Apple Warns Against Closing MacBooks With a Cover Over the Camera

[Arlen Holder]

Dateline today... (verbatim given apologists deny facts about Apple
because, apparently, they _hate_ what Apple actually is because they only
believe in the glossy imaginary world that Apple feeds them to believe).

"The latest MBP 16 inch with the thin tiny bezels and display comes at a
cost of breakage with the tiniest of forces..."

o *Apple Warns Against Closing MacBooks With a Cover Over the Camera*
<https://www.macrumors.com/2020/07/10/apple-macbook-camera-cover-warning/>

"Apple this month published a support document that warns customers
against closing their Mac notebooks with a cover over the camera as
it can lead to display damage."

"If you close your Mac notebook with a camera cover installed,
you might damage your display because the clearance between the
display and keyboard is designed to very tight tolerances.

Covering the built-in camera might also interfere with the ambient
light sensor and prevent features like automatic brightness and
True Tone from working.

As an alternative to a camera cover, use the camera indicator light
to determine if your camera is active,
and decide which apps can use your camera in System Preferences."

More in the article.
--
o Type I apologists, like nospam, always parrot Apple MARKETING messages
o Type II apologists, like Andreas Rutishauser, simply ignore basic facts
o Type III apologists, like BK, actually _believe_ what Apple feeds them

[Arlen Holder]

On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 10:52:38 -0400, nospam wrote:

> it never stops.

Hi nospam,

I know you apologists well, perhaps better than you know yourselves.
o Notice you don't refute the facts - you attack the mere messenger.

You all always prove one thing: *You _hate_ facts about Apple products!*
o Even facts that Apple thyemselves, published openly and honestly.

You hate _all_ facts about Apple products...
o Because, your entire belief system is not based on even a single fact.

Your entire belief system.... is imaginary.
o Facts never fit into your belief system.

All the apologists clearly stated they wish to remain ignorant of the
facts, which is because facts don't fit into any of your belief systems.

*And yet, not a single one of you has addressed the facts Apple published!*
o All you can do is claim facts about Apple will never end.

And they won't.
--
It's my job to bring TRUTH to the child-like Apple newsgroups - via facts.

[Arlen Holder]

On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 10:51:33 -0400, Wolffan wrote:

> Poor Arlen the pervert is spewing again? Damn. I didnĒt notice.

Notice you apologists are so _petrified_ of something as simple as a fact.
o Like childish bullies, you attack the mere messenger of those facts.

Why?
o I don't know why.

I think, by attacking the messenger of facts Wolffan hates, he can then, in
his childish mind, keep his purely imaginary belief systems intact.

Wolffan acted like a fifth grade bully told that Santa Claus doesn't exist.
o "Liar liar, pants on fire" is how Wolffan naturally reacts to mere facts.
--
What's consistent is how _petrified_ apologists are of mere simple facts.

[Arlen Holder]

On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 11:28:26 -0500, Otto Pylot wrote:

> I agree. I've had to filter lots of users who I wouldn't normally want to
> filter because they keep responding and junking up the newsgroups.

It's interestingly how _petrified_ you Apple apologists are, of mere facts.

All you Apple apologists are pretty much exactly like flat earthers.
o *Your belief system is instantly DESTROYED by mere facts about Apple.*

The reason you filter out facts is Apple owns your brains via emotion.
o Your brains only work on emotion - which is why you always hate facts.

You literally _hate_ what Apple is, so much, that you filter out facts
about Apple products, just so that you can maintain your imaginary beliefs
intact.
--
It's interestingly how petrified you Apple apologists are, of mere facts.

[Arlen Holder]

On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 14:43:26 -0000 (UTC), Joe Dee wrote:

> It would've been seen by fewer if you didn't fucking reply to it.

What's interesting is how deathly _afraid_ you are of mere facts.
o Your entire belief system is instantly DESTROYED by mere facts.

Years ago, I wondered why Apple aficionados were so strange.
o What's so scary, to you apologists, about simple mere facts?

Over the years, I've realized any fact about Apple that doesn't fit into
your purely imaginary belief system - you simply wish to filter out.
--
It's why say you Apple apologists all appear to own the mind of a child.

[Arlen Holder]

On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 07:26:38 -0700, John McWilliams wrote:

> What I hate is having to kill/block every thread started by

What I _love_ is you apologists prove to _hate_ facts about Apple.
o *Your belief system is instantly DESTROYED by mere facts about Apple.*

That's why you're so pathetically afraid of something as simple as a fact.
o Facts are, literally, the scariest things to you apologists.

You _hate_ facts about Apple products.
o Your entire belief system is completely imaginary (devoid of facts)
--
You hate that Apple products, aren't, in fact, what you wish they were.

[Ant]

Weird. No problems with old MBPs like from 2012 and 2008. Must be the newer
models.

In comp.sys.mac.system Arlen Holder <arlen...@newmachine.com> wrote:
> Dateline today... (verbatim given apologists deny facts about Apple
> because, apparently, they _hate_ what Apple actually is because they only
> believe in the glossy imaginary world that Apple feeds them to believe).

> "The latest MBP 16 inch with the thin tiny bezels and display comes at a
> cost of breakage with the tiniest of forces..."

> o *Apple Warns Against Closing MacBooks With a Cover Over the Camera*
> <https://www.macrumors.com/2020/07/10/apple-macbook-camera-cover-warning/>

> "Apple this month published a support document that warns customers
> against closing their Mac notebooks with a cover over the camera as
> it can lead to display damage."

