Re: More sorbs blacklisting
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 03:33:59PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 08:11:48PM -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
> > On Monday 07 August 2006 17:54, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > > trouble is that whoever you spoke to is not actually clued up, they are
> > > speaking complete shit.
> > >
> > > did you ever stop to think that your ISP is either lying to cover their
> > > laziness and incompetence or just speaking shit because they don't have a
> > > fucking clue?
> >
> > What an interesting idea.
>
> the bleeding obvious is seemingly way beyond your meagre powers of
> reasoning.
>
> halfwits like you should learn to keep your mouth shut, otherwise you
> risk revealing your appalling inadequacy to the world...but then, if
> you were actually capable of learning anything you wouldn't be near as
> half-witted as you are.
Good with the insults, aren't you - not so good with the learning - how
about shutting the fuck up and realising that SORBS, as with all
blacklists, is a pain in the arse. Are they paying you? Or are you just
ranting because you have nothing better to do in the world - you'd think
that when 1 person disagrees with several, they'd get the message, no?
Now, as most of this thread (which has been going on far too long) has
been people saying that SORBS is bad, and xyz has happened to them - you
disputing this constantly can only suggest either:
(a) SORBS are feeding you royalties
(b) Your head is so far up your arse that everything that you say
*must* be right
(c) You're Joerg Schilling in disguise (oh, wait, that's covered by b)
> > Thank you so much for sharing. (Plonk)
>
> i'll see your "plonk" and raise you a "fuck off and die".
Wow - so mature, impressive. I wish everyone was *just like you*. No,
really. It'd cull the population and the animals would once again rule
the earth.
"Thanks",
Brett.
Reply to: