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

Groups > microsoft.public.scripting.vbscript > #11717 > unrolled thread

the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result. Possible ? If so, how ?

Back to article view | Back to microsoft.public.scripting.vbscript

Contents

  the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2017-07-22 13:14 +0200
    Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2017-07-22 13:41 +0200
      Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2017-07-22 14:16 +0200
    Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "Dave \"Crash\" Dummy" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-07-22 07:58 -0400
      Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible?  If so, how ? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2017-07-22 14:29 +0200
    Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result. Possible ? If so, how ? Ulrich Möller <knobbi38@arcor.de> - 2017-07-22 14:53 +0200
      Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result. Possible? If so, how ? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2017-07-22 16:28 +0200
        Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result. Possible? If so, how ? Ulrich Möller <knobbi38@arcor.de> - 2017-07-23 13:49 +0200
          Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.Possible? If so, how ? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2017-07-24 08:29 +0200
    Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net> - 2017-07-22 19:58 +0700
      Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2017-07-22 16:52 +0200
    Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2017-07-22 09:28 -0400
      Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2017-07-22 17:09 +0200
        Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2017-07-23 08:41 -0400
          Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2017-07-24 10:52 +0200
            Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2017-07-24 08:38 -0400
              Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2017-07-24 18:45 +0200
                Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2017-07-25 10:02 +0200
                  Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2017-07-25 14:18 +0200
                    Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2017-07-25 23:42 +0200
                      Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2017-07-26 08:20 +0200
                        Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2017-07-26 10:21 +0200
                          Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2017-07-26 14:14 +0200
                            Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2017-07-26 19:34 +0200
                              Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2017-07-27 09:11 +0200
                                Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2017-07-27 09:18 +0200
                                  Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2017-07-27 12:44 +0200
                                    Re: the "execute" command, arguments and returning a result.  Possible ?  If so, how ? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2017-08-01 23:21 +0200

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#11737

Evertjan,

> Why too late? It's never too late to repend.

True.  But that would not change anything to the fact that the deed has been
done.

> The latter is okay. But you did not, you took me as an example.

I've tried to explain I did not/had no intention to do so.   Your above
stance shows that you either do not believe me, or could not care less.   As
a result of that we have nothing more to talk about.  Goodbye.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser


-- Origional message:
Evertjan. <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> schreef in berichtnieuws
XnsA7BDF127CF0F0eejj99@194.109.6.166...
> "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> wrote on 25 Jul 2017 in
> microsoft.public.scripting.vbscript:
>
> > Evertjan,
> >
> >> No, don't take me as an example
> >
> > Too late, I just did.
>
> Why too late? It's never too late to repend.
>
> > Or rather, I took something you posted as an example.
>
> The latter is okay. But you did not, you took me as an example.
>
> >> [And please don't engage in the ad-hominem falacy of taking me
> >> in stead of my posting as an example
> >
> > Ah, I'm sorry.  I was not aware that when you make an example of what
> > someone wrote that to mention that someones name with it automatically
> > makes it an at-hominem attack.
>
> That you were not aware of it is not an argument against it,
> you could have missed something and/or just be wrong.
>
> > <said with a light sauce of sarcasm>
>
> Are you a cook?
>
> > But no, it isn't,
>
> I contest that.
>
> > and was not even ment as such.
>
> That's fine, but the 'even' is illogical
> as could very weel be ment as such while you think it is not.
>
> > The only reason I
> > mentioned your name with that example was to give Mayayana (or anyone
> > else) a chance to easily find the context (read: the specific post)
> > back.
>
> You could have mentioned my name by saying that you disagraad with me on a
> subject, inferring the ad-hominem falacy was unnecessary and impolite.
>
> > So don't make it sound as if it was all about *you*.  It wasn't.
>
> I don't, but you just were impolite and should appologise.
>
> >> I don't care about your idea of intentions, because you seem to think
> >> this NG is an helpdesk,
>
> Strange conclusion, as I stated it is not.
>
> >> where one should respond with an answer and
> >> more so within the confines the OP posed.
>
> > You already *know* that what you say there is (far) besides the truth.
>
> So now you pretant to klow hat I know,how strange.
>
> > If it would have been than I could/would possibly have chewed your head
> > off for it, and *certainly not* have responded to you trying to explain
> > why it actually does work.
>
> This sentence sounds like you are just babbling around.
>
> [> ...]
>
> --
> Evertjan.
> The Netherlands.
> (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

