Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > aus.computers > #56470 > unrolled thread
| Started by | felix <me@nothere.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-12-21 17:33 +1100 |
| Last post | 2016-12-28 11:56 +0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 398 — 23 participants |
Back to article view | Back to aus.computers
Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-21 17:33 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-21 20:12 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.net> - 2016-12-22 07:16 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-21 21:32 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-22 09:38 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-22 09:49 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-22 10:04 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI news16 <news16@woa.com.au> - 2016-12-22 00:05 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-22 14:22 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-22 14:29 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI news16 <news16@woa.com.au> - 2016-12-22 04:03 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-22 15:18 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI news16 <news16@woa.com.au> - 2016-12-22 04:37 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-22 20:49 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI news16 <news16@woa.com.au> - 2016-12-22 10:23 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-22 21:28 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-22 15:52 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-22 15:55 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-22 20:52 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-22 21:29 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-23 00:01 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.net> - 2016-12-23 05:49 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-23 09:14 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.net> - 2016-12-23 09:36 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-23 12:34 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 12:10 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-23 13:13 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI D Walford <dwalford@internode.on.net> - 2016-12-23 14:40 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-23 03:53 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-23 17:35 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.net> - 2016-12-23 17:38 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-23 18:13 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.net> - 2016-12-23 18:33 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-23 18:43 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-23 20:26 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-23 20:40 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-23 21:59 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-24 00:17 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-24 00:31 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.net> - 2016-12-24 05:22 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 17:39 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-23 18:49 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 19:48 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-23 21:27 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-23 22:17 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-24 00:19 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-24 00:21 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-24 00:34 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-24 00:49 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-24 19:55 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-24 21:47 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-25 00:25 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-24 00:33 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Lindsay <ask.me.for.it@hornet.net.ay.you> - 2016-12-24 07:04 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-24 00:50 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> - 2016-12-24 08:50 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-24 09:56 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-24 00:58 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-24 00:57 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-24 20:12 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-24 19:49 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> - 2016-12-24 20:13 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-24 21:20 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> - 2016-12-24 20:35 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-24 21:49 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-25 00:28 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-25 07:36 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-25 08:48 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-25 16:46 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-25 19:19 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 00:42 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-25 19:19 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-24 22:08 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-25 09:15 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-25 10:24 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-25 16:35 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-25 19:20 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Clocky <notgonn@happen.com> - 2016-12-25 01:12 +0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-25 16:34 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-25 19:15 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Clocky <notgonn@happen.com> - 2016-12-25 16:26 +0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 00:44 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 00:50 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 01:04 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 01:09 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 08:30 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 10:04 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 11:02 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 12:15 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 12:42 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-26 12:49 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 13:00 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 13:06 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-26 13:41 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 14:53 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 15:34 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 16:57 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 17:27 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 17:40 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 18:06 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> - 2016-12-26 19:09 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 21:00 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-26 10:49 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> - 2016-12-26 21:45 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-26 20:58 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> - 2016-12-27 08:59 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-27 00:51 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-27 12:31 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-27 02:52 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2016-12-29 03:39 +0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2016-12-27 16:26 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2016-12-27 20:17 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> - 2016-12-28 06:39 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-28 13:12 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 13:34 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-28 17:13 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 19:47 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-28 20:25 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 20:42 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-28 14:20 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI lindsay <ask.me.for.it@nunnya.business.net.ay.you> - 2016-12-28 21:30 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 23:57 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-27 01:20 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 20:58 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI jonz <johnhhhinton7@gmail.com> - 2016-12-26 00:54 -0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-26 06:34 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-26 06:34 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Clocky <notgonn@happen.com> - 2016-12-26 06:18 +0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-25 19:38 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-25 22:14 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 00:47 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Clocky <notgonn@happen.com> - 2016-12-26 06:19 +0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-25 22:48 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 11:20 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 12:14 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 12:38 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 13:04 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2016-12-26 10:40 +0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI jonz <johnhhhinton7@gmail.com> - 2016-12-26 00:45 -0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-26 10:42 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 10:51 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2016-12-26 10:49 +0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 15:47 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Clocky <notgonn@happen.com> - 2016-12-29 06:23 +0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> - 2016-12-25 21:08 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-25 22:21 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> - 2016-12-25 22:01 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-25 23:29 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 00:50 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-26 06:38 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Lindsay <ask.me.for.it@hornet.net.ay.you> - 2016-12-26 08:05 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 10:06 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-25 23:41 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 12:19 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 11:03 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 12:20 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-26 12:56 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 13:16 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-26 13:54 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 14:54 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-26 16:03 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> - 2016-12-26 15:07 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-26 16:40 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 17:06 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 16:58 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 15:40 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-26 16:15 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 17:02 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 08:32 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Lindsay <ask.me.for.it@hornet.net.ay.you> - 2016-12-26 08:39 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 10:08 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 10:07 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-26 10:44 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 11:10 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-26 17:11 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> - 2016-12-26 16:28 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-27 07:31 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-27 10:40 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-27 11:37 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-27 00:52 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-27 11:56 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-27 12:24 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-27 12:26 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-27 12:56 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-27 14:32 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-27 03:41 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-27 16:53 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-27 12:03 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-27 01:18 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Jacko" <Jacko_ONE@bigpond.com> - 2016-12-27 13:09 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Lindsay <ask.me.for.it@hornet.net.ay.you> - 2016-12-27 15:27 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-27 16:27 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-27 16:57 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Troll Slapper" <felixisadumbcowardlycuntofathing@felixisastrupidcunt.org> - 2016-12-27 06:02 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-27 12:24 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 18:03 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-26 18:51 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 19:08 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 21:05 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-26 21:27 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 21:53 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-26 22:11 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 22:42 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-27 00:09 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-27 01:17 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Lindsay <ask.me.for.it@nunnya.business.com.au> - 2016-12-27 07:33 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI jonz <johnhhhinton7@gmail.com> - 2016-12-30 18:32 -0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 21:04 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-26 21:06 