Prev: Habberdabber! Warnerbee is our forlorn hope!
Next: Aquarium screen saver?
From: za kAT on 18 Apr 2010 14:18
On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 18:07:31 GMT, Bear Bottoms wrote:

> za kAT <zakAT(a)super-secret-IPaddress.invalid> wrote in
> news:hqfgu1$m2r$1(a)news.eternal-september.org:
>
>> On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 17:45:30 GMT, Bear Bottoms wrote:
>>
>>> za kAT <zakAT(a)super-secret-IPaddress.invalid> wrote in
>>> news:hqffa2$akp$1(a)news.eternal-september.org:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 17:16:17 GMT, Bear Bottoms wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> za kAT <zakAT(a)super-secret-IPaddress.invalid> wrote in
>>>>> news:hqfcbm$kcg$1 @news.eternal-september.org:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 14:09:04 GMT, Bear Bottoms wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> why was this kept a secret?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> More important is why is Rising low and to the left?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> While they have improved their testing to include some reactives,
>>>>> they still have a long way to go. I'm tickled to see this post
>>>>> however, as it sustains my argument of past about their
>>>>> flawed/incomplete testing.
>>>>
>>>> Only in your head. From what I remember just about everyone else
>>>> was/and still is aware that /no/ testing can be definitive, but it's
>>>> the best we've got, and what's more it's still flawed because it
>>>> doesn't test for stray banana custard on my t shirt.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Your rememberance is flawed though the statement is a given, yet
>>> doesn't approach the actual events of discussion accurately.
>>
>> Don't troll me Bottom. There wasn't an open and honest discussion. You
>> couldn't provide /any/ credible evidence of the proactive defence you
>> claimed Rising provided, and were roasted for it. You could have just
>> ended it there but you trolled on and on, and you are still doing it.
>> Again you have openly criticised this testing and supplied nothing to
>> backup your statement.
>>
>
> heh, the fact that they changed their approach proved my argument...you
> missed that eh?

That doesn't follow, but of course you know that.

If you want a productive discussion here, try providing some credible
criticism of what you think is wrong with their present testing procedures.

--
zakAT(a)pooh.the.cat - www.zakATsKopterChat.com
From: Mark Warner on 18 Apr 2010 14:32
za kAT wrote:
>
> If you want a productive discussion here, try providing some credible
> criticism of what you think is wrong with their present testing procedures.

Sheesh. Quit being so dense. Here, let me spell it out for you: their
testing methods don't give him the results he wants. Therefore, the
tests are faulty. Got it?

--
Mark Warner
MEPIS Linux
Registered Linux User #415318
....lose .inhibitions when replying
From: za kAT on 18 Apr 2010 14:36
On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 14:32:44 -0400, Mark Warner wrote:

> za kAT wrote:
>>
>> If you want a productive discussion here, try providing some credible
>> criticism of what you think is wrong with their present testing procedures.
>
> Sheesh. Quit being so dense. Here, let me spell it out for you: their
> testing methods don't give him the results he wants. Therefore, the
> tests are faulty. Got it?

That computes.

--
zakAT(a)pooh.the.cat - www.zakATsKopterChat.com
From: za kAT on 18 Apr 2010 14:39
On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 18:30:47 GMT, Bear Bottoms wrote:

