Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > uk.comp.sys.mac > #181561 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-08-05 12:38 +0100 |
| Last post | 2025-08-14 15:27 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 91 — 15 participants |
Back to article view | Back to uk.comp.sys.mac
Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-05 12:38 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Tyrone <none@none.none> - 2025-08-06 00:06 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-08-06 05:58 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-08 11:19 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Tyrone <none@none.none> - 2025-08-08 12:55 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-08 15:39 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-08-08 17:21 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-08 19:13 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-08 12:29 -0700
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-08 21:40 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-08 13:51 -0700
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-08 21:58 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Tyrone <none@none.none> - 2025-08-08 21:30 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-08 23:01 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Tyrone <none@none.none> - 2025-08-09 14:05 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-09 18:54 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Tyrone <none@none.none> - 2025-08-09 21:09 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-09 22:47 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-13 20:06 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-08 15:18 -0700
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-09 09:50 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-09 09:15 -0700
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-09 18:58 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-09 13:15 -0700
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-09 22:49 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-09 15:38 -0700
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-10 09:46 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-10 12:41 -0700
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-13 20:09 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-13 12:32 -0700
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-13 21:58 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-13 22:12 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-13 14:54 -0700
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-08-11 19:08 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow WolfFan <akwolffan@zoho.com> - 2025-08-10 09:07 -0400
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-10 12:41 -0700
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2025-08-08 22:07 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-08-08 15:37 -0700
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-08-08 22:57 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-08-09 01:22 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-08-08 13:56 -0700
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-08-09 01:22 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-08-09 04:48 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-09 09:44 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-08-11 19:08 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-08-09 01:22 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-08-09 01:22 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-09 10:01 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Creon <creon@creon.earth> - 2025-08-09 09:48 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-09 12:13 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Charlie Glock <charlieglock@localhost.com> - 2025-08-09 22:05 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-09 23:20 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-08-09 15:32 -0700
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-13 20:07 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Tyrone <none@none.none> - 2025-08-13 21:16 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-13 22:45 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-13 14:55 -0700
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Kelly Phillips <KFile@podcasts.org> - 2025-08-13 20:09 -0500
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-14 08:58 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Kelly Phillips <KFile@podcasts.org> - 2025-08-14 17:23 -0500
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Tyrone <none@none.none> - 2025-08-14 14:58 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-24 08:31 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Kelly Phillips <KFile@podcasts.org> - 2025-08-24 17:55 -0500
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-25 08:28 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-25 07:02 -0700
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-25 17:46 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Kelly Phillips <KFile@podcasts.org> - 2025-08-25 10:19 -0500
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-08-25 17:44 +0200
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-25 17:43 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-08-25 22:24 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-08-25 22:59 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-26 10:50 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-08-26 13:29 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <DavidB.@nomail.afraid.org> - 2025-08-26 15:19 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-08-26 15:30 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-08-26 08:46 -0700
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-08-26 15:47 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2025-08-26 18:02 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <DavidB.@nomail.afraid.org> - 2025-08-26 21:07 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> - 2025-08-26 07:31 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-08-26 13:24 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <DavidB.@nomail.afraid.org> - 2025-08-26 15:16 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <DavidB.@nomail.afraid.org> - 2025-08-26 16:22 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Creon <creon@creon.earth> - 2025-08-26 21:21 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow "David B." <DavidB.@nomail.afraid.org> - 2025-08-26 22:24 +0100