> "If you close your Mac notebook with a camera cover installed,
> you might damage your display because the clearance between the
> display and keyboard is designed to very tight tolerances.

> Covering the built-in camera might also interfere with the ambient
> light sensor and prevent features like automatic brightness and
> True Tone from working.

> As an alternative to a camera cover, use the camera indicator light
> to determine if your camera is active,
> and decide which apps can use your camera in System Preferences."

> More in the article.

--

Life is so loco! ..!.. *isms, sins, hates, (d)evil, illnesses (e.g., COVID-19/2019-nCoV/SARS-CoV-2), deaths (RIP, grandqueen), heat waves, fires, out(r)ages, dramas, unlucky #4, 2020, greeds, etc.
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\:( Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org /
/ /\ /\ \ http://antfarm.ma.cx. Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o o| |
\ _ /
( )

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-07-11 5:09 p.m., Ant wrote:
> Weird. No problems with old MBPs like from 2012 and 2008. Must be the newer
> models.

Of course, because it's Arlen, he leaves out important details:

'If your work environment requires a camera cover at all times

If your work environment requires you to cover the camera on your Mac
notebook, follow these guidelines to avoid damaging the display:

Make sure the camera cover is not thicker than an average piece of
printer paper (0.1mm).

Avoid using a camera cover that leaves adhesive residue.
If you install a camera cover that is thicker than 0.1mm, remove the
camera cover before closing your computer.'


<https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211148>

Which was mentioned in the article:

'MacBook owners can also control which apps have access to the built-in
camera as users must grant permission for camera use on any operating
system after macOS Mojave. For those who do need to cover the camera,
Apple recommends a camera cover that's not thicker than the average
piece of printer paper (0.1mm) and that does not leave adhesive residue.'

[Arlen Holder]

On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 19:09:27 -0500, Ant wrote:

> Weird. No problems with old MBPs like from 2012 and 2008. Must be the newer
> models.

Hi Ant,

You're the only one who responded who isn't a known apologist...
o And your response was the only one that covered the topic.

It's shocking, how childishly afraid of facts teh apologists are
o Where all they did was deny the facts & filter out all facts.

It's as if they _hate_ what Apple _is_ every time a fact is stated.
o Or, they claim the facts weren't facts even as they were verbatim.

And, they're so used to being _immune_ to facts about Apple products
o That they will claim I didnt' quote the entire freaking article.

Simply because they're too much like children to even click on the link.
o And when they do, they very often fail to comprehend what it says.

In _this_ situation, Ant, Apple says that if you use a cover, then you can
easily break the screen, as the tolerances are rather tight (and it has
happened, apparently, enough to have caused Apple to issue the warning).

So simply consider this a PSA, so that you know how to not have it happen.
--
Finally someone brings needed truth to typically ignorant Apple newsgroups.

[Sandman]

In article <redodb$g1d$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder wrote:

> In _this_ situation, Ant, Apple says that if you use a cover, then
> you can easily break the screen

Can't find that quote in the linked article, Arlen. Are you lying about what
Apple have said again?

> Finally someone brings needed truth to typically ignorant Apple newsgroups.

Ironic.

--
Sandman

[Wolffan]

On 12 Jul 2020, Sandman wrote
(in article<sandman-f5948ad81796...@individual.net>):

> In article<redodb$g1d$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder wrote:
>
> > In _this_ situation, Ant, Apple says that if you use a cover, then
> > you can easily break the screen
>
> Can't find that quote in the linked article, Arlen. Are you lying about what
> Apple have said again?

Of course he is. He’s simply incapable of telling the truth. Why, he lies
even when the truth would help him. Either that or he can’t read for
comprehension, as he posts links which fail to support his position. Possibly
both.

>
>
> > Finally someone brings needed truth to typically ignorant Apple newsgroups.
>
> Ironic.

Nah. Just poor Arlen the pervert being poor Arlen the pervert. It’s what he
is. I usually ignore him, he’s not worth even poking with a sharp stick.

[Arlen Holder]

On 12 Jul 2020 12:05:29 GMT, Sandman wrote:

> Can't find that quote in the linked article, Arlen. Are you lying about what
> Apple have said again?

Hi Sandman,

Apologists are so pathetic they can't even comprehend obvious cited facts.

I don't remember much about you, Sandman, so I don't know, a priori, if
you're an apologist or not, but I do know you're an utter moron based
simply on what you wrote.

*How the hell did you _miss_ this quote, which was also in the OP?*

"Apple this month published a support document that warns customers
against closing their Mac notebooks with a cover over the camera as
it can lead to display damage."

I suspect, given you're clearly an utter moron, Sandman, that you're simply
yet another pathetic sock of Alan Baker... but how you respond (e.g.,
calling all facts lies by liars, claiming you're too stupid to click on the
link and actually read it, etc., will tell us all what you're made of
Sandman.
--
Apologists are so pathetic they can't even comprehend obvious cited facts.

[Arlen Holder]

On Sun, 12 Jul 2020 08:19:16 -0400, Wolffan wrote:

> Of course he is. He's simply incapable of telling the truth. Why, he lies
> even when the truth would help him. Either that or he can't read for
> comprehension, as he posts links which fail to support his position.

