Re: [mod] Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation - OS2

This is a discussion on Re: [mod] Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation - OS2 ; Jason Bowen wrote: > The eCS Guy wrote: > >> Jason Bowen wrote: >> >>> The OS/2 Guy wrote: >>> >>>> The eCS Guy wrote: >>>> >>>>> Jason Bowen wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> The OS/2 Guy wrote: ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 144

Thread: Re: [mod] Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

  1. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Jason Bowen wrote:
    > The eCS Guy wrote:
    >
    >> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>
    >>> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Strange that he would let my posts go through too.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> I wouldn't let your posts go through if they had come
    >>>>>>> through during my shift. Hell, you don't even use
    >>>>>>> OS/2 and that alone is sufficient for the rule of deletion.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> You're full of ****. Go ahead and post your "shift" times. Punk.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> If he did that then you would know when to avoid his
    >>>>> shift and deletions.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The eCS Guy
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> First, did you notice how pissed off he is with that first
    >>>> sentence? I stepped on a nice big nerve there. Next
    >>>> he offers a plea for "shift" times. He needs those so
    >>>> he can avoid my shift and get one of his silly whines
    >>>> in comp.os.os2.moderated. And finally we have the
    >>>> spittle of disgust: "Punk".
    >>>>
    >>>> How easy it is to make the foolish look dumb.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> So much for what a doctorate means these days. No plea, just proof
    >>> you are too much of a wimp to provide real proof for your claims,
    >>> just like your buddy Eddie. Let's see, to figure out when you are
    >>> the moderator that you claim to be, all I have to do is continually
    >>> post and when I got blocked it will be your time. Of course if you
    >>> let me post, trying to not give yourself away, you've already lost
    >>> because you allow me to post. Have a good day :-). Punk.

    >>
    >>
    >> I think Dr. Martin wins this one. If you continually post, all posts
    >> will
    >> have to be OS/2 related.
    >>
    >> The eCS Guy

    >
    > I win, he claimed he was blocking in the last 24 hours, my post went
    > through.


    Naw, you lose, again. I never claimed I was blocking posts 24/7. I can
    only do it when I'm "on duty" which is a large proportion of the time.
    Take a look at moderated today. No posts. Nada. None. Zilch. This
    is because the postings have never made it into the moderator's bin,
    were deleted from the moderator's bin, or no one posted to the
    moderator's bin.

    No matter what the answer, I win. That's got to drive you nuts.

    --
    Dr. 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

  2. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    The eCS Guy wrote:
    > Jason Bowen wrote:
    >
    >> The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>
    >>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Strange that he would let my posts go through too.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I wouldn't let your posts go through if they had come
    >>>>>>>> through during my shift. Hell, you don't even use
    >>>>>>>> OS/2 and that alone is sufficient for the rule of deletion.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> You're full of ****. Go ahead and post your "shift" times. Punk.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> If he did that then you would know when to avoid his
    >>>>>> shift and deletions.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> The eCS Guy
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> First, did you notice how pissed off he is with that first
    >>>>> sentence? I stepped on a nice big nerve there. Next
    >>>>> he offers a plea for "shift" times. He needs those so
    >>>>> he can avoid my shift and get one of his silly whines
    >>>>> in comp.os.os2.moderated. And finally we have the
    >>>>> spittle of disgust: "Punk".
    >>>>>
    >>>>> How easy it is to make the foolish look dumb.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> So much for what a doctorate means these days. No plea, just proof
    >>>> you are too much of a wimp to provide real proof for your claims,
    >>>> just like your buddy Eddie. Let's see, to figure out when you are
    >>>> the moderator that you claim to be, all I have to do is continually
    >>>> post and when I got blocked it will be your time. Of course if you
    >>>> let me post, trying to not give yourself away, you've already lost
    >>>> because you allow me to post. Have a good day :-). Punk.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> I think Dr. Martin wins this one. If you continually post, all posts
    >>> will
    >>> have to be OS/2 related.
    >>>
    >>> The eCS Guy

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> I win, he claimed he was blocking in the last 24 hours, my post went
    >> through.

    >
    >
    >
    > Maybe you missed his shift.
    >
    > The eCS Guy


    There are two reasons why his post(s) will appear. 1. If they are
    OS/2 relevant enough to be of interest, and (2) he should post
    during my absence. If it is the latter then the other moderators
    would delete any flames or attacks but they too would let through
    an OS/2 relevant posting.

    Jason doesn't use OS/2 at all. He posts purely out of personal
    animosity toward OS/2 users and from a lack of self-confidence
    at his lack of ability to actually use OS/2.