> za kAT <zakAT(a)super-secret-IPaddress.invalid> wrote in
> news:hqfidm$1a7$1(a)news.eternal-september.org:
>
>> On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 18:07:31 GMT, Bear Bottoms wrote:
>>
>>> za kAT <zakAT(a)super-secret-IPaddress.invalid> wrote in
>>> news:hqfgu1$m2r$1(a)news.eternal-september.org:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 17:45:30 GMT, Bear Bottoms wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> za kAT <zakAT(a)super-secret-IPaddress.invalid> wrote in
>>>>> news:hqffa2$akp$1(a)news.eternal-september.org:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 17:16:17 GMT, Bear Bottoms wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> za kAT <zakAT(a)super-secret-IPaddress.invalid> wrote in
>>>>>>> news:hqfcbm$kcg$1 @news.eternal-september.org:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 14:09:04 GMT, Bear Bottoms wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> why was this kept a secret?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> More important is why is Rising low and to the left?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While they have improved their testing to include some reactives,
>>>>>>> they still have a long way to go. I'm tickled to see this post
>>>>>>> however, as it sustains my argument of past about their
>>>>>>> flawed/incomplete testing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Only in your head. From what I remember just about everyone else
>>>>>> was/and still is aware that /no/ testing can be definitive, but
>>>>>> it's the best we've got, and what's more it's still flawed because
>>>>>> it doesn't test for stray banana custard on my t shirt.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Your rememberance is flawed though the statement is a given, yet
>>>>> doesn't approach the actual events of discussion accurately.
>>>>
>>>> Don't troll me Bottom. There wasn't an open and honest discussion.
>>>> You couldn't provide /any/ credible evidence of the proactive
>>>> defence you claimed Rising provided, and were roasted for it. You
>>>> could have just ended it there but you trolled on and on, and you
>>>> are still doing it. Again you have openly criticised this testing
>>>> and supplied nothing to backup your statement.
>>>>
>>>
>>> heh, the fact that they changed their approach proved my
>>> argument...you missed that eh?
>>
>> That doesn't follow, but of course you know that.
>>
>> If you want a productive discussion here, try providing some credible
>> criticism of what you think is wrong with their present testing
>> procedures.
>>
>
> Why, I provided a lot in the past that is over the head of most in this
> group...you think it is different now?

Boring. Go look for my IP. You must have found it by now?

--
zakAT(a)pooh.the.cat - www.zakATsKopterChat.com
From: za kAT on 18 Apr 2010 14:57
On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 18:44:11 GMT, Bear Bottoms wrote:

> za kAT <zakAT(a)super-secret-IPaddress.invalid> wrote in
> news:hqfjlu$a85$1(a)news.eternal-september.org:
>
>> On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 18:30:47 GMT, Bear Bottoms wrote:
>>
>>> za kAT <zakAT(a)super-secret-IPaddress.invalid> wrote in
>>> news:hqfidm$1a7$1(a)news.eternal-september.org:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 18:07:31 GMT, Bear Bottoms wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> za kAT <zakAT(a)super-secret-IPaddress.invalid> wrote in
>>>>> news:hqfgu1$m2r$1(a)news.eternal-september.org:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 17:45:30 GMT, Bear Bottoms wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> za kAT <zakAT(a)super-secret-IPaddress.invalid> wrote in
>>>>>>> news:hqffa2$akp$1(a)news.eternal-september.org:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 17:16:17 GMT, Bear Bottoms wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> za kAT <zakAT(a)super-secret-IPaddress.invalid> wrote in
>>>>>>>>> news:hqfcbm$kcg$1 @news.eternal-september.org:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 14:09:04 GMT, Bear Bottoms wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> why was this kept a secret?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> More important is why is Rising low and to the left?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> While they have improved their testing to include some
>>>>>>>>> reactives, they still have a long way to go. I'm tickled to see
>>>>>>>>> this post however, as it sustains my argument of past about
>>>>>>>>> their flawed/incomplete testing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Only in your head. From what I remember just about everyone else
>>>>>>>> was/and still is aware that /no/ testing can be definitive, but
>>>>>>>> it's the best we've got, and what's more it's still flawed
>>>>>>>> because it doesn't test for stray banana custard on my t shirt.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your rememberance is flawed though the statement is a given, yet
>>>>>>> doesn't approach the actual events of discussion accurately.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Don't troll me Bottom. There wasn't an open and honest discussion.
>>>>>> You couldn't provide /any/ credible evidence of the proactive
>>>>>> defence you claimed Rising provided, and were roasted for it. You
>>>>>> could have just ended it there but you trolled on and on, and you
>>>>>> are still doing it. Again you have openly criticised this testing
>>>>>> and supplied nothing to backup your statement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> heh, the fact that they changed their approach proved my
>>>>> argument...you missed that eh?
>>>>
>>>> That doesn't follow, but of course you know that.
>>>>
>>>> If you want a productive discussion here, try providing some
>>>> credible criticism of what you think is wrong with their present
>>>> testing procedures.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why, I provided a lot in the past that is over the head of most in
>>> this group...you think it is different now?
>>
>> Boring. Go look for my IP. You must have found it by now?
>>
>
> Why do you think I care?

I don't. When have you /ever/ bothered to present credible evidence for any
of your erroneous claims.

EOT [end of troll] for me.

--
zakAT(a)pooh.the.cat - www.zakATsKopterChat.com
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Habberdabber! Warnerbee is our forlorn hope!
Next: Aquarium screen saver?