Ping: David Kaye

[George Orwell]

"~BD~" <BoaterDaveNoSpam@Hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message news:hqbpth$4k2$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> David H. Lipman wrote:
>>>
>>> They weren't Easter bunnies. It was soft p.o.r.n. It was
>>> inappropriate for the Malkwarebyte forums and the religious
>>> Christians were offended.
>
> What rubbish!
>
> Most certainly there was no reason for banning me from the Malwarebytes
> forums, that's for sure.
>
> There's something that doesn't quite ring true about an organisation
> which does not correspond in a civilised manner with the users of its
> product.
>
> Maybe someone like David Kaye has the experience to determine if a
> machine is actually *clean* after installing and running MBAM. Someone,
> surely, has carried out an independent check to give such a widely used
> facility a clean bill of health. Whilst MBAM is obviously highly
> effective at removing 'malware' why is it considered impossible for the
> downloaded software to leave its *own* gremlin within the cleaned
> machine?
>
> Is Malwarebytes approved by Microsoft itself? If so, please cite
> reference.
>
> Dave - seeking only the truth!

IDIOT!

Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
https://www.mixmaster.it

[BoaterDave]

On 17 Apr, 10:15, George Orwell <nob...@mixmaster.it> wrote:
> "~BD~" <BoaterDaveNoS...@Hotmail.co.uk> wrote in messagenews:hqbpth$4k2$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> > David H. Lipman wrote:
>
> >>> They weren't Easter bunnies. *It was soft p.o.r.n. *It was
> >>> inappropriate for the Malkwarebyte forums and the religious
> >>> Christians were offended.
>
> > What rubbish!
>
> > Most certainly there was no reason for banning me from the Malwarebytes
> > forums, that's for sure.
>
> > There's something that doesn't quite ring true about an organisation
> > which does not correspond in a civilised manner with the users of its
> > product.
>
> > Maybe someone like David Kaye has the experience to determine if a
> > machine is actually *clean* after installing and running MBAM. Someone,
> > surely, has carried out an independent check to give such a widely used
> > facility a clean bill of health. Whilst MBAM is obviously highly
> > effective at removing 'malware' why is it considered impossible for the
> > downloaded software to leave its *own* gremlin within the cleaned
> > machine?
>
> > Is Malwarebytes approved by Microsoft itself? *If so, please cite
> > reference.
>
> > Dave - seeking only the truth!
>
> IDIOT!

> - Show quoted text -

Why did you post if you didn't know the answer?

Dave BD