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-08-31 21:03 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-08-31 22:14 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-08-26 14:34 -0700
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-08-31 21:03 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-08-31 22:15 +0000
Re: Optimising performance with EtreCheckPro and Ulbow T i m <eternal@spaced.me.uk> - 2025-08-14 15:27 +0100
Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
| From | "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-09 09:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mfogenF7cadU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #181594 |
On 08/08/2025 23:18, Alan wrote: [....] >>>> >>>> Here's what Mr Daniel showed about himself:- https://i.ibb.co/ >>>> bRRy3cwQ/ Screenshot-2022-04-19-at-17-13-29.png >>>> >>>> Please help me understand why none of his other work can be identified. >> >>> I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. >> >> That’s a colourful turn of phrase, but it does rather underline my point: >> when faced with a fair and reasonable technical question, you choose >> to respond with personal abuse instead of facts. > I wasn't given a "fair and reasonable" question, because you aren't a > fair and reasonable person. > > You're an asshole who I wouldn't bother to put out if he was on fire... Alan, Your personal opinion of me is noted, but irrelevant to the point at hand. You still haven’t addressed the core question: Why is there no publicly verifiable record of other commercial software products by John Daniel, despite his claimed history of such work? If you believe the answer exists, simply cite your sources so we can all examine them. If you don’t have an answer, that’s fine too — but personal abuse isn’t a substitute for evidence.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-09 09:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1077s68$1d40a$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #181604 |
On 2025-08-09 01:50, David B. wrote: > On 08/08/2025 23:18, Alan wrote: > [....] >>>>> >>>>> Here's what Mr Daniel showed about himself:- https://i.ibb.co/ >>>>> bRRy3cwQ/ Screenshot-2022-04-19-at-17-13-29.png >>>>> >>>>> Please help me understand why none of his other work can be >>>>> identified. >>> >>>> I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. >>> >>> That’s a colourful turn of phrase, but it does rather underline my >>> point: >>> when faced with a fair and reasonable technical question, you choose >>> to respond with personal abuse instead of facts. >> I wasn't given a "fair and reasonable" question, because you aren't a >> fair and reasonable person. >> >> You're an asshole who I wouldn't bother to put out if he was on fire... > > > Alan, > > Your personal opinion of me is noted, but irrelevant to the point at hand. It is as relevant as your attacks on someone else.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-09 18:58 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mfpgi5Fdjj4U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #181613 |
On 09/08/2025 17:15, Alan wrote: > On 2025-08-09 01:50, David B. wrote: >> On 08/08/2025 23:18, Alan wrote: >> [....] >>>>>> >>>>>> Here's what Mr Daniel showed about himself:- https://i.ibb.co/ >>>>>> bRRy3cwQ/ Screenshot-2022-04-19-at-17-13-29.png >>>>>> >>>>>> Please help me understand why none of his other work can be >>>>>> identified. >>>> >>>>> I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. >>>> >>>> That’s a colourful turn of phrase, but it does rather underline my >>>> point: >>>> when faced with a fair and reasonable technical question, you choose >>>> to respond with personal abuse instead of facts. >>> I wasn't given a "fair and reasonable" question, because you aren't a >>> fair and reasonable person. >>> >>> You're an asshole who I wouldn't bother to put out if he was on fire... >> >> >> Alan, >> >> Your personal opinion of me is noted, but irrelevant to the point at >> hand. > > It is as relevant as your attacks on someone else. Alan, The distinction is that I’m questioning software and its developer in the context of user security — not making remarks about someone’s personal worth. If you think my concerns about EtreCheck are equivalent to a personal insult, then please address that directly by showing why the security concerns are unfounded, with evidence. That way, we stay focused on verifiable facts rather than trading opinions about people.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-09 13:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1078a8g$1d433$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #181616 |
On 2025-08-09 10:58, David B. wrote: > On 09/08/2025 17:15, Alan wrote: >> On 2025-08-09 01:50, David B. wrote: >>> On 08/08/2025 23:18, Alan wrote: >>> [....] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Here's what Mr Daniel showed about himself:- https://i.ibb.co/ >>>>>>> bRRy3cwQ/ Screenshot-2022-04-19-at-17-13-29.png >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please help me understand why none of his other work can be >>>>>>> identified. >>>>> >>>>>> I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. >>>>> >>>>> That’s a colourful turn of phrase, but it does rather underline my >>>>> point: >>>>> when faced with a fair and reasonable technical question, you >>>>> choose to respond with personal abuse instead of facts. >>>> I wasn't given a "fair and reasonable" question, because you aren't >>>> a fair and reasonable person. >>>> >>>> You're an asshole who I wouldn't bother to put out if he was on fire... >>> >>> >>> Alan, >>> >>> Your personal opinion of me is noted, but irrelevant to the point at >>> hand. >> >> It is as relevant as your attacks on someone else. > > Alan, > > The distinction is that I’m questioning software and its developer in > the context of user security — not making remarks about someone’s > personal worth. Bully for you. You're a lying piece of shit, so what you say you are doing doesn't matter at all.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-09 22:49 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mfpu3oFf8ukU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #181617 |
On 09/08/2025 21:15, Alan wrote: > On 2025-08-09 10:58, David B. wrote: >> On 09/08/2025 17:15, Alan wrote: >>> On 2025-08-09 01:50, David B. wrote: >>>> On 08/08/2025 23:18, Alan wrote: >>>> [....] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Here's what Mr Daniel showed about himself:- https://i.ibb.co/ >>>>>>>> bRRy3cwQ/ Screenshot-2022-04-19-at-17-13-29.png >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Please help me understand why none of his other work can be >>>>>>>> identified. >>>>>> >>>>>>> I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. >>>>>> >>>>>> That’s a colourful turn of phrase, but it does rather underline my >>>>>> point: >>>>>> when faced with a fair and reasonable technical question, you >>>>>> choose to respond with personal abuse instead of facts. >>>>> I wasn't given a "fair and reasonable" question, because you aren't >>>>> a fair and reasonable person. >>>>> >>>>> You're an asshole who I wouldn't bother to put out if he was on >>>>> fire... >>>> >>>> >>>> Alan, >>>> >>>> Your personal opinion of me is noted, but irrelevant to the point at >>>> hand. >>> >>> It is as relevant as your attacks on someone else. >> >> Alan, >> >> The distinction is that I’m questioning software and its developer in >> the context of user security — not making remarks about someone’s >> personal worth. > Bully for you. > > You're a lying piece of shit, so what you say you are doing doesn't > matter at all. Just whose sock-puppet are you, dear boy?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-09 15:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1078iku$1he2o$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #181620 |
On 2025-08-09 14:49, David B. wrote: > On 09/08/2025 21:15, Alan wrote: >> On 2025-08-09 10:58, David B. wrote: >>> On 09/08/2025 17:15, Alan wrote: >>>> On 2025-08-09 01:50, David B. wrote: >>>>> On 08/08/2025 23:18, Alan wrote: >>>>> [....] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Here's what Mr Daniel showed about himself:- https://i.ibb.co/ >>>>>>>>> bRRy3cwQ/ Screenshot-2022-04-19-at-17-13-29.png >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Please help me understand why none of his other work can be >>>>>>>>> identified. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That’s a colourful turn of phrase, but it does rather underline >>>>>>> my point: >>>>>>> when faced with a fair and reasonable technical question, you >>>>>>> choose to respond with personal abuse instead of facts. >>>>>> I wasn't given a "fair and reasonable" question, because you >>>>>> aren't a fair and reasonable person. >>>>>> >>>>>> You're an asshole who I wouldn't bother to put out if he was on >>>>>> fire... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Alan, >>>>> >>>>> Your personal opinion of me is noted, but irrelevant to the point >>>>> at hand. >>>> >>>> It is as relevant as your attacks on someone else. >>> >>> Alan, >>> >>> The distinction is that I’m questioning software and its developer in >>> the context of user security — not making remarks about someone’s >>> personal worth. >> Bully for you. >> >> You're a lying piece of shit, so what you say you are doing doesn't >> matter at all. > > Just whose sock-puppet are you, dear boy? > No one's, you lying sack of shit. And don't you just hate that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-10 09:46 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mfr4ihFko2dU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #181624 |
On 09/08/2025 23:38, Alan wrote: > On 2025-08-09 14:49, David B. wrote: >> On 09/08/2025 21:15, Alan wrote: >>> On 2025-08-09 10:58, David B. wrote: >>>> On 09/08/2025 17:15, Alan wrote: >>>>> On 2025-08-09 01:50, David B. wrote: >>>>>> On 08/08/2025 23:18, Alan wrote: >>>>>> [....] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Here's what Mr Daniel showed about himself:- https://i.ibb.co/ >>>>>>>>>> bRRy3cwQ/ Screenshot-2022-04-19-at-17-13-29.png >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Please help me understand why none of his other work can be >>>>>>>>>> identified. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That’s a colourful turn of phrase, but it does rather underline >>>>>>>> my point: >>>>>>>> when faced with a fair and reasonable technical question, you >>>>>>>> choose to respond with personal abuse instead of facts. >>>>>>> I wasn't given a "fair and reasonable" question, because you >>>>>>> aren't a fair and reasonable person. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You're an asshole who I wouldn't bother to put out if he was on >>>>>>> fire... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Alan, >>>>>> >>>>>> Your personal opinion of me is noted, but irrelevant to the point >>>>>> at hand. >>>>> >>>>> It is as relevant as your attacks on someone else. >>>> >>>> Alan, >>>> >>>> The distinction is that I’m questioning software and its developer in >>>> the context of user security — not making remarks about someone’s >>>> personal worth. >>> Bully for you. >>> >>> You're a lying piece of shit, so what you say you are doing doesn't >>> matter at all. >> >> Just whose sock-puppet are you, dear boy? >> > > No one's, you lying sack of shit. I don't lie about anything, laddie! :-P > And don't you just hate that. I'd very much like to know which post(s) you, personally, made in THIS thread! https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/is-etrecheck-safe-to-use-and-is-this-safe-place-to-download.2034144/page-2 Do tell!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-10 12:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <107aske$22qav$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #181625 |
On 2025-08-10 01:46, David B. wrote: > On 09/08/2025 23:38, Alan wrote: >> On 2025-08-09 14:49, David B. wrote: >>> On 09/08/2025 21:15, Alan wrote: >>>> On 2025-08-09 10:58, David B. wrote: >>>>> On 09/08/2025 17:15, Alan wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-08-09 01:50, David B. wrote: >>>>>>> On 08/08/2025 23:18, Alan wrote: >>>>>>> [....] >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Here's what Mr Daniel showed about himself:- https:// >>>>>>>>>>> i.ibb.co/ bRRy3cwQ/ Screenshot-2022-04-19-at-17-13-29.png >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Please help me understand why none of his other work can be >>>>>>>>>>> identified. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That’s a colourful turn of phrase, but it does rather underline >>>>>>>>> my point: >>>>>>>>> when faced with a fair and reasonable technical question, you >>>>>>>>> choose to respond with personal abuse instead of facts. >>>>>>>> I wasn't given a "fair and reasonable" question, because you >>>>>>>> aren't a fair and reasonable person. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You're an asshole who I wouldn't bother to put out if he was on >>>>>>>> fire... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Alan, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Your personal opinion of me is noted, but irrelevant to the point >>>>>>> at hand. >>>>>> >>>>>> It is as relevant as your attacks on someone else. >>>>> >>>>> Alan, >>>>> >>>>> The distinction is that I’m questioning software and its developer in >>>>> the context of user security — not making remarks about someone’s >>>>> personal worth. >>>> Bully for you. >>>> >>>> You're a lying piece of shit, so what you say you are doing doesn't >>>> matter at all. >>> >>> Just whose sock-puppet are you, dear boy? >>> >> >> No one's, you lying sack of shit. > > I don't lie about anything, laddie! :-P You're lying about that. >> And don't you just hate that. > > I'd very much like to know which post(s) you, personally, made in THIS > thread! > > https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/is-etrecheck-safe-to-use-and-is- > this-safe-place-to-download.2034144/page-2 > > Do tell! Sure. I've never seen that thread or to my best recollection ever posted anything on those forums.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-13 20:09 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mg467lF6tekU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #181634 |
On 10/08/2025 20:41, Alan wrote: > On 2025-08-10 01:46, David B. wrote: >> On 09/08/2025 23:38, Alan wrote: >>> On 2025-08-09 14:49, David B. wrote: >>>> On 09/08/2025 21:15, Alan wrote: >>>>> On 2025-08-09 10:58, David B. wrote: >>>>>> On 09/08/2025 17:15, Alan wrote: >>>>>>> On 2025-08-09 01:50, David B. wrote: >>>>>>>> On 08/08/2025 23:18, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>> [....] >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Here's what Mr Daniel showed about himself:- https:// >>>>>>>>>>>> i.ibb.co/ bRRy3cwQ/ Screenshot-2022-04-19-at-17-13-29.png >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Please help me understand why none of his other work can be >>>>>>>>>>>> identified. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> That’s a colourful turn of phrase, but it does rather >>>>>>>>>> underline my point: >>>>>>>>>> when faced with a fair and reasonable technical question, you >>>>>>>>>> choose to respond with personal abuse instead of facts. >>>>>>>>> I wasn't given a "fair and reasonable" question, because you >>>>>>>>> aren't a fair and reasonable person. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You're an asshole who I wouldn't bother to put out if he was on >>>>>>>>> fire... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Alan, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Your personal opinion of me is noted, but irrelevant to the >>>>>>>> point at hand. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is as relevant as your attacks on someone else. >>>>>> >>>>>> Alan, >>>>>> >>>>>> The distinction is that I’m questioning software and its developer in >>>>>> the context of user security — not making remarks about someone’s >>>>>> personal worth. >>>>> Bully for you. >>>>> >>>>> You're a lying piece of shit, so what you say you are doing doesn't >>>>> matter at all. >>>> >>>> Just whose sock-puppet are you, dear boy? >>>> >>> >>> No one's, you lying sack of shit. >> >> I don't lie about anything, laddie! :-P > > You're lying about that. > >>> And don't you just hate that. >> >> I'd very much like to know which post(s) you, personally, made in THIS >> thread! > > > https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/is-etrecheck-safe-to-use-and-is- >> this-safe-place-to-download.2034144/page-2 >> >> Do tell! > > Sure. I've never seen that thread or to my best recollection ever posted > anything on those forums. Do you know ANYTHING about Apple software?!!! Or hardware?!!!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-13 12:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <107ip7m$2vd0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #181672 |
On 2025-08-13 12:09, David B. wrote: > On 10/08/2025 20:41, Alan wrote: >> On 2025-08-10 01:46, David B. wrote: >>> On 09/08/2025 23:38, Alan wrote: >>>> On 2025-08-09 14:49, David B. wrote: >>>>> On 09/08/2025 21:15, Alan wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-08-09 10:58, David B. wrote: >>>>>>> On 09/08/2025 17:15, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2025-08-09 01:50, David B. wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 08/08/2025 23:18, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>>> [....] >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Here's what Mr Daniel showed about himself:- https:// >>>>>>>>>>>>> i.ibb.co/ bRRy3cwQ/ Screenshot-2022-04-19-at-17-13-29.png >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Please help me understand why none of his other work can be >>>>>>>>>>>>> identified. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> That’s a colourful turn of phrase, but it does rather >>>>>>>>>>> underline my point: >>>>>>>>>>> when faced with a fair and reasonable technical question, you >>>>>>>>>>> choose to respond with personal abuse instead of facts. >>>>>>>>>> I wasn't given a "fair and reasonable" question, because you >>>>>>>>>> aren't a fair and reasonable person. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> You're an asshole who I wouldn't bother to put out if he was >>>>>>>>>> on fire... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Alan, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Your personal opinion of me is noted, but irrelevant to the >>>>>>>>> point at hand. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It is as relevant as your attacks on someone else. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Alan, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The distinction is that I’m questioning software and its >>>>>>> developer in >>>>>>> the context of user security — not making remarks about someone’s >>>>>>> personal worth. >>>>>> Bully for you. >>>>>> >>>>>> You're a lying piece of shit, so what you say you are doing >>>>>> doesn't matter at all. >>>>> >>>>> Just whose sock-puppet are you, dear boy? >>>>> >>>> >>>> No one's, you lying sack of shit. >>> >>> I don't lie about anything, laddie! :-P >> >> You're lying about that. >> >>>> And don't you just hate that. >>> >>> I'd very much like to know which post(s) you, personally, made in >>> THIS thread! >> > > https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/is-etrecheck-safe-to-use- >> and-is- >>> this-safe-place-to-download.2034144/page-2 >>> >>> Do tell! >> >> Sure. I've never seen that thread or to my best recollection ever >> posted anything on those forums. > > Do you know ANYTHING about Apple software?!!! > > Or hardware?!!! How do you get that response from the fact that I haven't read a particular thread on a not particularly important forum?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-13 21:58 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mg4cjuF855bU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #181673 |
On 13/08/2025 20:32, Alan wrote: > On 2025-08-13 12:09, David B. wrote: >> On 10/08/2025 20:41, Alan wrote: >>> On 2025-08-10 01:46, David B. wrote: >>>> On 09/08/2025 23:38, Alan wrote: >>>>> On 2025-08-09 14:49, David B. wrote: >>>>>> On 09/08/2025 21:15, Alan wrote: >>>>>>> On 2025-08-09 10:58, David B. wrote: >>>>>>>> On 09/08/2025 17:15, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 2025-08-09 01:50, David B. wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 08/08/2025 23:18, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>>>> [....] >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here's what Mr Daniel showed about himself:- https:// >>>>>>>>>>>>>> i.ibb.co/ bRRy3cwQ/ Screenshot-2022-04-19-at-17-13-29.png >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please help me understand why none of his other work can >>>>>>>>>>>>>> be identified. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> That’s a colourful turn of phrase, but it does rather >>>>>>>>>>>> underline my point: >>>>>>>>>>>> when faced with a fair and reasonable technical question, >>>>>>>>>>>> you choose to respond with personal abuse instead of facts. >>>>>>>>>>> I wasn't given a "fair and reasonable" question, because you >>>>>>>>>>> aren't a fair and reasonable person. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You're an asshole who I wouldn't bother to put out if he was >>>>>>>>>>> on fire... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Alan, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Your personal opinion of me is noted, but irrelevant to the >>>>>>>>>> point at hand. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It is as relevant as your attacks on someone else. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Alan, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The distinction is that I’m questioning software and its >>>>>>>> developer in >>>>>>>> the context of user security — not making remarks about someone’s >>>>>>>> personal worth. >>>>>>> Bully for you. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You're a lying piece of shit, so what you say you are doing >>>>>>> doesn't matter at all. >>>>>> >>>>>> Just whose sock-puppet are you, dear boy? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> No one's, you lying sack of shit. >>>> >>>> I don't lie about anything, laddie! :-P >>> >>> You're lying about that. >>> >>>>> And don't you just hate that. >>>> >>>> I'd very much like to know which post(s) you, personally, made in >>>> THIS thread! >>> > > https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/is-etrecheck-safe-to-use- >>> and-is- >>>> this-safe-place-to-download.2034144/page-2 >>>> >>>> Do tell! >>> >>> Sure. I've never seen that thread or to my best recollection ever >>> posted anything on those forums. >> >> Do you know ANYTHING about Apple software?!!! >> >> Or hardware?!!! > How do you get that response from the fact that I haven't read a > particular thread on a not particularly important forum? Alan, Fair point — not having read a particular MacRumors thread doesn’t in itself prove anything about your Apple knowledge. I only asked because MacRumors is, in my view, the go-to Mac forum, and I was curious if you’d seen the relevant discussion there. That said, in a thread about EtreCheck and Ulbow, it’s fair to ask whether contributors have first-hand Apple experience to back their opinions. My focus is on the facts — software behaviour, developer background, and security implications — not personalities.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-13 22:12 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mg4de3F855bU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #181674 |
On 13/08/2025 21:58, David B. wrote: > On 13/08/2025 20:32, Alan wrote: >> On 2025-08-13 12:09, David B. wrote: >>> On 10/08/2025 20:41, Alan wrote: >>>> On 2025-08-10 01:46, David B. wrote: >>>>> On 09/08/2025 23:38, Alan wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-08-09 14:49, David B. wrote: >>>>>>> On 09/08/2025 21:15, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2025-08-09 10:58, David B. wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 09/08/2025 17:15, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 2025-08-09 01:50, David B. wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 08/08/2025 23:18, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> [....] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here's what Mr Daniel showed about himself:- https:// >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i.ibb.co/ bRRy3cwQ/ Screenshot-2022-04-19-at-17-13-29.png >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please help me understand why none of his other work can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be identified. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> That’s a colourful turn of phrase, but it does rather >>>>>>>>>>>>> underline my point: >>>>>>>>>>>>> when faced with a fair and reasonable technical question, >>>>>>>>>>>>> you choose to respond with personal abuse instead of facts. >>>>>>>>>>>> I wasn't given a "fair and reasonable" question, because you >>>>>>>>>>>> aren't a fair and reasonable person. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> You're an asshole who I wouldn't bother to put out if he was >>>>>>>>>>>> on fire... >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Alan, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Your personal opinion of me is noted, but irrelevant to the >>>>>>>>>>> point at hand. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It is as relevant as your attacks on someone else. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Alan, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The distinction is that I’m questioning software and its >>>>>>>>> developer in >>>>>>>>> the context of user security — not making remarks about someone’s >>>>>>>>> personal worth. >>>>>>>> Bully for you. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You're a lying piece of shit, so what you say you are doing >>>>>>>> doesn't matter at all. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Just whose sock-puppet are you, dear boy? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> No one's, you lying sack of shit. >>>>> >>>>> I don't lie about anything, laddie! :-P >>>> >>>> You're lying about that. >>>> >>>>>> And don't you just hate that. >>>>> >>>>> I'd very much like to know which post(s) you, personally, made in >>>>> THIS thread! >>>> > > https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/is-etrecheck-safe-to-use- >>>> and-is- >>>>> this-safe-place-to-download.2034144/page-2 >>>>> >>>>> Do tell! >>>> >>>> Sure. I've never seen that thread or to my best recollection ever >>>> posted anything on those forums. >>> >>> Do you know ANYTHING about Apple software?!!! >>> >>> Or hardware?!!! >> How do you get that response from the fact that I haven't read a >> particular thread on a not particularly important forum? > > Alan, > > Fair point — not having read a particular MacRumors thread doesn’t in > itself prove anything about your Apple knowledge. I only asked because > MacRumors is, in my view, the go-to Mac forum, and I was curious if > you’d seen the relevant discussion there. > > That said, in a thread about EtreCheck and Ulbow, it’s fair to ask > whether contributors have first-hand Apple experience to back their > opinions. My focus is on the facts — software behaviour, developer > background, and security implications — not personalities. https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/is-etrecheck-safe-to-use-and-is-this-safe-place-to-download.2034144/page-2 I was slightly phased by poster Applescrumpy! (Another 'will o' the wisp'!) Methinks a Troll!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-13 14:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <107j1hp$4fjn$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #181674 |
On 2025-08-13 13:58, David B. wrote: > On 13/08/2025 20:32, Alan wrote: >> On 2025-08-13 12:09, David B. wrote: >>> On 10/08/2025 20:41, Alan wrote: >>>> On 2025-08-10 01:46, David B. wrote: >>>>> On 09/08/2025 23:38, Alan wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-08-09 14:49, David B. wrote: >>>>>>> On 09/08/2025 21:15, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2025-08-09 10:58, David B. wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 09/08/2025 17:15, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 2025-08-09 01:50, David B. wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 08/08/2025 23:18, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> [....] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here's what Mr Daniel showed about himself:- https:// >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i.ibb.co/ bRRy3cwQ/ Screenshot-2022-04-19-at-17-13-29.png >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please help me understand why none of his other work can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be identified. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> That’s a colourful turn of phrase, but it does rather >>>>>>>>>>>>> underline my point: >>>>>>>>>>>>> when faced with a fair and reasonable technical question, >>>>>>>>>>>>> you choose to respond with personal abuse instead of facts. >>>>>>>>>>>> I wasn't given a "fair and reasonable" question, because you >>>>>>>>>>>> aren't a fair and reasonable person. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> You're an asshole who I wouldn't bother to put out if he was >>>>>>>>>>>> on fire... >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Alan, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Your personal opinion of me is noted, but irrelevant to the >>>>>>>>>>> point at hand. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It is as relevant as your attacks on someone else. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Alan, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The distinction is that I’m questioning software and its >>>>>>>>> developer in >>>>>>>>> the context of user security — not making remarks about someone’s >>>>>>>>> personal worth. >>>>>>>> Bully for you. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You're a lying piece of shit, so what you say you are doing >>>>>>>> doesn't matter at all. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Just whose sock-puppet are you, dear boy? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> No one's, you lying sack of shit. >>>>> >>>>> I don't lie about anything, laddie! :-P >>>> >>>> You're lying about that. >>>> >>>>>> And don't you just hate that. >>>>> >>>>> I'd very much like to know which post(s) you, personally, made in >>>>> THIS thread! >>>> > > https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/is-etrecheck-safe-to-use- >>>> and-is- >>>>> this-safe-place-to-download.2034144/page-2 >>>>> >>>>> Do tell! >>>> >>>> Sure. I've never seen that thread or to my best recollection ever >>>> posted anything on those forums. >>> >>> Do you know ANYTHING about Apple software?!!! >>> >>> Or hardware?!!! >> How do you get that response from the fact that I haven't read a >> particular thread on a not particularly important forum? > > Alan, > > Fair point — not having read a particular MacRumors thread doesn’t in > itself prove anything about your Apple knowledge. I only asked because > MacRumors is, in my view, the go-to Mac forum, and I was curious if > you’d seen the relevant discussion there. Yeah, but you're view means precisely jack shit. > > That said, in a thread about EtreCheck and Ulbow, it’s fair to ask > whether contributors have first-hand Apple experience to back their > opinions. My focus is on the facts — software behaviour, developer > background, and security implications — not personalities. Wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. Remember that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-11 19:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <XnsB3389A17D29C1HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5> |
| In reply to | #181625 |
"David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> news:mfr4ihFko2dU1@mid.individual.net Sun, 10 Aug 2025 08:46:09 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: > I don't lie about anything, laddie! :-P Bullshit. You *continue to lie* for Snit! -- I don't need no Dr. All I need...is my lawyer.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | WolfFan <akwolffan@zoho.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-10 09:07 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <0001HW.2E48D10D0336DC7D70000890938F@news.supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #181624 |
On Aug 9, 2025, Alan wrote (in article <1078iku$1he2o$2@dont-email.me>): > On 2025-08-09 14:49, David B. wrote: > > On 09/08/2025 21:15, Alan wrote: > > > On 2025-08-09 10:58, David B. wrote: > > > > On 09/08/2025 17:15, Alan wrote: > > > > > On 2025-08-09 01:50, David B. wrote: > > > > > > On 08/08/2025 23:18, Alan wrote: > > > > > > [....] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's what Mr Daniel showed about himself:- https://i.ibb.co/ > > > > > > > > > > bRRy3cwQ/ Screenshot-2022-04-19-at-17-13-29.png > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please help me understand why none of his other work can be > > > > > > > > > > identified. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That’s a colourful turn of phrase, but it does rather underline > > > > > > > > my point: > > > > > > > > when faced with a fair and reasonable technical question, you > > > > > > > > choose to respond with personal abuse instead of facts. > > > > > > > I wasn't given a "fair and reasonable" question, because you > > > > > > > aren't a fair and reasonable person. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You're an asshole who I wouldn't bother to put out if he was on > > > > > > > fire... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alan, > > > > > > > > > > > > Your personal opinion of me is noted, but irrelevant to the point > > > > > > at hand. > > > > > > > > > > It is as relevant as your attacks on someone else. > > > > > > > > Alan, > > > > > > > > The distinction is that I’m questioning software and its developer in > > > > the context of user security — not making remarks about someone’s > > > > personal worth. > > > Bully for you. > > > > > > You're a lying piece of shit, so what you say you are doing doesn't > > > matter at all. > > > > Just whose sock-puppet are you, dear boy? > > No one's, you lying sack of shit. > > And don't you just hate that. Our David likes to deploy sock puppets. he thinks that everyone is as dishonest as he is.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-10 12:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <107asl8$22qav$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #181628 |
On 2025-08-10 06:07, WolfFan wrote: > On Aug 9, 2025, Alan wrote > (in article <1078iku$1he2o$2@dont-email.me>): > >> On 2025-08-09 14:49, David B. wrote: >>> On 09/08/2025 21:15, Alan wrote: >>>> On 2025-08-09 10:58, David B. wrote: >>>>> On 09/08/2025 17:15, Alan wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-08-09 01:50, David B. wrote: >>>>>>> On 08/08/2025 23:18, Alan wrote: >>>>>>> [....] >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Here's what Mr Daniel showed about himself:- https://i.ibb.co/ >>>>>>>>>>> bRRy3cwQ/ Screenshot-2022-04-19-at-17-13-29.png >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Please help me understand why none of his other work can be >>>>>>>>>>> identified. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That’s a colourful turn of phrase, but it does rather underline >>>>>>>>> my point: >>>>>>>>> when faced with a fair and reasonable technical question, you >>>>>>>>> choose to respond with personal abuse instead of facts. >>>>>>>> I wasn't given a "fair and reasonable" question, because you >>>>>>>> aren't a fair and reasonable person. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You're an asshole who I wouldn't bother to put out if he was on >>>>>>>> fire... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Alan, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Your personal opinion of me is noted, but irrelevant to the point >>>>>>> at hand. >>>>>> >>>>>> It is as relevant as your attacks on someone else. >>>>> >>>>> Alan, >>>>> >>>>> The distinction is that I’m questioning software and its developer in >>>>> the context of user security — not making remarks about someone’s >>>>> personal worth. >>>> Bully for you. >>>> >>>> You're a lying piece of shit, so what you say you are doing doesn't >>>> matter at all. >>> >>> Just whose sock-puppet are you, dear boy? >> >> No one's, you lying sack of shit. >> >> And don't you just hate that. > > Our David likes to deploy sock puppets. he thinks that everyone is as > dishonest as he is. > The untrustworthy are ever mistrustful.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-08 22:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <1075seu$uu51$7@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #181588 |
On 2025-08-08, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: > On 2025-08-08 13:40, David B. wrote: >> On 08/08/2025 20:29, Alan wrote: >>> On 2025-08-08 11:13, David B. wrote: >>>> On 08/08/2025 18:21, Gremlin wrote: >>>>> "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> news:mfm1aeFqc46U1@mid.individual.net >>>>> Fri, >>>>> 08 Aug 2025 10:19:58 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 06/08/2025 06:58, Gremlin wrote: >>>>>>> "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> news:mfe8q5Fh1j1U1@mid.individual.net >>>>>>> Tue, 05 Aug 2025 11:38:45 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There a question, too, about it possibly being "Malware"! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This has already been resolved. There is no malware present in the >>>>>>> software. You have already confirmed that you continue to infer >>>>>>> that's >>>>>>> not the case because the author will not engage with you. You are >>>>>>> once >>>>>>> again, knowingly dishonestly, sliming the product. >>>>>> >>>>>> Perhaps you will categorically confirm that once one has given >>>>>> EtreCheck >>>>>> "Full Disk Access" one has *NOT* left an open backdoor? >>>>> >>>>> This nonsense has already been covered as well. I asked you several >>>>> times >>>>> why you didn't apply the same standards to a variety of other software >>>>> companies who's software does the same thing. Including Apple. You >>>>> danced >>>>> around my question and finally responded with the reason, because >>>>> the author >>>>> won't correspond with you. That's never going to be a satisifactory >>>>> answer >>>>> for your implications and wrongful accusations that you continue to >>>>> make >>>>> against the software. >>>>> >>>>> Etrecheck is clean. Use it or don't use it. >>>> >>>> What about "John Daniel" - is HE "clean"? >>>> >>>> Have you even /bothered/ to investigate him?!! >>>> >>> >>> Has anyone investigated you? >>> >>> Oh wait! They have! >> >> THAT isn't difficult! >> >> *MY* persona has been depicted on LinkedIn for many, many, years. >> >> Here's what Mr Daniel showed about himself:- https://i.ibb.co/bRRy3cwQ/ >> Screenshot-2022-04-19-at-17-13-29.png >> >> Please help me understand why none of his other work can be identified. > I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. LOL ! David needs snit for that.after all snit once claimed he pissed or almost pissed on his cat because he was so high on drugs. David is surely a bigger target for snit! And since they are besties snit will oblige. ROTFLMAO! -- pothead "Our lives are fashioned by our choices. First we make our choices. Then our choices make us." -- Anne Frank
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | % <pursent100@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-08 15:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <EKqdndxpYLas4Qv1nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #181593 |
