From: dorayme on
In article
<1jj5po7.lool4p1b2wfgaN%mikePOST(a)TOGROUPmacconsult.com>,
mikePOST(a)TOGROUPmacconsult.com (Mike Rosenberg) wrote:

> Davoud <star(a)sky.net> wrote:
>
> > I'll bet you think your reply was more useful than mine. Firstly, you
> > addressed it to me, not to the OP.
>
> No, I posted my response to the same newsgroup and thread the OP posted
> to.
>
> > Secondly, your indirect reply to the
> > OP said "works for me" (which is famously the least useful reply on
> > USENET) and "round up the usual suspects," which is possibly the second
> > least useful reply on USENET when one doesn't say who those suspects
> > might be. Perhaps they are not at all usual to the OP.
>
> Since you didn't actually read his question,

What is it about you guys? You are so argumentative! Why not take
a leaf out of my book, you know, peaceful, low profile, humble,
non-irritating... If any of you need some lessons, I run a
franchise for the Dale Carnegie School courses and am prepared to
give you folk a special discount...

--
dorayme
From: Barry Margolin on
In article <dorayme-EEB6D1.11210328052010(a)news.albasani.net>,
dorayme <dorayme(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote:

> In article
> <1jj5po7.lool4p1b2wfgaN%mikePOST(a)TOGROUPmacconsult.com>,
> mikePOST(a)TOGROUPmacconsult.com (Mike Rosenberg) wrote:
>
> > Davoud <star(a)sky.net> wrote:
> >
> > > I'll bet you think your reply was more useful than mine. Firstly, you
> > > addressed it to me, not to the OP.
> >
> > No, I posted my response to the same newsgroup and thread the OP posted
> > to.
> >
> > > Secondly, your indirect reply to the
> > > OP said "works for me" (which is famously the least useful reply on
> > > USENET) and "round up the usual suspects," which is possibly the second
> > > least useful reply on USENET when one doesn't say who those suspects
> > > might be. Perhaps they are not at all usual to the OP.
> >
> > Since you didn't actually read his question,
>
> What is it about you guys? You are so argumentative! Why not take
> a leaf out of my book, you know, peaceful, low profile, humble,
> non-irritating... If any of you need some lessons, I run a
> franchise for the Dale Carnegie School courses and am prepared to
> give you folk a special discount...

You seem to have forgotten that this is Usenet. I think it's
international law that the slightest offense must immediately escalate
into a flamewar.

--
Barry Margolin, barmar(a)alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***
From: John Varela on
On Fri, 28 May 2010 01:20:24 UTC, "John Varela"
<newlamps(a)verizon.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 28 May 2010 00:48:39 UTC, "John Varela"
> <newlamps(a)verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > I'll try going thru the plugins and extensions turning them off one
> > at a time to see if one of them is the source of the problem.
>
> Found it: NoScript was blocking Silverlight.

Which is no excuse for Firefox crashing on a conflict between a
plug-in and an add-on.

--
John Varela