Prev: ANUSHKA HOT PICTURES FOR BOLLYWOOD FANS
Next: Software able to turn off laptop at set time?
From: rotfl on 30 Jul 2010 04:06
H-Man wrote:

>"I disagree. In order to cut this short, you are entitled to your >facts."

Erm. Methinks you got that slightly wrong H-Man. The expression goes:

'You are entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts'.

But in this case, having read BB's comments they are in accordance with
the ACF archive which I have done some crash reading of lately. So they
are facts.

Also, AFAICS not one PWH person disputed any part of the PWH expos�
when it was originally posted by whistleblower:
"The Great $Pricelessware$ Racket".

That must tell you something quite important about PWH. No?

>In the end I'm just a guy with an opinion. If you disagree with my
>opinion, and you have stated emphatically that you do, then so be it.
>It is just one guy's opinion, no need to get upset about it.

True, but in this case your opinion is to restart Pricelessware activity
on this newsgroup, hence your comment up the thread with Corliss. But
that would be wrong for all the reasons BB has set out.
In the end, it will come down to whether the PWH racketeers want to
start a new war by exercising a false right to abuse a Usenet newsgroup
and indulge in unlawful activity by making PL CD.ISOs available for
download without evidence that all authors have given specific approval.
That process in itself is aiding and abetting copyright theft.


-rotfl

From: B. R. 'BeAr' Ederson on 30 Jul 2010 16:36
On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 10:06:38 +0200, rotfl wrote:

> But in this case, having read BB's comments they are in accordance with
> the ACF archive which I have done some crash reading of lately. So they
> are facts.
>
> Also, AFAICS not one PWH person disputed any part of the PWH expos�
> when it was originally posted by whistleblower:
> "The Great $Pricelessware$ Racket".
>
> That must tell you something quite important about PWH. No?

After months and years of ever-repeating exchanges of views, this
lampoon was just another humoresque or source of boredom - depending
on the mood and character of the reader. For those, who knew the
goings-on from personal experience, the twists of "facts" and the
flowery imaginary were too obvious to be taken seriously.

If you're just pretending to be new to the group, you'll knew this by
yourself. If not, reading through the archives to discover the /real/
facts, will be hard work. *If* you want to do this, you should start
at least 1999 and read from there chronologically. Reading backwards
or just skimming the archives will yank any posts out of context. (You
even need to read most seemingly unrelated threads, because posts
inside any such thread may be the cause of a reaction inside a PW
related one.)

Reading a non-answer to WB as an /important sign/ is a typical example
for such a mistake. The matter was discussed *ad nauseam*, already.
These are just /two/ examples of countless others:

Message-ID: <1521dof8xoabf.dlg(a)br.ederson.news.arcor.de>
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/aa74df99dff1b21e

Message-ID: <97fwmjs6treg$.dlg(a)br.ederson.news.arcor.de>
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/20a681aaa8c2becd

Unfortunately, false accusations and twists of what happened have been
*spammed* to acf for a couple of years by now. Therefore - just out of
statistical reasons - you're inclined to read a multitude more of these,
than of realistic descriptions. :-(

BeAr
--
===========================================================================
= What do you mean with: "Perfection is always an illusion"? =
===============================================================--(Oops!)===
From: »Q« on 30 Jul 2010 20:54
In <news:88z87tksoekr.dlg(a)br.ederson.news.arcor.de>,
B. R. 'BeAr' Ederson <br.ederson(a)expires-2010-07-31.arcornews.de> wrote:

> Unfortunately, false accusations and twists of what happened have been
> *spammed* to acf for a couple of years by now.

I've snipped most of it, but that was an excellent reply to one of the
"new" posters who come along a couple of times a year and after taking
a "crash course" in a.c.f history quickly "see" that
Bottoms/hummingbird/Me.Here are right about everything. (Funny how the
person who "sees" that is using a remailer -- I think the last time it
got hold of a relatively legit server, the posts came from "Legit
Anon".)

In case anybody wants to bookmark it, there's a copy of BeAr's post at
<http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=128053766800>.

