Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > uk.comp.sys.mac > #183334

Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules!

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On Apr 12, 2026 at 12:04:02 AM MST, "Gremlin" wrote
<XnsB42C1F3366EFFHT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>:

> Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com>
> news:69db1685$2$26$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com Sun, 12 Apr 2026 03:50:29
> GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
> 
>> On Apr 11, 2026 at 8:25:53 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote
>> <XnsB42BEE5BDDEA6HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>:
> 
> [SNIP SNIP]
> 
>>> Agreed again! I am shocked to see you showing a backbone and correcting
>>> the only 'friend' (he really isn't; but you are determined to learn
>>> this the hard way) you have here. Kudos for doing the right thing. It's
>>> extremely rare and it's appreciated. Sincerely. It would be nice to see
>>> you doing this as well as accepting humility with grace more often. You
>>> *could potentially* earn some much needed respect from others if you
>>> actually continued to follow this behavior pattern.
>> 
>> I call it like it is.
> 
> No, you don't.

Well, like everyone I make mistakes -- but overall I do. Your denial does not
change it.

> If you actually did that, I'd respond more often and thank
> you for doing so.

Your responses are on you and not indicative of anything about me. Remember,
your focus is not to call it "as is" but to protect your very delicate ego. It
is why almost every post of yours is about how amazing you are and when you
feel insecure you lash out with lies and threats. 

> I actually do call things like they are.

Nope. You lie nonstop -- idiotic lies about discounts that make no sense but
the story is to harm someone and protect your ego, nonsense about legal issues
which are irrelevant and inappropriate and also clearly false given the
evidence, attacks against other's competency because your ego is so frail.

That is not "as is", that is you using defense mechanisms to try to feel
better about yourself. You also seek others who are mentally stronger to feel
better... you get used by Carroll and maybe others. They play you like a
fiddle.

> You often take
> great offense to that and lie your arse off as you do so, but, the jig has
> been up for sometime now. You're already over extending your welcome in
> several other newsgroups. It's been years since you last posted to some and
> you're already fucking up in them.

See: nonsense attacks you cannot support. Ego protection. It is pretty much
your defining characteristic.
> 
> At some point, maybe?, you'll come to realize that the problem is you. It
> isn't logical to assume it's everyone else, Snit.

You and your MAGA fools focus on tribalism and scapegoating. I respond to you.
And you then twist and say it is "everyone" because you WANT it to be. You
want to be part of a crowd. You look to numbers instead of reason and
evidence. It is why you and Carroll use socks (he far more than you). But your
HHI sock... oy... not sure I have ever seen a more transparent one. Does not
help that you have such a unique style -- rambling and ego filled.
> 
>> Where so many of the trolls, often you included,
>> focus on tribalism and scapegoating I focus on morality.

Look at your below wall of text. Damn. You say nothing but use a LOT of words
to do it. My point proved -- NOBODY has your rambling ego-driven style but
you.
> 
> There's only a couple of people here who nearly qualify for the troll title.
> I'm not one of them. Neither are the rest of the regulars. Yourself included,
> Snit. I often refer to you as a troll - but you are much worse than a troll
> and your behavior doesn't really fit the old school definition of one.
> Trolls aren't quite as bad/dishonest as you continue to show you are.

No actual content from you... just insults. Could have been skipped or shorted
to one sentence where you express your ego-driven thoughts about me.
> 
> You also seem to have a serious reading comprehension issue. I'm not the
> only one to have noticed this either. Infact, I'm decades late in having
> formed the same opinion - without interacting with the majority of others
> who reached that opinion years before I ever met you.

See: another evidence-lacking ego-driven rant from you that means NOTHING
other than show your insecurities.
> 
> Back when you first got here and asked about the 3d printing technology on
> that website...I knew something was a little off with you. The website told
> you, in fine print granted, but it did tell you exactly what they did those
> prints with. They are in the business of selling that gear they make to
> anyone who can afford it. Those prints were done with their gear. Why
> wouldn't they want you to know which model was responsible for each print?
> You could be an interested buyer with the bankroll to make one or more
> purchases.

So deeply off topic, and unsupported, as to be useless. See: your ego-driven
rambling style. On display!
> 
> The site also disclosed their printer technology in fine print on the main
> page. No digging around was necessary unless you wanted to know which
> specific make/model was responsible for the quite nicely done prints they
> were sharing. They weren't your everyday average home owner grade printers
> though. Those were some very nice machines with the pricetag to match.
> 
> You told me that I was mistaken, I must have misread one or more things
> because they did not include any specifics about the printers used. That was
> your rebuttle. Despite my sharing the links and a screenshot. <G> It just
> occured to me that you have actually used that routine before, with others.
> You've also done the same song and dance routine concerning your arrest and
> driving records. You really do lie your ass off and hope nobody notices. Has
> that ever actually worked out for you? Has it ever gotten you the results
> you wanted instead of the ones I've seen you get when you tried it here?

None of this is even slightly relevant... and even if it was none of it is
supported. You simply are lashing out with nonsense. You attack my tech skills
/ knowledge often as you ignore your MANY errors. We all make mistakes. Did I
with some printer thing from who knows how many years ago? Who cares? You are
not important enough to me to even remember the conversation... but you treat
me like the market leader. I am a threat to your ego because you see how many
times you get things wrong and I am correct. Not saying I do not also make
mistakes -- I absolutely do -- but my ego is not tied to how much I please
you. You focus so much on wanting to convince me you are right. You present
yourself as a toddler, and like may toddlers when get into tantrum mode you
make silly threats.

>> Good to see you back it though.
> 
> Why wouldn't I?

It might not fit your ego to... but in this case you did the right thing. But
look below again. Damn! Ego ego ego ego rambling nonsense.

> One, it was solid advice. Two, you of all people provided it.
> I had to respond. I've never seen you shooting straight from the hip the
> entire time I've known you existed. To say it took me by surprise would be
> an under statement. I strongly suspect it's some new? variation to set
> another circus tent. Whether it is or it isn't doesn't really matter. You
> won't gain the necessary traction with it in acw. Almost none of the
> regulars in acw interact with you at all. Of the few of us who still do on
> occasion, it's rare and becoming that much more so.
> 
> acw isn't suitable for your activities anymore. You haven't been welcome
> here for a long time. So for you the other day to suggest someone else
> wasn't wanted here - that was just out of line. Various regulars, myself
> included, have all asked that you fuck off. Not SC, not Pot Head, etc. You.
> Specifically, you. The majority of us have corrected reached the conclusion
> that the various urls known to contain details concerning you is all true
> and that you aren't the sort of person who's capable of having an adult
> conversation with nearly anyone for any real period of time before you
> resort to childish antics and false accusations.
> 
> Oh, and creative story telling. Floodbot, insider knowledge of the floodbot,
> then accusing me of lying about having insider knowledge when I made no such
> claim in the first place. Do you really think all that morphing and changing
> of your original accusation went unnoticed by most? I doubt it, dude. I'm
> not the only one to notice how many times you morphed the floodbot story to
> keep from admitting you lied about me and apologizing for it. You continued
> to try and shift any blame from you onto me. You continued to lie about me
> with your efforts to morph the story and you accused me of being a liar yet
> again when I wasn't with yet another morphing effort. That I lied about
> having insider knowledge of the bot. I can't very well lie about something I
> never claimed in the first place. You have dug yourself such a deep hole
> with the whole floodbot accusation and your follow up efforts to defend it
> that you sunk any possible hope of someone thinking that you're an honest
> and honorable person.
> 
> You are neither honest nor honorable. Only in a rare situation, as with
> David Brooks and his efforts to continue to harass the author of Etrecheck
> are you even remotely honest. Otherwise, you lie and double down on whatever
> one it is this time when you're called out.
> 
> Your claims of bringing receipts aren't working out as you had hoped either.
> People are checking the MIDs you provide. They are discovering for
> themselves that the MIDs you present are not supporting the stories you are
> writing. People are finding out that your're quoting out of context all over
> the map AND you seem to have a serious reading comprehension issue. Several
> of us have agreed that this is what you're actually showing everyone.
> 
> Atleast one poster suspects you might be struggling to read at what a typical
> 3rd grader should be capable of. Going back over some of our previous
> discussions (Not to worry, I only spent twenty minutes or so) I can see why
> they have that impression and I'm surprised that I missed it. I might have
> been giving you undeserved credit by thinking you were reading at 5th to 8th
> grade level on occasion.