    --
    Dr. 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

  3. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    The eCS Guy wrote:
    > inkleputDEL@ETEisp.com wrote:
    >
    >> Jason Bowen said:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>> How easy it is to make the foolish look dumb.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>> So much for what a doctorate means these days.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Sigh. There went another one.

    >
    >
    > If doctorates are handed out that easy, I want one.
    >
    > The eCS Guy


    It wasn't easy. Took eight years of hard work. Drives
    the naysayers nuts that I now hold a full doctorate.
    That's a good thing.

    --
    Dr. 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

  4. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Mike Ross wrote:
    > On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 19:13:39 -0400, The OS/2 Guy <";
    > OS2Guy"@Gmail.com;> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Mike Ross wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 20:17:15 -0400, The OS/2 Guy <";
    >>>OS2Guy"@Gmail.com;> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>There were a total of 20 messages submitted on 9/21.
    >>>>I deleted 18. Gunny let 2 through.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Curious - what was the problem with the 18 you deleted?

    >>
    >>Why do you think there was a problem? There wasn't.
    >>It was quite easy to push the delete button.

    >
    >
    > Let's just back up a bit here. If there wasn't a problem (i.e. the
    > posts were not spam, on-topic etc. etc.) you wouldn't have deleted
    > them. So I'll rephrase? Why did you delete them?


    You seem to have a comprehension problem. I deleted them
    to prove a point: if they are eCS related spam they will be deleted
    before they ever hit the reviewing stand. I deleted them because
    I have the power to do so. Why is that so hard to understand?
    Read the moderated Charter. It calls for postings strictly related
    to IBM's OS/2, not Serenity's eComStation.

    > Reason I ask is tied-in with another question: why does anyone use the
    > moderated groups anyway? I've seen virtually no commercial spam in any
    > of the os2 groups, and the only one chronically infested with non-OS/2
    > posts is advocacy.


    It started with Jim L. He "plonker" doesn't work even though he
    tries to use it at every opportunity and he can't keep his index
    finger (aka ego) from clicking on those posts he doesn't want
    to read. He was hoping to shift every eCS Luser over to the
    moderated newsgroup so it could be used to "ban" me (and
    every other non-eCS supporter) from telling the truth about eCS.
    Jim is heavily invested in eCS, totally dependent upon Serenity
    for his future computing needs, and desperate to con others
    into buying eCS to help secure his own investment.

    But that isn't happening. eCS has actually lost consumers
    and potential customers. Serenity can't hold on to their
    own business partners, Parallels the latest loss. This latter
    assures the failure of SVISTA and eCS Lusers realize every
    day their investment has been totally wasted.

    > If you're having to moderate the moderated group so heavily it must a
    > spam-magnet compared with the unmoderated groups... I'm not seeing 18
    > spam a day in this group!


    As an eCS investor, you'll never see posts here from eCS
    Lusers as spam. The mere mention of eCS by an eCS
    investor is spam.

    --
    Dr. 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

  5. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Richard Steiner wrote:
    > On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 23:04:29 -0400 in comp.os.os2.misc,
    > The eCS Guy spake unto us, saying:
    >
    >
    >>Mike Ross wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Reason I ask is tied-in with another question: why does anyone use the
    >>>moderated groups anyway? I've seen virtually no commercial spam in any
    >>>of the os2 groups, and the only one chronically infested with non-OS/2
    >>>posts is advocacy.

    >>
    >>Wasn't it to ban posts by Dr. Tim Martin?

    >
    >
    > That was part of the reason for its creation (the exclusion of various
    > kooks, not just Mr. "Martin").


    Let's not mince words, Rich. It was 'revived' specifically to ban
    me primarily, Ed and everyone else who is brave about to
    speak out against or tell the truth about eComStation.

    > You'll notice (if you search in Google) that Tim didn't use his virtual
    > "Dr." title until very recently.


    There is nothing 'virtual' about it, Rich. Took many years of very
    hard work to achieve it. That's something you don't have the
    wherewithal or 'smarts' to accomplish yourself. You're obviously
    jealous.

    --
    Dr. 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

  6. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Mike Ross wrote:
    > On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 10:31:22 -0400, The OS/2 Guy <";
    > OS2Guy"@Gmail.com;> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Mike Ross wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 19:13:39 -0400, The OS/2 Guy <";
    >>>OS2Guy"@Gmail.com;> wrote:

    >
    >
    >
    >
    >>>>Why do you think there was a problem? There wasn't.
    >>>>It was quite easy to push the delete button.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Let's just back up a bit here. If there wasn't a problem (i.e. the
    >>>posts were not spam, on-topic etc. etc.) you wouldn't have deleted
    >>>them. So I'll rephrase? Why did you delete them?

