"CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
Xns99EBADD5C6314isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 5:05 PM:
> Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in
> news:C364899D.99C68%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
>
>> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
>> Xns99EB7375A9473isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 11:21 AM:
>>
>>> Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in news:C36459FB.99C0B%
>>> CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
>>>
>>>> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
>>>> Xns99EB504CFA479isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 7:53 AM:
>>>>
>>>>> Oxford <linuxlovesosx@supersmart.com> wrote in
>>>>> news:linuxlovesosx-A4028C.23070516112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net
>>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>>> CozmicDebris <isheforreal> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No he didn't, and I'd be willing to bet that a number of $700
>>>>>>> laptops do more than an Apple.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bet... go find a $700 laptop that has more features than this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I win- every one I looked at had all of those features and more.
>>>>
>>>> Damn, Oxford, once he posts those links you sure are going to have
>>>> egg on your face!
>>>>
>>>> Oh.
>>>>
>>>> Never mind.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Gee, Snot- you seem awfulk sure of yourself. You might want to
>>> research a little more before stepping into it like that.
>>
>> Hey! You forgot the links! LOL!
>>
>>
>
> I posted it and strangely enough, you didn't respond to that one, Snot.
> How interesting.
> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
> Xns99EBADD5C6314isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 5:05 PM:
>
>> Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in
>> news:C364899D.99C68%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
>>
>>> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
>>> Xns99EB7375A9473isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 11:21 AM:
>>>
>>>> Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in news:C36459FB.99C0B%
>>>> CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
>>>>
>>>>> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
>>>>> Xns99EB504CFA479isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 7:53 AM:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Oxford <linuxlovesosx@supersmart.com> wrote in
>>>>>> news:linuxlovesosx-A4028C.23070516112007@mpls-nnrp-
03.inet.qwest.net
>>>>>> :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> CozmicDebris <isheforreal> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No he didn't, and I'd be willing to bet that a number of $700
>>>>>>>> laptops do more than an Apple.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bet... go find a $700 laptop that has more features than this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I win- every one I looked at had all of those features and more.
>>>>>
>>>>> Damn, Oxford, once he posts those links you sure are going to have
>>>>> egg on your face!
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh.
>>>>>
>>>>> Never mind.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Gee, Snot- you seem awfulk sure of yourself. You might want to
>>>> research a little more before stepping into it like that.
>>>
>>> Hey! You forgot the links! LOL!
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I posted it and strangely enough, you didn't respond to that one,
Snot.
>> How interesting.
>
> What post did you think I did not respond to.
>
> Oh.
>
> None.
>
> Oh well. You are just delaying.
>
>
Posted hours ago, twit. You're so stupid that you forgot your own
delayed response to it.
"CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
Xns99EBAFEFC6245isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 5:17 PM:
>> What post did you think I did not respond to.
>>
>> Oh.
>>
>> None.
>>
>> Oh well. You are just delaying.
>>
>>
>
> Posted hours ago, twit. You're so stupid that you forgot your own
> delayed response to it.
>
> Snot is not very smart.
And now you are going as far off topic as you can. OK. Let me know if you
decide if you think I responded or not.
Better yet: actually support your claims... remember, here are your claims:
* Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
* Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
* I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you are right.
* You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the Mac Oxford
pointed to.
You have linked to a laptop to try to support your last claim... I commend
you for that, though you failed to actually offer a comparison between the
two machines.
--
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.
--Aldous Huxley
Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in
news:C364D7A3.99D5E%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
> Xns99EBAFEFC6245isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 5:17 PM:
>
>>> What post did you think I did not respond to.
>>>
>>> Oh.
>>>
>>> None.
>>>
>>> Oh well. You are just delaying.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Posted hours ago, twit. You're so stupid that you forgot your own
>> delayed response to it.
>>
>> Snot is not very smart.
>
> And now you are going as far off topic as you can. OK. Let me know
> if you decide if you think I responded or not.
>
> Better yet: actually support your claims... remember, here are your
> claims:
>
> * Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
> right.
Wikipedia is full of inaacuracy and lies. No serious debate can occur
with wikipedia as the authoritative souce.
> * Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
> right.
The quote used did not support the newbie's claim.
> * I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you
> are right.
And by making this a point of contention, you simply prove my spelling
to be more appropriate.
> * You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the
> Mac Oxford
> pointed to.
And I did. The fact that you are too stupid to make your comparison of
data is not my problem.
>
> You have linked to a laptop to try to support your last claim
It was not a "try"- it fully supports my claim, child. And moments ago
(see above), you were claiming that I had not posted the link.
Now who's delaying?
>... I
> commend you for that, though you failed to actually offer a comparison
> between the two machines.
>
Here's my comparison- the laptop that I linked to has more functionality
at lower cost than a $1000 crapbook.
"CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
Xns99EBB4BA24AF8isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 5:45 PM:
> Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in
> news:C364D7A3.99D5E%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
>
>> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
>> Xns99EBAFEFC6245isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 5:17 PM:
>>
>>>> What post did you think I did not respond to.
>>>>
>>>> Oh.
>>>>
>>>> None.
>>>>
>>>> Oh well. You are just delaying.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Posted hours ago, twit. You're so stupid that you forgot your own
>>> delayed response to it.
>>>
>>> Snot is not very smart.
>>
>> And now you are going as far off topic as you can. OK. Let me know
>> if you decide if you think I responded or not.
>>
>> Better yet: actually support your claims... remember, here are your
>> claims:
>>
>> * Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
>> right.
>
>
> Wikipedia is full of inaacuracy and lies. No serious debate can occur
> with wikipedia as the authoritative souce.
>
>> * Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
>> right.
>
> The quote used did not support the newbie's claim.
>
>> * I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you
>> are right.
>
> And by making this a point of contention, you simply prove my spelling
> to be more appropriate.
>
>> * You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the
>> Mac Oxford
>> pointed to.
>
> And I did. The fact that you are too stupid to make your comparison of
> data is not my problem.
>
>>
>> You have linked to a laptop to try to support your last claim
>
> It was not a "try"- it fully supports my claim, child. And moments ago
> (see above), you were claiming that I had not posted the link.
>
> Now who's delaying?
>
>> ... I
>> commend you for that, though you failed to actually offer a comparison
>> between the two machines.
>>
>
> Here's my comparison- the laptop that I linked to has more functionality
> at lower cost than a $1000 crapbook.
A bunch of words from you - but not a word of support for your claims.
* Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
* Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
* I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you are right.
* You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the Mac Oxford
pointed to.
Maybe in your next post?
--
"Innovation is not about saying yes to everything. It's about saying NO to
all but the most crucial features." -- Steve Jobs
Funny how many folks from Colorado IPs post to CSMA - and how many of them
come and go ... and show as little sense as you do. Coincidence, I am sure.
LOL!
--
Teachers open the door but you must walk through it yourself.
>
> A bunch of words from you - but not a word of support for your claims.
>
> * Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
> * Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
> * I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you are right.
> * You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the Mac Oxford
> pointed to.
>
> Maybe in your next post?
>
>
Maybe in the last post that you posted this whiny list in? You need to
keep up, Snot- you're looking like an idiot.
Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in
news:C364DB17.99D7F%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
> Xns99EBB4BA24AF8isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 5:45 PM:
>
> Info on your IP:
>
> NetRange: 76.25.0.0 - 76.25.255.255
> CIDR: 76.25.0.0/16
> NetName: COLORADO-24
>
> Funny how many folks from Colorado IPs post to CSMA - and how many of
> them come and go ... and show as little sense as you do. Coincidence,
> I am sure. LOL!
>
And what makes you think I'm reading this in CSMA? Here's a hint- I'm not,
Snot.
> Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in news:C364DA25.99D72%
> CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
>
>
>>
>> A bunch of words from you - but not a word of support for your claims.
>>
>> * Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
>> * Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
>> * I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you are right.
>> * You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the Mac Oxford
>> pointed to.
>>
>> Maybe in your next post?
>>
>>
>
> Maybe in the last post that you posted this whiny list in? You need to
> keep up, Snot- you're looking like an idiot.
Well, I am speaking to you... a new "anonymous" poster from Colorado.
Amazing.
--
The direct use of force is such a poor solution to any problem, it is
generally employed only by small children and large nations. - David
Friedman
Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in
news:C364E6B0.99DA0%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
> "Scott" <how.do@you.do> stated in post
> hfWdnYZUydNbEKLanZ2dnUVZ_vTinZ2d@adelphia.com on 11/17/07 5:56 PM:
>
>> Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in news:C364DA25.99D72%
>> CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> A bunch of words from you - but not a word of support for your
>>> claims.
>>>
>>> * Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
>>> right. * Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
>>> right. * I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you
>>> are right. * You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the
>>> Mac Oxford
>>> pointed to.
>>>
>>> Maybe in your next post?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Maybe in the last post that you posted this whiny list in? You need
>> to keep up, Snot- you're looking like an idiot.
>
> Well, I am speaking to you... a new "anonymous" poster from Colorado.
> Amazing.
>
>
Hardly new. Maybe new to your fanboi world, but not new to the usenet
world.
And with a name like Snot, I wouldn't be commenting on somebody posting
anonymously if I were you.
Funny how you back down and simply snipe when confronted with your own
stupidity.
"CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
Xns99EBB6BCEA107isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 5:57 PM:
> Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in
> news:C364DB17.99D7F%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
>
>> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
>> Xns99EBB4BA24AF8isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 5:45 PM:
>>
>> Info on your IP:
>>
>> NetRange: 76.25.0.0 - 76.25.255.255
>> CIDR: 76.25.0.0/16
>> NetName: COLORADO-24
>>
>> Funny how many folks from Colorado IPs post to CSMA - and how many of
>> them come and go ... and show as little sense as you do. Coincidence,
>> I am sure. LOL!
>>
>
> And what makes you think I'm reading this in CSMA? Here's a hint- I'm not,
> Snot.
>
> You're simply not real smart.
More from you - but not a word of support for your claims.
* Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
* Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
* I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you are right.
* You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the Mac Oxford
pointed to.
Maybe in your next post?
--
It usually takes me more than three weeks to prepare a good impromptu
speech. -- Mark Twain
"CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
Xns99EBBF518A1E8isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 6:48 PM:
> Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in
> news:C364E6B0.99DA0%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
>
>> "Scott" <how.do@you.do> stated in post
>> hfWdnYZUydNbEKLanZ2dnUVZ_vTinZ2d@adelphia.com on 11/17/07 5:56 PM:
>>
>>> Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in news:C364DA25.99D72%
>>> CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> A bunch of words from you - but not a word of support for your
>>>> claims.
>>>>
>>>> * Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
>>>> right. * Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
>>>> right. * I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you
>>>> are right. * You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the
>>>> Mac Oxford
>>>> pointed to.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe in your next post?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe in the last post that you posted this whiny list in? You need
>>> to keep up, Snot- you're looking like an idiot.
>>
>> Well, I am speaking to you... a new "anonymous" poster from Colorado.
>> Amazing.
>>
>>
>
> Hardly new. Maybe new to your fanboi world, but not new to the usenet
> world.
>
> And with a name like Snot, I wouldn't be commenting on somebody posting
> anonymously if I were you.
>
> Funny how you back down and simply snipe when confronted with your own
> stupidity.
More from you - but not a word of support for your claims.
* Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
* Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
* I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you are right.
* You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the Mac Oxford
pointed to.
Maybe in your next post?
--
Computers are incredibly fast, accurate, and stupid: humans are incredibly
slow, inaccurate and brilliant; together they are powerful beyond
imagination. --Albert Einstein
Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in
news:C364FA39.99DDC%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
> Xns99EBB6BCEA107isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 5:57 PM:
>
>> Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in
>> news:C364DB17.99D7F%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
>>
>>> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
>>> Xns99EBB4BA24AF8isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 5:45 PM:
>>>
>>> Info on your IP:
>>>
>>> NetRange: 76.25.0.0 - 76.25.255.255
>>> CIDR: 76.25.0.0/16
>>> NetName: COLORADO-24
>>>
>>> Funny how many folks from Colorado IPs post to CSMA - and how many
>>> of them come and go ... and show as little sense as you do.
>>> Coincidence, I am sure. LOL!
>>>
>>
>> And what makes you think I'm reading this in CSMA? Here's a hint-
>> I'm not, Snot.
>>
>> You're simply not real smart.
>
> More from you - but not a word of support for your claims.
>
> * Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
> right. * Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
> right. * I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you
> are right. * You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the
> Mac Oxford
> pointed to.
>
> Maybe in your next post?
>
>
I love it when a troll has to resort to spamming in the face of defeat.
"CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
Xns99EBCD2F561E9isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 8:10 PM:
>> More from you - but not a word of support for your claims.
>>
>> * Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
>> right. * Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
>> right. * I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you
>> are right. * You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the
>> Mac Oxford
>> pointed to.
>>
>> Maybe in your next post?
>>
>>
>
> I love it when a troll has to resort to spamming in the face of defeat.
> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
> Xns99EBCD2F561E9isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 8:10 PM:
>
>>> More from you - but not a word of support for your claims.
>>>
>>> * Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
>>> right. * Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
>>> right. * I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you
>>> are right. * You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the
>>> Mac Oxford
>>> pointed to.
>>>
>>> Maybe in your next post?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I love it when a troll has to resort to spamming in the face of defeat.
>
> And still no support for your claims. OK.
>
>
I've responded to it all, Snot. You are simply acting like a child because
you didn't like the answers.
"CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
Xns99EBCEA656AE3isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 8:18 PM:
>> And still no support for your claims. OK.
>
> I've responded to it all, Snot. You are simply acting like a child because
> you didn't like the answers.
And *still* no support for your claims. You at least made a sad effort on
the last one... but frankly you did not even try with the first three.
Here, prove me wrong - show your support for the following:
* Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
* Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
* I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you are right.
* You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the Mac Oxford
pointed to.
But you won't.
Maybe it has something to do with you being in Colorado? Weird.
--
I am one of only .3% of people who have avoided becoming a statistic.
Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in
news:C3650603.99DF6%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
> Xns99EBCEA656AE3isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 8:18 PM:
>
>>> And still no support for your claims. OK.
>>
>> I've responded to it all, Snot. You are simply acting like a child
>> because you didn't like the answers.
>
> And *still* no support for your claims. You at least made a sad
> effort on the last one... but frankly you did not even try with the
> first three. Here, prove me wrong - show your support for the
> following:
>
> * Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
> right.
"CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
Xns99EBDCC616B0isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 9:42 PM:
> Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in
> news:C3650603.99DF6%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
>
>> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
>> Xns99EBCEA656AE3isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 8:18 PM:
>>
>>>> And still no support for your claims. OK.
>>>
>>> I've responded to it all, Snot. You are simply acting like a child
>>> because you didn't like the answers.
>>
>> And *still* no support for your claims. You at least made a sad
>> effort on the last one... but frankly you did not even try with the
>> first three. Here, prove me wrong - show your support for the
>> following:
>>
>> * Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
>> right.
>
> Wikipedia founder admits to serious quality problems | The Register
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10...ality_problem/
>
> How Authoritative is Wikipedia
> http://www.frozennorth.org/C2011481421/E652809545/
>
> Examples of Bias in Wikipedia - Conservapedia
> http://www.conservapedia.com/Example...s_in_Wikipedia
>
> Shall I continue? These were found on the first page of search results.
>
>
>
>> * Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
>> right. *
>
> Umm- I said that the quote did not bolster the argument being made,
> Snotboy.
>
>> I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you
>> are right.
>
> You're right- based on your posts, the name should be Shit instead of
> Snot.
>
>> * You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the
>> Mac Oxford
>> pointed to.
>
> I did and posted a link. You have yet to prove that I was wrong. And
> you won't because you can't, Snot.
>
>
>>
>> But you won't.
>>
>
> But I just did, newbie.
>
>> Maybe it has something to do with you being in Colorado? Weird.
>
> You're right- you aren't used to dealing with people of high
> intelligence from Colorado, fanboi.
>
>>
>>
>
All that from you and you have yet to support your claims!
* Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
* Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
* I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you are right.
* You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the Mac Oxford
pointed to.
With the first you just attacked Wikipedia but refused to show how it was
wrong in this case - you have showed *nothing* that is contrary to the idea
that AppleTalk was designed with networking in mind.
With the second you have shown you did not understand the reference from
*Apple* that talked about AppleTalk being designed for networking.
With the third you just sank to name calling... a form of waving your white
flag. Ok.
With the fourth you made a very ironic claim:
I did and posted a link. You have yet to prove that I was wrong.
LOL! Being that you failed to show how my links were wrong that is just
damned funny!
In any case, I have made no statement as to if the system you pointed to fit
or did not fit the criteria - I have merely noted how *you* have not shown
how it does. And you won't. That is quite telling in itself.
Oh well, you have nothing but juvenile name calling, white flag waving, and
- my favorite - hilarious irony.
I did and posted a link. You have yet to prove that I was wrong.
LOL! That one phrase alone, from you, made this going-nowhere thread worth
it. Thanks for the laugh. Been a long time since I have talked to someone
as unintentionally funny as you are.
--
Try not to become a man of success, but rather try to become a man of value.
--Albert Einstein
Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in
news:C36519CC.99E0D%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
>
> In any case, I have made no statement as to if the system you pointed
> to fit or did not fit the criteria - I have merely noted how *you*
> have not shown how it does. And you won't. That is quite telling in
> itself.
But I did, Snot. Anyone of even minimal intelligence would click on the
link and see the vast superiority of the product. Even little Oxtrard has
avoided commenting on it.
>
> Oh well, you have nothing but juvenile name calling, white flag
> waving, and - my favorite - hilarious irony.
>
> I did and posted a link. You have yet to prove that I was wrong.
I can't help the fact that you are too stupid to do your own research. In
fact, your inability to find any flaw with the computer shows that I was
successful in providing a link to a computer that met the criterias-
something that you specifically asked for.
Changing the criteria is better left to children and morons. Which are
you?
>
> LOL! That one phrase alone, from you, made this going-nowhere thread
> worth it. Thanks for the laugh. Been a long time since I have talked
> to someone as unintentionally funny as you are.
Who says it's unintentional? It's not often that I get to play with such a
stupid puppet as yourself. I don't even have to try to make you dance- you
do it all on your own, as your repeated posting of the same material shows.
You obsession with deflecting away from the facts at hand is worth a few
minutes of my time.
"CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
Xns99EBE4C2FE0EBisheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 10:29 PM:
> Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in
> news:C36519CC.99E0D%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
>
>>
>> In any case, I have made no statement as to if the system you pointed
>> to fit or did not fit the criteria - I have merely noted how *you*
>> have not shown how it does. And you won't. That is quite telling in
>> itself.
>
> But I did
You stated it but gave no reasons, thoughts, explainations, analysis or a
shred of anything interesting.
You did, however, give an ironic comment that had my laughing out loud.
Really.
I did and posted a link. You have yet to prove that I was wrong.
That after you failed to show why the evidence I pointed you to (and quoted)
was wrong.
* Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
* Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
* I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you are right.
Ok, to be fair the last one was just me mocking your white flag waving name
calling... but in the first two you made claims about AppleTalk you could ot
support - and I pointed to sources that showed you were wrong. You then put
on your running shoes. Oh well.
> Anyone of even minimal intelligence would click on the
> link and see the vast superiority of the product.
And yet you can not defend why you think it is superior. Wow. Just wow.
Sorry to hear you have such bad self esteem. If you actually tried and
succeeded then maybe you would feel better about yourself and not put
yourself down for lacking "minimal intelligence".
>> Oh well, you have nothing but juvenile name calling, white flag
>> waving, and - my favorite - hilarious irony.
>>
>> I did and posted a link. You have yet to prove that I was wrong.
>
> I can't help the fact that you are too stupid to do your own research.
Your claims - your responsibility to do research. Easy to understand... for
anyone with "minimal intelligence" or better.
> In fact, your inability to find any flaw with the computer shows that I was
> successful in providing a link to a computer that met the criterias- something
> that you specifically asked for.
Your logic is flawed - and you pretend like I have a goal to show you are
incorrect. I merely asked you to *support* your claim. You failed to...
even though you claimed so someone with "minimal intelligence" could. You
were pretty rough on yourself there.
>> LOL! That one phrase alone, from you, made this going-nowhere thread
>> worth it. Thanks for the laugh. Been a long time since I have talked
>> to someone as unintentionally funny as you are.
>
> Who says it's unintentional?
You were being purposefully ironic and shooting down your own claims? LOL!
Unlikely!
> It's not often that I get to play with such a stupid puppet as yourself. I
> don't even have to try to make you dance- you do it all on your own, as your
> repeated posting of the same material shows. You obsession with deflecting
> away from the facts at hand is worth a few minutes of my time.
I am merely focusing on the actual topic - your unsupported claims:
* Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
* Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
* I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you are right.
* You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the Mac Oxford
pointed to.
Sorry if you do not like it when I fail to let you change the topic from
your failures.
--
If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law.
Roy Santoro, Psycho Proverb Zone (http://snipurl.com/BurdenOfProof)
In article <C36519CC.99E0D%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com>,
Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
> Xns99EBDCC616B0isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 9:42 PM:
>
> > Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in
> > news:C3650603.99DF6%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
> >
> >> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
> >> Xns99EBCEA656AE3isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 8:18 PM:
> >>
> >>>> And still no support for your claims. OK.
> >>>
> >>> I've responded to it all, Snot. You are simply acting like a child
> >>> because you didn't like the answers.
> >>
> >> And *still* no support for your claims. You at least made a sad
> >> effort on the last one... but frankly you did not even try with the
> >> first three. Here, prove me wrong - show your support for the
> >> following:
> >>
> >> * Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
> >> right.
> >
> > Wikipedia founder admits to serious quality problems | The Register
> > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10...ality_problem/
> >
> > How Authoritative is Wikipedia
> > http://www.frozennorth.org/C2011481421/E652809545/
> >
> > Examples of Bias in Wikipedia - Conservapedia
> > http://www.conservapedia.com/Example...s_in_Wikipedia
> >
> > Shall I continue? These were found on the first page of search results.
> >
> >
> >
> >> * Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
> >> right. *
> >
> > Umm- I said that the quote did not bolster the argument being made,
> > Snotboy.
> >
> >> I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you
> >> are right.
> >
> > You're right- based on your posts, the name should be Shit instead of
> > Snot.
> >
> >> * You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the
> >> Mac Oxford
> >> pointed to.
> >
> > I did and posted a link. You have yet to prove that I was wrong. And
> > you won't because you can't, Snot.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> But you won't.
> >>
> >
> > But I just did, newbie.
> >
> >> Maybe it has something to do with you being in Colorado? Weird.
> >
> > You're right- you aren't used to dealing with people of high
> > intelligence from Colorado, fanboi.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> All that from you and you have yet to support your claims!
>
> * Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
> * Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
> * I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you are right.
> * You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the Mac Oxford
> pointed to.
>
> With the first you just attacked Wikipedia but refused to show how it was
> wrong in this case - you have showed *nothing* that is contrary to the idea
> that AppleTalk was designed with networking in mind.
>
> With the second you have shown you did not understand the reference from
> *Apple* that talked about AppleTalk being designed for networking.
Aroo? Wha? Did I just suffer a stroke? AppleTalk is a network protocol!
It's what Macs from the 128 to the BW G3 could use to talk to each other
and to things like Apple's laser printers.
CozmicDebris, did you *really* claim that AppleTalk was not about
networking?
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com> http://www.timberwoof.com
"When you post sewage, don't blame others for
emptying chamber pots in your direction." ‹Chris L.
In article <C36519CC.99E0D%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com>,
Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> With the first you just attacked Wikipedia but refused to show how it was
> wrong in this case - you have showed *nothing* that is contrary to the idea
> that AppleTalk was designed with networking in mind.
Where did CozmicDebris say that it wasn't?
And what sense does your statement make? AppleTalk is a networking
protocol.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com> http://www.timberwoof.com
"When you post sewage, don't blame others for
emptying chamber pots in your direction." ‹Chris L.
> In article <C36519CC.99E0D%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> With the first you just attacked Wikipedia but refused to show how it was
>> wrong in this case - you have showed *nothing* that is contrary to the idea
>> that AppleTalk was designed with networking in mind.
>
> Where did CozmicDebris say that it wasn't?
Mark Crispen stated:
It's also a stretch to call AppleTalk "networking".
*AppleTalk at its inception was little more than a printer
I/O bus. *It was only later that Apple realized that it could
be extended to do file sharing.
I refuted that idea with links and quotes from Wikipedia and Apple... to
which CozmicDebris replied with:
It shows that it was designed as an I/O bus.
But it did not.
> And what sense does your statement make? AppleTalk is a networking
> protocol.
Hence why *nobody* has shown anything contrary to the idea that AppleTalk
was designed with networking in mind.
--
It usually takes me more than three weeks to prepare a good impromptu
speech. -- Mark Twain
>> All that from you and you have yet to support your claims!
>>
>> * Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
>> * Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
>> * I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you are right.
>> * You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the Mac Oxford
>> pointed to.
>>
>> With the first you just attacked Wikipedia but refused to show how it was
>> wrong in this case - you have showed *nothing* that is contrary to the idea
>> that AppleTalk was designed with networking in mind.
>>
>> With the second you have shown you did not understand the reference from
>> *Apple* that talked about AppleTalk being designed for networking.
>
> Aroo? Wha? Did I just suffer a stroke? AppleTalk is a network protocol!
Of course. While Wikipedia might not be "authorities" on that subject,
Apple certainly is.
> It's what Macs from the 128 to the BW G3 could use to talk to each other
> and to things like Apple's laser printers.
>
> CozmicDebris, did you *really* claim that AppleTalk was not about
> networking?
Mark Crispen stated:
It's also a stretch to call AppleTalk "networking".
*AppleTalk at its inception was little more than a printer
I/O bus. *It was only later that Apple realized that it could
be extended to do file sharing.
I refuted that idea with links and quotes from Wikipedia and Apple... to
which CozmicDebris replied with:
It shows that it was designed as an I/O bus.
But it did not. Of course not. That would be silly.
> In article
> <timberwoof.spam-8325DE.22272217112007@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net>,
> Timberwoof <timberwoof.spam@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <C36519CC.99E0D%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com>,
>> Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
>>> Xns99EBDCC616B0isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 9:42 PM:
>>>
>>>>
>>> All that from you and you have yet to support your claims!
>>>
>>> * Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
>>> * Apple is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are right.
>>> * I am wrong about how to spell my online name... but you are right.
>>> * You can find a $700 laptop that does more than the Mac Oxford
>>> pointed to.
>>>
>>> With the first you just attacked Wikipedia but refused to show how it was
>>> wrong in this case - you have showed *nothing* that is contrary to the idea
>>> that AppleTalk was designed with networking in mind.
>>>
>>> With the second you have shown you did not understand the reference from
>>> *Apple* that talked about AppleTalk being designed for networking.
>>
>> Aroo? Wha? Did I just suffer a stroke? AppleTalk is a network protocol!
>> It's what Macs from the 128 to the BW G3 could use to talk to each other
>> and to things like Apple's laser printers.
>>
>> CozmicDebris, did you *really* claim that AppleTalk was not about
>> networking?
>
> AppleTalk is still in use today.
>
> The claim that "AppleTalk is what Macs from the 128 to the BWG3 could
> use to talk to each other" shows the world that you don't know what
> you're talking about.
>
> What you're talking about is LOCALTALK, which is the wiring. APPLETALK
> is the protocol, and is still in use today--although Apple is trying
> hard to kill it.
>
Fair enough - but the claim that CozmicDebris and Mark Crispen made is just
flat out wrong.
Mark Crispen stated:
It's also a stretch to call AppleTalk "networking".
*AppleTalk at its inception was little more than a printer
I/O bus. *It was only later that Apple realized that it could
be extended to do file sharing.
I refuted that idea with links and quotes from Wikipedia and Apple... to
which CozmicDebris replied with:
It shows that it was designed as an I/O bus.
But it did not. Of course not. That would be silly for it to say since
that is not the case.
I have been having some fun pointing out how CozmicDebris is completely
unable to support his claim (and can't, being that it is not true).
--
Satan lives for my sins... now *that* is dedication!
"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
> > Aroo? Wha? Did I just suffer a stroke? AppleTalk is a network protocol!
> > It's what Macs from the 128 to the BW G3 could use to talk to each other
> > and to things like Apple's laser printers.
> >
> > CozmicDebris, did you *really* claim that AppleTalk was not about
> > networking?
>
> AppleTalk is still in use today.
>
> The claim that "AppleTalk is what Macs from the 128 to the BWG3 could
> use to talk to each other" shows the world that you don't know what
> you're talking about.
>
> What you're talking about is LOCALTALK, which is the wiring. APPLETALK
> is the protocol, and is still in use today--although Apple is trying
> hard to kill it.
Elmo, actually knows his stuff on this topic. AppleTalk is alive and
well, it's in Leopard and will be in Lion (or whatever) in the future.
Currently it's tunneled through TCP/IP, but works well and no need to
get rid of it.
Yes, there was a time where AppleTalk represented the physical layer and
the protocol, but (roughly) around 1989, they were separated out since
some users were getting confused. so LocalTalk became the physical
wiring and could still be used up until the PowerMac G5's with the
stealth port.
> Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in
> news:C364D7A3.99D5E%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com:
>
>
>>"CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
>>Xns99EBAFEFC6245isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/17/07 5:17 PM:
>>
>>
>>>>What post did you think I did not respond to.
>>>>
>>>>Oh.
>>>>
>>>>None.
>>>>
>>>>Oh well. You are just delaying.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Posted hours ago, twit. You're so stupid that you forgot your own
>>>delayed response to it.
>>>
>>>Snot is not very smart.
>>
>>And now you are going as far off topic as you can. OK. Let me know
>>if you decide if you think I responded or not.
>>
>>Better yet: actually support your claims... remember, here are your
>>claims:
>>
>> * Wikipedia is wrong about Apple technologies... but you are
>> right.
>
>
>
> Wikipedia is full of inaacuracy and lies. No serious debate can occur
> with wikipedia as the authoritative souce.
>
I know that Wiki is not an accurate source for information.
Re: Hey Oxford - more reality 