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

#11738

"R.Wieser" <address@not.available> wrote on 26 Jul 2017 in
microsoft.public.scripting.vbscript: 

> Evertjan,
> 
>> Why too late? It's never too late to repend.
> 
> True.  But that would not change anything to the fact that the deed has
> been done.

How christian of you. [ Well, my 'repend' asked for that ;-) ] 

Well, I am not looking for guild or revenge, just analyzing.

>> The latter is okay. But you did not, you took me as an example.
> 
> I've tried to explain I did not/had no intention to do so. 

Well, I was not looking for guild or revenge, just analyzing.

> Your above
> stance shows that you either do not believe me, or could not care less. 

Incomplete analysis.

Well, I was not looking for guild or revenge, just analyzing.

> As a result of that we have nothing more to talk about.

A conclusion both based on an incomplete analysis,
and that is not yours to deside.

> Goodbye.

C Y

-- 
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

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

#11739

Evertjan,

> How christian of you. [ Well, my 'repend' asked for that ;-) ]

Nope, as I do not believe in (a/any) god (as such I'm not able to repend).
But I do know when not to make an issue about such a triviality when trying
to explain something else.  It would only muddy the waters.

> Well, I was not looking for guild or revenge, just analyzing.

I hate to bring it to you, but analyzing is something else than to work
towards a result you already have decided is the only possible result by
discarding everything that does not fit that preconception.

> Incomplete analysis.

Odd. You *know* its incomplete, but obviosuly do not feel any need to even
*hint* at what is missing ...

To me you sound like the kid who tells his friend "I know something you
don't!", just to get his friend to beg him to tell, thereby making himself
feel important. :-(

> > As a result of that we have nothing more to talk about.
>
> A conclusion both based on an incomplete analysis,
> and that is not yours to deside.

Pray tell, if its not mine, who is it than to to decide ?  Yours ?   Are you
really *that* daft ?

Regards,
Rudy Wieser


-- Origional message:
Evertjan. <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> schreef in berichtnieuws
XnsA7BE696931BBCeejj99@194.109.6.166...
> "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> wrote on 26 Jul 2017 in
> microsoft.public.scripting.vbscript:
>
> > Evertjan,
> >
> >> Why too late? It's never too late to repend.
> >
> > True.  But that would not change anything to the fact that the deed has
> > been done.
>
> How christian of you. [ Well, my 'repend' asked for that ;-) ]
>
> Well, I am not looking for guild or revenge, just analyzing.
>
> >> The latter is okay. But you did not, you took me as an example.
> >
> > I've tried to explain I did not/had no intention to do so.
>
> Well, I was not looking for guild or revenge, just analyzing.
>
> > Your above
> > stance shows that you either do not believe me, or could not care less.
>
> Incomplete analysis.
>
> Well, I was not looking for guild or revenge, just analyzing.
>
> > As a result of that we have nothing more to talk about.
>
> A conclusion both based on an incomplete analysis,
> and that is not yours to deside.
>
> > Goodbye.
>
> C Y
>
> --
> Evertjan.
> The Netherlands.
> (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

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

#11740

"R.Wieser" <address@not.available> wrote on 26 Jul 2017 in 
microsoft.public.scripting.vbscript:

> Are you really *that* daft ?

And again, you cannot argument without an ad-hominem attack.

Convincing arguments do not need that crap.

