keep playin' him like a little bitch then tim.. you got my support

On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 16:47:40 -0400, The OS/2 Guy wrote:

:dinkmeister wrote:
:> Can't you guys argue on the phone or something? It seems like you guys
:> have a lot in common, like the need to argue constantly.
:
:Good God no. The Boob can't afford to pay for eCS promotion.
:The best he can do is sit in the newsgroups and whine wussily.
:--
r. Timothy Martin, The Official and Only OS/2 Guy
:Warp City Web Site - http://www.warpcity.com
:email: OS2Guy@Gmail.com OR eCSGuy@Gmail.com

Andrew Stephenson wrote:
> In article <42a067e9$0$965$8b463f8a@news.nationwide.net>
> Serenity@Augustmail.com "Bob StJohn" writes:
>
>
>>dinkmeister wrote:
>>
>>>Can't you guys argue on the phone or something? It seems
>>>like you guys have a lot in common, like the need to argue
>>>constantly.
>>
>>You have various options to ignore anything I post. I'm posting to
>>clarify what is available to eComStation users. Not to argue.
>
>
> Bob is correcting the slanderous/libelous (not sure which applies
> on the Net) assertions of the psychopathic personality stain that
> uses the name (amongst many) of "Tim Martin" -- who now, I notice
> from others' quotes, has awarded himself some kind of docorate.

No, it's a punctuation error, as in:

"Dr, Tim Martin again." "Groan"

Chris

The OS/2 Guy wrote:

> Bob StJohn wrote:
>
>> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
>>
>>> Bob StJohn wrote:
>>>
>>>> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> *Real* OS/2 users can install them immediately, of
>>>>> course, once downloaded. That's the privilege and
>>>>> advantage of having a *real* OS/2 operating system.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Gee .. thanks, but these were uploaded to the eComStation site days
>>>> ago.
>>>
>>>
>>> Then you should list them as being available. You don't. Typical.
>>
>>
>> Also typical, you didn't answer any of my questions.
>
>
> There's no reason to respond to any of your questions. You have
> little to no credibility here. You are lucky I take time to read the
> first line of any post with your email address attached to it - as
> anything beyond that first line is irrelevant and insipid. Most readers
> simply ignore you and your desperate rants.
>

Projection


Chris

On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 14:20:00 UTC, letoured@nospam.net wrote:

> In <1117804930.90000edd2d3d775585f26fbfb88d3b2f@terane ws>, on 06/03/2005
> at 09:25 AM, Mike Ross said:
>
> >On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 11:06:41 +0000 (UTC), "Frank Wochatz"
> > wrote:
>
> >>On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 10:58:59 UTC, Mike Ross wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> >Bottom line: Anyone or any company who has to rely on freeware
> >>> >programmers to keep the product working, is out of business.
> >>>
> >>> Linux seems to be doing just fine on that business model ;-)
> >>
> >>apples >< pears ;-)
> >>
> >>Linux is Open Source and you are able to download it for free.
>
> >Oh sure - I was just pointing out that Mr. Letoured was talking utter
> >nonsense in his blanket assertion regarding relying on freeware being a
> >recipe for corporate disaster!
>
>
> And linux is a corporation based where???

Look on, the le tour ed is too dumb do see the difference between an
os and a cooperation.

le tour ed, where is the cooperation named OS/2?

le tour ed quacking to himself:
> Deal with reality you idiot; booby and ecs are now in a disaster mode.
> He has no programmers working for him. Its all donated freeware work
> that's making patches.
>


--
Tschau/Bye
Herbert

Visit http://www.ecomstation.de the home of german eComStation
eComStation 1.2 Deutsch ist da!

Here in comp.os.os2.misc,
"Bob Eager" spake unto us, saying:

>Linux...a jumped up UNIX wannabe...! I use FreeBSD....when I need a
>UNIX-like system!

Each of them has advantages over the other. I guess I tend to prefer
Linux, but that's because I have a lot more experience with it than I
do with FreeBSD.

--
-Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Smyrna, GA USA
OS/2 + eCS + Linux + Win95 + DOS + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
WARNING: I've seen FIELDATA FORTRAN V and I know how to use it!
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.

On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 11:18:28 +0700, Chris Lasdauskas wrote:

:Andrew Stephenson wrote:
:> In article <42a067e9$0$965$8b463f8a@news.nationwide.net>
:> Serenity@Augustmail.com "Bob StJohn" writes:
:>
:>
:>>dinkmeister wrote:
:>>
:>>>Can't you guys argue on the phone or something? It seems
:>>>like you guys have a lot in common, like the need to argue
:>>>constantly.
:>>
:>>You have various options to ignore anything I post. I'm posting to
:>>clarify what is available to eComStation users. Not to argue.
:>
:>
:> Bob is correcting the slanderous/libelous (not sure which applies
:> on the Net) assertions of the psychopathic personality stain that
:> uses the name (amongst many) of "Tim Martin" -- who now, I notice
:> from others' quotes, has awarded himself some kind of docorate.
:
:No, it's a punctuation error, as in:
:
:"Dr, Tim Martin again." "Groan"
:
:Chris

lol

On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 06:17:59 UTC, rsteiner@visi.com (Richard Steiner)
wrote:

> Here in comp.os.os2.misc,
> "Bob Eager" spake unto us, saying:
>
> >Linux...a jumped up UNIX wannabe...! I use FreeBSD....when I need a
> >UNIX-like system!
>
> Each of them has advantages over the other. I guess I tend to prefer
> Linux, but that's because I have a lot more experience with it than I
> do with FreeBSD.