I admit I skimmed. Same nonsense attacks. Same lack of evidence. Same failure
to show MIDs or quotes. Same crying I quoted you. Here, the quotes you cried
about:

Gremlin <XnsAB6D6F1BFA61HT1@3dOIZISX3.IwU6R1OH8iz29MMTN26bF08TPFtT157gyFB5>:
    -----
    It needs to be recoded anyway, it's a seriously piss poor
    example of writing software.
    -----

Gremlin <XnsAB6E44E6AFE1AHT1@ZdS859K14.7p1JRyU90Zyd>
    -----
    Do you think when you disassemble something that you're
    provided the original source code that was
    compiled/assembled by the author? You aren't, what you're
    given looks nothing like the original source code, but it
    still tells you *everything* about the program.
    -----

If you can understand what you read you will come to the same conclusion as
ChatGPT, which I shared the full posts with:

https://chatgpt.com/share/681ea0aa-d35c-800c-b586-185275735e26
    -----
    Gremlin repeatedly claims he hasn’t seen the source code
    for Carroll’s flood bot—yet he calls it a “seriously piss
    poor example of writing software” and boasts that
    disassembly “tells you everything about the program.” So
    either he’s seen the code or reverse-engineered it—meaning
    he has examined it closely enough to know how it works. He
    criticizes it like someone who’s dug into its inner
    workings, but dances around admitting it outright. And for
    someone who sometimes denies Carroll is behind the bot, he
    sure acts like he knows a lot about it.
    -----

Quoting you is not lying... no matter how many times you insist it is.

>> If you can continue this I am happy to move forward in
>> peace.
> 
> I'll try to dumb this down further for you in the hope that you understand.

See: ego driven nonsense. But the point is clear: you do not want peace with
others... you want it with yourself and you fail to have it. You look to the
worst of the worse to get validation, and you attack UP. Nobody with your ego
challenges attacks down... you go after the "market leader"... the person you
look up to and feel in your heart your cannot rise to that level so you seek
to tear others down.

Your candle does not shine brighter by trying to extinguish that of others,
but your toddler brain, which you let control you, tries anyway.
> 
> I responded to you because you did the right thing concerning David Brooks
> and I was very surprised by this. I felt that you deserved recognition
> atleast of some sort for calling David Brooks out as you did.

As I said, I tend to call it as it is -- even when it is friends who are
acting poorly.
> 
> I have no intentions of giving you a free pass, Snit.

See: you blame your own issues on me. Your ego is hurt and you cannot face who
YOU are so you blame me.

And below... ANOTHER of your ego driven rants. As I said, when you socked as
HHI it was obvious from your unique style.