*What I love about you apologists is you prove to _hate_ what Apple is.*
o You find any excuse to deny what Apple is....

Rather than address the facts, as Ant did, as an actual adult would...
o You endlessly play your silly childishly pathetic apologists' games.

Why?
o I don't know why.

I suspect you _hate_ that Apple isn't what you _thought_ Apple should be.
o So you deny everything and anything that doesn't fit your belief system.

Which makes you fantastically immune to even the simplest cited facts.
o To wit, you are utterly immune to facts in the article & in the OP:

"If you close your Mac notebook with a camera cover installed,
you might damage your display because the clearance between the
display and keyboard is designed to very tight tolerances.

--
Apologists hate that Apple never turns out to be what they thought it was.

[Sandman]

In article <ref6an$ssg$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder wrote:

> > Sandman:

> > Of course he is. He's simply incapable of telling the truth. Why,
> > he lies even when the truth would help him. Either that or he
> > can't read for comprehension, as he posts links which fail to
> > support his position.
>
> *What I love about you apologists is you prove to _hate_ what Apple
> is.* o You find any excuse to deny what Apple is....

Instead of reporting facts you trolls lie
o Why? I don't know, you hate facts and instead lie about what Apple has said
o Maybe it's an insecurity thing, you are liars and fear reality

One thing one can be sure of is that liars as you will never ever
o Admit to having lied
o Admit to making claims you can't substantiate
o Admit to not reporting facts, instead making things up



--
Sandman

[Sandman]

In article <ref60h$s2d$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder wrote:

> > Wolffan:

> > Can't find that quote in the linked article, Arlen. Are you lying
> > about what Apple have said again?
>
> Hi Sandman,

> Apologists are so pathetic they can't even comprehend obvious cited
> facts.

> I don't remember much about you, Sandman, so I don't know, a priori,
> if you're an apologist or not, but I do know you're an utter moron
> based simply on what you wrote.

> *How the hell did you _miss_ this quote, which was also in the OP?*

> "Apple this month published a support document that warns customers
> against closing their Mac notebooks with a cover over the camera as
> it can lead to display damage."

> I suspect, given you're clearly an utter moron, Sandman, that you're
> simply yet another pathetic sock of Alan Baker... but how you
> respond (e.g., calling all facts lies by liars, claiming you're too
> stupid to click on the link and actually read it, etc., will tell us
> all what you're made of Sandman.

That's a lot of words to say that you outright lied when you said this:

"Apple says that if you use a cover, then you can easily
break the screen"

/ Arlen Holder- 07/12/2020

Why? Why does reality and fact scares you so much?
o Is it because you can't wrap your head around it and must lie?
o Maybe you just make things up and hope no one will notice your lies?

For reasons unknown you trolls must always lie, and I have never understood
why.
o Is it because you have been lied to your whole life, by your government?
o Is it because you can't look at reality and then correctly report on it?
o Is it because you have brain damage?

--
Sandman

[Arlen Holder]

On 13 Jul 2020 09:12:29 GMT, Sandman wrote:

> Instead of reporting facts you trolls lie

Hi Sandman,

Regarding these published well-cited facts which you brazenly deny:
o Apple Warns Against Closing MacBooks With a Cover Over the Camera
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.sys.mac.system/K9dMw2t7Cl8>

You just proved you're a Type III apologist (ala, Alan Baker)

The entire post was verbatim - and - it included the cite to the original.
o I didn't add anything - I simply quoted the salient facts for you.

*How can you possibly call a verbatim post (with the cite), a "lie"?*
o No reasonable adult does what you strange apologists always do.

Since I've studied you apologists for years, I've assessed you _hate_ what
Apple is, because you own an imaginary belief system (fed to you by
MARKETING) of what you _thought_ Apple was.

And yet, every fact points to what Apple _is_ which is why you hate them.

It's like your mom is a prostitute whom you _think_ is an angel.
o So every fact about your mom, even as it's fact, you call a lie.

Like flat earthers, the _only_ way you can maintain your imaginary belief
system intact is to simply claim that all facts about Apple are lies.

Even verbatim quotes are "lies" to you apologists.
--
Apologists _hate_ what Apple is so much that all facts about Apple, to
them, must be lies since facts don't fit into what MARKETING fed them.

[Arlen Holder]

On 13 Jul 2020 09:18:32 GMT, Sandman wrote:

> That's a lot of words to say that you outright lied when you said this:
>
> "Apple says that if you use a cover, then you can easily
> break the screen"
> / Arlen Holder- 07/12/2020
>
> Why? Why does reality and fact scares you so much?
> o Is it because you can't wrap your head around it and must lie?
> o Maybe you just make things up and hope no one will notice your lies?
>
> For reasons unknown you trolls must always lie, and I have never understood
> why.
> o Is it because you have been lied to your whole life, by your government?
> o Is it because you can't look at reality and then correctly report on it?
> o Is it because you have brain damage?

Hi Sandman,

Hehhehheh... *Clearly, you _hate_ that facts show what Apple really is.*
o You turn into instantly child whenever facts about Apple are posted here.

You have no adult response to facts, where, in your desperate attempt to
refute what Apple themselves publicly stated, you bring politics into this.

*In your strange mind, politics must be what forced Apple to tell the truth.*

The way your strange brain works, apparently, is that if there's a fact you
can't refute (which you can't, in this case), and if you _hate_ that fact
(since you hate all facts about Apple which don't fit into what MARKETING
fed you to believe), then, in your strange mind, it must be some
"government" politics must be involved.

