Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #327971 > unrolled thread

OT: OK, what changed?

Started bySteve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com>
First post2015-10-23 12:10 -0700
Last post2015-10-30 07:55 -0700
Articles 20 on this page of 101 — 9 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy


Contents

  OT: OK, what changed? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 12:10 -0700
    Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-23 21:14 +0000
      Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-23 14:35 -0700
        Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-23 21:58 +0000
          Re: OT: OK, what changed? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 15:16 -0700
            Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-23 22:46 +0000
              Re: OT: OK, what changed? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 15:53 -0700
                Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-23 22:57 +0000
                  Re: OT: OK, what changed? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 16:11 -0700
                    Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-23 23:46 +0000
                      Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-23 21:10 -0700
                  Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-23 21:14 -0700
                    Re: OT: OK, what changed? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 21:58 -0700
              Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-23 20:57 -0700
                Re: OT: OK, what changed? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 21:55 -0700
      Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-23 14:40 -0700
        Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-23 21:53 +0000
          Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-23 15:34 -0700
            Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-23 22:43 +0000
              Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-23 20:52 -0700
                Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-24 18:06 +0000
                  Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-24 12:17 -0700
                    Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-24 23:03 +0000
                      Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-24 16:27 -0700
                        Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-24 23:41 +0000
                          Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-24 16:57 -0700
                            Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-25 00:11 +0000
                              Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-24 17:17 -0700
                                Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-25 00:25 +0000
                                  Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-24 17:47 -0700
                                  Re: OT: OK, what changed? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-25 12:54 -0400
                                    Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-25 10:36 -0700
                                    Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-25 18:23 +0000
                                      Re: OT: OK, what changed? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-25 14:32 -0400
                                        Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-25 18:46 +0000
                                          Re: OT: OK, what changed? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-25 16:45 -0400
                                            Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-25 21:08 +0000
                                      Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-25 11:45 -0700
                                      Re: OT: OK, what changed? Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-25 14:54 -0400
                                        Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-25 19:18 +0000
                                          Re: OT: OK, what changed? Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-25 15:23 -0400
                                            Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-25 19:34 +0000
                                              Re: OT: OK, what changed? Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-25 15:37 -0400
                                                Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-25 19:58 +0000
                                                  Re: OT: OK, what changed? Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-25 16:01 -0400
                                                    Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-25 20:11 +0000
                                                      Re: OT: OK, what changed? Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-25 16:11 -0400
                                                        Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-25 20:27 +0000
                                                          Re: OT: OK, what changed? Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-25 16:27 -0400
                                                            Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-25 20:38 +0000
                                                              Re: OT: OK, what changed? Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-25 16:47 -0400
                                                                Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-25 21:02 +0000
                                                                  Re: OT: OK, what changed? Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-25 17:08 -0400
                                                                    Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-25 21:31 +0000
                                                                      Re: OT: OK, what changed? Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-25 17:33 -0400
                                                                        Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-25 21:51 +0000
                                                                          Re: OT: OK, what changed? Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-25 18:07 -0400
                                                                            Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-25 22:28 +0000
                                                                              Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-25 17:17 -0700
                                                                          Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-25 17:32 -0700
                                                                      Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-25 17:20 -0700
                                                                  Re: OT: OK, what changed? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-25 17:28 -0400
                                                                    Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-25 21:37 +0000
                                                                    Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-25 17:21 -0700
                                                              Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-25 17:15 -0700
                                                          Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-25 17:14 -0700
                                                            Re: OT: OK, what changed? Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-25 20:23 -0400
                                                      Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-25 17:13 -0700
                                                    Re: OT: OK, what changed? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-25 17:25 -0400
                                                      Re: OT: OK, what changed? Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-25 17:30 -0400
                                                        Re: OT: OK, what changed? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-25 20:06 -0400
                                                          Re: OT: OK, what changed? Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-25 20:12 -0400
                                                      Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-25 17:22 -0700
                                                  Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-25 17:11 -0700
                                                    Re: OT: OK, what changed? Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-25 20:13 -0400
                                                      Re: OT: OK, what changed? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 08:44 -0700
                                                    Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-26 00:39 +0000
                                                      Re: OT: OK, what changed? Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-25 20:42 -0400
                                                        Re: OT: OK, what changed? Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-25 20:58 -0400
                                                        Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-26 03:53 +0000
                                                      Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-25 17:46 -0700
                                                        Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-26 03:56 +0000
                                                          Re: OT: OK, what changed? Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-25 23:57 -0400
                                                            Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-26 04:46 +0000
                                                              Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-25 22:22 -0700
                                                                Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-26 05:43 +0000
                                                                  Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-26 13:05 -0700
                                                          Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-25 21:11 -0700
                                                            Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-26 04:48 +0000
                                                              Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-25 22:27 -0700
                                                                Re: OT: OK, what changed? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-26 05:51 +0000
                                                                  Re: OT: OK, what changed? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-26 13:05 -0700
            Re: OT: OK, what changed? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 15:47 -0700
        Re: OT: OK, what changed? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 15:10 -0700
          Re: OT: OK, what changed? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-27 22:46 -0400
            Re: OT: OK, what changed? Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2015-10-29 00:31 +0000
              Re: OT: OK, what changed? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-29 07:10 -0500
                Re: OT: OK, what changed? Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 08:36 -0400
                Re: OT: OK, what changed? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-29 14:46 +0100
            Re: OT: OK, what changed? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-29 09:41 -0400
              Re: OT: OK, what changed? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 07:55 -0700