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-26 10:52 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 21:53 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-27 00:07 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-27 01:15 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 21:03 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-27 19:38 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-27 20:26 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-27 20:48 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-27 10:25 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-27 22:09 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-27 23:31 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 00:07 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 00:31 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 00:37 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-27 18:05 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> - 2016-12-28 04:27 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-28 00:46 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 16:05 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-28 05:36 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 23:41 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-28 13:37 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-29 08:29 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-28 22:30 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-29 12:41 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Clocky <notgonn@happen.com> - 2016-12-29 11:05 +0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-29 14:29 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-29 15:22 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 17:02 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-28 17:26 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2016-12-29 05:38 +0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-28 22:38 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Clocky <notgonn@happen.com> - 2016-12-29 11:15 +0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-29 14:38 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-29 14:37 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-29 17:07 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-27 23:23 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-27 12:38 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 00:32 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 00:38 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 16:40 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 17:14 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 17:33 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 19:52 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 19:58 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-28 20:28 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 20:59 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 22:16 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 22:29 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 22:52 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 23:09 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-29 00:49 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-29 08:33 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-29 14:40 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-29 17:21 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-29 17:46 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-29 18:03 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 20:43 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-28 10:35 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 00:44 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-27 17:51 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 08:23 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-28 10:00 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 10:24 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-28 11:06 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 11:20 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-29 04:54 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2016-12-31 16:00 +0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2017-01-01 08:23 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 14:45 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 14:54 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 15:07 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 17:15 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-28 17:17 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 17:37 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-28 17:46 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 19:54 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 19:53 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 19:56 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-28 20:26 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 20:45 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 21:49 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 22:52 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 22:55 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 23:11 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 19:53 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-28 17:17 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 19:56 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-28 04:19 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-28 17:22 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 19:58 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-28 10:37 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 22:52 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI F Murtz <haggisz@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-28 16:55 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 17:11 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-28 17:31 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 18:24 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 20:00 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 20:11 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-28 20:31 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 21:00 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 20:48 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 21:57 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 22:53 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 19:59 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 20:09 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 20:48 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 21:56 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 22:57 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-29 00:46 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-28 13:58 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-29 08:35 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-29 14:52 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-29 17:26 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2016-12-31 00:28 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-31 01:33 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> - 2016-12-31 06:53 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-01-01 21:40 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> - 2017-01-01 21:55 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-01-02 21:27 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Clocky <notgonn@happen.com> - 2017-01-02 22:06 +0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Lindsay <ask.me.for.it@hornet.net.ay.you> - 2016-12-28 07:03 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 08:24 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-28 15:40 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 00:10 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-27 22:32 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-27 23:05 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-27 23:37 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-28 00:25 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-30 00:30 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-30 00:43 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-30 12:04 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-30 12:32 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-30 13:24 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-30 13:30 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-30 13:38 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-30 14:43 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-30 15:33 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-30 21:26 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-30 22:09 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-30 23:07 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-31 00:21 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-31 08:34 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-31 12:08 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-31 12:18 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-31 13:32 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-31 14:12 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-31 14:49 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-31 16:35 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-31 18:59 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI jonz <johnhhhinton7@gmail.com> - 2016-12-31 07:29 -0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2016-12-31 16:56 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Andy <nospam@no.no> - 2016-12-31 10:03 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2017-01-01 08:22 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2017-01-01 00:12 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2017-01-01 11:38 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2017-01-01 00:58 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2017-01-02 06:58 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> - 2017-01-01 10:57 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> - 2017-01-01 01:01 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2017-01-01 13:00 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Clocky <notgonn@happen.com> - 2017-01-01 08:20 +0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2017-01-01 11:42 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-01-01 13:42 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2017-01-01 15:56 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Clocky <notgonn@happen.com> - 2017-01-01 13:35 +0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-30 20:42 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-30 22:02 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-30 23:02 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-31 00:24 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI lindsay <ask.me.for.it@nunnya.business.net.ay.you> - 2016-12-31 07:44 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-30 06:15 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2016-12-31 09:06 +0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-31 14:28 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2016-12-31 15:36 +0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2016-12-31 19:38 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI felix <me@nothere.invalid> - 2016-12-26 00:48 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-26 00:51 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.net> - 2016-12-24 05:34 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.net> - 2016-12-24 05:29 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI news16 <news16@woa.com.au> - 2016-12-23 18:50 +0000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.org> - 2016-12-25 09:32 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-24 09:28 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-23 18:56 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Clocky <notgonn@happen.com> - 2016-12-23 20:19 +0800
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Noddy <me@home.com> - 2016-12-22 11:56 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Jeßus <j@j.net> - 2016-12-22 10:00 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-22 15:03 +1100
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2016-12-22 21:37 +1000
Re: Digital evidence for insurance claim rejected by AAMI pedro <me@privacy.net> - 2016-12-28 11:56 +0800
Page 4 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 20 Next page →
| From | felix <me@nothere.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-24 19:49 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ec6r4nFlo0uU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #56594 |
On Saturday, 24 Dec 2016 9:50 AM, Grumpy Tech wrote: > On 23/12/2016 8:27 PM, felix wrote: >> On Friday, 23 Dec 2016 8:48 PM, Grumpy Tech wrote: >>> On 23/12/2016 5:49 PM, felix wrote: >>>> On Friday, 23 Dec 2016 6:39 PM, Grumpy Tech wrote: >>> >>>>>>> the properties are not available on pics >>>>>>> posted on the net *if you just look at them on the net*. as you >>>>>>> say, >>>>>>> you >>>>>>> need to download them first. >>>>>> >>>>>> You are truly pathetic. >>>>>> >>>>> I think he completely missed the bit about the temporary internet >>>>> files... >>>> >>>> I didn't. it was irrelevant to the fact that until the picture in on >>>> your PC, whether in the temp file or from being saved, you cannot >>>> access >>>> the properties. the properties are not available from a photo *on a >>>> webpage*. so despite all the cackle and laughter and bluster about my >>>> stupidity, the fact is that what I said is correct >>> >>> What part of the temp file being downloaded on your computer >>> immediately you click on the link and can be accessed from the >>> computer from then on along with it's info. You cannot look at a >>> picture on the net on your computer without the picture being >>> downloaded to your computer. >>> >>> You do not have to take deliberate action to download the picture. >>> >>> Whilst in your estimation you cannot access the info just by looking >>> at the webpage, you are incorrect. There are a number of addons for >>> Chrome and Firefox that will allow you to access the photo's exif info >>> just by clicking on a button or menu item. You really have outdone >>> yourself this time by showing