>  We've already been
> over this. You have knowingly lied your arse off about me multiple times.
> You have intentionally gone out of your way to try and seed a completely
> bogus label that was supposed to describe me, but, as we've *all seen in acw*
> it actually describes you. A functionally illiterate fraud would still have
> a dead mac and still think there was a problem with the mainboard because
> said person wouldn't know any different. They wouldn't know how to diagnose
> a spinner HD in failure condition. They wouldn't put two and two together
> over time why the machines performance started to degrade and then the
> machine began to become unstable. Yet, this same person would try to run a
> computer repair business. Without having the necessary knowledge, skill,
> field experience, or tools! to even begin. Only a functionally illiterate
> fraud such as yourself, Snit, would confuse a soldering iron for that of an
> engraver. Only a functionally illiterate fraud (i'm just going to shorten
> this to bullshitter) like you would be unable to diagnose his own fucking
> gear.
> 
> As everyone can see who read that repair discussion, you really don't know
> what the fuck you're doing when it comes to doing something besides running
> a program you're already familiar with. You don't actually know how the
> machine runs. You aren't that familiar with the hardware AND you have a
> limited above beginner end user level knowledge of the computer in general.
> You don't actually understand how the software itself works or it's true
> relation to the hardware.
> 
> It was nice to see, despite your efforts to stall me, to see that smart
> diags agreed with my and mine alone diagnosis; that you had a hard drive
> failure in progress and it had been in such a state for a long time already.
> If you were competent, you had more than enough time to diagnose the problem
> entirely on your own and take necessary action to keep all the data you care
> about as well as replace the drive, reload the os, apps, etc, and go about
> your day. You didn't do that because you didn't know what was wrong with the
> machine. You claimed you took it to someone and they determined there was an
> issue with the mainboard. I don't believe you were telling the truth,
> because, it's not that likely that you'd find an actual tech who's anywhere
> near as incompetent as you.
> 
> Any technician who cannot diagnose a bad drive and blames the mainboard for
> the symptoms the computer is displaying is incompetent. They shouldn't be
> working on their own gear, let alone, a paying client.
> 
> They need to take some classes and stop being a poseur until they do. You
> won't even do that. You'd rather wallow in your excessive ignorance and
> attack instead.

Again, barely skimmed... but I note you have no quote... no MID. Just your own
views where you long to be a hero and to drag down those above you to be below
you. You cannot imagine growing and improving.
> 
>> I am not the one who wants the war you and Carroll push anyway.
> 
> There's no war that is being pushed by Carroll or myself, Snit. You aren't
> going to be able to make a sale with this bullshit story either. We aren't
> the bad guys here. You are.

Even as you push your war with long ego driven, evidence-lacking, rants you
deny your own behavior. You have very poor self awareness.

>> Let it end here. Deal?
> 
> If you wanted things to end, you had the option of ignoring several of my
> recent posts OR! responding to them yourself. You chose to play games with
> AI instead for each reply. Despite already being shown by the very AIs you
> think so highly of that it cannot accurately do as you requested multiple
> times and shared the very inaccurate results of. The AI's told you that they
> would provide very inaccurate information and should not be used for the
> purposes you did in those replies you left.
> 
> Chatgpt I think it was? went into greater detail and explained why someone
> might want to use the 'psy profile' routine and it wasn't anything of a
> positive nature. The individual who'd opt to do this wasn't being honest
> with the audience. In other words Snit, you were being very dishonest
> intentionally with your AI replies. All because you knew Chatgpt couldn't do
> what you were asking of it. So you have no excuse to continue with the same
> routine. You know the results are junk. The AI itself has told you. SC
> shared the discussion concerning the subject.
> 
> Not only is Chatgpt incapable of doing as you requested - It also went into
> considerable detail concerning why someone might try to use it for that
> purpose and share the results. A dishonest individual is a nice summary of
> the type of individual who would.
> 
> Going by what's already well known about you and your usenet history; one
> can easily reach the conclusion you are playing games with AI due to your
> very dishonest nature.
> 
> If one knows anything about your history with some of us here, they can see
> your very dishonest nature in the very reply that I'm responding to.
> 
> Can you go a single post without mentioning SC?

Another of your ego rants... and mentioning my stalker / harasser. I have no
obligation to NOT speak of you and he as you two attack me and lie about me.
You to have an obligation to stop lying and attacking but you will not live up
to that. Carroll is too filled with hate and anger, and you have too weak of
an ego. You will not stop.