You're _that_ easily proven to be fantastically ignorant, Sandman.

Why can't you handle the fact that Apple said what Apple said?

o I don't know why.

I suspect you're exactly like a child whose mom is a high-priced
prostitute, where, when you're told the facts, you brazenly call all facts
(even verbatim facts from the police report itself) a downright lie.

Given your belief system is entirely imaginary, any fact about your mom you
will _hate_, and worse, you attack the bearer of those facts about your
mom.

In this case, the metaphor is that your high-priced prostitute mom is
Apple, where you own a belief system about Apple which MARKETING fed you,
but which is entirely imaginary.

*Hence, you _hate_ when facts show what Apple really is.*
--
Facts show that Apple isn't what MARKETING fed you to believe, and that's
why you hate facts (even these well cited facts from Apple themselves).

[Arlen Holder]

What's consistent is how apologists brazenly deny even what Apple admitted!
o *What is wrong with the Apple Apologists that they deny even what Apple admitted?*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/fyL1cQUVCp0>

Here's the news from today, direct from Apple (as always, verbatim so that
Apologists will simply have to brazenly deny exactly what Apple said)
o *Don't close your MacBook, MacBook Air, or MacBook Pro with a cover over the camera*
<https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211148>

Notice the apologists in this thread repeatedly brazenly denied every fact
about Apple they simply don't like! (Which is pretty much everything since
their entire belief system, being purely imaginary, is threatened by facts)

o *Apple Warns Against Closing MacBooks With a Cover Over the Camera*

<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.sys.mac.system/K9dMw2t7Cl8>

That thread contained verbatim quotes from Apple, which, the apologists,
apparently hate (since they hate that facts show what Apple is), so they
repeatedly (and viciously) denied that Apple said what Apple said.

What is so very wrong with these strange apologists anyway?
o Why are they so pathetically afraid of something as simple as a fact?

I don't know why.

o However, I suspect it's pretty simple why.

Consider a child of a high-priced prostitute who dearly loves his mom.
o Of course, that child will call all facts about his mom, a "lie by liars"

What else can that child do to maintain his purely imaginary belief system?

In summary, I don't know why apologists call all facts a lie by liars...
o Even facts that clearly are facts that Apple themselves published openly.

I suspect it's as simple as apologists _hate_ what Apple is.
o Facts about Apple instantly DESTROY their imaginary belief systems.
--
Bringing truth to the Apple newsgroups, where they need it most.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-07-13 3:21 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> What's consistent is how apologists brazenly deny even what Apple admitted!
> o *What is wrong with the Apple Apologists that they deny even what Apple admitted?*
> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/fyL1cQUVCp0>
>
> Here's the news from today, direct from Apple (as always, verbatim so that
> Apologists will simply have to brazenly deny exactly what Apple said)
> o *Don't close your MacBook, MacBook Air, or MacBook Pro with a cover over the camera*
> <https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211148>

The part you leave out:

'Designed to protect your privacy, Mac notebooks have a camera indicator
light to let you know when the camera is on.'

[Arlen Holder]

On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 13:34:29 -0700, John McWilliams wrote:

> I usually just kill the entire thread that the pest has started unless
> it's early on and cross posted.

*Since facts are true, facts don't fit into John McWilliams' belief system.*

Facts instantly DESTROY apologists imaginary Apple belief systems.
o *The real reason Apple is warning users about MacBook camera covers*
<https://www.zdnet.com/article/the-real-reason-apple-is-warning-users-about-macbook-camera-covers/>

"But consequently, the number of screen breakages are up.
And it's a pretty distinctive screen break -- leaving a glowing white
line down the middle of the display -- so we know why it's happened
even if people are evasive about how the damage happened."

What's interesting is how petrifyingly AFRAID apologists are of facts.
o John McWilliams says he's so afraid, he plonks the entire thread.

The bezel is "almost non-existent, and anything that gets in-between
the screen and the body can break the display in a heartbeat.
They do, they just go 'pop' and the damage is done.

Only the other day, I saw a display that had been cracked when someone
has closed a coin on it. Left a nice print of the coin on the display."

Why does John McWilliams _hate_ this facts so much that he's afraid of it?
o I suspect facts scare the shit out of John because facts are true.

*Since facts are true, facts don't fit into John McWilliams' belief system.*

It's like a child covering his ears when told the fact that Santa Claus
simply doesn't exist - Santa is merely something MARKETING fed him.

Every post from apologists like John McWilliams proves this point for us.
o It's like his mom is a prostitute so he _hates_ facts about his mom.

The metaphor is he hates what facts show about what his prostitute mom
really is - and therefore - he hates the mere bearer of those facts.

Like all apologists, _hates_ what Apple is.
o Facts instantly DESTROY his completely imaginary Apple belief system.

*Since facts are true, facts don't fit into John McWilliams' belief system.*
--
Facts instantly DESTROY apologists imaginary Apple belief systems.

[Sandman]

In article <reilg0$o85$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder wrote:

> > Sandman:

So many words and you still are pissing your pants afraid to admit you lied
when you said the following:

"Apple says that if you use a cover, then you can easily
break the screen"
/ Arlen Holder- 07/12/2020

If you don't want your numerous and multitude of lies exposed easily and
effortlessly, then stop lying. Do not make claims you are 100% unable to
substantiate. Given enough time there is even a chance you might be regarded a
normal person in a year or two.
o Then again, I'm not holding my breath
o Liars like you NEED to lie with every single post.

--
Sandman

[Sandman]

In article <reikrh$n07$3...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder wrote:

> > Sandman:

> > Instead of reporting facts you trolls lie
>
> Hi Sandman,

> Regarding these published well-cited facts which you brazenly deny:
> o Apple Warns Against Closing MacBooks With a Cover Over the Camera
> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.sys.mac.system/K9dMw2t7Cl8>

> You just proved you're a Type III apologist (ala, Alan Baker)

> The entire post was verbatim - and - it included the cite to the
> original. o I didn't add anything - I simply quoted the salient
> facts for you.

> *How can you possibly call a verbatim post (with the cite), a
> "lie"?* o No reasonable adult does what you strange apologists
> always do.

> Since I've studied you apologists for years, I've assessed you
> _hate_ what Apple is, because you own an imaginary belief system
> (fed to you by MARKETING) of what you _thought_ Apple was.

> And yet, every fact points to what Apple _is_ which is why you hate
> them.

> It's like your mom is a prostitute whom you _think_ is an angel. o
> So every fact about your mom, even as it's fact, you call a lie.

> Like flat earthers, the _only_ way you can maintain your imaginary
> belief system intact is to simply claim that all facts about Apple
> are lies.

> Even verbatim quotes are "lies" to you apologists.

Only, like the massive LIAR you are, you can not quote this verbatim:

"Apple says that if you use a cover, then you can easily
break the screen"

/ Arlen Holder- 07/12/2020

No, you can only LIE about it, again and again and again. It's your only way
of communication - lying. Facts are not interesting to you.
o Why? I have no idea, maybe brain damage?
o Maybe a desire to garner attention?
o Maybe poor self-image?

--
Sandman

[Arlen Holder]

On 14 Jul 2020 08:43:03 GMT, Sandman wrote:

> No, you can only LIE about it, again and again and again. It's your only way
> of communication - lying. Facts are not interesting to you.
> o Why? I have no idea, maybe brain damage?
> o Maybe a desire to garner attention?
> o Maybe poor self-image?

Apologists _hate_ Apple isn't what MARKETING fed them to believe it was.
o This thread is 98% apologists denying Apple said what Apple clearly said.

The facts remain, despite apologists brazenly denying Apple said what Apple
said, which Apple clearly said, despite apologists denying Apple said it:

o *Don't close your MacBook, MacBook Air, or MacBook Pro with a cover over the camera*
<https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211148>

I've studied you apologists for a long time, so I think I know how your
strange minds work, perhaps better than even you know yourself.

You brazenly deny what Apple said, simply because what Apple does never
fits into your wholly imaginary belief system that MARKETING fed you.
--
Apologists _hate_ Apple isn't what MARKETING fed them to believe it was.

[Wolffan]

On 14 Jul 2020, Sandman wrote
(in article<sandman-15bd923f6aa9...@individual.net>):

Poor Arlen the pervert will never stop lying. He can’t help himself. Among
his other problems is the fact that he’s got a severe case of OCD.

[Arlen Holder]

On Tue, 14 Jul 2020 06:25:02 -0400, Wolffan wrote:

> Poor Arlen the pervert will never stop lying. He can┤ help himself. Among
> his other problems is the fact that he┬ got a severe case of OCD.

Hi Wolffan,

It's clear you apologists _hate_ what Apple is, so much that you'll
brazenly deny even what Apple clearly said, which is:

o *Don't close your MacBook, MacBook Air, or MacBook Pro with a cover over the camera*
<https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211148>

Since you _hate_ what Apple is, you brazenly deny the fact Apple said it.
o Because what Apple said doesn't fit into your imaginary belief systems.

And yet, the fact is, Apple said it.
o The fact apologists hate facts doesn't change that they're still facts.
--

[Arlen Holder]

On 14 Jul 2020 08:40:32 GMT, Sandman wrote:

> If you don't want your numerous and multitude of lies exposed easily and
> effortlessly, then stop lying. Do not make claims you are 100% unable to
> substantiate. Given enough time there is even a chance you might be regarded a
> normal person in a year or two.
> o Then again, I'm not holding my breath
> o Liars like you NEED to lie with every single post.

Hi Sandman,

Clearly you _hate_ what Apple is such that you deny Apple said what it did.

I've studied you apologists for a long time, so I think I may know how your
rather strange little minds work, perhaps better than you know yourself.

o *Don't close your MacBook, MacBook Air, or MacBook Pro with a cover over the camera*
<https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211148>

You brazenly deny what Apple said, simply because what Apple does never
fits into your wholly imaginary belief system that MARKETING fed you.
--

Clearly you _hate_ what Apple is such that you deny Apple said what it did.

[Sandman]

In article <rek0ct$n02$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder wrote:

> > Sandman:

> > No, you can only LIE about it, again and again and again. It's
> > your only way of communication - lying. Facts are not interesting
> > to you. o Why? I have no idea, maybe brain damage? o Maybe a
> > desire to garner attention? o Maybe poor self-image?
>
> Apologists _hate_ Apple isn't what MARKETING fed them to believe it
> was. o This thread is 98% apologists denying Apple said what Apple
> clearly said.