-- 
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

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

#11741

Evertjan,

> And again, you cannot argument without an ad-hominem attack.

You really think you can claim that someone does not have the right to
decide for himself what to do with his own life, and *not* get a response
back which doubts your mental health in that regard ?   Really ?

And again you have refused to answer a simple question: If its not mine to
decide, who's is it?  Yours ?   Are you *really* that daft ?

And no, I don't think you are.   But I think you realized that you (again)
made a mistake there, and are now doing your best to deflect any attention
do it -- by trying to attack someone on something, *anything* you can find
(or make up) ...

Kiddo, have a nice life.  Goodby (again).

Regards,
Rudy Wieser


-- Origional message
Evertjan. <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> schreef in berichtnieuws
XnsA7BEC71D32DBEeejj99@194.109.6.166...
> "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> wrote on 26 Jul 2017 in
> microsoft.public.scripting.vbscript:
>
> > Are you really *that* daft ?
>
> And again, you cannot argument without an ad-hominem attack.
>
> Convincing arguments do not need that crap.
>
> --
> Evertjan.
> The Netherlands.
> (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

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

#11742

"R.Wieser" <address@not.available> wrote on 27 Jul 2017 in 
microsoft.public.scripting.vbscript:

>> And again, you cannot argument without an ad-hominem attack.

This is a statement of observation, not an admonishment.
 
> You really think you can claim that someone does not have the right to
> decide for himself 

I do not claim any lack of rights, on Usenet there are no such rights.

I just point out to the NG your lack of decency by forgoing valid arguments 
by using ad-hominem fallacies.

-- 
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

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

#11743

Evertjan,

You current reply does not constitute or contain an asnwer to thge question
put forward.  Please try again.

--question --
If its not mine to decide, who's is it?  Yours ?   Are you *really* that
daft ?

-- Your answer here --



Regards,
Rudy Wieser

P.s.
After you answer that one (to my satisfaction ofcourse) I'm probably going
to work my way back up (all the) other un-answered questions.

P.p.s.
> I do not claim any lack of rights, on

Quote:
> and that is not yours to deside.

Lying much ? :-)


-- Origional message
Evertjan. <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> schreef in berichtnieuws
XnsA7BF5EA29256Feejj99@194.109.6.166...
> "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> wrote on 27 Jul 2017 in
> microsoft.public.scripting.vbscript:
>
> >> And again, you cannot argument without an ad-hominem attack.
>
> This is a statement of observation, not an admonishment.
>
> > You really think you can claim that someone does not have the right to
> > decide for himself
>
> I do not claim any lack of rights, on Usenet there are no such rights.
>
> I just point out to the NG your lack of decency by forgoing valid
arguments
> by using ad-hominem fallacies.
>
> --
> Evertjan.
> The Netherlands.
> (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

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

#11744

> Evertjan,

I already thought so.

Its all fun-and-games as long as you can, by hook or by crook, stay on the
offence. But it is/becomes a lot less pleasant when you have to defend
yourself too, don't you think ?

what you did was dishonest to say the least.  Throwing accusations and than
bluntly refuse to talk about anything I said that didn't agree with it.

And do yourself a favour, and pick up a dictionary to look up the meaning of
what an ad-hominem actually is.

If thats to hard for you, here are a few links:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/ad-hominem
http://examples.yourdictionary.com/ad-hominem-examples.html

As for your "incomplete analysis" (said without even bothering to explain
how it would be incomplete and/or how to complete it) ?     It only makes
you sound like the next-best 6-year old who (repeatedly) exclaims "You're
WRONG!".  Not because the other is, but just because.  As a shield ?  So he
doesn't have to actually think ?  As a "leave me alone" plea ?  Your guess
is as good as mine.

And by the way, its funny to see that your whole rant towards me is based on
an "incomplete analysis" of what an ad-hominem actually is -- thats the pot
calling the kettle black. :-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | microsoft.public.scripting.vbscript

csiph-web