Page 1 of 6  [1] 2 3 4 5 6  Next page →


#327971 — OT: OK, what changed?

FromSteve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-23 12:10 -0700
SubjectOT: OK, what changed?
Message-ID<c271285b-f733-4db7-8303-61849e46a4be@googlegroups.com>
I've read a lot of posts from the last month or so and I notice what seems to be a pattern where some of the people who were often seen +1-ing (of a sort)  Snit's trolling are no longer doing it, at least, not nearly to the same extent. I don't think anyone can doubt that DFS and Ezekiel are the poster boys for anti-Snit engagement. While they might post a quote of his for some reason or other, they rarely (if ever) acknowledge his existence and several of you appear to be doing the same, at least, to a greater extent than previously.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#327992

Fromowl <owl@rooftop.invalid>
Date2015-10-23 21:14 +0000
Message-ID<sdfmnbjc83.03pp@rooftop.invalid>
In reply to#327971
Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've read a lot of posts from the last month or so and I notice what seems to be a pattern where some of the people who were often seen +1-ing (of a sort)  Snit's trolling are no longer doing it, at least, not nearly to the same extent. I don't think anyone can doubt that DFS and Ezekiel are the poster boys for anti-Snit engagement. While they might post a quote of his for some reason or other, they rarely (if ever) acknowledge his existence and several of you appear to be doing the same, at least, to a greater extent than previously.

Well, I haven't been feeding him lately.  I've had him on a 30-day
plonk, which seems to have expired about two hours ago.  It'll probably
end up going permafrost though, because I doubt he'll ever cease to be
a jackass and learn how to take a beating like a man.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#327995

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2015-10-23 14:35 -0700
Message-ID<D24FF615.61362%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#327992
On 10/23/15, 2:14 PM, in article sdfmnbjc83.03pp@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I've read a lot of posts from the last month or so and I notice what seems to
>> be a pattern where some of the people who were often seen +1-ing (of a sort)
>> Snit's trolling are no longer doing it, at least, not nearly to the same
>> extent. I don't think anyone can doubt that DFS and Ezekiel are the poster
>> boys for anti-Snit engagement. While they might post a quote of his for some
>> reason or other, they rarely (if ever) acknowledge his existence and several
>> of you appear to be doing the same, at least, to a greater extent than
>> previously.
> 
> Well, I haven't been feeding him lately.  I've had him on a 30-day
> plonk, which seems to have expired about two hours ago.  It'll probably
> end up going permafrost though, because I doubt he'll ever cease to be
> a jackass and learn how to take a beating like a man.
> 

LOL! I am not good at backing down from bullies - I stick to evidence and
just keep repeating it in the face of lies. Those who troll tend to hate it.


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328009

Fromowl <owl@rooftop.invalid>
Date2015-10-23 21:58 +0000
Message-ID<sfmcjx93.adjf9@rooftop.invalid>
In reply to#327995
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 10/23/15, 2:14 PM, in article sdfmnbjc83.03pp@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I've read a lot of posts from the last month or so and I notice what seems to
>>> be a pattern where some of the people who were often seen +1-ing (of a sort)
>>> Snit's trolling are no longer doing it, at least, not nearly to the same
>>> extent. I don't think anyone can doubt that DFS and Ezekiel are the poster
>>> boys for anti-Snit engagement. While they might post a quote of his for some
>>> reason or other, they rarely (if ever) acknowledge his existence and several
>>> of you appear to be doing the same, at least, to a greater extent than
>>> previously.
>> 
>> Well, I haven't been feeding him lately.  I've had him on a 30-day
>> plonk, which seems to have expired about two hours ago.  It'll probably
>> end up going permafrost though, because I doubt he'll ever cease to be
>> a jackass and learn how to take a beating like a man.
>> 
> 
> LOL! I am not good at backing down from bullies - I stick to evidence and
> just keep repeating it in the face of lies. Those who troll tend to hate it.
> 

