sandman.net> said:
>>
>>> The serial for the Adobe Photoshop CS3 beta has now expired. The
>>> Master Collection bundle, which I have ordered, hasn't been released
>>> yet. D'oh!
>>
>> Well Adobe never said they would supply you with uninterrupted access
>> to Photoshop CS3 until release, did they? Didn't think so.
>
> Still, in Sandman's defense, if he is just learning to use the Adobe suite
> it can be quite a pain for him to be interrupted. This would also be true
> if he were dependant on some new feature, but that is quite unlikely in his
> case.
If he wanted to learn Photoshop he should have used some other means. A
beta's purpose isn't to be a demo or learning tool.
Snit
>>> Linksys products have HAD MULTIPLE BUGS. As evidenced by multiple firmware
>>> upgrades.
>>>
>> Your point? Or did you fail to realize I was talking about a specific bug
>> that Snit claimed? The firmware upgrade that he said didn't exist was on the
>> site... very easy to find and its accompanying data sheet didn't say one word
>> about the bug Snit was referring to. Obviously, Snit didn't expect anyone to
>> call him on his tale and actually check the site.
>
> It is STANDARD PROCEDURE for virtually 100% of companies out there not to list
> 100% of the bugs corrected in a firmware or software updates release notes.
> Had you ever worked as a professional you would know that.
Only Steve would think that every firmware upgrade is accompanied by a
complete and total list of all changes to it. Amazing. Then again, he
thinks visiting a website is somehow closely related to working on a
router... I posted a link to my site to which Steve responded:
"Why go there? So they can be accused of "working" on your router?"
He never could explain why going to a site would have anything to do with
what he accused me of.
Snit
> On 2007-05-04 13:56:54 -0500, Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> said:
>
>> He is, apparently, automatically appending that to every post of his - at
>> least to the ones he posts that are directed at me.
>
> Or he was simply pasting the same thing over and over in an attempt to
> make you read it.
I have already read it and responded to it... and responded with wording
that was almost exactly like what he asked me to.
I recognize your opinion, but I am not interested in arguing
this matter in the way you seem to be proposing, so I will
respectfully withdraw from the discussion. Thank you for
understanding.
Sadly Sandman showed no understanding. Also note he could not even decide
what it was he wanted me to do with what he wrote or figure out who wrote
it:
Sandman:
... why won't you sign the agreement you yourself have written?
Snit
You mean the one that has already been "signed"?
Sandman:
No, the one you keep dishonestly snipping, of course.
Snit:
Oh, so the one I did not write... not the one you talk about me
having written, above.
I have, of course, noted where I "signed" the agreement I wrote:
<http://csma.gallopinginsanity.com/honor/>
Sandman is just very, very confused.
--
€ The tilde in an OS X path does *not* mean "the hard drive only"
€ Things which are not the same are not "identical"
€ The word "ouch" is not a sure sign of agreement.
Snit
> On 2007-05-04 13:58:06 -0500, Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> said:
>
>> "Jolly Roger" <jolly...@pobox.com> stated in post
>> 2007050413491577178-jollyroger@poboxcom on 5/4/07 11:49 AM:
>>
>>> On 2007-05-04 02:45:23 -0500, Sandman <m...@sandman.net> said:
>>>
>>>> The serial for the Adobe Photoshop CS3 beta has now expired. The
>>>> Master Collection bundle, which I have ordered, hasn't been released
>>>> yet. D'oh!
>>>
>>> Well Adobe never said they would supply you with uninterrupted access
>>> to Photoshop CS3 until release, did they? Didn't think so.
>>
>> Still, in Sandman's defense, if he is just learning to use the Adobe suite
>> it can be quite a pain for him to be interrupted. This would also be true
>> if he were dependant on some new feature, but that is quite unlikely in his
>> case.
>
> If he wanted to learn Photoshop he should have used some other means. A
> beta's purpose isn't to be a demo or learning tool.
It can be used to help you familiarize you with new features. But you do
have a good point - a beta is shared to allow users to test features and
give feedback. With that in mind, if there is some time from when a beta
expires and when a company finishes responding to that feedback, fixing
code, and releasing a product it really is not a big deal. Neither Sandman
nor Carroll show any understanding of this - to the contrary they claim to
be frustrated at Adobe for doing just that! Thanks for bringing that point
up. I wonder if Sandman and Carroll will explain their frustration.
Snit
>>> And yet, here you are, blaming Sandman for the expiration. ...
>> Where, Steve, do you think John blamed Sandman for the expiration?
>
> Where, Snit, did I ever give you the idea that I have any confidence in your
> ability to comprehend the answer if I bothered to show you?
Come on, Steve! You made an accusation! Try to back it up or... well... do
what you always do - run.
In the end the fact that you have been caught telling another falsehood is
very, very clear.
>> When you fail to quote John ever doing so, Steve, are you more comfortable
>> having your false statement called a lie, a delusion, or a sign you cannot
>> understand what you read? My how you do get all bent out of shape when
>> people do not characterize your false statements in a way that pleases you!
Gee, Steve, I guess you did not like that question - you even snipped it.
Jolly Roger
> I wonder if Sandman and Carroll will explain their frustration.
Heh... doubt it.
John
"Snit" <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
news:C2612079.7F5C0%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com...
