MEB is a fraud - Who is * Guy and various other. They are allthe same moron and liar

Hey 98 Guy, learn how to PROPERLY create new discussions...

I suppose this is beyond your abilities since you constantly display
you ARE a moron...

On 05/14/2010 08:59 AM, 98 Guy wrote:
MEB wrote:

Naturally we 98 users have been applying the IE6-SP1 updates and
patches to our system that have been made available for win-2k -
haven't we?

Why would "we";

I know you wouldn't, because you don't actually run Windows 98, and
haven't for years.

BS. More of your deliberately false statements. The date of my ending
was posted within this group [end of 2009], discussed within this group,
received your typical moronic responses, and included the reason for
discontinuing usage "out here".
You have posted that you stopped using Win9X in 2006/2007 and were
using a pirated copy of XP [at that time, likely you are using a newer
pirated copy OS]. You also posted this previously in various other
forums/groups.


You have an axe to grind over IE6 and it's applicability to Windows 98.
One would think that because of that, that you would recommend win-98
users switch to Firefox 2.0.0.20 instead of continuing to run IE6. IE6
is 4 years out-of-date for win-98 users, but Firefox is only 1.5 years
out of date. But you refuse to speak to that point.

I'm a fraud huh, you are a "in the world's face liar" that hasn't even
sense enough to realize that you CONSTANTLY show the world that you are
not only a fraud, a liar, a troll, and a criminal, but that you are so
stupid you think these posts disappear. I suppose there are those across
the world that ARE susceptible to your frauds and lies, those with a
brain aren't.

Here's evidence of one of your more recent POS posts regarding this, and
my response.

I wrote this in response to your normal set of lies:

Date: Sun, 02 May 2010 00:32:26 -0400
From: MEB
Subject: Opera - Firefox 2.0.0.20 is filled with vulnerabilities
References:
In-Reply-To:

On 05/01/2010 03:31 PM, 98 Guy wrote:
MEB wrote:

Firefox 2.0.0.20 is a perfectly capable browser for win-98.

No it isn't,

What a goofball statement.

Of course it is.

And from a security POV, it's more up-to-date than IE6 is.

Yeah, so... its still filed vulnerabilities, everything starting with
Firefox 3.0.5/6 hasn't been fixed in EOL Firefox 2 but likely affects it
as well.
Check the source:
ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/

During support for FF2 it generally received similar updates as in FF3
EXCEPT those specific to the changes creating FF3.

** Security Advisories for Firefox 2.0
http://www.mozilla.org/security/know...firefox20.html
"Firefox 2.0 is no longer supported and the last update, Firefox
2.0.0.20, is affected by several vulnerabilities fixed in newer versions
of the program. All users are urged to upgrade to the newest version of
Firefox."

It links to this page for vulnerabilities EOL/EOS:
http://www.mozilla.org/security/know...firefox30.html
It supposedly notes in those vulnerabilities when FF2 is NOT vulnerable
or affected [after EOL] to that particular issue or the issue was fixed
via the last two or three FF2 updates, HOWEVER, one must also READ the
bug reports and comments as they may actually indicate otherwise,
particularly against base files or engine.

After EOL other XSS exploits were found and discussed in the developers
forums affecting FF2.0.0.20; the PNG vulnerability affected all versions
which included the library [FF2 does]; javascript vulnerabilities which
affected FF2 [for the most part] can be checked against the
engine/version in the developer discussions however most do not address
1.7 as that was FF2, also note that FF's java script support is actually
a blend of three; and the list goes on; well beyond the supposed 4 or so
"known" {reported} vulnerabilities purportedly left in FF2.
No "authority" or bug tracking service or otherwise, bothered to list
these as FF2 vulnerabilities/bugs as it was EOL and the "bugs" were not
leveraged at/listed for the EOL FF2. The same thing happened with Win9X
versions, other EOL OSs, or browser versions in EOL OSs, and other
participating applications.


But what do you know?

A heck of a lot more than you do. Why? I make an effort to find out
unlike you mouthing garbage you pulled out {of} the landfill...


When was the last time you used win-98 as your default, daily-use OS?

You are a coward - because you will not answer that question. And you
will prove exactly that in your reply.

Really, now you purport I'm a coward... that's funny. YOU, on the other
hand, are a worthless, mindless, lying, stealing, openly moronic slug
without ANY intelligence.

*I* posted the EXACT time period [you even posted some of your moronic
crap in that discussion] when I stopped using Win9X "out here" [I still
use it] AND the reasons for that. And HAVE REPEATEDLY posted the
applicable materials for this supposed FF2 crap of yours in this forum.
Do your own research, the materials are ONCE AGAIN LINKED; oh I forgot
you haven't the brain to do so and within two months or so you'll claim
they were never placed [once cleared from the forums and archives]...

YOU, on the other hand, haven't used Win9X since you bragged in this
forum [and elsewhere] you were using a pirated copy of XP, around the
end of 2006 or in 2007 wasn't it.
INSTEAD, you forge identifiers to make it APPEAR you use Win9X.

SOOOOOOO dorkidum, what other stupid stuff do you have to post here?

-- MEB
--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

Sometimes I cannot /wait/ until 01 June!

MEB wrote:
Hey 98 Guy, learn how to PROPERLY create new discussions...

I suppose this is beyond your abilities since you constantly display
you ARE a moron...

"PA Bear [MS MVP]" wrote:

Sometimes I cannot /wait/ until 01 June!


In that you must be very stupid because you can go to Forums
NOWWWWW not until 01 June. You are here because you like to abuse
and bully Microsoft customers. The sooner you get killed, the
better it would be for Microsoft.

hth
--
THE INFORMATION IS PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY
KIND. LDS5ZRA DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EITHER EXPRESSED OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. IN NO EVENT SHALL LDS5ZRA
OR HIS ASSOCIATES BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER
INCLUDING DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, LOSS OF
BUSINESS PROFITS OR SPECIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF LDS5ZRA OR HIS
ASSOCIATES HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGES. SOME STATES DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OR
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY FOR CONSEQUENTIAL OR INCIDENTAL
DAMAGES SO THE FOREGOING LIMITATION MAY NOT APPLY.

Copyright LDS5ZRA 2010.

MEB wrote:

Hey 98 Guy, learn how to PROPERLY create new discussions...

I know how to properly create new discussions.

I changed the subject of this thread to something appropriate - which is
to call you a fraud - which you are.

I suppose this is beyond your abilities since you constantly
display you ARE a moron...

According to usenet conventions, I changed the subject line, and I added
"Was: (etc)" to indicate the previous subject. Clearly that went right
over your dim head.

I know you wouldn't, because you don't actually run Windows 98,
and haven't for years.

BS. More of your deliberately false statements. The date of my
ending was posted within this group [end of 2009],

No. Tell us the date when you last stopped running Windows 98 as your
default OS. Not just an OS that you run in VMware or equivalent.

You have posted that you stopped using Win9X in 2006/2007

That is a complete load of horse sh.it. I never posted such a thing,
because both at home and at $dayjob the only OS that is installed on
both machines is Windows 98se.

I have built approx. 450 computers over the past 15 years, and for the
past 6 years I've built about 150 systems with XP. So I know how to
install XP, I know how to update XP, I've installed a variety of apps,
hacks and cracks on XP, learned all about WGA and how to get around it,
etc. My experiences with XP begin and end with systems that are
destined for production and final sale - not for daily use by me either
at home or at work.

and were using a pirated copy of XP [at that time, likely you are
using a newer pirated copy OS]. You also posted this previously in
various other forums/groups.

I actually have never needed to pirate XP, because I have a binder full
of XP product keys (System Builder 2002 version) that have never been
published on the web, so they are not black-listed by Microshaft, and I
can re-use them as much as I want. I also clone several
production-ready drives on a regular basis.

I'm a fraud huh, you are a "in the world's face liar"

What have I lied about? You won't answer, because you're a blowhardt
and a fraud.

that hasn't even sense enough to realize that you CONSTANTLY show
the world that you are not only a fraud, a liar, a troll, and a
criminal, but that you are so stupid you think these posts disappear.

You are the fraud who think's he's a lawyer.

You won't back up your claim that I'm a liar.

I'm not a troll (and neither are you) - because neither of us meet the
definition of a usenet troll.

Nobody can be a criminal until they're convicted by a court. Software
acquisition or usage in contravention to corporate EULAs is not a
criminal offence (it's a civil matter).

And I know quite well that these posts will not disappear. I have never
claimed that they would (again, another lie and mis-direction from
you). I'm counting on future readers finding these posts so that they
will understand what a fraud and a hoax you are.

I suppose there are those across the world that ARE susceptible
to your frauds and lies, those with a brain aren't.

What fraud? What lies?

If it is a fruad or a lie to claim that windows 98 is fully compatible
with IE6 updates released for win-2K, then I dare you to have the balls
to post such a statement on the msfn.org website, where such a belief is
common, accepted knowledge.

Here's evidence of one of your more recent POS posts regarding
this, and my response.

I wrote this in response to your normal set of lies:

Firefox 2.0.0.20 is a perfectly capable browser for win-98.

No it isn't,

What a goofball statement.
And from a security POV, it's more up-to-date than IE6 is.

Yeah, so... its still filed vulnerabilities,

A perfect example of how your logic is cracked.

You will not explain why a broswer such as IE6 is *LESS* vulnerable than
FF 2.20, given that IE6 was last updated in July 2006 (4 years ago) and
FF 2.20 was last updated in Dec 2008 (1.5 years ago).

How many vulnerabilities does IE6 circa July 2006 have, and how many
vulnerabilities does FF 2.20 circa Dec 2008 have?

Are you that foolish to think that you can foist such a bankrupt
argument upon the readers of this group?

I fully expect that your pseudo sock puppets:

- Dan
- Hemorrhoid
- PCR

will believe anything you say, but nobody else does.

When was the last time you used win-98 as your default, daily-use
OS? You are a coward - because you will not answer that question.
And you will prove exactly that in your reply.

Really, now you purport I'm a coward... that's funny.

Thank you for proving it. The reader will note that as predicted, MEB
did not answer the simple question put to him.

*I* posted the EXACT time period [you even posted some of your
moronic crap in that discussion] when I stopped using Win9X
"out here"

It would have taken fewer keystrokes to simply state the approximate
date that you stopped using windows 98 as your default or main OS.

Instead you answered the question like you answer practically all
questions - by saying that you've already answered the question.

[I still use it]

As your main, default, general-use OS?

You didn't make your last post here using it. You were using Suse
linux.

Do your own research, the materials are ONCE AGAIN LINKED;

Again, with your "linked" evidence.

Link this MEB - (I'm giving you the finger)

YOU, on the other hand, haven't used Win9X since you bragged
in this forum [and elsewhere] you were using a pirated copy
of XP, around the end of 2006 or in 2007 wasn't it.

Look at the headers of this post - and EVERY post I've made in this
newsgroup for the past 5 years. You will see which OS I'm using.

I wouldn't run XP as my main, personal, default OS if you paid me.

INSTEAD, you forge identifiers to make it APPEAR you use Win9X.

That's a sore point with you - isin't it?

When I continue to use win-98, when I say which motherboards have the
drivers to fully run win-98, when my headers continue to indicate that
I'm running windows 98.

And when I point out to others here that you don't run windows 98, and
that you haven't used windows 98 as your main operating system for
years.

That diminishes you in the eyes of others here, doesn't it? That takes
away from your supposed authority to know exactly what's going on with
windows 98 in the year 2010, doesn't it?

When I continue to ask why are you here. Why do you take an interest in
an OS that you don't use any more, that you have no current expertise
in, where you don't know the current best-practices, options,
enhancements. And you don't answer.

And you make statements like "this will end my obligation to windows
98". What sort of bombast is that? Who exactly obligated you?

SOOOOOOO dorkidum, what other stupid stuff do you have to post
here?

Other than infantile name calling?

On 05/14/2010 07:04 PM, PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
Sometimes I cannot /wait/ until 01 June!

MEB wrote:
Hey 98 Guy, learn how to PROPERLY create new discussions...

I suppose this is beyond your abilities since you constantly display
you ARE a moron...

I'm sure, at least this type of activity will soon cease to exist on
Microsoft, and I'll be gone shortly [loud cheers from all sides and points].
Robear, we may have disagreed at times on things - that's part of life,
but, it was a "real" experience. Good luck in wherever life takes you
[and watch out for the bad wine, but keep those "pipes" properly oiled],
and good health [we're getting old, much as we hate to admit it].

Uh, excuse me, seems dorkidum has posted in the wrong discussion again..

--
MEB

"LDS5ZRA" wrote in message
.. .


"PA Bear [MS MVP]" wrote:

Sometimes I cannot /wait/ until 01 June!


In that you must be very stupid snip

Rich, from someone with such a stupid sig ?

On 05/14/2010 01:04 PM, MEB wrote:

Hey 98 Guy, learn how to PROPERLY create new discussions...

I suppose this is beyond your abilities since you constantly display
you ARE a moron...

On 05/14/2010 08:59 AM, 98 Guy wrote:
MEB wrote:

Naturally we 98 users have been applying the IE6-SP1 updates and
patches to our system that have been made available for win-2k -
haven't we?

Why would "we";

I know you wouldn't, because you don't actually run Windows 98, and
haven't for years.

BS. More of your deliberately false statements. The date of my ending
was posted within this group [end of 2009], discussed within this group,
received your typical moronic responses, and included the reason for
discontinuing usage "out here".
You have posted that you stopped using Win9X in 2006/2007 and were
using a pirated copy of XP [at that time, likely you are using a newer
pirated copy OS]. You also posted this previously in various other
forums/groups.


You have an axe to grind over IE6 and it's applicability to Windows 98.
One would think that because of that, that you would recommend win-98
users switch to Firefox 2.0.0.20 instead of continuing to run IE6. IE6
is 4 years out-of-date for win-98 users, but Firefox is only 1.5 years
out of date. But you refuse to speak to that point.

I'm a fraud huh, you are a "in the world's face liar" that hasn't even
sense enough to realize that you CONSTANTLY show the world that you are
not only a fraud, a liar, a troll, and a criminal, but that you are so
stupid you think these posts disappear. I suppose there are those across
the world that ARE susceptible to your frauds and lies, those with a
brain aren't.

Here's evidence of one of your more recent POS posts regarding this, and
my response.

I wrote this in response to your normal set of lies:

Date: Sun, 02 May 2010 00:32:26 -0400
From: MEB
Subject: Opera - Firefox 2.0.0.20 is filled with vulnerabilities
References:
In-Reply-To:

On 05/01/2010 03:31 PM, 98 Guy wrote:
MEB wrote:

Firefox 2.0.0.20 is a perfectly capable browser for win-98.

No it isn't,

What a goofball statement.

Of course it is.

And from a security POV, it's more up-to-date than IE6 is.

Yeah, so... its still filed vulnerabilities, everything starting with
Firefox 3.0.5/6 hasn't been fixed in EOL Firefox 2 but likely affects it
as well.
Check the source:
ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/

During support for FF2 it generally received similar updates as in FF3
EXCEPT those specific to the changes creating FF3.

** Security Advisories for Firefox 2.0
http://www.mozilla.org/security/know...firefox20.html
"Firefox 2.0 is no longer supported and the last update, Firefox
2.0.0.20, is affected by several vulnerabilities fixed in newer versions
of the program. All users are urged to upgrade to the newest version of
Firefox."

It links to this page for vulnerabilities EOL/EOS:
http://www.mozilla.org/security/know...firefox30.html
It supposedly notes in those vulnerabilities when FF2 is NOT vulnerable
or affected [after EOL] to that particular issue or the issue was fixed
via the last two or three FF2 updates, HOWEVER, one must also READ the
bug reports and comments as they may actually indicate otherwise,
particularly against base files or engine.

After EOL other XSS exploits were found and discussed in the developers
forums affecting FF2.0.0.20; the PNG vulnerability affected all versions
which included the library [FF2 does]; javascript vulnerabilities which
affected FF2 [for the most part] can be checked against the
engine/version in the developer discussions however most do not address
1.7 as that was FF2, also note that FF's java script support is actually
a blend of three; and the list goes on; well beyond the supposed 4 or so
"known" {reported} vulnerabilities purportedly left in FF2.
No "authority" or bug tracking service or otherwise, bothered to list
these as FF2 vulnerabilities/bugs as it was EOL and the "bugs" were not
leveraged at/listed for the EOL FF2. The same thing happened with Win9X
versions, other EOL OSs, or browser versions in EOL OSs, and other
participating applications.


But what do you know?

A heck of a lot more than you do. Why? I make an effort to find out
unlike you mouthing garbage you pulled out {of} the landfill...


When was the last time you used win-98 as your default, daily-use OS?

You are a coward - because you will not answer that question. And you
will prove exactly that in your reply.

Really, now you purport I'm a coward... that's funny. YOU, on the other
hand, are a worthless, mindless, lying, stealing, openly moronic slug
without ANY intelligence.

*I* posted the EXACT time period [you even posted some of your moronic
crap in that discussion] when I stopped using Win9X "out here" [I still
use it] AND the reasons for that. And HAVE REPEATEDLY posted the
applicable materials for this supposed FF2 crap of yours in this forum.
Do your own research, the materials are ONCE AGAIN LINKED; oh I forgot
you haven't the brain to do so and within two months or so you'll claim
they were never placed [once cleared from the forums and archives]...

YOU, on the other hand, haven't used Win9X since you bragged in this
forum [and elsewhere] you were using a pirated copy of XP, around the
end of 2006 or in 2007 wasn't it.
INSTEAD, you forge identifiers to make it APPEAR you use Win9X.

SOOOOOOO dorkidum, what other stupid stuff do you have to post here?

-- MEB

Hmm, did some idiot attempt to respond?
No, guess not, I see no response from 98 Guy in this discussion...


--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

Sunny wrote:


Rich, from someone with such a stupid sig ?

If you were smart enough then you would have not read it and
allowed people to assume your stupidity rather than reading it and
confirming your own stupidity.

hth

--
THE INFORMATION IS PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY
KIND. LDS5ZRA DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EITHER EXPRESSED OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. IN NO EVENT SHALL LDS5ZRA
OR HIS ASSOCIATES BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER
INCLUDING DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, LOSS OF
BUSINESS PROFITS OR SPECIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF LDS5ZRA OR HIS
ASSOCIATES HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGES. SOME STATES DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OR
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY FOR CONSEQUENTIAL OR INCIDENTAL
DAMAGES SO THE FOREGOING LIMITATION MAY NOT APPLY.

Copyright LDS5ZRA 2010.

MEB wrote:

Hmm, did some idiot attempt to respond?
No, guess not, I see no response from 98 Guy in this discussion...

Respond to this, you coward:

MEB wrote:

Hey 98 Guy, learn how to PROPERLY create new discussions...

I know how to properly create new discussions.

I changed the subject of this thread to something appropriate - which is
to call you a fraud - which you are.

I suppose this is beyond your abilities since you constantly
display you ARE a moron...

According to usenet conventions, I changed the subject line, and I added
"Was: (etc)" to indicate the previous subject. Clearly that went right
over your dim head.

I know you wouldn't, because you don't actually run Windows 98,
and haven't for years.

BS. More of your deliberately false statements. The date of my
ending was posted within this group [end of 2009],

No. Tell us the date when you last stopped running Windows 98 as your
default OS. Not just an OS that you run in VMware or equivalent.

You have posted that you stopped using Win9X in 2006/2007

That is a complete load of horse sh.it. I never posted such a thing,
because both at home and at $dayjob the only OS that is installed on
both machines is Windows 98se.

I have built approx. 450 computers over the past 15 years, and for the
past 6 years I've built about 150 systems with XP. So I know how to
install XP, I know how to update XP, I've installed a variety of apps,
hacks and cracks on XP, learned all about WGA and how to get around it,
etc. My experiences with XP begin and end with systems that are
destined for production and final sale - not for daily use by me either
at home or at work.

and were using a pirated copy of XP [at that time, likely you are
using a newer pirated copy OS]. You also posted this previously in
various other forums/groups.

I actually have never needed to pirate XP, because I have a binder full
of XP product keys (System Builder 2002 version) that have never been
published on the web, so they are not black-listed by Microshaft, and I
can re-use them as much as I want. I also clone several
production-ready drives on a regular basis.

I'm a fraud huh, you are a "in the world's face liar"

What have I lied about? You won't answer, because you're a blowhardt
and a fraud.

that hasn't even sense enough to realize that you CONSTANTLY show
the world that you are not only a fraud, a liar, a troll, and a
criminal, but that you are so stupid you think these posts disappear.

You are the fraud who think's he's a lawyer.

You won't back up your claim that I'm a liar.

I'm not a troll (and neither are you) - because neither of us meet the
definition of a usenet troll.

Nobody can be a criminal until they're convicted by a court. Software
acquisition or usage in contravention to corporate EULAs is not a
criminal offence (it's a civil matter).

And I know quite well that these posts will not disappear. I have never
claimed that they would (again, another lie and mis-direction from
you). I'm counting on future readers finding these posts so that they
will understand what a fraud and a hoax you are.

I suppose there are those across the world that ARE susceptible
to your frauds and lies, those with a brain aren't.

What fraud? What lies?

If it is a fruad or a lie to claim that windows 98 is fully compatible
with IE6 updates released for win-2K, then I dare you to have the balls
to post such a statement on the msfn.org website, where such a belief is
common, accepted knowledge.

Here's evidence of one of your more recent POS posts regarding
this, and my response.

I wrote this in response to your normal set of lies:

Firefox 2.0.0.20 is a perfectly capable browser for win-98.

No it isn't,

What a goofball statement.
And from a security POV, it's more up-to-date than IE6 is.

Yeah, so... its still filed vulnerabilities,

A perfect example of how your logic is cracked.

You will not explain why a broswer such as IE6 is *LESS* vulnerable than
FF 2.20, given that IE6 was last updated in July 2006 (4 years ago) and
FF 2.20 was last updated in Dec 2008 (1.5 years ago).

How many vulnerabilities does IE6 circa July 2006 have, and how many
vulnerabilities does FF 2.20 circa Dec 2008 have?

Are you that foolish to think that you can foist such a bankrupt
argument upon the readers of this group?

I fully expect that your pseudo sock puppets:

- Dan
- Hemorrhoid
- PCR

will believe anything you say, but nobody else does.

When was the last time you used win-98 as your default, daily-use
OS? You are a coward - because you will not answer that question.
And you will prove exactly that in your reply.

Really, now you purport I'm a coward... that's funny.

Thank you for proving it. The reader will note that as predicted, MEB
did not answer the simple question put to him.

*I* posted the EXACT time period [you even posted some of your
moronic crap in that discussion] when I stopped using Win9X
"out here"

It would have taken fewer keystrokes to simply state the approximate
date that you stopped using windows 98 as your default or main OS.

Instead you answered the question like you answer practically all
questions - by saying that you've already answered the question.

[I still use it]

As your main, default, general-use OS?

You didn't make your last post here using it. You were using Suse
linux.

Do your own research, the materials are ONCE AGAIN LINKED;

Again, with your "linked" evidence.

Link this MEB - (I'm giving you the finger)

YOU, on the other hand, haven't used Win9X since you bragged
in this forum [and elsewhere] you were using a pirated copy
of XP, around the end of 2006 or in 2007 wasn't it.

Look at the headers of this post - and EVERY post I've made in this
newsgroup for the past 5 years. You will see which OS I'm using.

I wouldn't run XP as my main, personal, default OS if you paid me.

INSTEAD, you forge identifiers to make it APPEAR you use Win9X.

That's a sore point with you - isin't it?

When I continue to use win-98, when I say which motherboards have the
drivers to fully run win-98, when my headers continue to indicate that
I'm running windows 98.

And when I point out to others here that you don't run windows 98, and
that you haven't used windows 98 as your main operating system for
years.

That diminishes you in the eyes of others here, doesn't it? That takes
away from your supposed authority to know exactly what's going on with
windows 98 in the year 2010, doesn't it?

When I continue to ask why are you here. Why do you take an interest in
an OS that you don't use any more, that you have no current expertise
in, where you don't know the current best-practices, options,
enhancements. And you don't answer.

And you make statements like "this will end my obligation to windows
98". What sort of bombast is that? Who exactly obligated you?

SOOOOOOO dorkidum, what other stupid stuff do you have to post
here?

Other than infantile name calling?

On 05/14/2010 09:34 PM, 98 Guy wrote:
MEB wrote:

Hmm, did some idiot attempt to respond?
No, guess not, I see no response from 98 Guy in this discussion...

Respond to this, you coward:

Spoken by someone who HIDES behind a false nym, uses an anonymous news
posting host, and has yet to show that the entity knows squat about
ANYTHING [or at least wasn't stolen from someone else's postings]. Er,
unless 98 Guy considered THAT a proper response... crawl away, babyboo,
your mamma's calling you... shooo,,, hey lady, change that diaper, it
smells awful!!!!!

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---