From: rotfl on 31 Jul 2010 08:24
New PWH sockpuppet "Grant" wrote:


>On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 02:41:12 +0200, rotfl <at.you(a)nd.them> wrote:
>
>>Those are my views and you are free to disagree with them as you see
>>fit, but absent anything new that rocks the world, they won't change.
>
>You need to improve your reading skills and comprehension of the
>English language.


Confucius said: "when you have nothing to say, stop saying it".


-rotfl

From: rotfl on 31 Jul 2010 14:29
BeAr wrote:
>I'm completely lost to see any "importance" of this. You posted an
>opinion and I posted a reply to *this* very opinion. Not a reply
>to sth. posted anywhere else in this thread, be it the OP or any
>other one.

The reason for mentioning it was covered in later comments, but since
you haven't spotted it, I'll explain: Virtually every Pricelessware
groupy peddles the notion that PWH is an integral (even necessary!)
part of ACF and the dissenters only number 1, 2 or 3 k00ks. (k00ks is
a term introduced by �Q� to denigrate dissenters).

The truth is very different, hence me pointing out that *I* did not
start this thread and *I* have no idea who did. I doubt it was Bear and
AFAIK HB is out of the country (as per -ART-) on a business project,
despite contrary claims from �Q� and the Franklin-Stubbings-za kAT
forging duo. These people know everything and nothing.

But the deception runs throughout posts made by �Q� in this thread and
several others, and it provides them with the excuse to claim that the
dissenters are just a couple of k00ks and it's OK to ignore them and
block their posts. That is jackboot behaviour, so typical of many PWH
people. PWH is akin to a gang of thugs who intimidate anybody who
disagrees or stands up to them. There's no limit to the level they will
stoop to. Corliss has threatened people with "toe-to-toe" encounters
and his baseball bat is legendary. lol.

>As I wrote: Read chronologically from about 1999 till today and *then*
>come back here talking about right and wrong. Maybe you'll notice, that
>sth. you *now* call "twisting" is in fact a correct recollection of
>the past.

Be aware that I have no intention of trawling back in the archives to
1999. The era I have posted about is since Bugher took control of PW
and got rid of Genna(sp?). This was about 2004. The reason's simple:
it is during, and since that takeover that PWH under Bugher began to
dominate ACF and tried to merge the two entities. WB set this out in
some detail. My point is that there was a lot of angry debate at the
time, clearly indicating that *many people* were not happy with what
was happening. *Many people* = a lot more than a couple of k00ks who
only appeared later on ACF c2006.

It's also relevant to mention that many good posters left ACF long
before the so-called "couple of k00ks" arrived, so the k00ks can't be
blamed for that. But PWH advocates try to bury that history.

So, there's a big lie being peddled about dissent over PWH and the PWH
groupies are in mass denial. What an unholy mess.

I'm not sure if WB mentioned it but altruism cannot explain the PWH
gang-hate campaigns which are waged against dissenters, so there has to
be something bigger at stake. That is invariably $$$. Such could also
explain why �Q� hosts the unlawful CD.ISOs on his server...


I am not going to respond to each of your comments but the response
from Bugher at the time to WB's original posting was a non-response.
IOW it didn't debunk anything he'd written. AFAICS no other person
attempted to debunk any of it because they couldn't - it's all true.

As I said previously,my own view is that some events can be interpreted
according to one's pov but angry posts that have been made over the
years and the PWH wars that existed are fact and cannot be subjected to
interpretation, save someone trying to rewrite history as I believe you
are desperately trying to do.

My view is that PWH should find its own home for its website business
and move away from ACF. I therefore agree with HB and BB and others.
ACF will become more productive and useful to those who participate.
THAT PWH people have so far refused to do that is itself evidence that
they have little concern for the damage they do to ACF and are only
interested in using ACF for their website business.

You are free to disagree with my views but you will not change them
short of producing material evidence that rocks the world. My trawling
of the archives has not revealed any.

HTH

-rotfl

 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: ANUSHKA HOT PICTURES FOR BOLLYWOOD FANS
Next: Software able to turn off laptop at set time?