> "Steve Carroll" <no...@nowhere.net> stated in post
> noone-85DB7E....@newsgroups.comcast.net on 5/4/07 3:43 PM:
>
>
>>>> And yet, here you are, blaming Sandman for the expiration. ...
>
>>> Where, Steve, do you think John blamed Sandman for the expiration?
>>
>> Where, Snit, did I ever give you the idea that I have any confidence in
>> your
>> ability to comprehend the answer if I bothered to show you?
>
> Come on, Steve! You made an accusation! Try to back it up or... well...
> do
> what you always do - run.
>
> In the end the fact that you have been caught telling another falsehood is
> very, very clear.
>
>>> When you fail to quote John ever doing so, Steve, are you more
>>> comfortable
>>> having your false statement called a lie, a delusion, or a sign you
>>> cannot
>>> understand what you read? My how you do get all bent out of shape when
>>> people do not characterize your false statements in a way that pleases
>>> you!
>
> Gee, Steve, I guess you did not like that question - you even snipped it.
> Well, then, let's just call your lie a lie. You are a liar, Steve.
> Period.
>
Steve is so delusional he doesn't see HOW OBVIOUS it is when he has been
caught lying. In general you just look for the cases where Steve radically
snips.
Snit
Hey! Maybe he is not delusional - maybe he is just an out and out liar. He
does not like it when you assume it is one and not the other... :)
Snit
> On 2007-05-04 19:35:22 -0500, Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> said:
>
>> I wonder if Sandman and Carroll will explain their frustration.
>
> Heh... doubt it.
But that does not make it any less obvious why they are so frustrated. :)
--
€ Different version numbers refer to different versions
€ Macs are Macs and Apple is still making and selling Macs
€ The early IBM PCs and Commodores shipped with an OS in ROM
Snit
>> Any piece of software that is included in any of their pro suites should not
>> have beta serials expire before the software is released. This is a situation
>> where Adobe stepped on their collective dicks... totally unprofessional. No
>> whining or finger pointing by you can change the reality that Adobe created
>> for their customers. Adobe charges professional prices... they should act
>> like professionals. You sound like a kid that Sandman beat up one too many
>> times.
>
> As usual you are full of it. Sandman ordered product IN ADDITION to
> Photoshop with which NO BETA as of Apr 20 had even been distributed. In fact
> the beta versions were not even made available until a short time ago.
While a beta can be used to help you familiarize you with new features its
primary purpose is to allow users to test features and give feedback. With
that in mind, if there is some time from when a beta expires and when a
company finishes responding to that feedback, fixing code, and releasing a
product it really is not a big deal. Neither Sandman nor Carroll show any
understanding of this - to the contrary they claim to be frustrated at Adobe
for doing just that! I wonder if Sandman and Carroll will explain their
frustration... or will we just see Carroll make up stories about how you
blamed Sandman for *Adobe's* actions... something you never did.
Steve, to John:
And yet, here you are, blaming Sandman for the expiration. ...
Snit:
Where, Steve, do you think John blamed Sandman for the expiration?
And Steve ran like a scared bunny... blaming *me* for his inability to
explain himself. Once again Steve not only is caught making accusations he
will *never* back up, he blames others for his lies and delusions.
--
€ A partial subset is not synonymous with the whole
€ A person's actions speak more about him than what others say
€ Apple doesn't provide as many options as the rest of the PC industry
Steve Carroll
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> "Steve Carroll" <no...@nowhere.net> stated in post
> noone-94972E....@newsgroups.comcast.net on 5/4/07 4:02 PM:
>
> >>>> Feel free to point out the part where I'm "technically clueless" any
> >>>> time you'd like.
> >>>>
> >> Oh! Oh! Is that open to all? How about when you got confused and
> >> thought I
> >> could not upgrade a router's firmware?
> >>
> > Are you talking about where you admitted you needed the help of Linksys
> > support group to accomplish that task?
>
> When do you think I did *that*? Quote me.
Been there, done that... got the T-shirt and wore it out long ago.
Snit
> In article <noone-182013....@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
> Steve Carroll <no...@nowhere.net> wrote:
>
>> In article <166dnaGpKPvb36bb...@netlojix.com>,
>> "John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "Sandman" <m...@sandman.net> wrote in message
>>> news:mr-E64CAE.09...@News.Individual.NET...
>>>> The serial for the Adobe Photoshop CS3 beta has now expired. The
>>>> Master Collection bundle, which I have ordered, hasn't been released
>>>> yet. D'oh!
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Sandman[.net]
>>> \
>>>
>>> No problem at all on this end. Had you ordered Design Premium there would
>>> be no problem. Sounds like your usual technical incompetence.
>>
>> His beta software serial number has run out and you're blaming him, Snit Jr.?
>> Why am I not surprised...
>
> Haha, John is priceless. And he keeps replying to me in spite of
> knowing that I have had him killfiled for a long time. :-D
>
Just like you *claimed* to not be reading my posts but then I caught you
with copies of them on your server... and then you decided to peek under
your KF... then you tried to block my from your web server but could not
figure out how... and on and on and on.
Just because you *say* you have someone in your KF, Sandman, why do you
think you are believed?
--
€ If A = B then B = A (known as the "symmetric property of equality")
€ Incest and sex are not identical (only a pervert would disagree)
€ One can be actually guilty of a crime but neither tried nor convicted
Steve Carroll
"John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
They will list a major bug list Snit claimed existed. There were no mentions on
the forum of the bug either. I wondered why Snit sent me there... until I
realized that he was a delusional nitwit.
Steve Carroll
Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
> On 2007-05-04 02:45:23 -0500, Sandman <m...@sandman.net> said:
>
> > The serial for the Adobe Photoshop CS3 beta has now expired. The
> > Master Collection bundle, which I have ordered, hasn't been released
> > yet. D'oh!
>
> Well Adobe never said they would supply you with uninterrupted access
> to Photoshop CS3 until release, did they? Didn't think so.
They should do that very thing. As they target professional users, they should
make any kind of convenience available to those users that is possible for them
to make. This one would have been possible if they coordinated their shit
properly.
Steve Carroll
"John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
Sandman stated that he ordered the Master Collection. Above, you're saying that
he ordered Photoshop "IN ADDITION to" that "product". Explain, oh technical
genius, why he would do that?
Steve Carroll
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> "Sandman" <m...@sandman.net> stated in post
> mr-275F08.18...@News.Individual.NET on 5/4/07 9:37 AM:
>
> > In article <noone-182013....@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
> > Steve Carroll <no...@nowhere.net> wrote:
> >
> >> In article <166dnaGpKPvb36bb...@netlojix.com>,
> >> "John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> "Sandman" <m...@sandman.net> wrote in message
> >>> news:mr-E64CAE.09...@News.Individual.NET...
> >>>> The serial for the Adobe Photoshop CS3 beta has now expired. The
> >>>> Master Collection bundle, which I have ordered, hasn't been released
> >>>> yet. D'oh!
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Sandman[.net]
> >>> \
> >>>
> >>> No problem at all on this end. Had you ordered Design Premium there
> >>> would
> >>> be no problem. Sounds like your usual technical incompetence.
> >>
> >> His beta software serial number has run out and you're blaming him, Snit
> >> Jr.?
> >> Why am I not surprised...
> >
> > Haha, John is priceless. And he keeps replying to me in spite of
> > knowing that I have had him killfiled for a long time. :-D
> >
> Just like you *claimed* to not be reading my posts but then I caught you
Said the guy who keeps *claiming* to people in csma that he is ignoring my posts.
Steve Carroll
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
He not only did it... the idiot suggested that Sandman bought the wrong product.
That was, in what John call his mind, Sandman's technical 'error'... buying the
wrong product. Too funny... he's almost as stupid as you are;)
Snit
>>>>>> Feel free to point out the part where I'm "technically clueless" any time
>>>>>> you'd like.
>>>>>>
>>>> Oh! Oh! Is that open to all? How about when you got confused and thought
>>>> I could not upgrade a router's firmware?
>>>>
>>> Are you talking about where you admitted you needed the help of Linksys
>>> support group to accomplish that task?
>>
>> When do you think I did *that*? Quote me.
>
> Been there, done that... got the T-shirt and wore it out long ago.
Great! If true then finding your evidence just got easier! You can point
to my original posts where I said what you claimed *or* you can point to
where you quoted me. You make it should like you quoted me a lot, so this
should be easy for you.
Right? Right? Oh, man... not so right. In fact, Steve, I predicted:
I bet you run from that, too.
In fact that was my very next sentence. But you snipped it... You also
snipped some quotes from you which showed you:
* Jumping from the topic of going to a website to the topic of working
on someone's router - as if you thought they were the same thing or
closely related.
* One where I noted some digits from my IP address only to have you
respond and claim I had said those digits were *not* in my IP
address.
* A bunch of quotes from you whining about your Linksys router and then
a bunch more quotes from you from *later* where you denied having had
problems with a Linksys router or having talked about having such
problems.
I ended my post with:
Have fun running - you know that is the best you can do.
And, if does seem, you took me up on that. LOL!
Snit
Pssst... Steve... that has nothing to do with your claim that John blamed
Sandman for Adobe's actions. Do try to understand what you read... OK. I
am not interested in your obfuscations.
Steve, to John:
And yet, here you are, blaming Sandman for the expiration. ...
Snit:
Where, Steve, do you think John blamed Sandman for the expiration?
And you, Steve, ran like a scared bunny... then you blamed *me* for your
inability to explain yourself. Come on, Steve, at least *try* to back up
your accusations. Please?
Snit
> In article <2007050413491577178-jollyroger@poboxcom>,
> Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2007-05-04 02:45:23 -0500, Sandman <m...@sandman.net> said:
>>
>>> The serial for the Adobe Photoshop CS3 beta has now expired. The Master
>>> Collection bundle, which I have ordered, hasn't been released yet. D'oh!
>>>
>> Well Adobe never said they would supply you with uninterrupted access to
>> Photoshop CS3 until release, did they? Didn't think so.
>>
> They should do that very thing. As they target professional users, they should
> make any kind of convenience available to those users that is possible for
> them to make. This one would have been possible if they coordinated their shit
> properly.
What, Steve, do you think is the purpose of a beta? Hint: it is not so that
professionals can use it early in a mission critical environment, as you
seem to think.
John
Steve you stupid idiot. He ordered a suite which CONTAINS Photoshop and ALL
of the other Adobe Apps solely because it was the most expensive collection.
Certainly not because he needed every single app. Obviously Photoshop was
the app he was most interested in(and the only one that had been released in
public beta prior to Apr 20.)