that you have *VERY* limited knowledge >>> of *IT*. >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> well whoop-de-do grumpy grub. firstly I don't claim to be any sort of >> computer guru, and secondly, all you have shown in your desperation to >> make a mountain out of this technology molehill, is that there is >> software that allows the examination of exif info in webpage pics. >> however, my original comment that you cannot access that data normally >> still stands. and why anyone wants to make an issue out of this, other >> than the usual felix bashing of course, remains a mystery. > > Felix > > Let's start with your claim a few days ago that a mate used to ring > you for help with computer stuff. Do you want to retract that now or > are you happy with the fact that what you know about computers could > be written on a postage stamp in 24 point font with room to spare. > > Secondly I tried to explain to you that *AS SOON AS YOU OPEN A LINK ON > A WEBPAGE ALL PICTURES AND THE CODE FOR THAT WEBPAGE ARE DOWNLOADED TO > YOUR COMPUTER*. This means you have a copy on your computer to get the > picture properties from. You then changed the meaning to be that you > cannot get it just from the webpage, I changed nothing. that was my meaning from the word go. I knew it could be obtained from a from a saved copy. how many times do I need to repeat myself > so I informed you about add ons that allow this to happen. > > You then claim I am making a mountain out of a molehill and despite > having it explicitly explained that the data is easily accessed you go > ahead and claim that this is not the case no > and that I am *felix bashing* you. > > I wasn't trying to bash you at all, I was trying to educate you you were being presumptuous in assuming I was as ignorant as you thought I was > and probably quite a few others that this information is easily > obtainable as soon as you have looked at a webpage. > > To extrapolate this further, you and probably everyone else here has > probably received an email in the past that states that you need to > click here and update your personal information or your account will > be suspended. Now often when you click on that link it doesn't take > you to where it says it is taking you and you may see nothing happen > on the webpage you are taken to then all of a sudden you get messages > flashing on the screen and your speakers sounding an alarm. You've > been hit by what is called a drive by malicious attack and your > computer now has a virus. This is because it automatically downloads > the information as soon as you clicked on that link and the > information was poisoned to attack your computer. > > It's exactly the way cryptolocker and those types of nasty computer > hijackers work. > > It's also the same way a lot of ad's on websites sucker you in to > click on the link then install malware in the background. and that's why there's anti-malware and anti-virus software, firewalls, and the rest. > Hopefully now you have received a very basic education on this stuff. > hopefully now you will pull your head in... -- I plan on living forever. So far so good!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-24 20:13 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <o3lhoj$10dh$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #56617 |
On 24/12/2016 6:49 PM, felix wrote: > On Saturday, 24 Dec 2016 9:50 AM, Grumpy Tech wrote: >> >> Felix >> >> Let's start with your claim a few days ago that a mate used to ring >> you for help with computer stuff. Do you want to retract that now or >> are you happy with the fact that what you know about computers could >> be written on a postage stamp in 24 point font with room to spare. >> >> Secondly I tried to explain to you that *AS SOON AS YOU OPEN A LINK ON >> A WEBPAGE ALL PICTURES AND THE CODE FOR THAT WEBPAGE ARE DOWNLOADED TO >> YOUR COMPUTER*. This means you have a copy on your computer to get the >> picture properties from. You then changed the meaning to be that you >> cannot get it just from the webpage, > > I changed nothing. that was my meaning from the word go. I knew it could > be obtained from a from a saved copy. how many times do I need to repeat > myself The fact is felix, you don't even have to save a copy. Once you click on the link it's on your computer. This is what you are failing to grasp. >> so I informed you about add ons that allow this to happen. >> >> You then claim I am making a mountain out of a molehill and despite >> having it explicitly explained that the data is easily accessed you go >> ahead and claim that this is not the case > > no > >> and that I am *felix bashing* you. >> >> I wasn't trying to bash you at all, I was trying to educate you > > you were being presumptuous in assuming I was as ignorant as you thought > I was With what you are saying and still repeating it is obvious to anyone that you are still not understanding how things work. I'm not presuming you are ignorant anymore, I flat out saying that not only are you ignorant you are stupid as well. >> and probably quite a few others that this information is easily >> obtainable as soon as you have looked at a webpage. >> >> To extrapolate this further, you and probably everyone else here has >> probably received an email in the past that states that you need to >> click here and update your personal information or your account will >> be suspended. Now often when you click on that link it doesn't take >> you to where it says it is taking you and you may see nothing happen >> on the webpage you are taken to then all of a sudden you get messages >> flashing on the screen and your speakers sounding an alarm. You've >> been hit by what is called a drive by malicious attack and your >> computer now has a virus. This is because it automatically downloads >> the information as soon as you clicked on that link and the >> information was poisoned to attack your computer. >> >> It's exactly the way cryptolocker and those types of nasty computer >> hijackers work. >> >> It's also the same way a lot of ad's on websites sucker you in to >> click on the link then install malware in the background. > > and that's why there's anti-malware and anti-virus software, firewalls, > and the rest. And the ransomware people make a lot of money because people trust their programs to look after their computers without taking some very obvious precautions themselves. Most antivirus programs are the first thing targeted by the crooks. Look up ntfs alternate data streams and learn something for once in your life. >> Hopefully now you have received a very basic education on this stuff. >> > > hopefully now you will pull your head in... Why, you have proven to be pig ignorant of basic issues such as exif data, browser hijackers, alternate data streams, and the fundamentals of computer operations. I don't need to pull my head in, you need to pull yours out of the sand.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | felix <me@nothere.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-24 21:20 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ec70elFmvjrU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #56625 |
