OS/2 WARP 4 CD Problem!!! - OS2

This is a discussion on OS/2 WARP 4 CD Problem!!! - OS2 ; Hi Ed letoured@nospam.net wrote: > Stop the bull****. My reader didn't mis-read anything. It doesn't thread > anything. Its plain ascii text that I see. The fact is, dodel quoted > someone else and attributed it to me. Its in ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 23 of 23

Thread: OS/2 WARP 4 CD Problem!!!

  1. [FUD4] Re: dodel lies again (Re: OS/2 WARP 4 CD Problem!!!)

    Hi Ed

    letoured@nospam.net wrote:
    > Stop the bull****. My reader didn't mis-read anything. It doesn't thread
    > anything. Its plain ascii text that I see. The fact is, dodel quoted
    > someone else and attributed it to me. Its in black and white and he's
    > either stupid or trolling or both.
    >
    > Now you can stop it too.
    >
    >




    What I see is Mark quoting a poster, Colin, responding to your comments.

    Should I see something different?

    Regards

    Pete



    >
    >
    >
    >
    > In , on 09/30/2006
    > at 01:34 PM, Peter Brown said:
    >
    >
    >
    >> Hi Ed

    >
    >> letoured@nospam.net wrote:
    >>> In , on 09/29/2006
    >>> at 09:06 PM, "Mark Dodel" said:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 00:25:23 UTC, letoured@nospam.net wrote:
    >>>> ->
    >>>> -> Stop lying dodel. You directly quoted what someone else said as
    >>>> coming -> from me.
    >>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 00:25:23 UTC, letoured@nospam.net wrote:
    >>>> -> Bizarre rant deleted.
    >>>> Whatever the voices tell you nutball.
    >>>
    >>> Would you like me to repost your exact words dodel? I'll make an idiot
    >>> you of you with your own post -- you game there boy? Its about 5 or 6
    >>> posts back. If you would pull your head out of your ass, you could figure
    >>> it out too.
    >>>
    >>> The fact is you directly quoted what someone else said as coming -> from
    >>> me. I corrected you and now --->You're one whiny, stupid, angry,
    >>> imbecile -- when you ought to be a man and just shut up.
    >>>
    >>>

    >
    >
    >> Having read what you are ranting about I think you ought to re-read it
    >> yourself.

    >
    >> It is obvious who said what and if you cannot see that then there is
    >> something wrong with either:-

    >
    >> 1] your software failing to display post correctly

    >
    >> 2] your eyes are not functioning correctly

    >
    >> 3] your brain is not interpreting the images from your eyes correctly

    >
    >
    >> Of course, it could be any combination of the above...

    >
    >
    >> Hope that helps

    >
    >> Pete

    >


  2. [FUD4]Re: dodel lies again (Re: OS/2 WARP 4 CD Problem!!!)

    letoured@nospam.net wrote:
    > Thanks for proving you're an ecs shill dodel -->You snipped parts of text
    > writting by another to make it look like I wrote all of the included text
    > you quoted below.
    >
    > Idiots like you can't even be honorable enough to prove people wrong with
    > facts. Probably because you don't have any to support your claims --
    > thus, in the end, proving me (and others who tell the truth) right.
    >
    > Now grow up little boy and learn to control your anger.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > n , on 09/29/2006
    > at 08:20 AM, "Mark Dodel" said:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >>On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 03:49:07 UTC, Colin Campbell
    >> wrote:

    >
    >
    >>-> letoured@nospam.net wrote:

    E>>-> > Stop the ecs shilling. Warp 4.52 has everything but the problems
    E>>-- that -> > ecs has.
    >>-> >
    >>-> >

    C>>-> Sorry, I don't think that pointing out that eCS is much more modern
    C>>than -> Warp 4.0 and that it has some support for low volume license
    C>>types like -> us is "shilling" for eCS.
    C>>->
    C>>-> To be guilty of that, I'd have to point out that eCS 2.0 will have ->
    C>>features that even Warp 4.52 doesn't, and never will, have. When will
    C>>-> you be booting 4.52 from a JFS volume? When will you have modern ACPI
    C>>-> support? When will you have a native OS/2 version of OpenOffice 2.0?
    C>>->
    C>>-> No, I'm not going to do that, so rest easy.
    >
    >

    M>>There's not much point to arguing with ed. He's insane. All we can
    M>>hope is that some day he will move on to torturing some other
    M>>platform's users like his buddy the psychotroll.
    M>
    M>
    M>>Mark (running eComStation 2.0 M2B2)
    >
    >
    >
    >

    Come now, Ed:

    You accuse Mark of snipping part of Colin's message and attributing things to
    you that were written by another.