I have been using BSD for just on 25 years, so I guess that's one thing.
And it's generally more secure...and no plethora of distributions to
choose from!

You're trolling ross -- and you're clearly a *complete idiot. ecs is
commercial product. Do you know what the word "commercial" means???
Linux is not a commercial product. It has to rely on volunteers.

When a commercial product has no developers -- but freeware volunteers --
to do the work, it means the product is dead. Its not earning enough
income to pay anyone do update or maintain it as a commercial produce.
This also means that any cash flow is being pocketed by booby st. john
while the believers are giving their time and talent to a dead cause.

Now grow up and stop playing asshole in the newsgroups.




In <1117843138.872d2c8cecdc9a4fe3f3d7e09a8d8342@terane ws>, on 06/03/2005
at 08:00 PM, Mike Ross said:

>On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 23:22:06 GMT, letoured@nospam.net wrote:

>>The issue isn't linux -->The issue is a commercial company that now has
>>to rely on freeware programers to produce anything.

>And despite your grumbling you still are utterly unable to explain why
>this is a bad thing! For about the fourth time of asking, what exactly is
>your problem with freeware?! Stop dodging the question. Put up or shut up
>about it.

>Mike
>--
>http://www.corestore.org
>'As I walk along these shores
>I am the history within'

On 06/03/05 08:21 pm Dan tossed the following ingredients into the
ever-growing pot of cybersoup:

> No Larry, most people ignore *your* posts.

Except for the people who go out and buy eCS because they realize that,
if Larry is against it, it must be good.

Perce

Learn to take notes hubert. You know from experience that you can not keep
up without doing that; In this thread, its one of your ecs
partners-in-stupidity claiming the ecs use of freeware programmers to get
anything done, is the same as linux.

The fact is; ecs is a completely failed commercial product that now relys
on the gifts of freeware programmers to get anything done, while the
con-man owner keeps any cash coming in.

Its ain't look good out there in ecs-land. I'd shut up now if I were you,
least you show the world just how dumb you are.



In , on 06/04/2005
at 05:37 AM, "Herbert Rosenau" said:

>On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 14:20:00 UTC, letoured@nospam.net wrote:

>> In <1117804930.90000edd2d3d775585f26fbfb88d3b2f@terane ws>, on 06/03/2005
>> at 09:25 AM, Mike Ross said:
>>
>> >On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 11:06:41 +0000 (UTC), "Frank Wochatz"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >>On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 10:58:59 UTC, Mike Ross wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> >Bottom line: Anyone or any company who has to rely on freeware
>> >>> >programmers to keep the product working, is out of business.
>> >>>
>> >>> Linux seems to be doing just fine on that business model ;-)
>> >>
>> >>apples >< pears ;-)
>> >>
>> >>Linux is Open Source and you are able to download it for free.
>>
>> >Oh sure - I was just pointing out that Mr. Letoured was talking utter
>> >nonsense in his blanket assertion regarding relying on freeware being a
>> >recipe for corporate disaster!
>>
>>
>> And linux is a corporation based where???

>Look on, the le tour ed is too dumb do see the difference between an os
>and a cooperation.

>le tour ed, where is the cooperation named OS/2?
>
>le tour ed quacking to himself:
>> Deal with reality you idiot; booby and ecs are now in a disaster mode.
>> He has no programmers working for him. Its all donated freeware work
>> that's making patches.
>>

In <3Qfoe.47650$rt1.21503@fe04.lga>, on 06/04/2005
at 06:59 AM, "Percival P. Cassidy" said:

>On 06/03/05 08:21 pm Dan tossed the following ingredients into the
>ever-growing pot of cybersoup:

>> No Larry, most people ignore *your* posts.

>Except for the people who go out and buy eCS because they realize that,
>if Larry is against it, it must be good.

Only complete idiots buy ecs at this point; The life-cost is more then OS2
from IBM, and ecs has no professionals on the staff. The most critical
updates -- even to install IBM released OS2 updates -- come from freeware
authors volunteering their time, and money and talent. -->While booby
and and "out of the reach of the law" off-shore reseller.

It ain't a pretty picture.






>Perce

>volunteering
In <3Qfoe.47650$rt1.21503@fe04.lga>, on 06/04/2005
at 06:59 AM, "Percival P. Cassidy" said:

>On 06/03/05 08:21 pm Dan tossed the following ingredients into the
>ever-growing pot of cybersoup:

>> No Larry, most people ignore *your* posts.

