Text 5100, 203 rader
Skriven 2005-06-17 17:57:08 av Rich (1:379/45)
Kommentar till text 5095 av Mike '/m' (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: Microsoft meets the hackers
=======================================
From: "Rich" <@>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_02A8_01C57365.FB5CC7E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I did not comment on the part I removed or anything related to what =
was removed. Your fixation on this is just a way for you to attempt a =
diversion.
I didn't expect a reply from you on your own behavior so in a sense =
my question was rhetorical. There will be no better luck next time = because
you avoid discussing about yourself what you disparage in = others.
Rich
"Mike '/m'" <mike@barkto.com> wrote in message =
news:qrn6b1ta8fucbqimog75bshk5vg13t9pt6@4ax.com...
OIC. When I remove the full quoteback, I am taking your comments out =
of
context, but the reverse does not hold true.
The rest of your comment is nothing more than your usual strawman
creation. I won't take your bait. Better luck next time.
/m
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:20:32 -0700, "Rich" <@> wrote:
> No I'm not. The issue in my last reply is your lack of regard to =
honest and accuracy and not anything anyone else said or wrote. That is = why
I prefaced my statement with "ignoring that the claimed statement = may be
inaccurate". Do you really want to say that because you are = responding to an
unsubstantiated claim in an article it is OK for you to = make unsubstantiated
disparaging remarks?
>
>Rich
>
> "Mike '/m'" <mike@barkto.com> wrote in message =
news:tji6b1devqal43auvcbotk34tec29mqo4c@4ax.com...
>
> By removing the full quoteback you're taking my comments out of =
context.
>
> /m
>
> On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 14:41:17 -0700, "Rich" <@> wrote:
>
> > Ignoring that the claimed statement may be inaccurate, don't =
you think you should be honest and accurate when making unsubstantiated =
disparaging remarks?
> >
> >Rich
> >
> > "Mike '/m'" <mike@barkto.com> wrote in message =
news:u7g6b1l5nhre2j4e2n6e4jdb5ltcss2p2t@4ax.com...
> > OK, then that wasn't the buffer overflow 'sploit that occurred =
shortly
> > after he made that statement. That's why I said "I think it =
was" as
> > opposed to just "it was".
> >
> > /m
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 14:27:28 -0700, "Rich" <@> wrote:
> >
> > > Which was not a buffer overflow. You have been told this =
before.
> > >
> > >Rich
> > >
> > > "Mike '/m'" <mike@barkto.com> wrote in message =
news:fse6b1hq91083dl0nv5ve3nbe4ck6haqja@4ax.com...
> > >
> > > There was a buffer overflow 'sploit shortly after he made =
that
> > > statement. I think it was the uPnP one.
> > >
> > > /m
------=_NextPart_000_02A8_01C57365.FB5CC7E0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2668" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> I did not comment on the =
part I=20
removed or anything related to what was removed. Your fixation on = this
is=20
just a way for you to attempt a diversion.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> I didn't expect a reply =
from you on=20
your own behavior so in a sense my question was rhetorical. There = will
be=20
no better luck next time because you avoid discussing about yourself = what
you=20
disparage in others.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Mike '/m'" <<A =
href=3D"mailto:mike@barkto.com">mike@barkto.com</A>>=20
wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:qrn6b1ta8fucbqimog75bshk5vg13t9pt6@4ax.com">news:qrn6b1ta8fu=
cbqimog75bshk5vg13t9pt6@4ax.com</A>...</DIV><BR>OIC. =20
When I remove the full quoteback, I am taking your comments out =
of<BR>context,=20
but the reverse does not hold true.<BR><BR>The rest of your comment is =
nothing=20
more than your usual strawman<BR>creation. I won't take your =
bait. =20
Better luck next time.<BR><BR> /m<BR><BR><BR>On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 =
15:20:32 -0700, "Rich" <@> wrote:<BR><BR>> No I'm =
not. The issue in my last reply is your lack of regard to honest =
and=20
accuracy and not anything anyone else said or wrote. That is why =
I=20
prefaced my statement with "ignoring that the claimed statement may be =
inaccurate". Do you really want to say that because you are =
responding=20
to an unsubstantiated claim in an article it is OK for you to make=20
unsubstantiated disparaging =
remarks?<BR>><BR>>Rich<BR>><BR>> =20
"Mike '/m'" <<A =
href=3D"mailto:mike@barkto.com">mike@barkto.com</A>> wrote=20
in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:tji6b1devqal43auvcbotk34tec29mqo4c@4ax.com">news:tji6b1devqa=
l43auvcbotk34tec29mqo4c@4ax.com</A>...<BR>><BR>> =20
By removing the full quoteback you're taking my comments out of=20
context.<BR>><BR>> /m<BR>><BR>> On Fri, =
17 Jun=20
2005 14:41:17 -0700, "Rich" <@> wrote:<BR>><BR>> =20
> Ignoring that the claimed statement may be =
inaccurate, don't=20
you think you should be honest and accurate when making =
unsubstantiated=20
disparaging remarks?<BR>> ><BR>> =
>Rich<BR>> =20
><BR>> > "Mike '/m'" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:mike@barkto.com">mike@barkto.com</A>> wrote in =
message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:u7g6b1l5nhre2j4e2n6e4jdb5ltcss2p2t@4ax.com">news:u7g6b1l5nhr=
e2j4e2n6e4jdb5ltcss2p2t@4ax.com</A>...<BR>> =20
> OK, then that wasn't the buffer overflow 'sploit that =
occurred=20
shortly<BR>> > after he made that statement. =
That's=20
why I said "I think it was" as<BR>> > opposed to =
just "it=20
was".<BR>> ><BR>> > =
/m<BR>> =20
><BR>> ><BR>> > On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 =
14:27:28=20
-0700, "Rich" <@> wrote:<BR>> ><BR>> =
> =20
> Which was not a buffer overflow. You have =
been=20
told this before.<BR>> > ><BR>> =
> =20
>Rich<BR>> > ><BR>> > =
> =20
"Mike '/m'" <<A =
href=3D"mailto:mike@barkto.com">mike@barkto.com</A>> wrote=20
in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:fse6b1hq91083dl0nv5ve3nbe4ck6haqja@4ax.com">news:fse6b1hq910=
83dl0nv5ve3nbe4ck6haqja@4ax.com</A>...<BR>> =20
> ><BR>> > > There was a buffer =
overflow 'sploit shortly after he made that<BR>> > =20
> statement. I think it was the uPnP one.<BR>> =
> ><BR>> > > =20
/m<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_02A8_01C57365.FB5CC7E0--
--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
* Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)
|