Arlen continues lying about what Apple said, and keeps snipping out his lie
over and over again:

"Apple says that if you use a cover, then you can easily
break the screen"
/ Arlen Holder- 07/12/2020

Arlen the liar can not quote Apple saying this because Arlen is a liar. He
makes things up and just hopes that by snipping his lies again and again and
again that no one will notice his outright lies. He will never admit to
having lied, nor will he acknowledge the indisputable fact that reality is
NOT what he claims it is.



--
Sandman

[Sandman]

In article <rek4og$nu$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder wrote:

> > Sandman:

> > If you don't want your numerous and multitude of lies exposed
> > easily and effortlessly, then stop lying. Do not make claims you
> > are 100% unable to substantiate. Given enough time there is even a
> > chance you might be regarded a normal person in a year or two. o
> > Then again, I'm not holding my breath o Liars like you NEED to lie
> > with every single post.
>
> Hi Sandman,

> Clearly you _hate_ what Apple is such that you deny Apple said what
> it did.

Yet Arlen the liar can not quote Apple saying what he lied about them saying:

"Apple says that if you use a cover, then you can easily
break the screen"
/ Arlen Holder- 07/12/2020

He is so afraid of this that his only course of action is to SNIP OUT his
lies in every single post, and try to ignore them outright. Go ahead little
liar, snip it again and run away with your tail between your legs, it is
after all what you do best. Far be it from you to actually acknowledge the
lie you told and admit to it. No, snip little boy, snip and run!

--
Sandman

[Arlen Holder]

On 14 Jul 2020 11:32:38 GMT, Sandman wrote:

> He is so afraid of this that his only course of action is to SNIP OUT his
> lies in every single post, and try to ignore them outright. Go ahead little
> liar, snip it again and run away with your tail between your legs, it is
> after all what you do best. Far be it from you to actually acknowledge the
> lie you told and admit to it. No, snip little boy, snip and run!

Hi Alan Baker (aka Sandman),

The problem with Apple newsgroups is simply that you apologists exist.
o This thread is PERFECT for the permanent archives - to prove that point.

A. Facts that Apple published themselves, were provided.
B. To date, 34 of 36 responses were apologists' refuting the facts
(or me explaining, patiently to those apologists, the facts)
C. And yet, *all the apologists are fantastically _immune_ to those facts*
(they literally brazenly deny Apple said what Apple clearly said!)

To wit, we come to this utter moron, of the same low IQ as Alan Baker.
o I estimate Alan Baker's IQ of around 40, maybe as high as 50 (IMHO).

Which is likely why he can't comprehend what a double quote indicates...
o Nor what the word "verbatim" even means (especially with double quotes).

Sandman _is_ most likely a sock of Alan Baker, as far as I can tell.
o As with Alan Baker, he incessantly claim all facts are "lies by liars".

Hence, to spare adults the indignity of me having to drop to his level
o This is my last post to Sandman on this topic.

For the very few actual adults on this newsgroup...
1. The topic was EXACTLY what it said (verbatim) in the Subject.
2. The description was EXACTLY as said (verbatim) in the OP.
3. Sandman (aka a sock of Alan Baker) refutes what Apple said.

If this "Sandman" isn't perchance, Alan Baker, they act the same:
a. They both call all facts "lies by liars" (even verbatim posts!)
b. They both hate when we use proper Usenet quoting netiquette

c. They both fail to comprehend Apple said exactly what Apple said:
o *Don't close your MacBook, MacBook Air, or MacBook Pro with a cover over the camera*
<https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211148>

Where the original post contained (verbatim) quotes from this cite:

o *Apple Warns Against Closing MacBooks With a Cover Over the Camera*
<https://www.macrumors.com/2020/07/10/apple-macbook-camera-cover-warning/>

There are 36 responses by 9 authors, only one of which is from an adult:

o *Apple Warns Against Closing MacBooks With a Cover Over the Camera*

<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.sys.mac.system/K9dMw2t7Cl8>

Other than the OP, the only posts on an adult level are these two:
o Ant

"Weird. No problems with old MBPs like from 2012 and 2008.
Must be the newer models."

<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.sys.mac.system/K9dMw2t7Cl8/mICgDVwTDQAJ>
o My adult response to Ant

"In _this_ situation, Ant, Apple says that if you use a cover,
then you can easily break the screen, as the tolerances are rather
tight (and it has happened, apparently, enough to have caused Apple
to issue the warning).
So simply consider this a PSA, so that you know how to not have
it happen."

<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.sys.mac.system/K9dMw2t7Cl8/DSmIvCAXDQAJ>

The rest of the responses prove why this newsgroup is what it is:
o Alan Baker, Sandman, John McWilliams, John Dee, Wolffan, Otto Pylot

While all those are Type III apologists (IQ of around 40 or 50, IMHO)...
o Our resident Type I apologist, nospam, weighted in claiming,
essentially, he's sick and tired of seeing accurate & well cited
facts about Apple products, saying (correctly so), "it never ends".

Good.
o When people are claiming the facts will never end... I'm doing my job.

While the Type III apologists claimed that Apple didn't say what Apple
clearly said (all of which was verbatim and they _still_ claimed Apple
didn't say what Apple said)...