LOL!  Two replies to the same post.  Smack! 
 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328020

FromSteve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-23 15:16 -0700
Message-ID<7e7741ac-df2c-4c50-83e7-b63b9188efeb@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#328009
On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 3:58:12 PM UTC-6, owl wrote:
> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> > On 10/23/15, 2:14 PM, in article sdfmnbjc83.03pp@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> > 
> >> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> I've read a lot of posts from the last month or so and I notice what seems to
> >>> be a pattern where some of the people who were often seen +1-ing (of a sort)
> >>> Snit's trolling are no longer doing it, at least, not nearly to the same
> >>> extent. I don't think anyone can doubt that DFS and Ezekiel are the poster
> >>> boys for anti-Snit engagement. While they might post a quote of his for some
> >>> reason or other, they rarely (if ever) acknowledge his existence and several
> >>> of you appear to be doing the same, at least, to a greater extent than
> >>> previously.
> >> 
> >> Well, I haven't been feeding him lately.  I've had him on a 30-day
> >> plonk, which seems to have expired about two hours ago.  It'll probably
> >> end up going permafrost though, because I doubt he'll ever cease to be
> >> a jackass and learn how to take a beating like a man.
> >> 
> > 
> > LOL! I am not good at backing down from bullies - I stick to evidence and
> > just keep repeating it in the face of lies. Those who troll tend to hate it.
> > 
> 
> LOL!  Two replies to the same post.  Smack!

I killed the key I had because it was verifying as used from one of the 'fretwizzen' acct. forgeries. It had nothing added to it, I assume that couldn't be done... but that it was passing at all seems kind of strange to me. Isn't that the whole point of that system?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328036

Fromowl <owl@rooftop.invalid>
Date2015-10-23 22:46 +0000
Message-ID<adf.eif9@rooftop.invalid>
In reply to#328020
Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 3:58:12 PM UTC-6, owl wrote:
>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> > On 10/23/15, 2:14 PM, in article sdfmnbjc83.03pp@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>> > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>> > 
>> >> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> I've read a lot of posts from the last month or so and I notice what seems to
>> >>> be a pattern where some of the people who were often seen +1-ing (of a sort)
>> >>> Snit's trolling are no longer doing it, at least, not nearly to the same
>> >>> extent. I don't think anyone can doubt that DFS and Ezekiel are the poster
>> >>> boys for anti-Snit engagement. While they might post a quote of his for some
>> >>> reason or other, they rarely (if ever) acknowledge his existence and several
>> >>> of you appear to be doing the same, at least, to a greater extent than
>> >>> previously.
>> >> 
>> >> Well, I haven't been feeding him lately.  I've had him on a 30-day
>> >> plonk, which seems to have expired about two hours ago.  It'll probably
>> >> end up going permafrost though, because I doubt he'll ever cease to be
>> >> a jackass and learn how to take a beating like a man.
>> >> 
>> > 
>> > LOL! I am not good at backing down from bullies - I stick to evidence and
>> > just keep repeating it in the face of lies. Those who troll tend to hate it.
>> > 
>> 
>> LOL!  Two replies to the same post.  Smack!
> 
> I killed the key I had because it was verifying as used from one of the 'fretwizzen' acct. forgeries. It had nothing added to it, I assume that couldn't be done... but that it was passing at all seems kind of strange to me. Isn't that the whole point of that system?

It was verifying because entire signed posts were copied and re-posted, not
because anyone gained access to your private key.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328041

FromSteve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-23 15:53 -0700
Message-ID<6ae196ed-00e8-4e08-8397-7d172431662e@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#328036
On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 4:46:57 PM UTC-6, owl wrote:
> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 3:58:12 PM UTC-6, owl wrote:
> >> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> > On 10/23/15, 2:14 PM, in article sdfmnbjc83.03pp@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> >> > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> >> > 
> >> >> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> I've read a lot of posts from the last month or so and I notice what seems to
> >> >>> be a pattern where some of the people who were often seen +1-ing (of a sort)
> >> >>> Snit's trolling are no longer doing it, at least, not nearly to the same
> >> >>> extent. I don't think anyone can doubt that DFS and Ezekiel are the poster
> >> >>> boys for anti-Snit engagement. While they might post a quote of his for some
> >> >>> reason or other, they rarely (if ever) acknowledge his existence and several
> >> >>> of you appear to be doing the same, at least, to a greater extent than
> >> >>> previously.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Well, I haven't been feeding him lately.  I've had him on a 30-day
> >> >> plonk, which seems to have expired about two hours ago.  It'll probably
> >> >> end up going permafrost though, because I doubt he'll ever cease to be
> >> >> a jackass and learn how to take a beating like a man.
> >> >> 
> >> > 
> >> > LOL! I am not good at backing down from bullies - I stick to evidence and
> >> > just keep repeating it in the face of lies. Those who troll tend to hate it.
> >> > 
> >> 
> >> LOL!  Two replies to the same post.  Smack!
> > 
> > I killed the key I had because it was verifying as used from one of the 'fretwizzen' acct. forgeries. It had nothing added to it, I assume that couldn't be done... but that it was passing at all seems kind of strange to me. Isn't that the whole point of that system?
> 
> It was verifying because entire signed posts were copied and re-posted, not
> because anyone gained access to your private key.

I didn't notice that, I only looked at one... but I didn't figure access was actually obtained. Too bad there wasn't a way for it to be tied to the post's header info.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328044

Fromowl <owl@rooftop.invalid>
Date2015-10-23 22:57 +0000
Message-ID<asdfv.k9z93@rooftop.invalid>
In reply to#328041
Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 4:46:57 PM UTC-6, owl wrote:
>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 3:58:12 PM UTC-6, owl wrote:
>> >> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> >> > On 10/23/15, 2:14 PM, in article sdfmnbjc83.03pp@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>> >> > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>> >> > 
>> >> >> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>> I've read a lot of posts from the last month or so and I notice what seems to
>> >> >>> be a pattern where some of the people who were often seen +1-ing (of a sort)
>> >> >>> Snit's trolling are no longer doing it, at least, not nearly to the same
>> >> >>> extent. I don't think anyone can doubt that DFS and Ezekiel are the poster
>> >> >>> boys for anti-Snit engagement. While they might post a quote of his for some
>> >> >>> reason or other, they rarely (if ever) acknowledge his existence and several
>> >> >>> of you appear to be doing the same, at least, to a greater extent than
>> >> >>> previously.
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Well, I haven't been feeding him lately.  I've had him on a 30-day
>> >> >> plonk, which seems to have expired about two hours ago.  It'll probably
>> >> >> end up going permafrost though, because I doubt he'll ever cease to be
>> >> >> a jackass and learn how to take a beating like a man.
>> >> >> 
>> >> > 
>> >> > LOL! I am not good at backing down from bullies - I stick to evidence and
>> >> > just keep repeating it in the face of lies. Those who troll tend to hate it.
>> >> > 
>> >> 
>> >> LOL!  Two replies to the same post.  Smack!
>> > 
>> > I killed the key I had because it was verifying as used from one of the 'fretwizzen' acct. forgeries. It had nothing added to it, I assume that couldn't be done... but that it was passing at all seems kind of strange to me. Isn't that the whole point of that system?
>> 
>> It was verifying because entire signed posts were copied and re-posted, not
>> because anyone gained access to your private key.
> 
> I didn't notice that, I only looked at one... but I didn't figure access was actually obtained. Too bad there wasn't a way for it to be tied to the post's header info.