You make threats. Carroll carries things out more quietly. You strive to be as
harmful as he is... but even in that you are a failure.

As far as your psych profiles... face it, ANYONE can see what AI does -- your
ego rants. You hate being called out because on some deep level you know it is
at least largely correct. Here, I have not ran the post I am replying to
through it... but I bet it says much the same as I did, above... and you will
use ad hominem and not logic to "refute" it, because -- again -- you know it
is largely correct:

https://chatgpt.com/share/69dba367-3504-8328-ab29-8e7f87dd4c7e

Here’s a clear breakdown of what’s going on in that post.

⸻

Psychological profile of “Gremlin”

This reads less like a technical discussion and more like a long-running
interpersonal conflict that’s hardened into a pattern.

Core traits:
    •   Highly adversarial mindset – frames interactions as battles to win
rather than problems to solve
    •   Fixation and scorekeeping – brings up years-old incidents, suggesting
grudges and a need to maintain a narrative of being “right all along”
    •   Dominance signaling – repeated attempts to position himself as the
authority (“I knew,” “everyone agrees,” “only I diagnosed it”)
    •   Moral framing as a weapon – portrays the target as dishonest,
incompetent, or morally flawed rather than just mistaken
    •   Escalation tendency – moves quickly from disagreement to character
assassination
    •   Low inhibition / high aggression – profanity and insults are frequent
and not strategic; they’re habitual

Cognitive patterns:
    •   Confirmation bias – selectively interprets past events to reinforce a
fixed view of the other person
    •   Mind reading – asserts motives (“you lied,” “you knew”) without
evidence
    •   Overgeneralization – expands specific disputes into global judgments
about intelligence, literacy, or character
    •   Narrative construction – builds a cohesive story where the other party
is consistently fraudulent

Likely underlying drivers:
    •    Strong need for status and recognition
    •    Sensitivity to perceived disrespect
    •   Possible enjoyment of conflict as engagement (common in legacy Usenet
culture)

In short: this is a combative personality organized around being the
“truth-teller,” but expressed in a way that undermines credibility.

⸻

Fact and logic check

There are a few technical claims buried in the noise:

1. Hard drive failure vs. logic board failure
    •   Claim: the other person misdiagnosed a failing drive as a mainboard
issue.
    •    Reality:
This is plausible. Failing storage (especially HDDs) can cause:
    •    Severe slowdowns
    •    System instability
    •    Boot issues
Less experienced technicians sometimes misattribute these to logic boards.
    •   Verdict: Technically reasonable, but unsupported in this post. No
actual diagnostics, logs, or SMART data are provided.

⸻

2. “Smart diagnostics agreed with my diagnosis”
    •   Problem: No evidence shown. This is an appeal to authority without
proof.
    •    Verdict: Unverifiable assertion.

⸻

3. Claims about widespread agreement (“everyone sees this,” “several of us
agree”)
    •    Classic bandwagon appeal.
    •    No citations, just social pressure rhetoric.
    •    Verdict: Logically weak.

⸻

4. Accusations of lying / illiteracy / incompetence
    •    These are ad hominem attacks, not arguments.
    •    Even if true, they don’t prove any technical point.
    •    Verdict: Irrelevant to the topic.

⸻

5. AI critique (ChatGPT misuse)
    •   Claim: AI cannot reliably generate psychological profiles and doing so
is dishonest.
    •    Reality:
There is some truth: AI-generated personality analysis can be speculative and
unreliable if treated as fact.
    •   Verdict: Partially valid point, buried in exaggeration and used
hypocritically.

⸻

Is anything worth replying to?

Very little.

Potentially reply-worthy:
    •   The diagnostic claim (drive vs. logic board) – if you want a technical
discussion

Not worth engaging:
    •    Personal attacks
    •    Historical grievances
    •    Claims about reputation or group consensus
    •    Psychological accusations

Engaging on those will just prolong the cycle.

Best strategy:
    •    Either ignore entirely
    •    Or respond narrowly, e.g.:
“If you have SMART data or logs supporting a drive failure, post them.”