John
WHAT A FUCKING STUPID IDIOT!!! Like Jesus you can't understand the most
simplest of concepts. Adobe made it clear when he ordered it that the
Master Collection would not ship until AFTER the beta expired. Sandman
had he had half a brain could have ordered Design Suite Premium which was
AVAILABLE NOW and had Photoshop included in it. Sandman IS NOT A
PROFESIONAL and as one stupid ass had no real need for the Master
Collection.
Snit
>>> As usual you are full of it. Sandman ordered product IN ADDITION to
>>> Photoshop with which NO BETA as of Apr 20 had even been distributed. In
>>> fact the beta versions were not even made available until a short time ago.
>>>
>> Sandman stated that he ordered the Master Collection. Above, you're saying
>> that he ordered Photoshop "IN ADDITION to" that "product". Explain, oh
>> technical genius, why he would do that?
>>
>
>
> Steve you stupid idiot. He ordered a suite which CONTAINS Photoshop and ALL
> of the other Adobe Apps solely because it was the most expensive collection.
> Certainly not because he needed every single app. Obviously Photoshop was the
> app he was most interested in(and the only one that had been released in
> public beta prior to Apr 20.)
And all of this is a side issue. Steve was called on his BS accusation to
you:
And yet, here you are, blaming Sandman for the expiration. ...
When asked to support his claim he ran like a scared bunny and is not
spewing obfuscations and pushing other accusations - any other accusation he
can think of - to hide the fact that he out and out lied about you.
--
€ There is no known malware that attacks OS X in the wild
€ There are two general types of PCs: Macs and PCs (odd naming conventions!)
€ Mac OS X 10.x.x is a version of Mac OS
Snit
>>> While a beta can be used to help you familiarize you with new features its
>>> primary purpose is to allow users to test features and give feedback. With
>>> that in mind, if there is some time from when a beta expires and when a
>>> company finishes responding to that feedback, fixing code, and releasing a
>>> product it really is not a big deal. Neither Sandman nor Carroll show any
>>> understanding of this - to the contrary they claim to be frustrated at Adobe
>>> for doing just that! I wonder if Sandman and Carroll will explain their
>>> frustration... or will we just see Carroll make up stories about how you
>>> blamed Sandman for *Adobe's* actions... something you never did.
>>>
>> He not only did it... the idiot suggested that Sandman bought the wrong
>> product. That was, in what John call his mind, Sandman's technical 'error'...
>> buying the wrong product. Too funny... he's almost as stupid as you are;)
>>
>
> WHAT A FUCKING STUPID IDIOT!!! Like Jesus you can't understand the most
> simplest of concepts. Adobe made it clear when he ordered it that the Master
> Collection would not ship until AFTER the beta expired. Sandman had he had
> half a brain could have ordered Design Suite Premium which was AVAILABLE NOW
> and had Photoshop included in it. Sandman IS NOT A PROFESIONAL and as one
> stupid ass had no real need for the Master Collection.
Steve does not show any sign of understanding that a beta is not released to
allow self-professed pros to base their mission critical work on it before
it is done. I have asked him what he thinks the primary purpose of a beta
release is and, as is his norm, he has run from the question. He likely has
no idea. No sign, yet, that Sandman does either, but he has not been
posting since I asked.
--
€ Nuclear arms are arms
€ OS X's Command+Scroll wheel function does not exist in default XP
€ Technical competence and intelligence are not the same thing
Snit
C2614CA2.7F620%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com on 5/4/07 8:48 PM:
> "John" <nos...@nospam.com> stated in post
> aeydnecSr8LfZ6bb...@netlojix.com on 5/4/07 8:30 PM:
>
>>>> As usual you are full of it. Sandman ordered product IN ADDITION to
>>>> Photoshop with which NO BETA as of Apr 20 had even been distributed. In
>>>> fact the beta versions were not even made available until a short time ago.
>>>>
>>> Sandman stated that he ordered the Master Collection. Above, you're saying
>>> that he ordered Photoshop "IN ADDITION to" that "product". Explain, oh
>>> technical genius, why he would do that?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Steve you stupid idiot. He ordered a suite which CONTAINS Photoshop and ALL
>> of the other Adobe Apps solely because it was the most expensive collection.
>> Certainly not because he needed every single app. Obviously Photoshop was
>> the
>> app he was most interested in(and the only one that had been released in
>> public beta prior to Apr 20.)
>
> And all of this is a side issue. Steve was called on his BS accusation to
> you:
>
> And yet, here you are, blaming Sandman for the expiration. ...
>
> When asked to support his claim he ran like a scared bunny and is *NOW*
> spewing obfuscations and pushing other accusations - any other accusation he
> can think of - to hide the fact that he out and out lied about you.
>
I fixed my typo.
--
€ It is OK to email yourself files and store them there for a few weeks
€ No legislation supercedes the Constitution (unless it amends it)
€ Apple's video format is not far from NTSC DVD and good enough for most
Sandman
Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
> > The serial for the Adobe Photoshop CS3 beta has now expired. The
> > Master Collection bundle, which I have ordered, hasn't been released
> > yet. D'oh!
>
> Well Adobe never said they would supply you with uninterrupted access
> to Photoshop CS3 until release, did they?
So this changes things how?
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >>>> I was *defending* the fact that your frustration makes sense...
> >>>
> >>> No, you were baiting me. Please stop.
