Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > comp.os.os2.beta > #78

Re: formatting to FAT32

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

>> Kid, stop trying to solve this problem.
>>
> Gladly; it's not my dog, and you aren't willing to be helped
>

Your "help" comprises teaching your grandfather to suck eggs.  It's 
stupid, thoughtless, and inane.  I know the basics, kid.  I don't need 
someone to hand-hold me through them on Usenet.  And you'd know this if 
you put the old brain box into gear and thought.  You've *seen* me 
hand-hold people through the basics often enough.  I've been doing it 
for nigh on 20 years.

>> Yes, and I'm experienced enough in these things to know that that's 
>> not necessarily the truth.  The truth is unknown in this instance.
>>
> But not experienced enough to know that it probably is.
>

On the contrary, I clearly have enough experience to have thought of 
something that you clearly haven't thought of.  And it's a fairly 
obvious thing.  Apply a little brainpower, for goodness' sake.

>> I do know my way around SMTP electronic mail, having written the odd 
>> mail server here and there, and have enough experience with dancing 
>> the same silly dances over and over again to immediately know when 
>> something is a lost cause, and I don't have the time to waste right 
>> now in going through the basics with someone on Usenet, thank you.  
>> I'm trying to give people a utility for checking their FAT32 volumes.
>>
> Trying to get a listing removed without fixing the problem?
>

As I said, thoughtless and inane.  Apply that brain, kid.  My ISP has 
been blacklisted by PenTeleData.  Who says that it is *anything at all 
to do with me*?  That would be astonishingly presumptuous to think 
that.  There's about 10 million customers, there.

> Especially if you keep blaming the list operator without knowing 
> whether the listing is legitimate.
>

The list operator can list whomever it likes, however sensible or 
foolish that may be; that's its prerogative.  But you're trying to have 
your cake and eat it.  You're trying to argue that there's a possibility 
that the listing is not legitimate in the same breath as you're trying 
to argue that all listings are in accordance with what the WWW page says 
because listings are only ever made legitimately.  You cannot have both 
at the same time.  The Clue which is not percolating through to you, 
that you're risibly trying to paint as inexperience, is that *the WWW 
page isn't necessarily the truth*.  Good grief, kid!   People don't 
always tell the truth on their WWW sites.  Indeed, people often 
*deliberately* don't explain what countermeasures they use against 
foes.  Nor, indeed, do they always stick to their own blacklisting 
policies.  Once you've had as much experience with these silly dances as 
I'm speaking from, you'll know that what I wrote above is the case.  
There's no reason to believe that the WWW page is necessarily the truth, 
and no reason to suppose that we know *any part at all* of the reason 
for PenTeleData deciding to blacklist an entire ISP.  I said that the 
truth is unknown, and it is.  For all you or I know, the postmaster at 
PenTeleData could have made a typing error, could have made an emergency 
listing bypassing published procedure to deal with something of the 
moment, or could be working to some quite different unpublished 
blacklisting policy.  Your assumption that the only possible chain of 
events that least to this sort of thing happening is the one chain of 
events laid out on a WWW page is simply naive, and your assumption that 
the chain of events laid out on the WWW page would have anything to do 
with me even were it the case is (a) foolish and not thought through at 
all (given that M. Dodel's mailbox clearly is *not* a honeypot), (b) 
professionally insulting (given the clear presumption on your part that 
I therefore must have sent some junk mail, since that's the stated 
prerequisite), and (c) sophomorically free from any thought of the fact 
that there are several million other people in the equation.

Back to comp.os.os2.beta | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: formatting to FAT32 Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@NTLWorld.COM> - 2011-03-30 12:36 +0100
  Re: formatting to FAT32 Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@NTLWorld.COM> - 2011-03-31 00:49 +0100
    Re: formatting to FAT32 Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@NTLWorld.COM> - 2011-03-31 17:04 +0100
      Re: formatting to FAT32 "Trevor Hemsley" <Trevor.Hemsley@mytrousers.ntlworld.com> - 2011-04-01 15:33 -0500
        Re: formatting to FAT32 Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@NTLWorld.COM> - 2011-04-02 02:17 +0100
      Re: formatting to FAT32 Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@NTLWorld.COM> - 2011-04-01 23:57 +0100
        Re: formatting to FAT32 Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@NTLWorld.COM> - 2011-04-05 19:12 +0100
  Re: formatting to FAT32 "Mark Dodel" <madodelNOSPAM@ptd.net> - 2011-03-31 15:23 -0500

csiph-web