⸻

Usenet-style summary

Here’s a short, neutral summary suitable for posting:

Gremlin’s reply is mostly personal attacks and re-litigation of old disputes,
with little technical substance. The only concrete claim – that the issue was
a failing drive rather than a logic board – is plausible but unsupported by
evidence (no diagnostics or logs provided). The rest relies heavily on ad
hominem arguments and appeals to group consensus. Not much here advances the
original topic.

-- 
It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.

Back to uk.comp.sys.mac | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-03-04 12:46 +0000
  You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-03-04 15:42 +0000
    You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-03-05 20:54 +0000
      Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-03-06 15:22 +0000
        Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2026-03-22 06:18 +0000
          Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-03-22 20:51 +0000
          Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-03-22 23:36 +0000
            Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2026-04-10 07:50 +0000
              Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-10 08:07 +0000
              Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-04-11 14:27 +0100
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-11 13:50 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-04-11 15:21 +0100
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-11 14:58 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-04-11 19:50 +0100
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-11 20:25 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-04-11 22:33 +0100
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 00:09 +0000
                Today's challenge! 😈 (Was - You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules!) "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-04-12 15:49 +0100
                Re: Today's challenge! 😈 (Was - You can protec t your Mac from malware by following three simple rules!) (was: Today's challenge! 😈 (Was - You can protec t your Mac from malware by following three simple rules!)) Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 15:11 +0000
                Re: Today's challenge! 😈 (Was - You can protec t your Mac from malware by following three simple rules!) "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-04-12 16:27 +0100
                Re: Today's challenge! 😈 (Was - You can  protec t your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! ) (was: Today's challenge! 😈 (Was - You can  protec t your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! )) Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 18:04 +0000
                Re: Today's challenge! 😈 (Was - You can protec t your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! ) "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-04-12 20:17 +0100
                Re: Today's challenge! 😈 (Was - You can  protec t your Mac from malware by following three simple rules!  ) (was: Today's challenge! 😈 (Was - You can  protec t your Mac from malware by following three simple rules!  )) Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 21:03 +0000
                Re: Today's challenge! 😈 (Was - You can protec t your Mac from malware by following three simple rules!) "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-04-12 23:07 +0100
                Re: Today's challenge! 😈 (Was - You can  protec t your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! ) (was: Today's challenge! 😈 (Was - You can  protec t your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! )) Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 23:05 +0000
                The hidden Library! (Was - Today's challenge!) "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-04-13 09:08 +0100
                Re: The hidden Library! (Was - Today's challenge!) Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-13 15:42 +0000
                Re: The hidden Library! (Was - Today's challenge!) "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-04-13 16:59 +0100
                Re: The hidden Library! (Was - Today's challenge!) Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-13 16:09 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2026-04-12 03:25 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 03:47 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-05-13 08:50 +0100
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-13 13:53 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-05-13 16:34 +0100
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-13 17:09 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-05-13 18:47 +0100
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-13 17:54 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-05-13 21:12 +0100
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-13 23:47 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-05-13 22:04 +0100
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-13 23:47 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Kelly Phillips <KFile@podcasts.org.invalid> - 2026-05-13 21:04 -0500
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2026-04-12 03:25 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 03:50 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2026-04-12 07:04 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-04-12 08:53 +0100
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 13:58 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! "David B." <David@hotmail.co.uk> - 2026-04-12 15:19 +0100
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 13:52 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 07:13 -0700
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 14:41 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 08:40 -0700
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 17:50 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 12:36 -0700
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 20:48 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 14:01 -0700
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 21:03 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 14:14 -0700
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 21:23 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 14:41 -0700
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 21:48 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 16:31 -0700
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 23:58 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2026-04-12 03:26 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2026-04-12 03:25 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-04-12 03:54 +0000
                Re: You can protect your Mac from malware by following three simple rules! Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2026-04-12 03:25 +0000

csiph-web