> >>
> >> What you snipped:
> >
> > What you snipped first:
>
> I snipped your excessively long signature.
No, you snipped this:
Code of Honesty:
1) Be specific. Use the specific example of what it is you that is
bothering you. Vague complaints are hard to agree on, especially
in a forum like this.
2) Don't generalize. Avoid words like "never" or "always." Such
generalizations are usually inaccurate and will heighten tensions.
3) Don't stockpile. Storing up lots of grievances over time is
counterproductive. It's almost impossible to deal with numerous old
problems for which interpretations may differ. Try to deal with
problems as they arise.
4) Agree to let the past go...
Dishonesty examples:
- Creative snipping
- Deliberate misinterpretation
- Diversion
- Having an agenda
- Lying
- Role Reversal
- Insults
- Forging posts and material
- Thread hijacking
- Projection
- Unsubstantiated accusations
- Antagonizing through other media
- Antagonizing threads
- Ignoring evidence
- Obfuscation
It should be clear that this agreement is valid for all posts made by
the signers, not merely those between the signers. Agreeing to this
displays ones commitment to "end the BS" (as worded by one possible
signer) and end ongoing and past disputes to embrace common
understanding, patience and tolerance.
After signing, the signers should refrain from entering discussions
that are, and opt-out of discussion that are becoming, offensive or
destructive, regardless of who is the instigator. This unless the
signer feels confident that he or she can continue participation
without engaging in the elevated level of argumentation.
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> "Sandman" <m...@sandman.net> stated in post
> mr-3F4863.19...@News.Individual.NET on 5/4/07 10:12 AM:
>
> > In article <C260B567.7F4AA%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> > Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>> Give him more credit than that - I think he is actually trying to learn
> >>>> to
> >>>> use the suite.
> >>>
> >>> Stop baiting me, please.
> >>
> >> Um, Sandman, I am *defending* you.
> >
> > No, you are baiting me. Please stop.
> >
> >> Are you *not* working on learning CS3?
> >> If you are not then I stand corrected. Feel free to clear that up.
>
> The question at hand:
>
> Are you *not* working on learning CS3?
>
> How much will you obfuscate and show yourself to be very evasive before
> finally answering the question?
I won't participate in your trolling circus. Please stop baiting me.
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
> > Haha, John is priceless. And he keeps replying to me in spite of
> > knowing that I have had him killfiled for a long time. :-D
>
> Just like you *claimed* to not be reading my posts but then I caught you
> with copies of them on your server...
It's automatically indexed, Michael, and unrelated to my kill filter.
Hope that clears up your confusion.
--
Sandman[.net]
ZnU
"John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> "Steve Carroll" <no...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
> news:noone-569F78....@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> WHAT A FUCKING STUPID IDIOT!!! Like Jesus you can't understand the most
> simplest of concepts. Adobe made it clear when he ordered it that the
> Master Collection would not ship until AFTER the beta expired. Sandman
> had he had half a brain could have ordered Design Suite Premium which was
> AVAILABLE NOW and had Photoshop included in it. Sandman IS NOT A
> PROFESIONAL and as one stupid ass had no real need for the Master
> Collection.
Your personal issues with Sandman aside, this is a pretty obnoxious
thing for Adobe to do to customers who are paying a lot of money, and it
would have been easy for them to do the right thing here.
--
"That's George Washington, the first president, of course. The interesting thing
about him is that I read three--three or four books about him last year. Isn't
that interesting?"
- George W. Bush to reporter Kai Diekmann, May 5, 2006
Sandman
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> "Jolly Roger" <jolly...@pobox.com> stated in post
> 2007050419222884172-jollyroger@poboxcom on 5/4/07 5:22 PM:
>
> > On 2007-05-04 13:56:54 -0500, Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> said:
> >
> >> He is, apparently, automatically appending that to every post of his - at
> >> least to the ones he posts that are directed at me.
> >
> > Or he was simply pasting the same thing over and over in an attempt to
> > make you read it.
>
> I have already read it and responded to it... and responded with wording
> that was almost exactly like what he asked me to.
>
> I recognize your opinion, but I am not interested in arguing
> this matter in the way you seem to be proposing, so I will
> respectfully withdraw from the discussion. Thank you for
> understanding.
>
> Sadly Sandman showed no understanding. Also note he could not even decide
> what it was he wanted me to do with what he wrote or figure out who wrote
> it:
>
> Sandman:
> ... why won't you sign the agreement you yourself have written?
>
> Snit
> You mean the one that has already been "signed"?
>
> Sandman:
> No, the one you keep dishonestly snipping, of course.
>
> Snit:
> Oh, so the one I did not write... not the one you talk about me
> having written, above.
>
> I have, of course, noted where I "signed" the agreement I wrote:
>
> <http://csma.gallopinginsanity.com/honor/>
>
> Sandman is just very, very confused.
I want the "BS to end" and I have proposed an agreement that I would
like both of us to sign to achieve that goal. Why won't you agree to
"end the BS" with me, Snit?
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
>>>>>> Give him more credit than that - I think he is actually trying to learn
>>>>>> to use the suite.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Stop baiting me, please.
>>>>>
>>>> Um, Sandman, I am *defending* you.
>>>>
>>> No, you are baiting me. Please stop.
>>>
>>>> Are you *not* working on learning CS3? If you are not then I stand
>>>> corrected. Feel free to clear that up.