On Saturday, 24 Dec 2016 9:13 PM, Grumpy Tech wrote: > On 24/12/2016 6:49 PM, felix wrote: >> On Saturday, 24 Dec 2016 9:50 AM, Grumpy Tech wrote: > >>> >>> Felix >>> >>> Let's start with your claim a few days ago that a mate used to ring >>> you for help with computer stuff. Do you want to retract that now or >>> are you happy with the fact that what you know about computers could >>> be written on a postage stamp in 24 point font with room to spare. >>> >>> Secondly I tried to explain to you that *AS SOON AS YOU OPEN A LINK ON >>> A WEBPAGE ALL PICTURES AND THE CODE FOR THAT WEBPAGE ARE DOWNLOADED TO >>> YOUR COMPUTER*. This means you have a copy on your computer to get the >>> picture properties from. You then changed the meaning to be that you >>> cannot get it just from the webpage, >> >> I changed nothing. that was my meaning from the word go. I knew it could >> be obtained from a from a saved copy. how many times do I need to repeat >> myself > > The fact is felix, you don't even have to save a copy. Once you click > on the link it's on your computer. This is what you are failing to grasp. I'm not failing to grasp it at all, and I've already told you that. my original remark was that the properties option is not available when you clik on photos on the net, and that is a fact! -- I plan on living forever. So far so good!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Grumpy Tech <grumpytech07@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-24 20:35 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <o3lj22$12ek$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #56626 |
On 24/12/2016 8:20 PM, felix wrote: > On Saturday, 24 Dec 2016 9:13 PM, Grumpy Tech wrote: >> >> The fact is felix, you don't even have to save a copy. Once you click >> on the link it's on your computer. This is what you are failing to grasp. > > I'm not failing to grasp it at all, and I've already told you that. my > original remark was that the properties option is not available when you > clik on photos on the net, and that is a fact! > keep being ignorant felix, it's all you have left.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Noddy <me@home.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-24 21:49 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <o3ljo7$2ur$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #56617 |
On 24/12/16 7:49 PM, felix wrote: >> Hopefully now you have received a very basic education on this stuff. >> > > hopefully now you will pull your head in... ROTFL :) Having fun now Felix? Glad you let everyone out of the bag now, are you? Nothing seems to have changed, huh? Everyone still seems to think you're a moron :) -- -- -- Regards, Noddy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | felix <me@nothere.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 00:28 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ec7bgkFpij6U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #56629 |
On Saturday, 24 Dec 2016 9:49 PM, Noddy wrote: > On 24/12/16 7:49 PM, felix wrote: > >>> Hopefully now you have received a very basic education on this stuff. >>> >> >> hopefully now you will pull your head in... > > ROTFL :) > > Having fun now Felix? Glad you let everyone out of the bag now, are you? I'm beginning to regret it.. > > Nothing seems to have changed, huh? Everyone still seems to think > you're a moron :) > > I love the way you keep saying 'everyone' when what you really mean is you and your sycophantic mates -- I plan on living forever. So far so good!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Noddy <me@home.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 07:36 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <o3mm4m$lq8$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #56641 |
On 25/12/16 12:28 AM, felix wrote: >> >> Having fun now Felix? Glad you let everyone out of the bag now, are you? > > I'm beginning to regret it.. Not terribly bright, are you? :) >> >> Nothing seems to have changed, huh? Everyone still seems to think >> you're a moron :) > > I love the way you keep saying 'everyone' when what you really mean is > you and your sycophantic mates Denial is one of the main reasons why you will never rise above the "moron" image you have now. You think the problem lies with everyone *else*. -- -- -- Regards, Noddy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeßus <j@j.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 08:48 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <d3rt5cpv24cpcnedeoljgg3kh6muh88tf3@j.net> |
| In reply to | #56641 |
On Sun, 25 Dec 2016 00:28:49 +1100, felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote: >On Saturday, 24 Dec 2016 9:49 PM, Noddy wrote: >> On 24/12/16 7:49 PM, felix wrote: >> >>>> Hopefully now you have received a very basic education on this stuff. >>>> >>> >>> hopefully now you will pull your head in... >> >> ROTFL :) >> >> Having fun now Felix? Glad you let everyone out of the bag now, are you? > >I'm beginning to regret it.. > >> >> Nothing seems to have changed, huh? Everyone still seems to think >> you're a moron :) >> >> > >I love the way you keep saying 'everyone' when what you really mean is >you and your sycophantic mates Excluding the 'you and your sycophantic mates' as you put it... whose left? Jonz and Xenocchio, of all people. Yeah, everyone else is in the 'cabal' :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | felix <me@nothere.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 16:46 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ec94p7F7nb2U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #56647 |
On Sunday, 25 Dec 2016 8:48 AM, Je�us wrote: > On Sun, 25 Dec 2016 00:28:49 +1100, felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote: > >> On Saturday, 24 Dec 2016 9:49 PM, Noddy wrote: >>> On 24/12/16 7:49 PM, felix wrote: >>> >>>>> Hopefully now you have received a very basic education on this stuff. >>>>> >>>> hopefully now you will pull your head in... >>> ROTFL :) >>> >>> Having fun now Felix? Glad you let everyone out of the bag now, are you? >> I'm beginning to regret it.. >> >>> Nothing seems to have changed, huh? Everyone still seems to think >>> you're a moron :) >>> >>> >> I love the way you keep saying 'everyone' when what you really mean is >> you and your sycophantic mates > Excluding the 'you and your sycophantic mates' as you put it... whose > left? all the sensible ppl in the world who don't have a chip on their shoulder > Jonz and Xenocchio, of all people. Yeah, everyone else is in the > 'cabal' :) -- I plan on living forever. So far so good!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Noddy <me@home.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 19:19 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <o3nvah$qla$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #56659 |
On 25/12/16 4:46 PM, felix wrote: >>> I love the way you keep saying 'everyone' when what you really mean is >>> you and your sycophantic mates >> Excluding the 'you and your sycophantic mates' as you put it... whose >> left? > > all the sensible ppl in the world who don't have a chip on their shoulder "The "world"? We're just talking about here, and of the regulars the only people apart from you who haven't called you a liar on this are your mates Jonz and Krypsis, and you'd have to go a *very* long way indeed to find people with smaller 'chips' than them. Especially Krypsis :) -- -- -- Regards, Noddy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | felix <me@nothere.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-26 00:42 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <eca0ldFduofU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #56663 |