    >>
    >>You seem to have a comprehension problem. I deleted them
    >>to prove a point: if they are eCS related spam they will be deleted
    >>before they ever hit the reviewing stand.

    >
    >
    > OK fair enough; sorry. The more informative answer to my original
    > question, rather than 'why do you think there was a problem?' would
    > have been 'because they were spam' :-)
    >
    >
    >>I have the power to do so. Why is that so hard to understand?
    >>Read the moderated Charter. It calls for postings strictly related
    >>to IBM's OS/2, not Serenity's eComStation.

    >
    >
    > Fair enough - I've never posted to the mod group so never needed to
    > read charter.
    >
    >
    >>It started with Jim L He was hoping to shift every eCS Luser over to the
    >>moderated newsgroup so it could be used to "ban" me

    >
    >
    > ... Well if they're posting about eCS, and that's
    > specifically off-topic for the mod group, then they would be twitted.
    > If they're posting on-topic, no problem. Plenty people use eCS *and*
    > IBM OS/2 - I sure do.


    Yes, you do except the .moderated. charter specifically states
    IBM's OS/2 and not Serenity's eComStation. Jason Bowen has
    learned this, even tho' he doesn't use OS/2 at all, he posts to
    c.o.o.moderated because he wants others to believe he belongs
    in the OS/2 community. To ensure his posts get through the
    filtering mechanism, he posts an OS/2 on-topic item. It may be
    a redundant item but it is related to IBM's OS/2.

    Once posted he has a hissy fit because I didn't delete it.

    >>As an eCS investor,

    >
    >
    > you must be confusing me for someone else; I am NOT and never
    > have been an eCS investor!


    Oh but you are invested. You purchased eCS at the incredible
    low low price of $59. Is that not an investment? If, in the future,
    the eCS product should ever offer something you deem worthy
    of your eCS needs, you'll be forced to buy it from Serenity. Thus,
    your eCS computing future is dependent upon eCs.

    Now you can publicly claim here that you have no intention of
    every 'buying-up' and that this is your one and only investment
    purchase in eCS but that's between you and the Moon. eCS
    Lusers are known for fudging, lying, twitting and avoiding the
    truth and as an eCS investor readers will have little to no credibility
    in your public eCS statements, even tho' they and you may be
    entirely credible.

    You see? That's the price you pay as an investor in eCS.

    >>you'll never see posts here from eCS
    >>Lusers as spam. The mere mention of eCS by an eCS
    >>investor is spam.


    Precisely. You see, eCS does not belong here it belongs
    in its own realm such as news.ecomstation.nl. eCS Lusers
    hope that by posting and reposting in the OS/2 newsgroups
    they will be able to overtake the OS/2 newsgroups. We
    know that will never happen - not as long as there are real
    OS/2 users using OS/2. The only 'viable' possible customer
    base Serenity can market to are naive OS/2 users with (1)
    a large hatred for IBM (Mark "Dodie" Dodel, Richard Steiner,
    Marty Amodeo, Bob "Eager Beaver" Eager, and another
    group longer then my arm) and (2) idyits who have been so
    brain-washed by "The Boob" into believing Serenity can
    somehow wrestle the OS/2 source code away from IBM and
    give them an assured eCS future. Like the cache of "WMD"
    claimed by that idyit in the White House, it's not gonna happen.

    It's like "Lindows" in the Linux newsgroups. Not at all welcome
    despite those pathetic Lindows Lusers who insist "Lindows is
    Linux". What was it I read the other day from the web site of
    the c.o.o.moderated Coordinator? Oh yeah, "Gentoo is a Linux
    distribution that I intensely dislike. The system doesn't seem to
    be put together very well, the overall aim of the system seems
    to be in a bad direction, and any suggestion for change is
    attacked by people who have the Amiga Persecution Complex."

    Replace Gentoo with eComStation, Linux with OS/2 and
    the rest of the sentiment is the same. And let's not forget,
    the above quote comes directly from the web site of one
    of the c.o.o.moderated group's coordinators. The very
    same guy who uses Linux instead of OS/2 and has the
    opportunity each day to delete, remove, ignore, pass by
    and 'deep six' posts that are obviously eCS spam.

    eCS is just a piece of crap being peddled by another
    one of those flaky OS/2 con artists we've all come to
    know and despise.

    >
    > Well from what you said above, the mere mention of eCS by anyone,
    > investor or not, is considered spam in the mod group.