>>>>
>> The question at hand:
>>
>> Are you *not* working on learning CS3?
>>
>> How much will you obfuscate and show yourself to be very evasive before
>> finally answering the question?
>
> I won't participate in your trolling circus. Please stop baiting me.
1) You talked about your frustration of a beta program ending
before you could get a product in the exact suite you wanted to.
2) Someone else belittled you for it.
3) I defended you by saying if you were learning CS3 I can see
where you might be frustrated.
4) You whined that to defend you is a form of *baiting* you.
5) I asked if maybe my guess was incorrect and perhaps you are not learning
to use CS3... hey, if I am wrong just let me know!
6) ... and you whine again! Even asking you if I am wrong about you is,
to you, somehow *baiting* you.
LOL! Come on, Sandman, cut the BS? Such an easy question: Are you or are
you not trying to learn to use CS3?
Seems you do not even know - or are embarrassed to admit that you are not.
Oh well...
Snit
> In article <C2613EF3.7F604%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>>> Haha, John is priceless. And he keeps replying to me in spite of
>>> knowing that I have had him killfiled for a long time. :-D
>>
>> Just like you *claimed* to not be reading my posts but then I caught you
>> with copies of them on your server...
>
> It's automatically indexed, Michael, and unrelated to my kill filter.
You automated collecting my posts and adding them to your site.
But then you want me to believe you were not reading those posts.
I guess that is sort of like you denying you sent me an email after you
claimed it was an automated email... do you just spam anyone you want and
deny responsibility?
>
> Hope that clears up your confusion.
You were copying my posts to your website, re-publishing them, and sometimes
even posting comments about them, but you decided to claim you were not even
reading them. Nothing confusing about that at all!
Snit
What were you using the beta for? If you were using it for critical work
then you made a mistake... and if not, what is your complaint?
--
€ OS X is partially based on BSD (esp. FreeBSD)
€ OS X users are at far less risk of malware then are XP users
€ Photoshop is an image editing application
Sandman
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
Please end the BS, Michael. WIll you agree to that with me? If not,
why not?
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
> Your personal issues with Sandman aside, this is a pretty obnoxious
> thing for Adobe to do to customers who are paying a lot of money, and it
> would have been easy for them to do the right thing here.
Sure, just provide an alternate serial number. Not that PS asked for
another serial, it just said the beta had expired, so I suppose one
would have to download a new beta.
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
While I respond and point out your BS, Sandman, I am not responsible for it.
See above for my full response to your begging.
Sandman
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >>> Haha, John is priceless. And he keeps replying to me in spite of
> >>> knowing that I have had him killfiled for a long time. :-D
> >>
> >> Just like you *claimed* to not be reading my posts but then I caught you
> >> with copies of them on your server...
> >
> > It's automatically indexed, Michael, and unrelated to my kill filter.
>
> You automated collecting my posts and adding them to your site.
No, all of csma's post.
> But then you want me to believe you were not reading those posts.
I've not expressed an opinion to that effect. What you believe isn't
relevant. If I wanted to read your mail, I wouldn't index it to my
database and read them there, I would remove the kill filter.
MT-NewsWatcher even has a "show killed articles" checkbox when viewing
new posts if one would like to peek under the kill filter.
Hope that clears up your confusion.
> I guess that is sort of like you denying you sent me an email after you
> claimed it was an automated email... do you just spam anyone you want and
> deny responsibility?
I have never sent you an email. "Sending" is a verb, i.e. an action.
That action has never been taken by me. Hope that clears up your
confusion.
> > Hope that clears up your confusion.
>
> You were copying my posts to your website, re-publishing them, and sometimes
> even posting comments about them, but you decided to claim you were not even
> reading them. Nothing confusing about that at all!
I don't have any means to read specific messages from the database.
Hope that clears up your confusion.
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> Well Adobe never said they would supply you with uninterrupted access
> >> to Photoshop CS3 until release, did they?
> >
> > So this changes things how?
>
> What were you using the beta for?
Work.
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
>> 1) You talked about your frustration of a beta program ending
>> before you could get a product in the exact suite you wanted to.
>>
>> 2) Someone else belittled you for it.
>>
>> 3) I defended you by saying if you were learning CS3 I can see
>> where you might be frustrated.
>>
>> 4) You whined that to defend you is a form of *baiting* you.
>>
>> 5) I asked if maybe my guess was incorrect and perhaps you are not learning
>> to use CS3... hey, if I am wrong just let me know!
>>
>> 6) ... and you whine again! Even asking you if I am wrong about you is,
>> to you, somehow *baiting* you.
>>
>> LOL! Come on, Sandman, cut the BS? Such an easy question: Are you or are
>> you not trying to learn to use CS3?
>>
>> Seems you do not even know - or are embarrassed to admit that you are not.
>> Oh well...
>
> Please end the BS, Michael. WIll you agree to that with me? If not,
> why not?
I defended you. You whined. I asked if the assumption I made in my defense
was wrong. You whined some more... and refused to answer the question.
You will continue to run from a simple question: are you trying to learn
CS3. Funny how that question troubles you so.
The BS is all yours, Sandman. How would anything *I* agree to get you to
stop?
--
€ Different version numbers refer to different versions
€ Macs are Macs and Apple is still making and selling Macs
€ The early IBM PCs and Commodores shipped with an OS in ROM
Sandman
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
Why won't you agree to end the BS, Snit?