pothead wrote: > On 2025-08-08, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >> On 2025-08-08 13:40, David B. wrote: >>> On 08/08/2025 20:29, Alan wrote: >>>> On 2025-08-08 11:13, David B. wrote: >>>>> On 08/08/2025 18:21, Gremlin wrote: >>>>>> "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> news:mfm1aeFqc46U1@mid.individual.net >>>>>> Fri, >>>>>> 08 Aug 2025 10:19:58 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 06/08/2025 06:58, Gremlin wrote: >>>>>>>> "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> news:mfe8q5Fh1j1U1@mid.individual.net >>>>>>>> Tue, 05 Aug 2025 11:38:45 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There a question, too, about it possibly being "Malware"! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This has already been resolved. There is no malware present in the >>>>>>>> software. You have already confirmed that you continue to infer >>>>>>>> that's >>>>>>>> not the case because the author will not engage with you. You are >>>>>>>> once >>>>>>>> again, knowingly dishonestly, sliming the product. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Perhaps you will categorically confirm that once one has given >>>>>>> EtreCheck >>>>>>> "Full Disk Access" one has *NOT* left an open backdoor? >>>>>> >>>>>> This nonsense has already been covered as well. I asked you several >>>>>> times >>>>>> why you didn't apply the same standards to a variety of other software >>>>>> companies who's software does the same thing. Including Apple. You >>>>>> danced >>>>>> around my question and finally responded with the reason, because >>>>>> the author >>>>>> won't correspond with you. That's never going to be a satisifactory >>>>>> answer >>>>>> for your implications and wrongful accusations that you continue to >>>>>> make >>>>>> against the software. >>>>>> >>>>>> Etrecheck is clean. Use it or don't use it. >>>>> >>>>> What about "John Daniel" - is HE "clean"? >>>>> >>>>> Have you even /bothered/ to investigate him?!! >>>>> >>>> >>>> Has anyone investigated you? >>>> >>>> Oh wait! They have! >>> >>> THAT isn't difficult! >>> >>> *MY* persona has been depicted on LinkedIn for many, many, years. >>> >>> Here's what Mr Daniel showed about himself:- https://i.ibb.co/bRRy3cwQ/ >>> Screenshot-2022-04-19-at-17-13-29.png >>> >>> Please help me understand why none of his other work can be identified. >> I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. > > LOL ! > > David needs snit for that.after all snit once claimed he pissed or almost pissed on > his cat because he was so high on drugs. > David is surely a bigger target for snit! > And since they are besties snit will oblige. > > ROTFLMAO! > > why do you allow yourself the burden of snit
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-08 22:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <689680d5$0$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> |
| In reply to | #181593 |
On Aug 8, 2025 at 3:07:26 PM MST, "pothead" wrote <1075seu$uu51$7@dont-email.me>: > On 2025-08-08, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >> On 2025-08-08 13:40, David B. wrote: >>> On 08/08/2025 20:29, Alan wrote: >>>> On 2025-08-08 11:13, David B. wrote: >>>>> On 08/08/2025 18:21, Gremlin wrote: >>>>>> "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> news:mfm1aeFqc46U1@mid.individual.net >>>>>> Fri, >>>>>> 08 Aug 2025 10:19:58 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 06/08/2025 06:58, Gremlin wrote: >>>>>>>> "David B." <BD@hotmail.co.uk> news:mfe8q5Fh1j1U1@mid.individual.net >>>>>>>> Tue, 05 Aug 2025 11:38:45 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There a question, too, about it possibly being "Malware"! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This has already been resolved. There is no malware present in the >>>>>>>> software. You have already confirmed that you continue to infer >>>>>>>> that's >>>>>>>> not the case because the author will not engage with you. You are >>>>>>>> once >>>>>>>> again, knowingly dishonestly, sliming the product. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Perhaps you will categorically confirm that once one has given >>>>>>> EtreCheck >>>>>>> "Full Disk Access" one has *NOT* left an open backdoor? >>>>>> >>>>>> This nonsense has already been covered as well. I asked you several >>>>>> times >>>>>> why you didn't apply the same standards to a variety of other software >>>>>> companies who's software does the same thing. Including Apple. You >>>>>> danced >>>>>> around my question and finally responded with the reason, because >>>>>> the author >>>>>> won't correspond with you. That's never going to be a satisifactory >>>>>> answer >>>>>> for your implications and wrongful accusations that you continue to >>>>>> make >>>>>> against the software. >>>>>> >>>>>> Etrecheck is clean. Use it or don't use it. >>>>> >>>>> What about "John Daniel" - is HE "clean"? >>>>> >>>>> Have you even /bothered/ to investigate him?!! >>>>> >>>> >>>> Has anyone investigated you? >>>> >>>> Oh wait! They have! >>> >>> THAT isn't difficult! >>> >>> *MY* persona has been depicted on LinkedIn for many, many, years. >>> >>> Here's what Mr Daniel showed about himself:- https://i.ibb.co/bRRy3cwQ/ >>> Screenshot-2022-04-19-at-17-13-29.png >>> >>> Please help me understand why none of his other work can be identified. >> I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. > > LOL ! > > David needs snit for that.after all snit once claimed he pissed or almost > pissed on > his cat because he was so high on drugs. > David is surely a bigger target for snit! > And since they are besties snit will oblige. > > ROTFLMAO! A white supremacist lying about me. Of course. -- It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-09 01:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <XnsB335D974D2D13HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5> |
| In reply to | #181588 |
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> news:1075o0u$rso5$2@dont-email.me Fri, 08 Aug 2025 20:51:42 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: > On 2025-08-08 13:40, David B. wrote: >> Please help me understand why none of his other work can be identified. > I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. As expensive as petrol is, I'd still donate some to such a worthy cause if the event occured irl where I could access the petrol can. I was taught to share and that it's better to give than to receive. And! the latter is exactly what his xian ass is taught. So, I'd be very christlike in sharing the petrol with him on all levels. Hallelujah -- I don't need no Dr. All I need...is my lawyer.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | uk.comp.sys.mac
csiph-web