    On my watch it is. The Charter for C.O.O.Moderated clearly
    states the newsgroup was established for IBM's OS/2 operating
    system. It says absolutely zilch about Serenity's piss-poor eCS
    product and that leaves eCS entirely "off-topic".

    --
    Dr. 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

  7. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Bob Eager wrote:
    > On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 18:05:47 UTC, Mike Ross wrote:
    >
    >
    >>>you'll never see posts here from eCS
    >>>Lusers as spam. The mere mention of eCS by an eCS
    >>>investor is spam.

    >
    >
    > That would explain why there are in fact eCS posts in c.o.o.m - NOT!


    Any post with eCS spam in it was posted while I was
    off-duty by the same guy who says on his own Pro-Linux
    site:

    "Gentoo is a Linux distribution that I intensely dislike. The system
    doesn't seem to be put together very well, the overall aim of the
    system seems to be in a bad direction, and any suggestion for
    change is attacked by people who have the Amiga Persecution
    Complex."

    Quite hypocritical but remember, he is a Linux user who is
    deciding the fate of the *real* OS/2 IBM user.

    >>Well from what you said above, the mere mention of eCS by anyone,
    >>investor or not, is considered spam in the mod group.

    >
    > Not at all. But remember that there is ONE moderator for that
    > group...and it isn't the deluded individual you were replying to.


    You have no idea who the moderator is. What you know is
    that the Master Moderator's List lists the aliases of the only
    Moderator and his four "coordinators".

    BTW, do you see any posts in c.o.o.moderated today?
    Nope. I've been on duty most of the day. :-)

    That drives you nuts Eager Beaver, absolutely nuts!

    --
    Dr. 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

  8. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Mike Ross wrote:
    > On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 12:48:11 -0400, The OS/2 Guy <";
    > OS2Guy"@Gmail.com;> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Mike Ross wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 10:31:22 -0400, The OS/2 Guy <";
    >>>OS2Guy"@Gmail.com;> wrote:

    >
    >
    >
    >
    >>>>As an eCS investor,

    >
    >
    >
    >>> you must be confusing me for someone else; I am NOT and never
    >>>have been an eCS investor!

    >
    >
    >>Oh but you are invested. You purchased eCS at the incredible
    >>low low price of $59. Is that not an investment?

    >
    >
    > Of course not.


    Deny it all you want. Your $59 was an investment in eCS
    and the future of the company who sold it to you.

    >>If, in the future,
    >>the eCS product should ever offer something you deem worthy
    >>of your eCS needs, you'll be forced to buy it from Serenity.

    >
    >
    > Of course I'll be forced to buy it from Serenity - it will be the only
    > place to go!


    That's because your eCS product is proprietary and you can't
    turn elsewhere.

    >
    > I've been called many things in my time, but never a luser.


    Accept it. You are an eCS Luser.

    >
    > The price I paid to purchase eCS was $59. That's gone. Spent. Game
    > over.


    That's right. The $59 you took out of your wallet went into
    the investment of Serenity's eCS.

    Now maybe you can understand the difference between
    renting and investing.

    --
    Dr. 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

  9. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Mike Ross wrote:
    > On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 15:55:23 -0400, The OS/2 Guy <";
    > OS2Guy"@Gmail.com;> wrote:
    >
    >>Mike Ross wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Oh but you are invested. You purchased eCS at the incredible
    >>>>low low price of $59. Is that not an investment?
    >>>
    >>>Of course not.

    >>
    >>Deny it all you want. Your $59 was an investment in eCS
    >>and the future of the company who sold it to you.

    >
    > Of course it wasn't an investment.


    Of course *it was* an investment. Your continued denial
    is useless. No one gives a damn what stocks your wife
    manages on Wall Street, not all investments sit in portfolios.
    Every reader here knows you plopped down $59 for a
    cut rate price on a piece of crap software. That transaction
    is an investment.

    Here's the bottom line, Mike. You have tried repeatedly
    to tout the value of eCS - a financial value that no new
    eCS consumer can obtain today. You are here for one
    and only one reason: to promote your $59 eCS investment.

    That makes you an eCS Investor Salesman and an
    individual not wanted much less welcomed in the OS/2
    newsgroups. So stop. Run to the eCS newsgroups and
    tell "The Boob" you failed to persuade any one that eCS
    is a viable product with a future. You are not here to
    support or advocate the use OS/2. Your posts have
    nothing to do with OS/2.

    eCS has its own newsgroup: news.ecomstation.nl
    Go there. Wave your $59 purchase there and see
    how many other eCS Lusers will yell back "F you!"
    knowing full well they had to pay over $300 for the
    same pathetic problematic "it don't work" product.