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
It would be silly for them to release a "new beta" after all key products in
the suite had shipped.
Are you even trying to learn to work with CS3?
Snit
No agreement I enter can make you end your BS. At this point, Sandman, we
are no longer even talking about the topic at hand - your flip-flopping on
who you even think wrote this agreement you are obsessing over: we have
moved to a meta-argument over who is responsible for your flip-flopping; you
for doing so or me for pointing it out.
Not interested, Sandman.
Sandman
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> "Sandman" <m...@sandman.net> stated in post
> mr-B86696.07...@News.Individual.NET on 5/4/07 10:36 PM:
>
> >> 1) You talked about your frustration of a beta program ending
> >> before you could get a product in the exact suite you wanted to.
> >>
> >> 2) Someone else belittled you for it.
> >>
> >> 3) I defended you by saying if you were learning CS3 I can see
> >> where you might be frustrated.
> >>
> >> 4) You whined that to defend you is a form of *baiting* you.
> >>
> >> 5) I asked if maybe my guess was incorrect and perhaps you are not learning
> >> to use CS3... hey, if I am wrong just let me know!
> >>
> >> 6) ... and you whine again! Even asking you if I am wrong about you is,
> >> to you, somehow *baiting* you.
> >>
> >> LOL! Come on, Sandman, cut the BS? Such an easy question: Are you or are
> >> you not trying to learn to use CS3?
> >>
> >> Seems you do not even know - or are embarrassed to admit that you are not.
> >> Oh well...
> >
> > Please end the BS, Michael. WIll you agree to that with me? If not,
> > why not?
>
> I defended you.
You baited me. You have baited me almost 100 times in the last three
weeks.
> You whined. I asked if the assumption I made in my defense
> was wrong. You whined some more... and refused to answer the question.
>
> You will continue to run from a simple question: are you trying to learn
> CS3. Funny how that question troubles you so.
How do you figure? I have no responsibility to answer all your
question, especially since you havent' agreed to end the BS. If you
had signed the agrement with me, then I would feel I could trust you
not to make a Snit Circus out of my reply. As it is, I can't trust
that you won't, since you haven't expressed any desire to end the BS.
> The BS is all yours, Sandman. How would anything *I* agree to get you to
> stop?
So why not just agree to the code of honesty I proposed?
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
Can you be more specific?
Sandman
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> "Sandman" <m...@sandman.net> stated in post
> mr-C3C01E.07...@News.Individual.NET on 5/4/07 10:41 PM:
>
> > In article <C26165BC.7F642%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> > Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>> Well Adobe never said they would supply you with uninterrupted access
> >>>> to Photoshop CS3 until release, did they?
> >>>
> >>> So this changes things how?
> >>
> >> What were you using the beta for?
> >
> > Work.
> >
> Can you be more specific?
In what way?
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> > Why won't you agree to end the BS, Snit?
>
> No agreement I enter can make you end your BS. At this point, Sandman, we
> are no longer even talking about the topic at hand - your flip-flopping on
> who you even think wrote this agreement you are obsessing over: we have
> moved to a meta-argument over who is responsible for your flip-flopping; you
> for doing so or me for pointing it out.
>
> Not interested, Sandman.
Why are you not interested to end the BS, Michael? I am, I have posted
by the agreement since I proposed it. Why can't you agree to do the
same?
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
> In article <C2616576.7F641%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> Haha, John is priceless. And he keeps replying to me in spite of
>>>>> knowing that I have had him killfiled for a long time. :-D
>>>>
>>>> Just like you *claimed* to not be reading my posts but then I caught you
>>>> with copies of them on your server...
>>>
>>> It's automatically indexed, Michael, and unrelated to my kill filter.
>>
>> You automated collecting my posts and adding them to your site.
>
> No, all of csma's post.
You automated collecting not just my posts but *all* of CSMA's posts! Holy
cow? What on Earth for?
>> But then you want me to believe you were not reading those posts.
>
> I've not expressed an opinion to that effect. What you believe isn't
> relevant. If I wanted to read your mail, I wouldn't index it to my
> database and read them there, I would remove the kill filter.
> MT-NewsWatcher even has a "show killed articles" checkbox when viewing
> new posts if one would like to peek under the kill filter.
>
> Hope that clears up your confusion.
You were copying my posts to your website, re-publishing them, and sometimes
even posting comments about them, but you decided to claim you were not even
reading them. Nothing confusing about that at all!
>> I guess that is sort of like you denying you sent me an email after you
>> claimed it was an automated email... do you just spam anyone you want and
>> deny responsibility?
>
> I have never sent you an email. "Sending" is a verb, i.e. an action.
> That action has never been taken by me. Hope that clears up your
> confusion.
I do not deny you claimed the email you sent me was automated. Do you
automate sending of email to everyone in CSMA as well? (Well, everyone you
can get their email address from, I suppose)
>>> Hope that clears up your confusion.
>>
>> You were copying my posts to your website, re-publishing them, and sometimes
>> even posting comments about them, but you decided to claim you were not even
>> reading them. Nothing confusing about that at all!
>
> I don't have any means to read specific messages from the database.
> Hope that clears up your confusion.
You cannot figure out how to search your own database? And then you wonder
why people question your technical abilities!