On Sunday, 25 Dec 2016 7:19 PM, Noddy wrote: > On 25/12/16 4:46 PM, felix wrote: > >>>> I love the way you keep saying 'everyone' when what you really mean is >>>> you and your sycophantic mates >>> Excluding the 'you and your sycophantic mates' as you put it... whose >>> left? >> >> all the sensible ppl in the world who don't have a chip on their >> shoulder > > "The "world"? We're just talking about here, and of the regulars the > only people apart from you who haven't called you a liar on this are > your mates Jonz and Krypsis, no > and you'd have to go a *very* long way indeed to find people with > smaller 'chips' than them. > > Especially Krypsis :) > -- I plan on living forever. So far so good!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeßus <j@j.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 19:19 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <n60v5c537nnaas8sjpqju2emj8hiuoki20@j.net> |
| In reply to | #56659 |
On Sun, 25 Dec 2016 16:46:14 +1100, felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote: >On Sunday, 25 Dec 2016 8:48 AM, Je?us wrote: >> On Sun, 25 Dec 2016 00:28:49 +1100, felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote: >> >>> On Saturday, 24 Dec 2016 9:49 PM, Noddy wrote: >>>> On 24/12/16 7:49 PM, felix wrote: >>>> >>>>>> Hopefully now you have received a very basic education on this stuff. >>>>>> >>>>> hopefully now you will pull your head in... >>>> ROTFL :) >>>> >>>> Having fun now Felix? Glad you let everyone out of the bag now, are you? >>> I'm beginning to regret it.. >>> >>>> Nothing seems to have changed, huh? Everyone still seems to think >>>> you're a moron :) >>>> >>>> >>> I love the way you keep saying 'everyone' when what you really mean is >>> you and your sycophantic mates >> Excluding the 'you and your sycophantic mates' as you put it... whose >> left? > >all the sensible ppl in the world who don't have a chip on their shoulder ' sensible' as in agree with or just politely go along with your stupidity, you mean. Anyone else isn't sensible, right? >> Jonz and Xenocchio, of all people. Yeah, everyone else is in the >> 'cabal' :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-24 22:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ec89utF248aU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #56641 |
felix wrote: > > > > Nothing seems to have changed, huh? Everyone still seems to think > > you're a moron :) > > > > > > I love the way you keep saying 'everyone' when what you really mean > is you and your sycophantic mates Well let's be fair then fetid and put it to an open vote Enter +1 below if you think Fetid Felix is a moronic liar.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeßus <j@j.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 09:15 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <post5cdaofbhpavo8hm5k3fal3lv2prr35@j.net> |
| In reply to | #56648 |
On 24 Dec 2016 22:08:30 GMT, "Blue Peeler" <woof@barque.org> wrote: >felix wrote: > >> > >> > Nothing seems to have changed, huh? Everyone still seems to think >> > you're a moron :) >> > >> > >> >> I love the way you keep saying 'everyone' when what you really mean >> is you and your sycophantic mates > >Well let's be fair then fetid and put it to an open vote > > >Enter +1 below if you think Fetid Felix is a moronic liar. Agreed (it's not in my DNA to use twitter talk, sorry).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Noddy <me@home.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 10:24 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <o3mvvd$o4d$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #56648 |
On 25/12/16 9:08 AM, Blue Peeler wrote: > felix wrote: > >>> >>> Nothing seems to have changed, huh? Everyone still seems to think >>> you're a moron :) >>> >>> >> >> I love the way you keep saying 'everyone' when what you really mean >> is you and your sycophantic mates > > Well let's be fair then fetid and put it to an open vote > > > Enter +1 below if you think Fetid Felix is a moronic liar. > +1 -- -- -- Regards, Noddy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | felix <me@nothere.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 16:35 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ec944gF7kg5U3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #56648 |
On Sunday, 25 Dec 2016 9:08 AM, Blue Peeler wrote: > felix wrote: > >>> Nothing seems to have changed, huh? Everyone still seems to think >>> you're a moron :) >>> >>> >> I love the way you keep saying 'everyone' when what you really mean >> is you and your sycophantic mates > Well let's be fair then fetid and put it to an open vote > > > Enter +1 below if you think Fetid Felix is a moronic liar. and then let's see the evidence for it. -- I plan on living forever. So far so good!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Noddy <me@home.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 19:20 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <o3nvcd$qla$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #56658 |
On 25/12/16 4:35 PM, felix wrote: >>> I love the way you keep saying 'everyone' when what you really mean >>> is you and your sycophantic mates >> Well let's be fair then fetid and put it to an open vote >> >> >> Enter +1 below if you think Fetid Felix is a moronic liar. > > and then let's see the evidence for it. Felix, it would not matter if the "evidence" was tattooed onto your fucking forehead, as you're such a deluded moronic cunt that you'd look in a mirror and deny that it was there. -- -- -- Regards, Noddy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Clocky <notgonn@happen.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 01:12 +0800 |
| Message-ID | <585eac81$0$1521$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #56594 |