    You know why you won't do it? Because you know
    damn well that's exactly what the other eCS Lusers
    will say and do.

    --
    Dr. 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

  10. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Here in comp.os.os2.misc,
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=A9_The_OS/2_Guy_=A9?= <"; OS2Guy"@Gmail.com;>
    spake unto us, saying:

    >It's like "Lindows" in the Linux newsgroups. Not at all welcome
    >despite those pathetic Lindows Lusers who insist "Lindows is
    >Linux".


    Lindows is (or was) a Linux distro, and it was (and is) a valid topic
    in the comp.os.linux.* hierarchy. I read many of those groups as well,
    though I've not been as active a participant over the past 4-5 years.

    Yeah, you get some folks who slam folks asking about Lindows, but the
    Linux newsgroups are as full of trolls as the OS/2 newsgroups are.

    >eCS is just a piece of crap being peddled by another
    >one of those flaky OS/2 con artists we've all come to
    >know and despise.


    Hey, it works for me on my hardware, and it runs the software that I
    install on it. What more can one ask of an OS?

    --
    -Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Mableton, 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.

  11. [FUD4] Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Here in comp.os.os2.misc,
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=A9_The_OS/2_Guy_=A9?= <"; OS2Guy"@Gmail.com;>
    spake unto us, saying:

    >Richard Steiner wrote:
    >
    >> That was part of the reason for its creation (the exclusion of various
    >> kooks, not just Mr. "Martin").

    >
    >Let's not mince words, Rich. It was 'revived' specifically to ban
    >me primarily, Ed and everyone else who is brave about to speak out
    >against or tell the truth about eComStation.


    I was talking about the comp.os.os2.moderated group's initial creation,
    not the current attempt to revive it.

    You're right, though -- the current incarnation was revived because a
    few people in the c.o.o.* groups (yourself included) are making life
    difficult for people who aren't skilled in newsreader usage and who
    want to concentrate on technical issues in these groups.

    Comments about eComStation are on-topic in comp.os.os2.ecomstation and
    (if about OS/2 topics in general) in various other OS/2 newsgroups, and
    comp.os.os2.moderated is now available as well if people want to avoid
    the various flamewars that occur in here from time to time.

    >> You'll notice (if you search in Google) that Tim didn't use his irtual
    >> "Dr." title until very recently.

    >
    >There is nothing 'virtual' about it, Rich. Took many years of very
    >hard work to achieve it.


    Okay. What subject? Where and when did you obtain your PhD?

    With that information, it should be easy to verify the existence of
    your degree, and there really isn't much reason to hide it (I would
    think that info would lend some legitimacy to your presence here).

    >That's something you don't have the wherewithal or 'smarts' to
    >accomplish yourself. You're obviously jealous.


    A PhD certainly indicates a certain level of dedication to a subject,
    but in my experience it isn't necessarily an indicator of intelligence
    or ability. I've met plenty of smart or even brilliant folks who have
    such a degree, but I've also met a few that I consider somewhat lacking
    in the brains and experience department. It depends on the person.

    Besides, I'm an applications developer/analyst, and my BSCS (Mankato
    State University, 1987 -- feel free to verify) and work experience has
    served me fairly well in the positions that I've been interested in
    over the past 18 years or so.

    A Masters or PhD simply isn't worth it in my line of work, at least if
    I want to continue in a technical track (and I plan on doing just that
    as long as I can). Someday I might consider an MBA if I find myself
    being steered towards a management position, tho.

    --
    -Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Mableton, 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.

  12. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    The eCS Guy wrote:
    > Jason Bowen wrote:
    >
    >> The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>
    >>> Jason Bowen wrote:

    >>
    >>
    >>>> I win, he claimed he was blocking in the last 24 hours, my post went
    >>>> through.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Maybe you missed his shift.

    >>
    >>
    >> Oh I'm sure I did. Mine just happened to be one that slipped through.

    >
    >
    > Maybe. It wasn't off-topic and OS/2 related. Those tend to "slip
    > through".
    >


    Can you read? He said my posts won't get through. In the time frame he
    claimed to be moderating, I posted and it went through.


    >> Me thinks he got sloppy and didn't check when making his claim. LOL.

    >
    >
    > Or maybe you got lucky and missed his shift.
    >


    LOL, my what a sycophant you are.

    >> There are no shifts, the moderation system is set up to email the
    >> moderator(s). It does't look at what time it is and say I'll send to
    >> this person or that one.

