Is MBAM is a 100% safe application?
in [Viruses]
|
From: JD on 2 May 2010 22:52 David H. Lipman wrote: > From: "JD"<JD(a)example.invalid> > > | David H. Lipman wrote: >>> From: "~BD~"<BoaterDave(a)hot.mail.co.uk> > >>> | sexually-oriented > >>> | ** > >>> | I've apologised for posting what was seen as as 'offending' picture. IMO >>> | rules should allow for mistakes being made inadvertently, not be used to >>> | banish folk forever! That makes no sense at all. > >>> You were given two chances. > > > | Each time you reply, he comes back with more ignorant bs. He's a fool > | asking for others to not be foolish. He seeks the real truth but he > | speaks in lies. If you stop replying to boater Dave maybe he'll go away. > | Maybe. God I hope so. Probably not. > > | But it's worth a try. 8-) > > Thank you. You are right. > I was about to reply but, I read this post and canceled the post. > > Thank you. Lets see what happens. -- JD..
From: Bullwinkle on 3 May 2010 06:28 As a liberal from the UK bd and his lapdogs,think rules apply to others and not them. "David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in message news:hrl49h0jkk(a)news5.newsguy.com... From: "~BD~" <BoaterDave(a)hot.mail.co.uk> >> You lack honor and discipline. | No - I don't. Yes - You do! | In fact, the 'Management' at Malwarebytes, by choosing not to | correspond, have shown very poor management skills. The management skills of Malwarewarebytes is excellent as they properly and judiciously enforced the rules YOU agreed to abide by. http://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?act=boardrules Terms of Use: "You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. In addition you will not engage in any sort of spamming, whether it is comment spam (injecting a comment into a thread for the purpose of placing a link back to a website offering the same services offered here; or services totally unrelated to this website), the use of signature links deemed to be for the sole purpose of increasing web traffic to a site of interest by the member, or any combination of those two examples. This includes the Personal Message feature." -- Dave http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html Multi-AV - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp
From: Jenn on 3 May 2010 19:11 "Dustin Cook" <bughunter.dustin(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:Xns9D6CA90C9596CHHI2948AJD832(a)69.16.185.247... > ~BD~ <BoaterDave(a)hot.mail.co.uk> wrote in news:uf6dnfDt- > LfgU0DWnZ2dnUVZ8tidnZ2d(a)bt.com: > >> Dustin Cook wrote: >>> ~BD~<BoaterDave(a)hotmail.co.ukk> wrote in >>> news:etmdnSAlabunKkTWnZ2dnUVZ8qednZ2d(a)bt.com: >>> >>>> OK - I'm convinced at last. :) >>>> >>>> Mbam *is* a 100% safe application! >>>> ********************************** >>>> >>>> See post number 3 - here:- >>>> >>>> http://forum.kaspersky.com/index.php?showtopic=141724&hl=Malwarebytes >>>> >>> >>> Yay! Thank God... :) >>> >>> >> >> I wrote to Malwarebytes and apologised, btw. >> >> Whilst I can (and have) registered again under another name, I'd prefer >> to have my ban rescinded and revert to being BD. >> >> How would you feel about putting in a good word for me, Dustin? > Are you smoking crack or heavily drinking? You just told me you forged > yourself a new identity to evade the BAN previously placed on you, and > then you want me to put in a good word for you? Laughable, frakking > laughable. You lack honor and disipline. > I'm thinking you're exaggerating quite alot, Dustin. Anyone can register under any name on any group. Dave just told you he re-registered. He didn't have to tell you or anyone and could be a member in good standing under any other username and no one would know... but he TOLD you. -- Jenn (from Oklahoma)
From: Jenn on 3 May 2010 19:17 "David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in message news:hrl6dg0lut(a)news5.newsguy.com... > From: "~BD~" <BoaterDave(a)hot.mail.co.uk> > > | sexually-oriented > > | ** > > | I've apologised for posting what was seen as as 'offending' picture. IMO > | rules should allow for mistakes being made inadvertently, not be used to > | banish folk forever! That makes no sense at all. > > You were given two chances. > Why not give him 5 chances .. or 6 chances.. or 4 chances?? Why do you stop at 2 chances especially when I saw no warning in the thread Dustin posted? Ya'll are being a bit of a hard case over a silly thing. -- Jenn (from Oklahoma)
From: Jenn on 3 May 2010 19:19
"JD" <JD(a)example.invalid> wrote in message news:VOidnRP-lLfWp0PWnZ2dnUVZ_uCdnZ2d(a)posted.grandecom... > David H. Lipman wrote: >> From: "JD"<JD(a)example.invalid> >> >> | David H. Lipman wrote: >>>> From: "~BD~"<BoaterDave(a)hot.mail.co.uk> >> >>>> | sexually-oriented >> >>>> | ** >> >>>> | I've apologised for posting what was seen as as 'offending' picture. >>>> IMO >>>> | rules should allow for mistakes being made inadvertently, not be used >>>> to >>>> | banish folk forever! That makes no sense at all. >> >>>> You were given two chances. >> >> >> | Each time you reply, he comes back with more ignorant bs. He's a fool >> | asking for others to not be foolish. He seeks the real truth but he >> | speaks in lies. If you stop replying to boater Dave maybe he'll go >> away. >> | Maybe. God I hope so. Probably not. >> >> | But it's worth a try. 8-) >> >> Thank you. You are right. >> I was about to reply but, I read this post and canceled the post. >> silly person ... nothing is going to happen ... people will pretend to not read daves posts.. and then ya'll will begin responding because that's what happens on ngs. -- Jenn (from Oklahoma) |