Avast Doesn't Block XP Defender malware (ave.exe)
in [Spyware]
|
From: ~BD~ on 8 Apr 2010 18:11 Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: > ~BD~ wrote: > >> Leythos wrote: >>> Why not respect Usenet yourself? >>> >>> Usenet is not a chat group that you can ramble on about any given >>> subject in any given group - the GROUP NAME DEFINES THE DISCUSSION >>> TYPE AND CONTENT. >>> >>> If you want to "Talk" with people about non-Anti-Virus things, then >>> you should respect Usenet and how it was intended to be used and >>> take your discussion to email. >>> >>> It's simple to follow Usenet methods, if you care. >> >> Everyone has a different view! Here's an example: >> >> <snip> >> >> There, SeaNymph said ........ > > "SeaNymph" is definitely not a person whose opinion should be used as a > reference to describe how Usenet works. That's like throwing down a gauntlet! Perhaps you should consider saying that to her face, BTS. *Why* is her opinion unworthy? Tell me that. -- Dave
From: Jenn on 8 Apr 2010 18:12 "Leythos" <spam999free(a)rrohio.com> wrote in message news:MPG.26281dfb4cde55fe98a29c(a)us.news.astraweb.com... > In article <hpljte$gio$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, > me(a)nowhere.whocareswhatthisemailisanyway says... >> Do you take into account that just about every thread on the internet has >> an >> ebb and flow and it's normal for content within threads to vary away from >> the subject title? Just a thought. >> > > Yes, this one has been off-topic for many posts, but, do we accept > wrongs just because it's not convenient or do we seek to correct wrongs > because it's the proper and right thing to do? oh come on ... :D ...... it's a newsgroup .. not a moral dilema <wink> ;-) -- Jenn (from Oklahoma) http://pqlr.org/bbs/
From: Andy Walker on 8 Apr 2010 18:13 Jenn wrote: > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off_Topic Wikipedia is not considered a reliable enough content source for Usenet. ;-)
From: Jenn on 8 Apr 2010 18:15 "Andy Walker" <awalker(a)nspank.invalid> wrote in message news:4bbe549e.688634718(a)news.webtv.com... > Jenn wrote: > >> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off_Topic > > Wikipedia is not considered a reliable enough content source for > Usenet. ;-) well ... it was good enough for Lythos... so I used the same source ... makes no nevermind to me... -- Jenn (from Oklahoma) http://pqlr.org/bbs/
From: Leythos on 8 Apr 2010 18:16
In article <hplkci$hs5$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, me(a)nowhere.whocareswhatthisemailisanyway says... > > "Leythos" <spam999free(a)rrohio.com> wrote in message > news:MPG.26281dfb4cde55fe98a29c(a)us.news.astraweb.com... > > In article <hpljte$gio$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, > > me(a)nowhere.whocareswhatthisemailisanyway says... > >> Do you take into account that just about every thread on the internet has > >> an > >> ebb and flow and it's normal for content within threads to vary away from > >> the subject title? Just a thought. > >> > > > > Yes, this one has been off-topic for many posts, but, do we accept > > wrongs just because it's not convenient or do we seek to correct wrongs > > because it's the proper and right thing to do? > > > oh come on ... :D ...... it's a newsgroup .. not a moral dilema <wink> > ;-) Why abandon your principals for your convenience? Doesn't that mean that your own ethicals and morals are somewhat lacking if you choose to only follow the rules that you agree with? -- You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to that. Trust yourself. spam999free(a)rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address) |