    >
    >
    > We know there are four coordinators according to the Master
    > Moderator's List. Sounds like shift work to me.
    >


    What it sounds like to you is irrelevant. What is really happening is
    relevant.

    > The eCS Guy


  13. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >
    >
    > There are two reasons why his post(s) will appear. 1. If they are
    > OS/2 relevant enough to be of interest, and (2) he should post
    > during my absence. If it is the latter then the other moderators
    > would delete any flames or attacks but they too would let through
    > an OS/2 relevant posting.
    >


    I posted when you claimed to be moderating. Punk.

    > Jason doesn't use OS/2 at all. He posts purely out of personal
    > animosity toward OS/2 users and from a lack of self-confidence
    > at his lack of ability to actually use OS/2.
    >


    LOL, this reeks of over justification for your behavior. You lack so
    much self-confidence that you make up a fake doctorate, and fake
    positions and fake supporters.

  14. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    > The eCS Guy wrote:
    >
    >> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>
    >>> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Strange that he would let my posts go through too.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> I wouldn't let your posts go through if they had come
    >>>>>>> through during my shift. Hell, you don't even use
    >>>>>>> OS/2 and that alone is sufficient for the rule of deletion.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> You're full of ****. Go ahead and post your "shift" times. Punk.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> If he did that then you would know when to avoid his
    >>>>> shift and deletions.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The eCS Guy
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> First, did you notice how pissed off he is with that first
    >>>> sentence? I stepped on a nice big nerve there. Next
    >>>> he offers a plea for "shift" times. He needs those so
    >>>> he can avoid my shift and get one of his silly whines
    >>>> in comp.os.os2.moderated. And finally we have the
    >>>> spittle of disgust: "Punk".
    >>>>
    >>>> How easy it is to make the foolish look dumb.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> So much for what a doctorate means these days. No plea, just proof
    >>> you are too much of a wimp to provide real proof for your claims,
    >>> just like your buddy Eddie. Let's see, to figure out when you are
    >>> the moderator that you claim to be, all I have to do is continually
    >>> post and when I got blocked it will be your time. Of course if you
    >>> let me post, trying to not give yourself away, you've already lost
    >>> because you allow me to post. Have a good day :-). Punk.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> I think Dr. Martin wins this one. If you continually post, all posts
    >> will
    >> have to be OS/2 related.
    >>
    >> The eCS Guy

    >
    >
    > I will *always* win against Jason Bowen. Jason doesn't use OS/2
    > at all. He hangs out in the OS/2 newsgroups and harasses OS/2
    > users. Why? He was never able to grasp an ability to actually
    > handle OS/2. It was beyond his capabilities.
    >


    Sure... tell me about Warp City hosting on their Linux server.... LOL.
    Tell me about ipv4 octets with values over 256. Tell me about trying to
    claim you were running Warp City on multiple servers when all you were
    doing was using .ht files and when I called you on it you screamed about
    how I gave away how people secure their servers. Tell me about not
    being able to use chmod and exposing your log files which showed that
    you were lying about your users. I can grasp plenty, you only grasp
    yourself.

  15. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    > Jason Bowen wrote:
    >
    >> The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>
    >>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Strange that he would let my posts go through too.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I wouldn't let your posts go through if they had come
    >>>>>>>> through during my shift. Hell, you don't even use
    >>>>>>>> OS/2 and that alone is sufficient for the rule of deletion.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> You're full of ****. Go ahead and post your "shift" times. Punk.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> If he did that then you would know when to avoid his
    >>>>>> shift and deletions.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> The eCS Guy
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> First, did you notice how pissed off he is with that first
    >>>>> sentence? I stepped on a nice big nerve there. Next
    >>>>> he offers a plea for "shift" times. He needs those so
    >>>>> he can avoid my shift and get one of his silly whines
    >>>>> in comp.os.os2.moderated. And finally we have the
    >>>>> spittle of disgust: "Punk".
    >>>>>
    >>>>> How easy it is to make the foolish look dumb.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> So much for what a doctorate means these days. No plea, just proof
    >>>> you are too much of a wimp to provide real proof for your claims,
    >>>> just like your buddy Eddie. Let's see, to figure out when you are
    >>>> the moderator that you claim to be, all I have to do is continually
    >>>> post and when I got blocked it will be your time. Of course if you
    >>>> let me post, trying to not give yourself away, you've already lost
    >>>> because you allow me to post. Have a good day :-). Punk.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> I think Dr. Martin wins this one. If you continually post, all posts
    >>> will
    >>> have to be OS/2 related.
    >>>
    >>> The eCS Guy

    >>
    >>
    >> I win, he claimed he was blocking in the last 24 hours, my post went
    >> through.

