Canon CLI-8/PGI-5 resetter question
in [Printers]
|
Prev: Printing on toilet paper
Next: Lexmark Z640 vs Z2320
From: IntergalacticExpandingPanda on 24 Dec 2008 04:46 On Dec 23, 11:51 pm, measekite <inkysti...(a)oem.com> wrote: > Please do not answer my posts. Please killfile my posts. You are a > screwball. You are so old that I do not wish to correspond with you ever. Sorry d00d, google has no killfile. So long as I notice you spreading wildly inaccurate information, like companies like alotofthings not disclosing what they sell when it's plastered all over the place, I'll respond. You may feel free to killfile me though. And you did recommend KMP ink, you claimed it was better than OEM. It could be for all I know, I haven't tried it.
From: measekite on 24 Dec 2008 13:04 On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 01:46:46 -0800, IntergalacticExpandingPanda wrote: > On Dec 23, 11:51 pm, measekite <inkysti...(a)oem.com> wrote: > >> Please do not answer my posts. Please killfile my posts. You are a >> screwball. You are so old that I do not wish to correspond with you ever. > > Sorry d00d, google has no killfile. So long as I notice you spreading > wildly inaccurate information, like companies like alotofthings not > disclosing what they sell when it's plastered all over the place, I'll > respond. > > You may feel free to killfile me though. > > And you did recommend KMP ink, you claimed it was better than OEM. It > could be for all I know, I haven't tried it. YOU ARE A FILTHY STINKING LIAR
From: IntergalacticExpandingPanda on 24 Dec 2008 13:55 On Dec 24, 10:04 am, measekite <inkysti...(a)oem.com> wrote: > > And you did recommend KMP ink, you claimed it was better than OEM. It > > could be for all I know, I haven't tried it. > > YOU ARE A FILTHY STINKING LIAR http://groups.google.com/group/comp.periphs.printers/msg/39416bccb470b1e1 In this post you clearly stated that KMP ink was "better" than OEM because of the highlighter test. As I've stated I've not used the stuff, but I'm told it drys quickly, is blacker, and holds up better to highlighters than OEM.
From: measekite on 24 Dec 2008 19:10 On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 10:55:56 -0800, IntergalacticExpandingPanda wrote: > YOU ARE A FILTHY STINKING LIAR YOU ARE A FILTHY STINKING LIAR
From: measekite on 24 Dec 2008 19:11
On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 21:07:21 +0000, John Jonas wrote: > IntergalacticExpandingPanda <intergalacticexpandingpanda(a)hotmail.com> wrote > in news:6394c3e6-d643-4eae-92d5-acc1f9e73a95(a)y1g2000pra.googlegroups.com: > >> On Dec 24, 10:04 am, measekite <inkysti...(a)oem.com> wrote: >> >>> > And you did recommend KMP ink, you claimed it was better than OEM. I >> t >>> > could be for all I know, I haven't tried it. >>> >>> YOU ARE A FILTHY STINKING LIAR >> >> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.periphs.printers/msg/39416bccb470b1e1 >> >> In this post you clearly stated that KMP ink was "better" than OEM >> because of the highlighter test. As I've stated I've not used the >> stuff, but I'm told it drys quickly, is blacker, and holds up better >> to highlighters than OEM. >> >> >> >> >> > > Readers in Google Groups rate messages (posts) they've read on a scale of > 1 to 5, with 5 being "excellent, I would recommend this post", to 1 "poor, > I would not recommend this post". Measekite has posted his "technical > expertise" in various tech groups involving printers, cell phones, Windows, > digital photos, graphics, computer hardware, etc. But in 1,163 ratings > received, Measekite has an average of 1 star which is equivalent to "I > would not recommend this poster." The lowest rating you can give is 1 star. > So it's quite conceivable his actual help rating is closer to ZERO than 1. > That would make him NO HELP at all in all things technical. Are we > surprised... > > > JohnJonas Have a nice hollerday |