Like we discussed when this was happening before, the solution is to include
enough context within the signed portion to make a repost obvious. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328045

FromSteve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-23 16:11 -0700
Message-ID<c559d1ad-4853-4c2c-ab7e-517d4ad19e5f@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#328044
On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 4:57:30 PM UTC-6, owl wrote:
> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 4:46:57 PM UTC-6, owl wrote:
> >> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 3:58:12 PM UTC-6, owl wrote:
> >> >> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> >> > On 10/23/15, 2:14 PM, in article sdfmnbjc83.03pp@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> >> >> > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> >> >> > 
> >> >> >> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>> I've read a lot of posts from the last month or so and I notice what seems to
> >> >> >>> be a pattern where some of the people who were often seen +1-ing (of a sort)
> >> >> >>> Snit's trolling are no longer doing it, at least, not nearly to the same
> >> >> >>> extent. I don't think anyone can doubt that DFS and Ezekiel are the poster
> >> >> >>> boys for anti-Snit engagement. While they might post a quote of his for some
> >> >> >>> reason or other, they rarely (if ever) acknowledge his existence and several
> >> >> >>> of you appear to be doing the same, at least, to a greater extent than
> >> >> >>> previously.
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> Well, I haven't been feeding him lately.  I've had him on a 30-day
> >> >> >> plonk, which seems to have expired about two hours ago.  It'll probably
> >> >> >> end up going permafrost though, because I doubt he'll ever cease to be
> >> >> >> a jackass and learn how to take a beating like a man.
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > LOL! I am not good at backing down from bullies - I stick to evidence and
> >> >> > just keep repeating it in the face of lies. Those who troll tend to hate it.
> >> >> > 
> >> >> 
> >> >> LOL!  Two replies to the same post.  Smack!
> >> > 
> >> > I killed the key I had because it was verifying as used from one of the 'fretwizzen' acct. forgeries. It had nothing added to it, I assume that couldn't be done... but that it was passing at all seems kind of strange to me. Isn't that the whole point of that system?
> >> 
> >> It was verifying because entire signed posts were copied and re-posted, not
> >> because anyone gained access to your private key.
> > 
> > I didn't notice that, I only looked at one... but I didn't figure access was actually obtained. Too bad there wasn't a way for it to be tied to the post's header info.
> 
> Like we discussed when this was happening before, the solution is to include
> enough context within the signed portion to make a repost obvious.

The entire post is probably the only way and, if it's signed... by me, someone else or multiple people, seems it'd get awfully cluttered.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328051

Fromowl <owl@rooftop.invalid>
Date2015-10-23 23:46 +0000
Message-ID<adsfammb9.30a@rooftop.invalid>
In reply to#328045
Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 4:57:30 PM UTC-6, owl wrote:
>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 4:46:57 PM UTC-6, owl wrote:
>> >> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 3:58:12 PM UTC-6, owl wrote:
>> >> >> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> >> >> > On 10/23/15, 2:14 PM, in article sdfmnbjc83.03pp@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>> >> >> > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>> >> >> > 
>> >> >> >> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >>> I've read a lot of posts from the last month or so and I notice what seems to
>> >> >> >>> be a pattern where some of the people who were often seen +1-ing (of a sort)
>> >> >> >>> Snit's trolling are no longer doing it, at least, not nearly to the same
>> >> >> >>> extent. I don't think anyone can doubt that DFS and Ezekiel are the poster
>> >> >> >>> boys for anti-Snit engagement. While they might post a quote of his for some
>> >> >> >>> reason or other, they rarely (if ever) acknowledge his existence and several
>> >> >> >>> of you appear to be doing the same, at least, to a greater extent than
>> >> >> >>> previously.
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> Well, I haven't been feeding him lately.  I've had him on a 30-day
>> >> >> >> plonk, which seems to have expired about two hours ago.  It'll probably
>> >> >> >> end up going permafrost though, because I doubt he'll ever cease to be
>> >> >> >> a jackass and learn how to take a beating like a man.
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> > 
>> >> >> > LOL! I am not good at backing down from bullies - I stick to evidence and
>> >> >> > just keep repeating it in the face of lies. Those who troll tend to hate it.
>> >> >> > 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> LOL!  Two replies to the same post.  Smack!
>> >> > 
>> >> > I killed the key I had because it was verifying as used from one of the 'fretwizzen' acct. forgeries. It had nothing added to it, I assume that couldn't be done... but that it was passing at all seems kind of strange to me. Isn't that the whole point of that system?
>> >> 
>> >> It was verifying because entire signed posts were copied and re-posted, not
>> >> because anyone gained access to your private key.
>> > 
>> > I didn't notice that, I only looked at one... but I didn't figure access was actually obtained. Too bad there wasn't a way for it to be tied to the post's header info.
>> 
>> Like we discussed when this was happening before, the solution is to include
>> enough context within the signed portion to make a repost obvious.
> 
> The entire post is probably the only way and, if it's signed... by me, someone else or multiple people, seems it'd get awfully cluttered.