    >
    >
    > Naw, you lose, again. I never claimed I was blocking posts 24/7. I can
    > only do it when I'm "on duty" which is a large proportion of the time.
    > Take a look at moderated today. No posts. Nada. None. Zilch. This
    > is because the postings have never made it into the moderator's bin,
    > were deleted from the moderator's bin, or no one posted to the
    > moderator's bin.
    >
    > No matter what the answer, I win. That's got to drive you nuts.
    >


    Doesn't drive me nuts, you've never once proven your claims. You're
    just a liar, plain and simple. You're an anonymous huckster that has no
    life and props himself up falsely.

  16. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Jason Bowen wrote:
    > The eCS Guy wrote:
    >
    >> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>
    >>> The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>> I win, he claimed he was blocking in the last 24 hours, my post
    >>>>> went through.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Maybe you missed his shift.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Oh I'm sure I did. Mine just happened to be one that slipped through.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Maybe. It wasn't off-topic and OS/2 related. Those tend to "slip
    >> through".
    >>

    >
    > Can you read? He said my posts won't get through. In the time frame he
    > claimed to be moderating, I posted and it went through.


    He said your posts won't get through when he is on duty. He gave
    no timeframe.

    >>> Me thinks he got sloppy and didn't check when making his claim. LOL.

    >>
    >> Or maybe you got lucky and missed his shift.

    >
    > LOL, my what a sycophant you are.


    Then post his shift and verify it is his shift.

    >
    >>> There are no shifts, the moderation system is set up to email the
    >>> moderator(s). It does't look at what time it is and say I'll send to
    >>> this person or that one.

    >>
    >> We know there are four coordinators according to the Master
    >> Moderator's List. Sounds like shift work to me.

    >
    > What it sounds like to you is irrelevant. What is really happening is
    > relevant.


    It sounds like he has embarassed you and you can't deal with it.

    The eCS Guy

  17. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Jason Bowen wrote:
    > The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> There are two reasons why his post(s) will appear. 1. If they are
    >> OS/2 relevant enough to be of interest, and (2) he should post
    >> during my absence. If it is the latter then the other moderators
    >> would delete any flames or attacks but they too would let through
    >> an OS/2 relevant posting.
    >>

    >
    > I posted when you claimed to be moderating. Punk.


    You still haven't identified his moderating shift. Post it.

    >
    >> Jason doesn't use OS/2 at all. He posts purely out of personal
    >> animosity toward OS/2 users and from a lack of self-confidence
    >> at his lack of ability to actually use OS/2.

    >
    > LOL, this reeks of over justification for your behavior. You lack so
    > much self-confidence that you make up a fake doctorate, and fake
    > positions and fake supporters.


    The only faker here seems to be you. Why don't you use OS/2?

    The eCS Guy



  18. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    Jason Bowen wrote:
    > The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >
    >> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>
    >>> The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Strange that he would let my posts go through too.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> I wouldn't let your posts go through if they had come
    >>>>>>>>> through during my shift. Hell, you don't even use
    >>>>>>>>> OS/2 and that alone is sufficient for the rule of deletion.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> You're full of ****. Go ahead and post your "shift" times. Punk.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> If he did that then you would know when to avoid his
    >>>>>>> shift and deletions.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> The eCS Guy
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> First, did you notice how pissed off he is with that first
    >>>>>> sentence? I stepped on a nice big nerve there. Next
    >>>>>> he offers a plea for "shift" times. He needs those so
    >>>>>> he can avoid my shift and get one of his silly whines
    >>>>>> in comp.os.os2.moderated. And finally we have the
    >>>>>> spittle of disgust: "Punk".
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> How easy it is to make the foolish look dumb.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> So much for what a doctorate means these days. No plea, just proof
    >>>>> you are too much of a wimp to provide real proof for your claims,
    >>>>> just like your buddy Eddie. Let's see, to figure out when you are
    >>>>> the moderator that you claim to be, all I have to do is continually
    >>>>> post and when I got blocked it will be your time. Of course if you
    >>>>> let me post, trying to not give yourself away, you've already lost
    >>>>> because you allow me to post. Have a good day :-). Punk.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> I think Dr. Martin wins this one. If you continually post, all
    >>>> posts will
    >>>> have to be OS/2 related.
    >>>>
    >>>> The eCS Guy
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> I win, he claimed he was blocking in the last 24 hours, my post went
    >>> through.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Naw, you lose, again. I never claimed I was blocking posts 24/7. I can
    >> only do it when I'm "on duty" which is a large proportion of the time.
    >> Take a look at moderated today. No posts. Nada. None. Zilch. This
    >> is because the postings have never made it into the moderator's bin,
    >> were deleted from the moderator's bin, or no one posted to the
    >> moderator's bin.
    >>
    >> No matter what the answer, I win. That's got to drive you nuts.
    >>

    >
    > Doesn't drive me nuts, you've never once proven your claims. You're
    > just a liar, plain and simple. You're an anonymous huckster that has no
    > life and props himself up falsely.