    In fact, Colin quoted one sentence of yours from a previous post, snipping the
    rest of the message. He then added three short paragraphs of response.

    Mark quoted Colin's entire message, snipping nothing, and added a paragraph of
    response and a tag line.

    You made your accusation and then quoted Mark's message which became somewhat
    garbled due to line wrap.

    I will be charitable and simply say that you are either mistaken or confused.
    Others will no doubt be more realistic and reach a different conclusion.

    I have quoted your entire post above and added at the left margin an E to lines
    Mark's message attributes to you, a C to lines which his message attributes to
    Colin and an M to the lines that Mark added himself. Anyone who knows how to
    interpret newsgroup messages can see that these annotations are correct and can
    look back in the thread to see the original messages and confirm that the
    attributions are indeed accurate.

    Moreover you have top posted which at the very least is frowned upon and have
    altered the subject line to make it appear that you were replying to a message
    entitled "dodel lies again (Re: OS/2 WARP 4 CD Problem!!!)" when the actual
    title was "[FUD4] Re: OS/2 WARP 4 CD Problem!!!"

    So tell us honestly, who's the offender here?

  3. Re: dodel lies again (Re: OS/2 WARP 4 CD Problem!!!)



    I guess I'll have to post the whole thing for you -->and we'll see if you
    characters have the integrity to just shut up when you're wrong.





    In , on 10/01/2006
    at 01:38 AM, "James J. Weinkam" said:



    >letoured@nospam.net wrote:
    >> Thanks for proving you're an ecs shill dodel -->You snipped parts of text
    >> writting by another to make it look like I wrote all of the included text
    >> you quoted below.
    >>
    >> Idiots like you can't even be honorable enough to prove people wrong with
    >> facts. Probably because you don't have any to support your claims --
    >> thus, in the end, proving me (and others who tell the truth) right.
    >>
    >> Now grow up little boy and learn to control your anger.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> n , on 09/29/2006
    >> at 08:20 AM, "Mark Dodel" said:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 03:49:07 UTC, Colin Campbell
    >>> wrote:

    >>
    >>
    >>>-> letoured@nospam.net wrote:

    >E>>-> > Stop the ecs shilling. Warp 4.52 has everything but the
    >problems E>>-- that -> > ecs has.
    >>>-> >
    >>>-> >

    >C>>-> Sorry, I don't think that pointing out that eCS is much more modern
    >C>>than -> Warp 4.0 and that it has some support for low volume license
    >C>>types like -> us is "shilling" for eCS.
    >C>>->
    >C>>-> To be guilty of that, I'd have to point out that eCS 2.0 will have
    >-> C>>features that even Warp 4.52 doesn't, and never will, have. When
    >will C>>-> you be booting 4.52 from a JFS volume? When will you have
    >modern ACPI C>>-> support? When will you have a native OS/2 version of
    >OpenOffice 2.0? C>>->
    >C>>-> No, I'm not going to do that, so rest easy.
    >>
    >>

    >M>>There's not much point to arguing with ed. He's insane. All we can
    >M>>hope is that some day he will move on to torturing some other
    >M>>platform's users like his buddy the psychotroll.
    >M>
    >M>
    >M>>Mark (running eComStation 2.0 M2B2)
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >Come now, Ed:


    >You accuse Mark of snipping part of Colin's message and attributing
    >things to you that were written by another.


    >In fact, Colin quoted one sentence of yours from a previous post,
    >snipping the rest of the message. He then added three short paragraphs
    >of response.


    >Mark quoted Colin's entire message, snipping nothing, and added a
    >paragraph of response and a tag line.


    >You made your accusation and then quoted Mark's message which became
    >somewhat garbled due to line wrap.


    >I will be charitable and simply say that you are either mistaken or
    >confused. Others will no doubt be more realistic and reach a different
    >conclusion.


    >I have quoted your entire post above and added at the left margin an E to
    >lines Mark's message attributes to you, a C to lines which his message
    >attributes to Colin and an M to the lines that Mark added himself.
    >Anyone who knows how to interpret newsgroup messages can see that these
    >annotations are correct and can look back in the thread to see the
    >original messages and confirm that the attributions are indeed accurate.


    >Moreover you have top posted which at the very least is frowned upon and
    >have altered the subject line to make it appear that you were replying
    >to a message entitled "dodel lies again (Re: OS/2 WARP 4 CD Problem!!!)"
    >when the actual title was "[FUD4] Re: OS/2 WARP 4 CD Problem!!!"


    >So tell us honestly, who's the offender here?



+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2