>Except for the people who go out and buy eCS because they realize that,
>if Larry is against it, it must be good.

Only complete idiots buy ecs at this point; The life-cost is more then OS2
from IBM, and ecs has no professionals on the staff. The most critical
updates -- even to install IBM released OS2 updates -- come from freeware
authors volunteering their time, and money and talent. -->While booby
and the "out of the reach of the law" off-shore reseller get all the
money.

It ain't a pretty picture.






>Perce

Captain's log. On StarDate Sat, 04 Jun 2005 02:17:59 -0400 received comm from
rsteiner@visi.com (Richard Steiner) on channel comp.os.os2.misc:

: Each of them has advantages over the other. I guess I tend to prefer
: Linux, but that's because I have a lot more experience with it than I
: do with FreeBSD.

They do have some technical differences (which could be deciding in some special
cases), but generally I agree it's mainly a preference issue based on your
personal taste and experience. I personally prefer FreeBSD because of it's
greater UNIX heritage which I have a little bit more experience with.

martin törnsten

--
http://martin.tornsten.com/

On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 04:18:28 UTC in comp.os.os2.apps, Chris Lasdauskas
wrote:

> No, it's a punctuation error, as in:
>
> "Dr, Tim Martin again." "Groan"

I suspect this deserves some sort of international comedy award.

thanks. Gotta go and get a replacement cup of coffee now.

--
Trevor Hemsley, Brighton, UK.
Trevor-Hemsley at dsl dot pipex dot com

On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 13:24:52 GMT, letoured@nospam.net wrote:

>Stop trolling and trying to divert attention from the fact that ecs is
>dead.



>>>Bottom line: Anyone or any company who has to rely on freeware
>>>programmers to keep the product working, is out of business.

You seem to be more concerned with trying to divert attention from the
fact that you've made a preposterous assertion and look like a prat.
You're the one who keeps trying to make this an argument about eCS.
I'm arguing about 'anyone or any company'.

Mike
--
http://www.corestore.org
'As I walk along these shores
I am the history within'

In article , letoured@nospam.net wrote:

> Stop trolling and trying to divert attention from the fact that ecs is
> dead.

ECS is only as dead as OS/2. So yes, in a sense, ECS is dead.

Dan

In article <1117891783.db7319ca31d3b3caa8eb0de66e6ac0b6@terane ws>,
Mike Ross wrote:

> On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 13:24:52 GMT, letoured@nospam.net wrote:
>
> >Stop trolling and trying to divert attention from the fact that ecs is
> >dead.
>
>
>
> >>>Bottom line: Anyone or any company who has to rely on freeware
> >>>programmers to keep the product working, is out of business.
>
> You seem to be more concerned with trying to divert attention from the
> fact that you've made a preposterous assertion and look like a prat.

He's not known as "Eddie LeTard" for nothing, ya know!

Dan

In <1117891783.db7319ca31d3b3caa8eb0de66e6ac0b6@terane ws>, on 06/04/2005
at 09:32 AM, Mike Ross said:

>On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 13:24:52 GMT, letoured@nospam.net wrote:

>>Stop trolling and trying to divert attention from the fact that ecs is
>>dead.

>

>>>>Bottom line: Anyone or any company who has to rely on freeware
>>>>programmers to keep the product working, is out of business.

>You seem to be more concerned with trying to divert attention from the
>fact that you've made a preposterous assertion and look like a prat.
>You're the one who keeps trying to make this an argument about eCS. I'm
>arguing about 'anyone or any company'.

Really? What assertion is that? -->ecs is a commercial product. It is
now relying on freeware authors for *critical *components. Only a
complete ****ing moron -- that's you -->would try to claim thats normal
and good.

It means ecs is dead, the company behind it is *broke. Or they would hire
staff to do the work. Now smarten up and stop the trolling.






>Mike
>--
>http://www.corestore.org
>'As I walk along these shores
>I am the history within'

On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 23:20:33 GMT, letoured@nospam.net wrote:

>In <1117891783.db7319ca31d3b3caa8eb0de66e6ac0b6@terane ws>, on 06/04/2005
> at 09:32 AM, Mike Ross said:
>
>>On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 13:24:52 GMT, letoured@nospam.net wrote:
>
>>>Stop trolling and trying to divert attention from the fact that ecs is
>>>dead.
>
>>
>
>>>>>Bottom line: Anyone or any company who has to rely on freeware
>>>>>programmers to keep the product working, is out of business.
>
>>You seem to be more concerned with trying to divert attention from the
>>fact that you've made a preposterous assertion and look like a prat.
>>You're the one who keeps trying to make this an argument about eCS. I'm
>>arguing about 'anyone or any company'.
>
>Really? What assertion is that?

You're really not following this very well... perhaps you should take
notes, as you suggested to another poster. This is the assertion I'm
talking about:

>Bottom line: Anyone or any company who has to rely on freeware
>programmers to keep the product working, is out of business.

Mike
--
http://www.corestore.org
'As I walk along these shores
I am the history within'