Re: Maybe cc will not run this time? But I bet he will.

From	William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net>
Newsgroups	comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject	Re: Maybe cc will not run this time? But I bet he will.
Date	2012-06-22 09:45 +0100
Organization	Dumb Willie Boaster @ Llareggub Inc.
Message-ID	<jundb9-oh5.ln1@alpha-one.wpnetwork.org> (permalink)
References	(14 earlier) <fc44314d-bff1-4e6f-9db7-116b33b54b1b@googlegroups.com> <1b104b9d-7f75-474f-9889-f80eac9610e4@re8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com> <42e3f942-9a43-4168-9294-7ceb47b1b831@googlegroups.com> <CC08971C.3C3A%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <yv8au0hr057w$.dlg@sitting.at.this.computer>

Show all headers | View raw

Here is a facsimile from Tattoo Vampire who, on 22/6/2012 03:31, wrote:

> Snit wrote:
>
>> A
>
> Do you really have to start endless new threads about the same argument?
> Troll.

OCD. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsessive%E2%80%93compulsive_disorder

-- 
M$ Windows: from the guys who brought you EDLIN

Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. 
That will just be a completely unintentional side effect.
-- Linus Torvalds (2003-09-28)

Every time Windows had a rebirth I would get hold of it 
and buy a new machine to run it on believing that they (M$)
must now have got things right and finally created an operating 
environment that could excite, impress and enthral me. 
But each time their system got more ham-fisted, more insulting 
and more indifferent to the pleasures and interests of the **consumer**.
-- Stephen Fry - December 2008 --

Windows is like a hooker; they're both easy, 
and using either puts you at risk of viruses.
--  Kelsey Bjarnason --
comp.os.linux.advocacy

Micro$oft, the company that makes spreading malware easy.

Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: OT: The "stats" debate... dead and buried Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2012-06-19 07:21 -0700
  Re: OT: The "stats" debate... dead and buried Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2012-06-19 16:26 +0200
    Re: OT: The "stats" debate... dead and buried cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-19 07:51 -0700
      Re: OT: The "stats" debate... dead and buried Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-19 07:59 -0700
      Re: OT: The "stats" debate... dead and buried Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2012-06-19 17:16 +0200
        Re: OT: The "stats" debate... dead and buried cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-19 08:23 -0700
        Re: OT: The "stats" debate... dead and buried Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2012-06-19 09:01 -0700
        Re: OT: The "stats" debate... dead and buried Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-19 10:20 -0700
    Re: OT: The "stats" debate... dead and buried Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-19 08:00 -0700
      Re: OT: The "stats" debate... dead and buried cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-19 08:13 -0700
        Re: OT: The "stats" debate... dead and buried Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-19 08:30 -0700
          Re: OT: The "stats" debate... dead and buried cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-19 08:58 -0700
            Re: OT: The "stats" debate... dead and buried Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2012-06-19 09:46 -0700
            Re: OT: The "stats" debate... dead and buried Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-19 10:23 -0700
              Re: OT: The "stats" debate... dead and buried cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-19 11:21 -0700
                Once again cc tried to back his claims... and falls flat on his face.  Now watch him run! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-19 12:16 -0700
                Re: Once again cc tried to back his claims... and falls flat on his face. Now watch him run! cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-19 12:27 -0700
                Re: Once again cc tried to back his claims... and falls flat on his face. Now watch him run! cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-19 12:33 -0700
                Re: Once again cc tried to back his claims... and falls flat on his face. Now watch him run! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-19 12:39 -0700
                Re: Once again cc tried to back his claims... and falls flat on his face. Now watch him run! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-19 12:41 -0700
                Re: Once again cc tried to back his claims... and falls flat on his face. Now watch him run! cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-19 12:49 -0700
                Re: Once again cc tried to back his claims... and falls flat on his face. Now watch him run! Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2012-06-19 13:23 -0700
                Re: Once again cc tried to back his claims... and falls flat on his face. Now watch him run! Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-19 18:34 -0700
                Re: Once again cc tried to back his claims... and falls flat on his face. Now watch him run! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-19 16:16 -0700
                Re: Once again cc tried to back his claims... and falls flat on his face. Now watch him run! Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-19 18:35 -0700
                Re: Once again cc tried to back his claims... and falls flat on his face. Now watch him run! cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-20 05:27 -0700
                Re: Once again cc tried to back his claims... and falls flat on his face. Now watch him run! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-20 08:36 -0700
                Re: Once again cc tried to back his claims... and falls flat on his face. Now watch him run! cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-20 08:43 -0700
                Re: Once again cc tried to back his claims... and falls flat on his face. Now watch him run! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-20 08:47 -0700
                Watch cc run! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-20 09:34 -0700
                Watch cc run! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-20 09:59 -0700
                OT: The realities Snit must overlook to continue... Re: Once again cc tried to back his claims... and falls flat on his face. Now watch him run! Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2012-06-20 10:57 -0700
                Re: OT: The realities Snit must overlook to continue... Re: Once again cc tried to back his claims... and falls flat on his face. Now watch him run! cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-20 11:10 -0700
                cc and Carroll lie about their running. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-20 11:48 -0700
                Re: cc and Carroll lie about their running. cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-20 11:57 -0700
                cc runs *again*.  How much of a coward can he be? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-20 12:26 -0700
                Re: cc runs *again*.  How much of a coward can he be? cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-20 12:39 -0700
                Re: cc runs *again*.  How much of a coward can he be? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-20 13:56 -0700
                Re: cc runs *again*.  How much of a coward can he be? cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-20 14:15 -0700
                Wow... cc proves he is a coward *again*! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-20 14:59 -0700
                Re: Wow... cc proves he is a coward *again*! Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-20 18:16 -0700
                Re: cc runs *again*. How much of a coward can he be? Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-20 18:24 -0700
                Re: cc runs *again*. How much of a coward can he be? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-20 19:45 -0700
                Re: cc runs *again*. How much of a coward can he be? Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2012-06-20 22:52 -0400
                Re: cc runs *again*. How much of a coward can he be? TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2012-06-21 04:07 +0000
                Re: cc runs *again*. How much of a coward can he be? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-20 21:10 -0700
                Re: cc runs *again*. How much of a coward can he be? Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-22 18:57 -0700
                Re: cc runs *again*. How much of a coward can he be? High Plains Thumper <hpt@invalid.invalid> - 2012-06-21 08:16 -0600
                Re: cc runs *again*. How much of a coward can he be? Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-22 18:55 -0700
                Re: cc runs *again*. How much of a coward can he be? Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2012-06-22 22:35 -0400
                Re: cc runs *again*. How much of a coward can he be? cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-21 05:14 -0700
                Maybe cc will not run *this* time?  But I bet he will. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-21 09:17 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time?  But I bet he will. cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-21 10:08 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time?  But I bet he will. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-21 10:52 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time?  But I bet he will. cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-21 11:03 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time?  But I bet he will. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-21 11:27 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time?  But I bet he will. cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-21 11:53 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time?  But I bet he will. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-21 13:13 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time? But I bet he will. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2012-06-21 12:35 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time? But I bet he will. cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-21 13:50 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time? But I bet he will. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2012-06-21 14:27 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time? But I bet he will. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-21 15:30 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time? But I bet he will. cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-22 05:03 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time? But I bet he will. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2012-06-22 06:11 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time? But I bet he will. Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-22 19:02 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time? But I bet he will. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-22 20:24 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time? But I bet he will. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-22 07:34 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time? But I bet he will. cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-22 08:00 -0700
                cc is proved wrong about "outliers"... but he will never admit to it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-22 14:38 -0700
                Help with understanding outliers Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-22 18:51 -0700
                Re: Help with understanding outliers Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2012-06-22 22:42 -0400
                Re: Help with understanding outliers Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2012-06-23 14:22 +0200
                Re: Help with understanding outliers Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2012-06-23 14:32 +0000
                Re: Help with understanding outliers Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@xzoozy.com> - 2012-06-23 11:02 -0400
                Re: Help with understanding outliers Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-23 08:31 -0700
                Re: Help with understanding outliers Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-23 08:21 -0700
                Re: Help with understanding outliers Frederick Williams <freddywilliams@btinternet.com> - 2012-06-23 16:45 +0100
                Re: Help with understanding outliers Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-23 10:18 -0700
                Re: Help with understanding outliers Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-23 18:58 -0700
                Re: Help with understanding outliers Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-23 19:55 -0700
                Re: Help with understanding outliers Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-23 14:52 -0700
                Re: Help with understanding outliers Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-23 14:52 -0700
                Re: Help with understanding outliers Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2012-06-23 22:48 -0400
                Re: cc is proved wrong about "outliers"... but he will never admit to it. Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-22 19:04 -0700
                Re: cc is proved wrong about "outliers"... but he will never admit to it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-22 20:22 -0700
                Re: cc is proved wrong about "outliers"... but he will never admit to it. Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2012-06-23 14:20 +0200
                Re: cc is proved wrong about "outliers"... but he will never admit to it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-23 08:12 -0700
                Re: cc is proved wrong about "outliers"... but he will never admit to it. Nobody <invalid@invalid.com> - 2012-06-24 14:59 -0500
                Re: cc is proved wrong about "outliers"... but he will never admit to it. cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-25 05:31 -0700
                Re: cc is proved wrong about "outliers"... but he will never admit to it. cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-25 06:45 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time? But I bet he will. Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-22 18:58 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time? But I bet he will. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2012-06-23 09:09 +0200
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time? But I bet he will. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2012-06-23 00:25 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time? But I bet he will. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-23 08:10 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time? But I bet he will. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-23 08:22 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time? But I bet he will. Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-22 18:59 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time?  But I bet he will. Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2012-06-21 22:31 -0400
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time?  But I bet he will. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-21 22:23 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time?  But I bet he will. Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2012-06-22 08:04 +0100
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time?  But I bet he will. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-22 07:38 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time?  But I bet he will. Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2012-06-22 07:29 -0400
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time?  But I bet he will. cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-22 05:04 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time?  But I bet he will. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-22 07:37 -0700
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time?  But I bet he will. Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2012-06-22 19:27 -0400
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time?  But I bet he will. William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2012-06-22 09:45 +0100
                Re: Maybe cc will not run *this* time?  But I bet he will. Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2012-06-22 07:30 -0400
                Re: cc runs *again*. How much of a coward can he be? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2012-06-20 14:33 -0700
                Re: cc runs *again*. How much of a coward can he be? Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-20 18:13 -0700
                Re: OT: The realities Snit must overlook to continue... Re: Once again cc tried to back his claims... and falls flat on his face. Now watch him run! Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-20 18:14 -0700
      Re: OT: The "stats" debate... dead and buried Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2012-06-19 08:59 -0700
    Re: OT: The "stats" debate... dead and buried Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2012-06-19 08:45 -0700

csiph-web