--
€ A partial subset is not synonymous with the whole
€ A person's actions speak more about him than what others say
€ Apple doesn't provide as many options as the rest of the PC industry
Snit
>>>> 1) You talked about your frustration of a beta program ending
>>>> before you could get a product in the exact suite you wanted to.
>>>>
>>>> 2) Someone else belittled you for it.
>>>>
>>>> 3) I defended you by saying if you were learning CS3 I can see
>>>> where you might be frustrated.
>>>>
>>>> 4) You whined that to defend you is a form of *baiting* you.
>>>>
>>>> 5) I asked if maybe my guess was incorrect and perhaps you are not learning
>>>> to use CS3... hey, if I am wrong just let me know!
>>>>
>>>> 6) ... and you whine again! Even asking you if I am wrong about you is,
>>>> to you, somehow *baiting* you.
>>>>
>>>> LOL! Come on, Sandman, cut the BS? Such an easy question: Are you or are
>>>> you not trying to learn to use CS3?
>>>>
>>>> Seems you do not even know - or are embarrassed to admit that you are not.
>>>> Oh well...
>>>
>>> Please end the BS, Michael. WIll you agree to that with me? If not,
>>> why not?
>>
>> I defended you.
>
> You baited me. You have baited me almost 100 times in the last three
> weeks.
How is defending you "baiting" you? The only way I can see your claim
having *any* merit is if I made a bad assumption about you learning CS3. In
case I did, I asked. If I was wrong I would have apologized.
>> You whined. I asked if the assumption I made in my defense
>> was wrong. You whined some more... and refused to answer the question.
>>
>> You will continue to run from a simple question: are you trying to learn
>> CS3. Funny how that question troubles you so.
>
> How do you figure?
Easy: I keep asking and you keep refusing to answer. You did finally give a
vague non-descript answer of how you used CS3 of "work".
<snip content="babbling about unrelated agreements Sandman authored by ...
who again?" />
>
>> The BS is all yours, Sandman. How would anything *I* agree to get you to
>> stop?
>
> So why not just agree to the code of honesty I proposed?
That is not an answer to my question. You sure obfuscate a lot.
--
€ The tilde in an OS X path does *not* mean "the hard drive only"
€ Things which are not the same are not "identical"
€ The word "ouch" is not a sure sign of agreement.
Snit
Remember when you and I recently accused each other of being evasive? Well,
thanks for proving me right about you.
In any case, what type of work?
--
€ Pros aren't beginners in their field (though there are new pros)
€ Similarly configured Macs and Win machines tend to cost roughly the same
€ Some people do use the term "screen name" in relation to IRC
Sandman
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> > No, all of csma's post.
>
> You automated collecting not just my posts but *all* of CSMA's posts! Holy
> cow? What on Earth for?
Statistics. Why?
> >> But then you want me to believe you were not reading those posts.
> >
> > I've not expressed an opinion to that effect. What you believe isn't
> > relevant. If I wanted to read your mail, I wouldn't index it to my
> > database and read them there, I would remove the kill filter.
> > MT-NewsWatcher even has a "show killed articles" checkbox when viewing
> > new posts if one would like to peek under the kill filter.
> >
> > Hope that clears up your confusion.
>
> You were copying my posts to your website
No, all posts.
> re-publishing them
No.
> and sometimes even posting comments about them
That had nothing to do with the indexing.
> but you decided to claim you were not even
> reading them.
At the time I had you kill filtered, I had you kill filtered and
didn't read your posts other than indirectly through others replies.
This is obviously unrelated to the indexing. Hope that clears up your
confusion.
> Nothing confusing about that at all!
Yet you seem confused. I hope I helped you clear it up.
> > I have never sent you an email. "Sending" is a verb, i.e. an action.
> > That action has never been taken by me. Hope that clears up your
> > confusion.
>
> I do not deny you claimed the email you sent me was automated.
It wasn't "automated", it was sent by request from you when you were
using open proxies.
> Do you automate sending of email to everyone in CSMA as well?
> (Well, everyone you can get their email address from, I suppose
>
> >>> Hope that clears up your confusion.
> >>
> >> You were copying my posts to your website, re-publishing them, and
> >> sometimes
> >> even posting comments about them, but you decided to claim you were not
> >> even
> >> reading them. Nothing confusing about that at all!
> >
> > I don't have any means to read specific messages from the database.
> > Hope that clears up your confusion.
>
> You cannot figure out how to search your own database?
My above comment didn't concern "searching", Michael.
> And then you wonder why people question your technical abilities!
When did I wonder that? For that matter, when did people do this?
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
> In article <C2616865.7F655%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>>> Why won't you agree to end the BS, Snit?
>>
>> No agreement I enter can make you end your BS. At this point, Sandman, we
>> are no longer even talking about the topic at hand - your flip-flopping on
>> who you even think wrote this agreement you are obsessing over: we have
>> moved to a meta-argument over who is responsible for your flip-flopping; you
>> for doing so or me for pointing it out.
>>
>> Not interested, Sandman.
>
> Why are you not interested to end the BS, Michael?
I would love to see you end your BS.
> I am, I have posted by the agreement since I proposed it.
If the trolling you have been doing fits into this agreement, then what good
is it?
> Why can't you agree to do the same?
Your begging will have not encourage me to offer you any favors.
--
€ Different viruses are still different even if in the same "family"
€ Dreamweaver and GoLive are professional web development applications
€ Dreamweaver, being the #1 pro web design tool, is used by many pros