You could also trim at will and just include the Message-ID of the
replied-to post within the signed portion.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328094

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2015-10-23 21:10 -0700
Message-ID<D25052B0.61435%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#328051
On 10/23/15, 4:46 PM, in article adsfammb9.30a@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

>>> Like we discussed when this was happening before, the solution is to include
>>> enough context within the signed portion to make a repost obvious.
>> 
>> The entire post is probably the only way and, if it's signed... by me,
>> someone else or multiple people, seems it'd get awfully cluttered.
> 
> You could also trim at will and just include the Message-ID of the
> replied-to post within the signed portion.

Or he could just use one account or, when he uses multiple ones, be honest
about it.

Maybe the word "could" is too strong there - it implies some level of self
control by him.


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328098

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2015-10-23 21:14 -0700
Message-ID<D25053BF.6143B%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#328044
On 10/23/15, 3:57 PM, in article asdfv.k9z93@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

>>>> I killed the key I had because it was verifying as used from one of the
>>>> 'fretwizzen' acct. forgeries. It had nothing added to it, I assume that
>>>> couldn't be done... but that it was passing at all seems kind of strange to
>>>> me. Isn't that the whole point of that system?
>>> 
>>> It was verifying because entire signed posts were copied and re-posted, not
>>> because anyone gained access to your private key.
>> 
>> I didn't notice that, I only looked at one... but I didn't figure access was
>> actually obtained. Too bad there wasn't a way for it to be tied to the post's
>> header info.
> 
> Like we discussed when this was happening before, the solution is to include
> enough context within the signed portion to make a repost obvious.

Not gonna happen - that would ruin his game of claiming he is a victim.


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328101

FromSteve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-23 21:58 -0700
Message-ID<a6e9c15c-611a-47b9-8db0-ae6f460fadaf@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#328098
On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 10:14:44 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> On 10/23/15, 3:57 PM, in article asdfv.k9z93@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> 
> >>>> I killed the key I had because it was verifying as used from one of the
> >>>> 'fretwizzen' acct. forgeries. It had nothing added to it, I assume that
> >>>> couldn't be done... but that it was passing at all seems kind of strange to
> >>>> me. Isn't that the whole point of that system?
> >>> 
> >>> It was verifying because entire signed posts were copied and re-posted, not
> >>> because anyone gained access to your private key.
> >> 
> >> I didn't notice that, I only looked at one... but I didn't figure access was
> >> actually obtained. Too bad there wasn't a way for it to be tied to the post's
> >> header info.
> > 
> > Like we discussed when this was happening before, the solution is to include
> > enough context within the signed portion to make a repost obvious.
> 
> Not gonna happen - that would ruin his game of claiming he is a victim.

So which is it? Did I "really" disable my key or am I just claiming to have done so in order to play victim? See your problem here, yet...  crackhead? LOL!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328091

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2015-10-23 20:57 -0700
Message-ID<D2504FA5.6142B%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#328036
On 10/23/15, 3:46 PM, in article adf.eif9@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

... 
>> I killed the key I had because it was verifying as used from one of the
>> 'fretwizzen' acct. forgeries. It had nothing added to it, I assume that
>> couldn't be done... but that it was passing at all seems kind of strange to
>> me. Isn't that the whole point of that system?
> 
> It was verifying because entire signed posts were copied and re-posted, not
> because anyone gained access to your private key.
> 
Carroll killed his private key because someone copied a message with his
public key?!?!?!

LOL!

That is really very funny.


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328100

FromSteve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-23 21:55 -0700
Message-ID<1e9b654b-5e1d-4304-9215-8c49e7a2a60e@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#328091
On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 9:57:14 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> On 10/23/15, 3:46 PM, in article adf.eif9@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> 
> ... 
> >> I killed the key I had because it was verifying as used from one of the
> >> 'fretwizzen' acct. forgeries. It had nothing added to it, I assume that
> >> couldn't be done... but that it was passing at all seems kind of strange to
> >> me. Isn't that the whole point of that system?
> > 
> > It was verifying because entire signed posts were copied and re-posted, not
> > because anyone gained access to your private key.
> > 
> Carroll killed his private key because someone copied a message with his
> public key?!?!?!
> 
> LOL!
> 
> That is really very funny.