The _best_ that Sandman (aka Alan Baker) can come up with is that in my one
reply to the one adult (Ant), I didn't bother to quote verbatim since I was
speaking with an adult, so I paraphrased what Apple said (where Ant well
knew I was doing that since ALL ADULTS would know I didn't state it was
verbatim - it was a summary to Ant, as an adult to an adult).

That one sentence, of that one-line summary, caused Sandman (aka Alan
Baker) to foment upon us a tirade of "liar liar pants on fire" posts,
all simply because Sandman (aka Alan Baker) is too stupid to understand
what Ant (and all adults) instantly knew was a paraphrase (since it had no
quotes, and it wasn't stated to be a quote, which, for God's sake, I can't
believe I have to EXPLAIN on this newsgroup).

Sandman (aka Alan Baker) is an utter moron who is so stupid he can't fathom
what the word "verbatim" means (it wasn't in that post to Ant as it wasn't
needed!) nor, what a double quote means (it wasn't in that post to Ant)...

Jesus Christ... can you believe how _loooooow_ the IQ of Sandman/Baker is?

Having worked in the Silicon Valley for decades, I have never run into
people like Sandman/Baker _that_ incredibly incomprehensibly stupid.

I can deal with nospam, since he's actually not as stupid as what he writes
shows him to be (nospam is simply a dutiful parrot of MARKETING mantra).

But I just can't stoop down to the low-IQ level of Sandman/Baker.
o I just can't.

*Clearly, these apologists are what has ruined this newsgroup, for years.*

See also:
o *Clear evidence that the real factual problem on Apple Usenet newsgroups - is simply that apologists exist*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.sys.mac.system/7IqoAq8fURo>

And...
o *Why are apologists like Alan Baker so fantastically immune to basics skills an adult should have on the Internet?*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.sys.mac.system/_50ZqBhcbYs>

And, in relation to apologists claiming all facts are lies by liars:
o *Why do apologists like nospam & Alan Baker incessantly call facts they don't like "lies" and all bearers of facts they don't like "Liars"?*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/nVzWBU2otC4>

And, in relation to apologists brazenly denying even what Apple admits!

o *What is wrong with the Apple Apologists that they deny even what Apple admitted?*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/fyL1cQUVCp0>

etc.

To spare the few adults on this newsgroup further childish indignity...
o This is my last response to Alan Baker (aka Sandman), on this topic.
--
The problem with Apple newsgroups is simply that the apologists exist.

[Sandman]

In article <reksni$m7c$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder wrote:

> > Sandman:

> > He is so afraid of this that his only course of action is to SNIP
> > OUT his lies in every single post, and try to ignore them
> > outright. Go ahead little liar, snip it again and run away with
> > your tail between your legs, it is after all what you do best. Far
> > be it from you to actually acknowledge the lie you told and admit
> > to it. No, snip little boy, snip and run!
>
> Hi Alan Baker (aka Sandman),

Arlen snips and runs AGAIN, just I predicted. What he is running from is this
outright lie of his:

"Apple says that if you use a cover, then you can easily

break the screen"
/ Arlen Holder- 07/12/2020

--
Sandman

[Wolffan]

On 14 Jul 2020, Sandman wrote
(in article<sandman-a759d41c3779...@individual.net>):

Poor Arlen the pervert is just that way. He’s utterly incompetent at
everything, including trolling. Which is why I usually ignore him.

[Arlen Holder]

On 15 Jul 2020 14:54:47 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

> It's so funny - in a rather pathetic way - that 'nospam' will argue
> the exact opposite (of what he does in this case), when the shoe is on
> the other foot (i.e. Apple is the accused party).
>
> It's also amazing to see that 'nospam' continues to misread/
> misinterpret what is written and 'reads' what's not written and
> continues to argue both these fallacies.

Hi Frank Slootweg,

Apple apologists always prove they have no adult tools to deal with facts.

We know each other well where's no love lost between us, where I just want
to let you (& others) know I've _studied_ these unprepossessing apologists.

Their strange (but consistently repetitive) actions piqued my interest:
a. They _always_ take the case of Apple (as you see nospam doing now)
b. They brazenly deny what Apple does (or blame M$ for what Apple does)
c. They fabricate functionality they _wish_ Apple products have

While there are three major types of apologists, what's consistent about
their arguments is that they are so used to being among their own cultists,
that they have absolutely no adult strategies to deal with actual facts.

For example, nospam will literally change your words in his quote of what
you said, and then he'll respond to _those_ changed words. He's done this
so many hundreds of times that I have an entire thread of when he's done
that - simply because he has no skill for handling actual facts.

For another example, all the apologists, will simply deny facts outright,
where they do it differently depending on the type. For example, Type I
apologists (nospam being the canonical member) will claim "he's told you
already", or just "nope" without calling all facts "lies by liars" which
the Type III apologists do. He'll deny any fact he simply doesn't like.

And yet, unlike the other types of apologists, nospam actually _knows_ the
facts, which is why his credibility is rather high for an apologists at
about the same result as a dumb random coin toss outcome.

The three types are clearly distinct, even as they're all strange people:
o Type I (e.g., nospam) will always parrot Apple MARKETING mantra.
o Type II (e.g., sms) are normal people who simply aren't factual minded.
o Type III (e.g., Alan Baker) are well into Quadrant 1 of Dunning-Kruger.

Notice what sets apart nospam from the other two despicable types is that
he doesn't believe a word he, himself, says, whereas the other two types
literally believe what they say (where the Type II are simply ignorant
people who aren't used to facts, e.g., Steve Scharf _still_ thinks the
Qualcomm royalties went down per iPhone!)... but it's the Type III (e.g.,
Jolly Roger, Lewis, Alan Baker, BK, Joerg Lorenz, et al.) who are the most
petrifying since they truly believe the strange things they claim.

By way of contrast with nospam, the Type III apologist are clearly of very
low IQ, whereas nospam has only a slightly below normal IQ (AFAICT), where
the fact he _understands_ the facts puts him in the normal range but the
fact he has no methods to deal with facts shows he's below normal in IQ.

The Type II apologists, as far as I can tell, have a normal range of IQ
(e.g., Alan Browne, Andreas Rutishauser, Savageduck, Steve Scharf, et al.),
where their flaws are simply that facts aren't something they're used to
dealing with (it's likely zero of them were science or engineering majors,
for example, but more likely they couldn't handle any factually rigorous
field of endeavor, e.g., Steve is the mayor of Cupertino, which doesn't
require factual skills - but which requires political acumen instead).

One thing that distinguishes apologists is their purpose on denying facts:
o Type I simply defend Apple and blame Microsoft/Google for Apple faults.
o Type II simply believe the MARKETING but otherwise are normal people.
o Type III are viscous hate-filled horribly unprepossessing bullies.

One trait both Type I and Type III apologists share is that they're easily
shown to be sadistic, which has been proven many times, where they
sadistically send innocent users on wild-goose chases simply because they
incessantly claim functionality that simply never existed.

It's shocking, actually, how horribly sadistic nospam is when he does that.
o He's a completely unprepossessing human being - devoid of purposefully
helpful advice - as he NEVER has any other goal but to push Apple's
marketing message on Usenet. He's NEVER purposefully helpful. Ever.

In short, nospam is, IMHO, a truly despicable human being, devoid of
purposefully helpful intent, honor, credibility, or compassion.

But he's not stupid! He's of only slightly below normal intelligence.
o He is the way he is because he _chooses_ to be despicable.

Unlike Type III and Type II apologists, who don't know any better.
o This nospam actually _knows_ he's despicable; he simply doesn't care.

In summary, all of the apologists deny what normal people know to be facts.
o Type I know the facts, but they'll support Apple at all costs

Hence, most Usenet threads they participate in are _filled_ with their
garbage, such that some threads are 99% them simply denying what nobody
normal would ever deny.

IMHO, these despicable people like nospam are what ruins Usenet.
o They don't have a single purposefully helpful bone in their bodies.

Happened just this week, for example, fully documented here:

o *Clear evidence that the real factual problem on Apple Usenet newsgroups - is simply that apologists exist*

<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/mQsBECSbICw>
--
Apple apologists always prove they have no adult tools to deal with facts.

[Arlen Holder]

*Type I*
o nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> (bullshitter par excellence)

*Type II*
o Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com> (sometimes is rational)
o Ammammata <amma...@tiscalinet.it> (ignores basic facts)
o Andreas Rutishauser <and...@macandreas.ch>
o Barry Margolin <bar...@alum.mit.edu> (educated & yet immune to fact)
o Meanie <M...@gmail.com> (probably couldn't handle any science degree)
o Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> (not dumb - but ignorant)
o sms <scharf...@geemail.com> (pretty smart but not factually focused)

*Type III*
o Alan Baker <nu...@ness.biz>
o Beedle <Bee...@dont-email.me>
o B...@Onramp.net (it's hard to find a human any dumber, sadly to say)
o Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
o Davoud <st...@sky.net>
o dpb <no...@none.net> (posts worthless drivel - but keeps it short)
o Elden <use...@moondog.org>
o Elfin <elfi...@gmail.com> (aka Lloyd, aka Lloyd Parsons)
o Hawk <Ha...@gmail.com> (literally posts what children would post)
o Hemidactylus <ecph...@allspamis.invalid>
o hh <recscub...@huntzinger.com>
o joe <no...@domain.invalid>
o Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> (has no adult thought processes)
o Johan <JH...@nospam.invalid>
o John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> (child-like cognitive skills)
o Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> (one of the dumbest of all)
o Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> (dumber than most)
o Lloyd <elfi...@gmail.com> (aka "Elfin")
o Lloyd Parsons <lloy...@gmail.com> (aka "Elfin")
o Panthera Tigris Altaica <northe...@outlook.com>
o roctb <gh...@mouse-potato.com> Russian poster hates all facts
o Sandman <m...@sandman.net> (likely Alan Baker, hates facts about Apple)
o Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> (aka Michael Glasser, troll #1)
o Tim Streater <timst...@greenbee.net> (indescribably childish)
o Wade Garrett <wa...@cooler.net> (about as dumb as a human can be)
o Wolffan <akwo...@zoho.com>
o Your Name <Your...@YourISP.com> (never posts anything of value)
--

[Sandman]

In article <renehp$lj5$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder wrote:

Arlen snips and runs AGAIN, just I predicted. What he is running from is this
outright lie of his:

"Apple says that if you use a cover, then you can easily
break the screen"
/ Arlen Holder- 07/12/2020

Funny thing is that he could have saved face by just saying "Oh right, no they
didn't say exactly that, it was just an exaggeration on my part, sorry" and
then voila - he would have been a normal person! But nooo, can't have facts or
reality when Arlen is involved!

--
Sandman