From: Dustin Cook on
"The Real Truth MVP" <trt(a)> wrote in news:hp883a$7e0$1

> Tell Malware bytes to read my blog then sue me for slander.

They've already been made aware of your new bitches comments. It got his
account disabled at malwarebytes with a ban on site issued by Rubber Ducky
himself. Your site will just continue to remain on the IP blocklist. FYI, a
program called peerblock (and peerguardian) block your site too; they say
rogue code thief when it's blocked. *grin*. Word gets around. I love it.
Neither of those programs has anything to do with antimalware or antivirus,
they just want the users of the programs safer. You've been included with
the lamers from the riaa/mpaa and the others who go after copyright
infringers. Millions of people can't load your site, peerblocker thinks
your a lamer too. :)

"Hrrngh! Someday I'm going to hurl this...hrrngh.. nudge
this boulder right down a cliff." - Goblin Warrior

From: Beauregard T. Shagnasty on
The Real Truth MVP wrote:

> It is a mute point

Mute? You should be! <lol!>

The Real Truth:
*WARNING* Do NOT follow any advice given by the people listed below.
They do NOT have the expertise or knowledge to fix your issue. Do not
waste your time.
PCButtface1, The Not-Real Truth Not-an-MVP,
From: Dustin Cook on
ASCII <me2(a)> wrote in news:4bb7f949.1110406(a)EDCBIC:

> ~BD~ wrote:
>>Let me understand this correctly. You seem to be saying that
>>Malwarebytes took it upon themselves to Block the IP of an innocent
>>Internet user (no convictions for anything AFAICT).
> If there were as much guilt as some claim,
> you'd think there'd be at least one conviction.

You don't know very much about IP laws then...

>>That seems to me like a commercial operation is acting as judge and
>>jury and installing a blocking mechanism on the computers of MBAM
>>users without their knowledge.
>>Is that right?
> Not entirely.
> MBAM doesn't do anything unless someone clicks on the installation
> file. As with the installation of any application there has to be an
> enabling action, either deliberate or through negligence to close open
> opportunities.
> Whether subsequent actions are desirable depend on expectations.
>>If it is, is such action legal?
> Sure it's legal, maybe of dubious ethics, but legal, yes.

> What's pitiful is that so many seem to take the recommendations of
> some of the loudmouth regular 'experts' here as if there were an
> implication of validity to their self serving claims.

And here we get to the root of your problem with most of us here. Your
inferiority complex. I don't feel sorry for you tho. You can learn just
as easily as the rest of us did. Individuals take recommendations from us
because we can be trusted, provide solid advice and have done so for a
very long time. We've been able to build a nice repatore (sp?). That
happens everywhere tho. And as with everywhere else, some moronic twit
like you eventually comes along and cries foul when he or she is 0wned at
almost every post. People like you wish to pick fights only, contribute
nothing and leech off the work of others. Example: bootlegging
malwarebytes and providing a link for others to do the same. *That* is
self serving and speaks greatly about your character.

"Hrrngh! Someday I'm going to hurl this...hrrngh.. nudge
this boulder right down a cliff." - Goblin Warrior

From: ---Fitz--- on

"The Real Truth MVP" <trt(a)> wrote in message
> You just think everyone who believes me is me.
If that sentence makes sense to you then a quality education should be your
goal instead of stealing other folks work.

From: Dustin Cook on
"Jenn" <nope(a)noway.atnohow.anyday> wrote in

> Dustin Cook wrote:
>> "David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in
>> news:hp5s5a03dq(a)
> long ago he didn't understand the relationship between
>>> and and it was explained
>>> to him.
>>> Months later he was asking about it all over again.
>>> Now he's an expert on headers.
>> He's an expert on stupidity, nothing more.
>> When I look stupid up in websters, I imagine seeing a picture of him
>> or his boat.
> I can attest to the fact that Dave is not stupid. :)

At one point, I would have agreed. Ignorance is a curable condition,

As we can clearly see, the ignorance isn't curable in Dave's case;
leaving only one conclusion: He *is* stupid. Sorry.

"Hrrngh! Someday I'm going to hurl this...hrrngh..
nudge this boulder right down a cliff." - Goblin Warrior