What's "very funny" here can be addressed by asking you the following obvious question:

Does it really not occur to you that you should not show any indication you believe I've disabled my key if you also believe I'm the owner of the 'fretwizzen' gmail acct.? 

One possibility is that you're so over-medicated you don't comprehend things that makes sense (i.e. your suggestion that I'm "forging" myself). Another possibility is that you're simply an idiot. Of course,  there's always the combo pack ;)


[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#327996

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2015-10-23 14:40 -0700
Message-ID<D24FF750.61367%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#327992
On 10/23/15, 2:14 PM, in article sdfmnbjc83.03pp@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

> Well, I haven't been feeding him lately.  I've had him on a 30-day
> plonk, which seems to have expired about two hours ago.  It'll probably
> end up going permafrost though, because I doubt he'll ever cease to be
> a jackass and learn how to take a beating like a man.

Ah, you think the "proper" way to take your beating is to run away for 30
days and not if someone rudely corrects you again you will never talk to
them again. Waaaaah!

LOL!

Anyway, did not even remember what debate you were running from. Now I see
you were whining my quoting style with Peter was completely confusing to you
("completely wacky, intentionally deceptive and annoying, and unlike
anything ever seen from a normal human.")

After a month rest are you better able to understand?

  Peter Köhlmann:
    -----
    | For example, if I modified a BSD variant and tried to pass it
    | off as "Linux" to people I would be stopped. I know of no
    | example of this but I think it is pretty obvious the license
    | holders would not allow this.
    BSD allows such sheenigans
    -----
The BSD license has no power to override trademarks and "allow" this.

Message-ID: l98q2g$nj1$1@dont-email.me
<http://goo.gl/zvo4fv>



-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328008

Fromowl <owl@rooftop.invalid>
Date2015-10-23 21:53 +0000
Message-ID<fscmvk93.izd@rooftop.invalid>
In reply to#327996
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 10/23/15, 2:14 PM, in article sdfmnbjc83.03pp@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Well, I haven't been feeding him lately.  I've had him on a 30-day
>> plonk, which seems to have expired about two hours ago.  It'll probably
>> end up going permafrost though, because I doubt he'll ever cease to be
>> a jackass and learn how to take a beating like a man.
> 
> Ah, you think the "proper" way to take your beating is to run away for 30
> days and not if someone rudely corrects you again you will never talk to
> them again. Waaaaah!
> 
> LOL!
> 
> Anyway, did not even remember what debate you were running from. Now I see
> you were whining my quoting style with Peter was completely confusing to you
> ("completely wacky, intentionally deceptive and annoying, and unlike
> anything ever seen from a normal human.")
> 
> After a month rest are you better able to understand?
> 
>   Peter Köhlmann:
>     -----
>     | For example, if I modified a BSD variant and tried to pass it
>     | off as "Linux" to people I would be stopped. I know of no
>     | example of this but I think it is pretty obvious the license
>     | holders would not allow this.
>     BSD allows such sheenigans
>     -----
> The BSD license has no power to override trademarks and "allow" this.
> 
> Message-ID: l98q2g$nj1$1@dont-email.me
> <http://goo.gl/zvo4fv>
> 

Wrong thread.
(Do you ever get anything right?  LOL!)

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.os.linux.advocacy/slecnXVi2Pg/9IJ1TSfLDwAJ
 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328031

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2015-10-23 15:34 -0700
Message-ID<D250040A.613A4%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#328008
On 10/23/15, 2:53 PM, in article fscmvk93.izd@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> On 10/23/15, 2:14 PM, in article sdfmnbjc83.03pp@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> Well, I haven't been feeding him lately.  I've had him on a 30-day
>>> plonk, which seems to have expired about two hours ago.  It'll probably
>>> end up going permafrost though, because I doubt he'll ever cease to be
>>> a jackass and learn how to take a beating like a man.
>> 
>> Ah, you think the "proper" way to take your beating is to run away for 30
>> days and not if someone rudely corrects you again you will never talk to
>> them again. Waaaaah!
>> 
>> LOL!
>> 
>> Anyway, did not even remember what debate you were running from. Now I see
>> you were whining my quoting style with Peter was completely confusing to you
>> ("completely wacky, intentionally deceptive and annoying, and unlike
>> anything ever seen from a normal human.")
>> 
>> After a month rest are you better able to understand?
>> 
>>   Peter Köhlmann:
>>     -----
>>     | For example, if I modified a BSD variant and tried to pass it
>>     | off as "Linux" to people I would be stopped. I know of no
>>     | example of this but I think it is pretty obvious the license
>>     | holders would not allow this.
>>     BSD allows such sheenigans
>>     -----
>> The BSD license has no power to override trademarks and "allow" this.
>> 
>> Message-ID: l98q2g$nj1$1@dont-email.me
>> <http://goo.gl/zvo4fv>
>> 
> 
> Wrong thread.