    Your continued ponitifcation proves you wrong.

    The eCS Guy

  19. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    The eCS Guy wrote:
    > Jason Bowen wrote:
    >
    >> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>
    >>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> The eCS Guy wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Jason Bowen wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>> Strange that he would let my posts go through too.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> I wouldn't let your posts go through if they had come
    >>>>>>>>>> through during my shift. Hell, you don't even use
    >>>>>>>>>> OS/2 and that alone is sufficient for the rule of deletion.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> You're full of ****. Go ahead and post your "shift" times. Punk.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> If he did that then you would know when to avoid his
    >>>>>>>> shift and deletions.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> The eCS Guy
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> First, did you notice how pissed off he is with that first
    >>>>>>> sentence? I stepped on a nice big nerve there. Next
    >>>>>>> he offers a plea for "shift" times. He needs those so
    >>>>>>> he can avoid my shift and get one of his silly whines
    >>>>>>> in comp.os.os2.moderated. And finally we have the
    >>>>>>> spittle of disgust: "Punk".
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> How easy it is to make the foolish look dumb.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> So much for what a doctorate means these days. No plea, just
    >>>>>> proof you are too much of a wimp to provide real proof for your
    >>>>>> claims, just like your buddy Eddie. Let's see, to figure out when
    >>>>>> you are the moderator that you claim to be, all I have to do is
    >>>>>> continually post and when I got blocked it will be your time. Of
    >>>>>> course if you let me post, trying to not give yourself away,
    >>>>>> you've already lost because you allow me to post. Have a good day
    >>>>>> :-). Punk.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I think Dr. Martin wins this one. If you continually post, all
    >>>>> posts will
    >>>>> have to be OS/2 related.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The eCS Guy
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> I win, he claimed he was blocking in the last 24 hours, my post went
    >>>> through.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Naw, you lose, again. I never claimed I was blocking posts 24/7. I can
    >>> only do it when I'm "on duty" which is a large proportion of the time.
    >>> Take a look at moderated today. No posts. Nada. None. Zilch. This
    >>> is because the postings have never made it into the moderator's bin,
    >>> were deleted from the moderator's bin, or no one posted to the
    >>> moderator's bin.
    >>>
    >>> No matter what the answer, I win. That's got to drive you nuts.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Doesn't drive me nuts, you've never once proven your claims. You're
    >> just a liar, plain and simple. You're an anonymous huckster that has
    >> no life and props himself up falsely.

    >
    >
    > Your continued ponitifcation proves you wrong.
    >
    > The eCS Guy


    With every post he proves I drive him nuts. I LOVE that!!! :-)

    --
    Dr. 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

  20. Re: Decision on coom and cooa policy on eComStation

    The eCS Guy wrote:
    > Jason Bowen wrote:
    >
    >> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> There are two reasons why his post(s) will appear. 1. If they are
    >>> OS/2 relevant enough to be of interest, and (2) he should post
    >>> during my absence. If it is the latter then the other moderators
    >>> would delete any flames or attacks but they too would let through
    >>> an OS/2 relevant posting.
    >>>

    >>
    >> I posted when you claimed to be moderating. Punk.

    >
    >
    > You still haven't identified his moderating shift. Post it.


    He doesn't know what my shift is. He just knows that if I
    am on duty his posts won't go through. It's already happened
    about fifteen times. I keep deleting his silly no-nothing
    messages.

    >>> Jason doesn't use OS/2 at all. He posts purely out of personal
    >>> animosity toward OS/2 users and from a lack of self-confidence
    >>> at his lack of ability to actually use OS/2.

    >>
    >>
    >> LOL, this reeks of over justification for your behavior. You lack so
    >> much self-confidence that you make up a fake doctorate, and fake
    >> positions and fake supporters.

    >
    >
    > The only faker here seems to be you. Why don't you use OS/2?
    >
    > The eCS Guy


    Jason spent four very long years at Colorado.edu and was eventually
    forced to give it up. No degree, no nothing and his parents had to
    pay the bill.

    You can understand why he goes berserk when I mention my
    own 8 years of college and the end result of a Doctorate.

    --
    Dr. 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

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast