From: Unknown on
Do you use a time base for everything? Are you paid by the hour?
"Terry R." <F1Com(a)NOSPAMpobox.com> wrote in message
news:ekP7SB6xKHA.812(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> On 3/19/2010 12:38 PM On a whim, glee pounded out on the keyboard
>
>> "Terry R."<F1Com(a)NOSPAMpobox.com> wrote in message
>> news:ukRhsX3xKHA.5480(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> On 3/18/2010 10:45 AM On a whim, Unknown pounded out on the keyboard
>>>
>>>> You assume far too much.
>>>
>>> So I assumed with a response and a valid answer. And your posts did
>>> what?
>>>
>>>
>>> Terry R.
>>
>> <sheesh> You've replied to almost everyone's reply in this thread to
>> tell them how their answer is not as good as yours, and is wrong.
>> Regedit will do exactly what the user wants, one entry at a time. It is
>> a perfectly valid answer. That it is less CONVENIENT than a third-party
>> tool does not make it less correct.
>
> Until John pipes back in and states he never knew regedit existed, I'm
> sticking with my recommendation.
>
> You see MVP's badmouthing tools like I suggest but then lamely suggest
> regedit. And like I said to another replier, using regedit is good IF
> you're getting paid by the hour and your client doesn't realize you're
> using something that takes um-teen times longer than a tool I suggested.
>
> I'm pretty confident the OP knows of regedit and was looking for a "tool"
> (like the subject states) that searched the entire registry at once AND
> displayed the results for ALL.
>
> And you forgot to close your tag. Bad coding...
>
>
> Terry R.
> --
> Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
> Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.


From: glee on
"Terry R." <F1Com(a)NOSPAMpobox.com> wrote in message
news:ekP7SB6xKHA.812(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> On 3/19/2010 12:38 PM On a whim, glee pounded out on the keyboard
>
>> "Terry R."<F1Com(a)NOSPAMpobox.com> wrote in message
>> news:ukRhsX3xKHA.5480(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> On 3/18/2010 10:45 AM On a whim, Unknown pounded out on the keyboard
>>>
>>>> You assume far too much.
>>>
>>> So I assumed with a response and a valid answer. And your posts did
>>> what?
>>>
>>>
>>> Terry R.
>>
>> <sheesh> You've replied to almost everyone's reply in this thread to
>> tell them how their answer is not as good as yours, and is wrong.
>> Regedit will do exactly what the user wants, one entry at a time. It
>> is
>> a perfectly valid answer. That it is less CONVENIENT than a
>> third-party
>> tool does not make it less correct.
>
> Until John pipes back in and states he never knew regedit existed, I'm
> sticking with my recommendation.
>
> You see MVP's badmouthing tools like I suggest but then lamely suggest
> regedit. And like I said to another replier, using regedit is good IF
> you're getting paid by the hour and your client doesn't realize you're
> using something that takes um-teen times longer than a tool I
> suggested.
>
> I'm pretty confident the OP knows of regedit and was looking for a
> "tool" (like the subject states) that searched the entire registry at
> once AND displayed the results for ALL.
>
> And you forgot to close your tag. Bad coding...

You can recommend whatever you like....the only one in this thread
bad-mouthing other replies is you, d00d....and you are still going on
about it.

I didn't "forget to close my tag", because there are no HTML tags in a
plain-text newsgroup post, made through a newsserver, posting with a
newsreader set to plain text. I don't know what newsreader you are
using, that shows plain text posts as HTML...maybe you should fix your
reader or your settings to display correctly?
--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP Oct. 2002 - Sept. 2009
A+
http://dts-l.net/

From: Greg Russell on
"glee" <glee29(a)spamindspring.com> wrote in message
news:O1WX8b%23xKHA.5576(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

>>> <sheesh> You've replied to almost everyone's reply in this thread ...
....
>> And you forgot to close your tag. Bad coding...
....
> I didn't "forget to close my tag", because there are no HTML tags in a
> plain-text newsgroup post, ...

Who said anything about HTML? She was obviously referring to your opening
<sheesh> tag.


From: Unknown on
SHE??????????
"Greg Russell" <grussell(a)invalid.com> wrote in message
news:80jbivFi50U1(a)mid.individual.net...
> "glee" <glee29(a)spamindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:O1WX8b%23xKHA.5576(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
>>>> <sheesh> You've replied to almost everyone's reply in this thread ...
> ...
>>> And you forgot to close your tag. Bad coding...
> ...
>> I didn't "forget to close my tag", because there are no HTML tags in a
>> plain-text newsgroup post, ...
>
> Who said anything about HTML? She was obviously referring to your opening
> <sheesh> tag.
>
>


From: glee on
"Greg Russell" <grussell(a)invalid.com> wrote in message
news:80jbivFi50U1(a)mid.individual.net...
> "glee" <glee29(a)spamindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:O1WX8b%23xKHA.5576(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
>>>> <sheesh> You've replied to almost everyone's reply in this thread
>>>> ...
> ...
>>> And you forgot to close your tag. Bad coding...
> ...
>> I didn't "forget to close my tag", because there are no HTML tags in
>> a
>> plain-text newsgroup post, ...
>
> Who said anything about HTML? She was obviously referring to your
> opening
> <sheesh> tag.

<brackets> can be used for things other than tags....for instance, as a
comment, such as <heh-heh> which would not require a closing </heh-heh>
because it's a comment not a tag. <sheesh> was a comment. I must have
missed that it was meant in humour due to the lack of an indication such
as a smiley or a <jk> comment....or are you going to tell me that <jk>
is a tag and must be closed too??
That's a <jk> BTW, FWIW <heh-heh> :)
--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP Oct. 2002 - Sept. 2009
A+
http://dts-l.net/