This is the exact right thread I meant to ask the question in. The fact it
references another is not in question. But after a month of relaxing from
your humiliation of yourself do you understand the quote style?

Pretty much you have noted if I beat you down again you will kill filter me
for life. I am happy if you do.

To be fair, I should give you another chance... so will not keep reminding
you of the nonsense that got you to run a month ago.


> (Do you ever get anything right?  LOL!)
> 
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.os.linux.advocacy/slecnXVi2Pg/
> 9IJ1TSfLDwAJ
>  



-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328034

Fromowl <owl@rooftop.invalid>
Date2015-10-23 22:43 +0000
Message-ID<ads.kb923@rooftop.invalid>
In reply to#328031
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 10/23/15, 2:53 PM, in article fscmvk93.izd@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>> On 10/23/15, 2:14 PM, in article sdfmnbjc83.03pp@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Well, I haven't been feeding him lately.  I've had him on a 30-day
>>>> plonk, which seems to have expired about two hours ago.  It'll probably
>>>> end up going permafrost though, because I doubt he'll ever cease to be
>>>> a jackass and learn how to take a beating like a man.
>>> 
>>> Ah, you think the "proper" way to take your beating is to run away for 30
>>> days and not if someone rudely corrects you again you will never talk to
>>> them again. Waaaaah!
>>> 
>>> LOL!
>>> 
>>> Anyway, did not even remember what debate you were running from. Now I see
>>> you were whining my quoting style with Peter was completely confusing to you
>>> ("completely wacky, intentionally deceptive and annoying, and unlike
>>> anything ever seen from a normal human.")
>>> 
>>> After a month rest are you better able to understand?
>>> 
>>>   Peter Köhlmann:
>>>     -----
>>>     | For example, if I modified a BSD variant and tried to pass it
>>>     | off as "Linux" to people I would be stopped. I know of no
>>>     | example of this but I think it is pretty obvious the license
>>>     | holders would not allow this.
>>>     BSD allows such sheenigans
>>>     -----
>>> The BSD license has no power to override trademarks and "allow" this.
>>> 
>>> Message-ID: l98q2g$nj1$1@dont-email.me
>>> <http://goo.gl/zvo4fv>
>>> 
>> 
>> Wrong thread.
> 
> This is the exact right thread I meant to ask the question in. The fact it
> references another is not in question. But after a month of relaxing from
> your humiliation of yourself do you understand the quote style?
> 

What are you babbling about?  That was *not* the thread you were plonked in.
Simple as that.  You claimed it was.  You were wrong.  Again.  As usual.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328089

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2015-10-23 20:52 -0700
Message-ID<D2504E89.61425%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
In reply to#328034
On 10/23/15, 3:43 PM, in article ads.kb923@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

... 
>>>> After a month rest are you better able to understand?
>>>> 
>>>>   Peter Köhlmann:
>>>>     -----
>>>>     | For example, if I modified a BSD variant and tried to pass it
>>>>     | off as "Linux" to people I would be stopped. I know of no
>>>>     | example of this but I think it is pretty obvious the license
>>>>     | holders would not allow this.
>>>>     BSD allows such sheenigans
>>>>     -----
>>>> The BSD license has no power to override trademarks and "allow" this.
>>>> 
>>>> Message-ID: l98q2g$nj1$1@dont-email.me
>>>> <http://goo.gl/zvo4fv>
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Wrong thread.
>> 
>> This is the exact right thread I meant to ask the question in. The fact it
>> references another is not in question. But after a month of relaxing from
>> your humiliation of yourself do you understand the quote style?
> 
> What are you babbling about?

The quote, above, which you claimed was done in a way that you found
"completely wacky, intentionally deceptive and annoying, and unlike anything
ever seen from a normal human."

The question is if you have figured out how to actually read such a quote
yet?

But you knew that and are just dodging.

...


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 1 of 6  [1] 2 3 4 5 6  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy


csiph-web