Announcing the MS-MVP HOS Awardees for 2005!

[Linda B]

That website is one big insult you're throwing around. The post about it is
a trolling post, intended only to provoke. And I just did a search on your
name -- every last one of them is bitching about how unfair a EULA is, how
to violate it, or what a horrible company Microsoft is. In no way are you
helping anyone by being here.

You're right about one thing, that the worst way to keep a troll from
trolling is by replying to his messages; what can I say? I'm a glutton for
punishment.

--LB

 

[Dan]

My mind works in strange ways. A negative in the field of medicine is good
because you do not have the illness whereas a positive is bad because it
means you are infected.

: Dan wrote:
: > However, 2 negatives do make a positive in math. Also, if you have
: > two electrons they naturally repel and it is the same with 2 protons.
: > However, neutrons have no charge.
: >
:
: I fail to see the connection unless you are equating "wrongs" with
: "negatives," which would be an erroneous comparison at best.
:
: --
: Peace!
: Kurt
: Self-anointed Moderator
: microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
: http://microscum.com
: "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
: "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
:
:

 

[Dan]

Born-again Christian that is what. :>

: Dan wrote:
: > I hope and pray for Kurttrail, Anthony and Linda B. Perhaps you
: > three should meet somewhere, have a great time and enjoy your
: > thoughts with each other. No disrespect but the three of you seem to
: > think along the same lines whereas most of the rest of this newsgroup
: > does not have time to continue with insults.
: >
:
: LOL! But Opinicus sad attempt in trying to insult me is OK because he
: thinks along the same lines as you do?
:
: And as you can see from my reply to him, I wasn't insulted.
:
: Insults, like pornography, is in the mind of the beholder. So what is
: wrong with your mind?
:
: --
: Peace!
: Kurt
: Self-anointed Moderator
: microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
: http://microscum.com
: "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
: "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
:
:

 

[kurttrail]

That website is one big insult you're throwing around.

As I said earlier, "Insults, like pornography, is in the mind of the
beholder."

The post
about it is a trolling post, intended only to provoke.

Obviously, you can not read the subject. It was an announcement, no
reply to it was sought.

And I just
did a search on your name -- every last one of them is bitching about
how unfair a EULA is, how to violate it, or what a horrible company
Microsoft is. In no way are you helping anyone by being here.

Those are the most popular posts of mine that are searched for on
Google, and there is no way you could have read the ALL over 6,000 posts
that I have made to this group.

You're right about one thing, that the worst way to keep a troll from
trolling is by replying to his messages; what can I say? I'm a
glutton for punishment.

So you know you are an enabler, but lack the self-control to stop
yourself.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[kurttrail]

Born-again Christian that is what. :>

That does explain a lot. MS is as much faith-based, as Christianity.

Reason gets thrown out the door, when faith flies innuendo! ;-)

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[kurttrail]

My mind works in strange ways. A negative in the field of medicine
is good because you do not have the illness whereas a positive is bad
because it means you are infected.

And the connection between "wrongs" and "negatives" in your strange mind
is . . . .

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[David Candy]

JJ used to be normal till you f*cked him up. Perhaps you should be up there as a subversive person who converts norms to psychos. There is nothing to be proud of in doing that.

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

According to Kurt I am there.
But as with all other information on his site, this page and associated
links are not worth wasting my time...even if I have time to waste.
So contrary to what Kurt has already assumed, I have not been there.
So Kurt can keep assuming along with the consequences assuming brings.

 

[kurttrail]

JJ used to be normal till you f*cked him up.
ROFL!

Perhaps you should be up
there as a subversive person who converts norms to psychos.

It takes two to tango, David. At most, I unlocked what he had kept
hidden from the outside world.

There is
nothing to be proud of in doing that.

In bringing to light one's true nature? I'm not proud, it's my
God-given talent. ;-)

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[kurttrail]

According to Kurt I am there.
But as with all other information on his site, this page and
associated links are not worth wasting my time...even if I have time
to waste. So contrary to what Kurt has already assumed, I have not
been there.
So Kurt can keep assuming along with the consequences assuming brings.

ROFL! The only ASSuming is in your own pinhead!

Juppy x-ed put the url to his Hall of Shame page in another thread:
"xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"

I replied, "That Juppy had to x-out the url shows that he is effected by
it. ROFL!
Thanks for letting us know that, Juppy!"

I said the "url" effected you, no where did I ASSume that you saw the
actual page. I'll leave the ASSuming up to you, Juppy! And your
ASSuming speaks volumes!

http://microscum.com/jupiter/

Please waste your time some more by x-ing out some more of my urls!
PMSL!

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

David;
Kurt did not change me.
Perhaps I said some things to strongly that could have been better stated.
Kurt is incapable of a great many things and one of those is changing me.
Please do not giver Kurt credit or blame for something he is incapable of
doing.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"David Candy" <.> wrote in message
JJ used to be normal till you f*cked him up. Perhaps you should be up there
as a subversive person who converts norms to psychos. There is nothing to be
proud of in doing that.

 

[kurttrail]

David;
Kurt did not change me.
Perhaps I said some things to strongly that could have been better
stated. Kurt is incapable of a great many things and one of those is
changing me. Please do not giver Kurt credit or blame for something
he is incapable of doing.

And here we finally agree on something. I didn't make you into a
psycho. You were always one.

http://microscum.com/jupiter/

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

No Kurt,we do not agree.
You continue to make assumptions based on your own twisted logic and of
course come to a wrong conclusion.

If you can post without an insult, go ahead.
If you need insults to bolster your position, you should quit.
If you were capable of presenting your position, you would not need insults
to strengthen your position.
Are you capable of an intelligent discussion, or can you only insult those
you disagree.?

Your insults are indicative of your own character while telling nothing of
the person you are insulting.

 

[Bruce Chambers]

lol those mvp's must be burnnning up over this

Why? We've grown quite used to the troll's having to resort to
juvenile name-calling for quite some time. (He's long ago proven he's
incapable of carrying on a rational discussion.) We just consider the
source.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
both at once. - RAH

 

[kurttrail]

Why? We've grown quite used to the troll's having to resort to
juvenile name-calling for quite some time. (He's long ago proven he's
incapable of carrying on a rational discussion.) We just consider the
source.

LOL! When I respond to you rationally, you don't reply, you only seem
to respond to the name-calling. Hell, it was the name-calling that got
me out of your killfile after a couple of years in it.

Here is a very rational one you left unanswered recently:


Title 17 Chapter 1 Section 117: Limitation on Exclusive Rights:
Computer Programs

In Copyright law "Exclusive Rights" mean the copyright owners rights.
The main gist of Section 117 is to LIMIT the "Exclusive Rights" of the
copyright owner!

Then Section 117 (a) is titled:

"Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy."

Adaptation - the process or state of changing to fit new circumstances
or conditions, or the resulting change.

And that's pretty much describes the act of installation software from a
CD to a computer. And Do I really have to define what ADDITIONAL
means?!

For you, I guess I do, that would mean additional to the original
adaptation or as I say installation.

Section 117 (a) continues:

"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an
infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or
authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer
program provided"

It is "NOT AN INFRINGEMENT" to make "ANOTHER COPY OR ADAPTATION." Can
you say it means anything about only one copy?

Now Section 117 gives 2 different condition when it making "another copy
or adaptation" is "not an infringement" on the exclusive rights of the
Computer Program Copyright Owner.

These conditions are stated as "(1) . . . . OR . . . . (2)", not (1) AND
(2). Do you know and understand the difference between the two
statements?

(1) AND (2) means that both conditions must be met in order that making
an "ANOTHER copy or adaptation" is "not an infringement."

"(1) . . . . OR . . . . (2)" means that only one of these conditions
need to be met in order that making an "ANOTHER copy or adaptation" is
"not an infringement."

Do you understand so far?

Condition (2) is fairly simple to understand, as it says you can make
backups, and has little bearing on using "ANOTHER copy or adaptation."
Do you agree?

Condition (1) is a little more complicated so first I'll quote it first
in conjuction with part (a), and then break it down into what I believe
it means.

". . . . Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of
Copy-"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an
infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or
authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer
program provided . . . . that such a new copy or adaptation is created
as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in
conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner . . .
.."

See all I did was removed "(a)" and "(1)" and the "or" at the end.

". . . . that such a new copy or adaptation . . . ."

"New" refers to the "additional" or "another copy or adaptation"
from part (a).

". . . . is created as an essential step . . . ."

In my interpretation I say " is made as a necessary step"

created - to produce something as a result, or make something happen

essential - necessary: of the highest importance for achieving something

See so far how my "interpretation is going, using the definitions to put
the law into laymans terms?

". . . . in the utilization of the computer program . . . ."

or as I say in my "interpretation:"

". . . . in making use of the software . . . ."

Are you willing to give me that "computer program" means "software?"

utilization - make use of something: to make use of or find a practical
use for something.

So far I'm twisting nothing, am I?

". . . . in conjunction with . . . . "

or as I say in my "interpretation:"

". . . . together with . . . ."

in conjunction with - together with or combined with something

Now we come to the hard part, the difference between "a" and "the"

the - CORE MEANING: an adjective, the definite article, used before
somebody or something that has already been mentioned or identified, or
something that is understood by both the speaker and hearer, as distinct
from "a" or "an"


a - CORE MEANING: the indefinite article, used before a singular
countable noun to refer to one person or thing not previously known or
specified, in contrast with "the," referring to somebody or something
known to the listener.

". . . . a machine . . . ."

Had the writers of this law had the intention that this "new copy or
adaptation" could only be used "in conjunction with" the computer with
the original adaption, then they would have written "THE machince," but
they didn't. They purposefully wrote "a machine," a thing not
previously known or specified.

So that's where I get my "interpretation" of "a machine" meaning:

". . . . a previously unknown computer . . . ."

Then part (1) ends with:

". . . . and that it is used in no other manner . . . ."

Which I use word for word in my interpretation.

So let's put it all together, and put the law and my "interpretation" up
side by side.

First the law again:

". . . . Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of
Copy-"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an
infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or
authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer
program provided . . . . that such a new copy or adaptation is created
as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in
conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner . . .
.."

Now my "interpretation:"

". . . . Making of Additional Installation by the Owner of a Copy of
Software. - It is not infringement for the owner of a copy of software
to make another installation provided . . . . that such a new
installation is made as a necessary step in making use of the software
together with a previously unknown computer and that it is used in no
other manner . . . ."

So you see, Section 117 (a) says absolutely nothing about using software
on only one computer, or protecting the exclusive rights of the
copyright owner over that of the owner of a copy of software. Section
117 (a) is a "Limitations on [the] exclusive rights" of the copyright
owner, and is a protection for "the owner of a copy of a computer
program"
from being sued by the copyright owner for "infringement" for making
"another copy or adaptation" for use on a non-specific computer, and
says ABSOLUTELY nothing about limiting all adaptations to the same
computer.


Now let's see you describe, in as minute detail as I have, how Section
117 limits software to being installed on only one computer at any given
time, Bruce. My guess is that you either won't reply, or you will try
to blow it off in a sentence or two that will distort the meaning of
what is actually written in Section 117.

And as anyone, with an open mind can see, I distort nothing in my
interpretation of Section 117, and I have a reasonable explanation for
everything I believe it means.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[kurttrail]

No Kurt,we do not agree.

If we don't agree, then you are reversing what you said earlier and are
now saying I did make you into a psycho.

You continue to make assumptions based on your own twisted logic and
of course come to a wrong conclusion.

Hey, I'm the one that is sticking with my opinion that I didn't make you
into a psycho! The only thing that is twisted is you on this account.

If you can post without an insult, go ahead.

I can and do it every day.

If you need insults to bolster your position, you should quit.

I never NEED to insult to bolster my position. I rationally state all
my opinions, and add to that my humor. If you are insulted by my humor,
that is your problem, not mine. Please read earlier in this thread
where I said to two other posters about insults being in the mind of the
beholder.

If you were capable of presenting your position, you would not need
insults to strengthen your position.

My humor is never added to stregthen my position, but to entertain those
of like humor. My position stand all on its own, despite my humor.

Are you capable of an intelligent discussion,

As I already said, I can and do it every day.

or can you only insult
those you disagree.?

Are you insulted by my humor? If so, that is your problem, not mine.

Your insults are indicative of your own character while telling
nothing of the person you are insulting.

What I call my humor, you call insults, and that is indicative that you
take yourself much too seriously.

http://microscum.com/jupiter/

"But as with all other information on his site, this page and associated
links are not worth wasting my time...even if I have time to waste." -
Jupiter Jones

Yet you waste your time x-ing out a url! I think thou doth protest too
much!

Yet more wasting of your time with x's! Wouldn't it just be easier to
cut the whole sig. I have OE quotefix installed on my computer and it
cuts all standard sigs of the post I repond to from my replies
automatically. I waste none of my time dealing with standard sigs. If
you need help setting it up, just ask, I'd be happy to help you out of
wasting your time with all the x's every time you respond to one of my
posts. ;-)

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[Dan]

Who knows? (???)

: Dan wrote:
: > My mind works in strange ways. A negative in the field of medicine
: > is good because you do not have the illness whereas a positive is bad
: > because it means you are infected.
: >
:
: And the connection between "wrongs" and "negatives" in your strange mind
: is . . . .
:
: --
: Peace!
: Kurt
: Self-anointed Moderator
: microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
: http://microscum.com
: "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
: "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
:
:

 

[Dan]

Has 1984 arrived in your mind, Kurt? (I am sure you must have read 1984 by
George Orwell)

: Bruce Chambers wrote:
: > Anthony wrote:
: >> lol those mvp's must be burnnning up over this
: >>
: >
: >
: > Why? We've grown quite used to the troll's having to resort to
: > juvenile name-calling for quite some time. (He's long ago proven he's
: > incapable of carrying on a rational discussion.) We just consider the
: > source.
:
: LOL! When I respond to you rationally, you don't reply, you only seem
: to respond to the name-calling. Hell, it was the name-calling that got
: me out of your killfile after a couple of years in it.
:
: Here is a very rational one you left unanswered recently:
:
:
: Title 17 Chapter 1 Section 117: Limitation on Exclusive Rights:
: Computer Programs
:
: In Copyright law "Exclusive Rights" mean the copyright owners rights.
: The main gist of Section 117 is to LIMIT the "Exclusive Rights" of the
: copyright owner!
:
: Then Section 117 (a) is titled:
:
: "Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy."
:
: Adaptation - the process or state of changing to fit new circumstances
: or conditions, or the resulting change.
:
: And that's pretty much describes the act of installation software from a
: CD to a computer. And Do I really have to define what ADDITIONAL
: means?!
:
: For you, I guess I do, that would mean additional to the original
: adaptation or as I say installation.
:
: Section 117 (a) continues:
:
: "Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an
: infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or
: authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer
: program provided"
:
: It is "NOT AN INFRINGEMENT" to make "ANOTHER COPY OR ADAPTATION." Can
: you say it means anything about only one copy?
:
: Now Section 117 gives 2 different condition when it making "another copy
: or adaptation" is "not an infringement" on the exclusive rights of the
: Computer Program Copyright Owner.
:
: These conditions are stated as "(1) . . . . OR . . . . (2)", not (1) AND
: (2). Do you know and understand the difference between the two
: statements?
:
: (1) AND (2) means that both conditions must be met in order that making
: an "ANOTHER copy or adaptation" is "not an infringement."
:
: "(1) . . . . OR . . . . (2)" means that only one of these conditions
: need to be met in order that making an "ANOTHER copy or adaptation" is
: "not an infringement."
:
: Do you understand so far?
:
: Condition (2) is fairly simple to understand, as it says you can make
: backups, and has little bearing on using "ANOTHER copy or adaptation."
: Do you agree?
:
: Condition (1) is a little more complicated so first I'll quote it first
: in conjuction with part (a), and then break it down into what I believe
: it means.
:
: ". . . . Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of
: Copy-"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an
: infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or
: authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer
: program provided . . . . that such a new copy or adaptation is created
: as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in
: conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner . . .
: ."
:
: See all I did was removed "(a)" and "(1)" and the "or" at the end.
:
: ". . . . that such a new copy or adaptation . . . ."
:
: "New" refers to the "additional" or "another copy or adaptation"
: from part (a).
:
: ". . . . is created as an essential step . . . ."
:
: In my interpretation I say " is made as a necessary step"
:
: created - to produce something as a result, or make something happen
:
: essential - necessary: of the highest importance for achieving something
:
: See so far how my "interpretation is going, using the definitions to put
: the law into laymans terms?
:
: ". . . . in the utilization of the computer program . . . ."
:
: or as I say in my "interpretation:"
:
: ". . . . in making use of the software . . . ."
:
: Are you willing to give me that "computer program" means "software?"
:
: utilization - make use of something: to make use of or find a practical
: use for something.
:
: So far I'm twisting nothing, am I?
:
: ". . . . in conjunction with . . . . "
:
: or as I say in my "interpretation:"
:
: ". . . . together with . . . ."
:
: in conjunction with - together with or combined with something
:
: Now we come to the hard part, the difference between "a" and "the"
:
: the - CORE MEANING: an adjective, the definite article, used before
: somebody or something that has already been mentioned or identified, or
: something that is understood by both the speaker and hearer, as distinct
: from "a" or "an"
:
:
: a - CORE MEANING: the indefinite article, used before a singular
: countable noun to refer to one person or thing not previously known or
: specified, in contrast with "the," referring to somebody or something
: known to the listener.
:
: ". . . . a machine . . . ."
:
: Had the writers of this law had the intention that this "new copy or
: adaptation" could only be used "in conjunction with" the computer with
: the original adaption, then they would have written "THE machince," but
: they didn't. They purposefully wrote "a machine," a thing not
: previously known or specified.
:
: So that's where I get my "interpretation" of "a machine" meaning:
:
: ". . . . a previously unknown computer . . . ."
:
: Then part (1) ends with:
:
: ". . . . and that it is used in no other manner . . . ."
:
: Which I use word for word in my interpretation.
:
: So let's put it all together, and put the law and my "interpretation" up
: side by side.
:
: First the law again:
:
: ". . . . Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of
: Copy-"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an
: infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or
: authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer
: program provided . . . . that such a new copy or adaptation is created
: as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in
: conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner . . .
: ."
:
: Now my "interpretation:"
:
: ". . . . Making of Additional Installation by the Owner of a Copy of
: Software. - It is not infringement for the owner of a copy of software
: to make another installation provided . . . . that such a new
: installation is made as a necessary step in making use of the software
: together with a previously unknown computer and that it is used in no
: other manner . . . ."
:
: So you see, Section 117 (a) says absolutely nothing about using software
: on only one computer, or protecting the exclusive rights of the
: copyright owner over that of the owner of a copy of software. Section
: 117 (a) is a "Limitations on [the] exclusive rights" of the copyright
: owner, and is a protection for "the owner of a copy of a computer
: program"
: from being sued by the copyright owner for "infringement" for making
: "another copy or adaptation" for use on a non-specific computer, and
: says ABSOLUTELY nothing about limiting all adaptations to the same
: computer.
:
:
: Now let's see you describe, in as minute detail as I have, how Section
: 117 limits software to being installed on only one computer at any given
: time, Bruce. My guess is that you either won't reply, or you will try
: to blow it off in a sentence or two that will distort the meaning of
: what is actually written in Section 117.
:
: And as anyone, with an open mind can see, I distort nothing in my
: interpretation of Section 117, and I have a reasonable explanation for
: everything I believe it means.
:
: --
: Peace!
: Kurt
: Self-anointed Moderator
: microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
: http://microscum.com
: "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
: "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
:
:

 

[Dan]

Huh? I do what God tells me and will gladly don the armor of God and face
the deepest pit in Hell if God commands it. :>

: Dan wrote:
: > Born-again Christian that is what. :>
:
: That does explain a lot. MS is as much faith-based, as Christianity.
:
: Reason gets thrown out the door, when faith flies innuendo! ;-)
:
: --
: Peace!
: Kurt
: Self-anointed Moderator
: microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
: http://microscum.com
: "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
: "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
:
:

 

[David Candy]

Send a postcard. Seeya.