On 24/12/2016 6:50 AM, Grumpy Tech wrote: > On 23/12/2016 8:27 PM, felix wrote: >> On Friday, 23 Dec 2016 8:48 PM, Grumpy Tech wrote: >>> On 23/12/2016 5:49 PM, felix wrote: >>>> On Friday, 23 Dec 2016 6:39 PM, Grumpy Tech wrote: >>> >>>>>>> the properties are not available on pics >>>>>>> posted on the net *if you just look at them on the net*. as you say, >>>>>>> you >>>>>>> need to download them first. >>>>>> >>>>>> You are truly pathetic. >>>>>> >>>>> I think he completely missed the bit about the temporary internet >>>>> files... >>>> >>>> I didn't. it was irrelevant to the fact that until the picture in on >>>> your PC, whether in the temp file or from being saved, you cannot >>>> access >>>> the properties. the properties are not available from a photo *on a >>>> webpage*. so despite all the cackle and laughter and bluster about my >>>> stupidity, the fact is that what I said is correct >>> >>> What part of the temp file being downloaded on your computer >>> immediately you click on the link and can be accessed from the >>> computer from then on along with it's info. You cannot look at a >>> picture on the net on your computer without the picture being >>> downloaded to your computer. >>> >>> You do not have to take deliberate action to download the picture. >>> >>> Whilst in your estimation you cannot access the info just by looking >>> at the webpage, you are incorrect. There are a number of addons for >>> Chrome and Firefox that will allow you to access the photo's exif info >>> just by clicking on a button or menu item. You really have outdone >>> yourself this time by showing that you have *VERY* limited knowledge >>> of *IT*. >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> well whoop-de-do grumpy grub. firstly I don't claim to be any sort of >> computer guru, and secondly, all you have shown in your desperation to >> make a mountain out of this technology molehill, is that there is >> software that allows the examination of exif info in webpage pics. >> however, my original comment that you cannot access that data normally >> still stands. and why anyone wants to make an issue out of this, other >> than the usual felix bashing of course, remains a mystery. > > Felix > > Let's start with your claim a few days ago that a mate used to ring you > for help with computer stuff. Do you want to retract that now or are you > happy with the fact that what you know about computers could be written > on a postage stamp in 24 point font with room to spare. > It's not difficult to convince people that you are an expert when those you are trying to convince have even less of a clue. Hard to imagine someone knowing less than felix though but I suppose it's possible.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | felix <me@nothere.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 16:34 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ec942oF7kg5U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #56643 |
On Sunday, 25 Dec 2016 4:12 AM, Clocky wrote: > On 24/12/2016 6:50 AM, Grumpy Tech wrote: >> On 23/12/2016 8:27 PM, felix wrote: >>> On Friday, 23 Dec 2016 8:48 PM, Grumpy Tech wrote: >>>> On 23/12/2016 5:49 PM, felix wrote: >>>>> On Friday, 23 Dec 2016 6:39 PM, Grumpy Tech wrote: >>>> >>>>>>>> the properties are not available on pics >>>>>>>> posted on the net *if you just look at them on the net*. as you >>>>>>>> say, >>>>>>>> you >>>>>>>> need to download them first. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You are truly pathetic. >>>>>>> >>>>>> I think he completely missed the bit about the temporary internet >>>>>> files... >>>>> >>>>> I didn't. it was irrelevant to the fact that until the picture in on >>>>> your PC, whether in the temp file or from being saved, you cannot >>>>> access >>>>> the properties. the properties are not available from a photo *on a >>>>> webpage*. so despite all the cackle and laughter and bluster about my >>>>> stupidity, the fact is that what I said is correct >>>> >>>> What part of the temp file being downloaded on your computer >>>> immediately you click on the link and can be accessed from the >>>> computer from then on along with it's info. You cannot look at a >>>> picture on the net on your computer without the picture being >>>> downloaded to your computer. >>>> >>>> You do not have to take deliberate action to download the picture. >>>> >>>> Whilst in your estimation you cannot access the info just by looking >>>> at the webpage, you are incorrect. There are a number of addons for >>>> Chrome and Firefox that will allow you to access the photo's exif info >>>> just by clicking on a button or menu item. You really have outdone >>>> yourself this time by showing that you have *VERY* limited knowledge >>>> of *IT*. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> well whoop-de-do grumpy grub. firstly I don't claim to be any sort of >>> computer guru, and secondly, all you have shown in your desperation to >>> make a mountain out of this technology molehill, is that there is >>> software that allows the examination of exif info in webpage pics. >>> however, my original comment that you cannot access that data normally >>> still stands. and why anyone wants to make an issue out of this, other >>> than the usual felix bashing of course, remains a mystery. >> >> Felix >> >> Let's start with your claim a few days ago that a mate used to ring you >> for help with computer stuff. Do you want to retract that now or are you >> happy with the fact that what you know about computers could be written >> on a postage stamp in 24 point font with room to spare. >> > > > It's not difficult to convince people that you are an expert when > those you are trying to convince have even less of a clue. > > Hard to imagine someone knowing less than felix though but I suppose > it's possible. > > yeah sure thing Clockwit. it's pity you have such a miserable life that you have nothing better to do on Christmas Day than amuse yourself by taking potshots at me. have you forgotten it's the season of goodwill? are you unhappy cos Santa never gave you a pressy? the reality, as distinct from your lies, is that I know more about computers than the average person, and most ppl my age, unless they're professionals or seriously into computers. you are aware that there are ppl who know nothing about computers and don't even have one, right? I have made literally dozens of computers, and trouble shooted and repaired them, and have been doing it for decades, both for myself and others. I was cut'n'pasting on my Mac and writing programs in Microsoft Basic, and entering commands in DOS on a PC while you were still in short pants. before that I was using a Vic20 and writing programs for it onto audio cassettes. if you had more than half a brain you would know that not knowing any one particular thing about computers has no bearing on the extent of ones knowledge about them in general, and that no matter how much anyone knows, there will still be some things they don't know.. even you, and even the Grumpy one! so stick that up your Kyber Pass! but how about we just stick to the facts for once? I DID know about the properties box via the right click menue, and it is NOT available when right clicking on pics on the web, just as I said. so despite all the kafuffle about this there really is nothing to make any fuss about! it's just been yet another excuse for felix bashing. have a very un-Merry Christmas. you've done nothing to make mine any better. -- I plan on living forever. So far so good!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Noddy <me@home.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 19:15 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <o3nv3g$qla$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #56657 |
On 25/12/16 4:34 PM, felix wrote: >> Hard to imagine someone knowing less than felix though but I suppose >> it's possible. >> >> > > yeah sure thing Clockwit. it's pity you have such a miserable life that > you have nothing better to do on Christmas Day than amuse yourself by > taking potshots at me. Clockwit is part of the "Cabal" too, is he pal? :) <Nonsensical rant snipped> -- -- -- Regards, Noddy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 20 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | aus.computers
csiph-web