Re: Cassie... reminds me of someone

[David H. Lipman]

From: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhondalea@gmail.com>

| Dustin wrote:
>> "SOG-1982" <sog82@army.com> wrote in
>> news:1159456368.834799.269390@h48g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com:
>>
>>> 8 year-olds. And no, there is no danger in having multiple antivirus
>>> applications on board your computer simultaneously. Just avoid
>>> scanning at the same time.
>>
>> WTF? You actually recommend people run more than one resident
>> antivirus on the same pc?
|
| That's not what he wrote at all. Not even close.
|
>> That's a huge waste of system resources and
>> good for conflicts. I suppose next you'll suggest two firewalls?
|
| I guess this means no one should use Multi_AV, right? I'll let Dave
| Lipman know. No need to thank me; I was happy to help.
|

I believe this is in reference to two fully installed anti virus applications.

The Multi AV Scanning Tool does NOT perform "On Access" scanning and thus can happily
coexist with other fully installed AV applications performing "On Access" scanning.

Generally speaking, it is contraindicated to have two anti virus applications installed and
performing "On Access" scanning. One who is good with software and not a noob, may be able
to have two fully installed anti virus applications installed but has tweaked both so they
don't interfere with each other.

--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm

[Dustin Cook]

David H. Lipman wrote:
> From: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhondalea@gmail.com>
>
> | Dustin wrote:
> >> "SOG-1982" <sog82@army.com> wrote in
> >> news:1159456368.834799.269390@h48g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com:
> >>
> >>> 8 year-olds. And no, there is no danger in having multiple antivirus
> >>> applications on board your computer simultaneously. Just avoid
> >>> scanning at the same time.
> >>
> >> WTF? You actually recommend people run more than one resident
> >> antivirus on the same pc?
> |
> | That's not what he wrote at all. Not even close.
> |
> >> That's a huge waste of system resources and
> >> good for conflicts. I suppose next you'll suggest two firewalls?
> |
> | I guess this means no one should use Multi_AV, right? I'll let Dave
> | Lipman know. No need to thank me; I was happy to help.
> |
>
> I believe this is in reference to two fully installed anti virus applications.

It was, yes.

> The Multi AV Scanning Tool does NOT perform "On Access" scanning and thus can
> happily
> coexist with other fully installed AV applications performing "On Access" scanning.

I think you lost her at the on access scanning point Dave.
She obviously didn't know how your program works.. hehe..

Thanks for speaking up tho.


> Generally speaking, it is contraindicated to have two anti virus applications installed and
> performing "On Access" scanning. One who is good with software and not a noob, may
> be able to have two fully installed anti virus applications installed but has tweaked both
> so they don't interfere with each other.

Yep Yep...

Maybe one day she'll understand the difference. Right now, it appears
she's too busy with a smear campaign regarding my software. I told ya
she was a troll!

--
Dustin
http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk

[Damian]

Dustin Cook wrote:
>
> I told ya
> she was a troll!


PEEEEEEEEE KAAAAAAAAAAAAAY BEEEEEEEEE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Rhonda Lea Kirk]

David H. Lipman wrote:
> From: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhondalea@gmail.com>
>
>> Dustin wrote:
>>> "SOG-1982" <sog82@army.com> wrote in
>>> news:1159456368.834799.269390@h48g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com:
>>>
>>>> 8 year-olds. And no, there is no danger in having multiple
>>>> antivirus applications on board your computer simultaneously. Just
>>>> avoid scanning at the same time.
>>>
>>> WTF? You actually recommend people run more than one resident
>>> antivirus on the same pc?
>>
>> That's not what he wrote at all. Not even close.
>>
>>> That's a huge waste of system resources and
>>> good for conflicts. I suppose next you'll suggest two firewalls?
>>
>> I guess this means no one should use Multi_AV, right? I'll let Dave
>> Lipman know. No need to thank me; I was happy to help.
>>
>
> I believe this is in reference to two fully installed anti virus
> applications.

Actually, it had no real context at all. The guy threw it in at the tail
end as an afterthought.

> The Multi AV Scanning Tool does NOT perform "On Access" scanning and
> thus can happily coexist with other fully installed AV applications
> performing "On Access" scanning.

I know, Dave. I've used it. If you recall, I even defended it--several
months ago--in one of the Windows newsgroups when someone was railing
about how it had destroyed his data.

> Generally speaking, it is contraindicated to have two anti virus
> applications installed and performing "On Access" scanning. One who
> is good with software and not a noob, may be able to have two fully
> installed anti virus applications installed but has tweaked both so
> they don't interfere with each other.

Dustin's post was totally irrelevant, given the context of the original
post. That's the point.

--
Rhonda Lea Kirk

Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is
willing to inflict on others. Phèdre nó Delaunay

[Rhonda Lea Kirk]

Dustin Cook wrote:
> David H. Lipman wrote:
>> From: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhondalea@gmail.com>
>>
>>> Dustin wrote:
>>>> "SOG-1982" <sog82@army.com> wrote in
>>>> news:1159456368.834799.269390@h48g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com:
>>>>
>>>>> 8 year-olds. And no, there is no danger in having multiple
>>>>> antivirus applications on board your computer simultaneously.
>>>>> Just avoid scanning at the same time.
>>>>
>>>> WTF? You actually recommend people run more than one resident
>>>> antivirus on the same pc?
>>>
>>> That's not what he wrote at all. Not even close.
>>>
>>>> That's a huge waste of system resources and
>>>> good for conflicts. I suppose next you'll suggest two firewalls?
>>>
>>> I guess this means no one should use Multi_AV, right? I'll let Dave
>>> Lipman know. No need to thank me; I was happy to help.
>>>
>>
>> I believe this is in reference to two fully installed anti virus
>> applications.
>
> It was, yes.
>
>> The Multi AV Scanning Tool does NOT perform "On Access" scanning and
>> thus can
>> happily
>> coexist with other fully installed AV applications performing "On
>> Access" scanning.
>
> I think you lost her at the on access scanning point Dave.
> She obviously didn't know how your program works.. hehe..

Yes, I do.

And I've replied to Dave. In very simple terms, if you weren't such an
attention seeker, you wouldn't go looking for things to pick on.

That's the point.

> Thanks for speaking up tho.
>
>
>> Generally speaking, it is contraindicated to have two anti virus
>> applications installed and performing "On Access" scanning. One who
>> is good with software and not a noob, may
>> be able to have two fully installed anti virus applications
>> installed but has tweaked both so they don't interfere with each
>> other.
>
> Yep Yep...
>
> Maybe one day she'll understand the difference. Right now, it appears
> she's too busy with a smear campaign regarding my software. I told ya
> she was a troll!

Y'know, Dustin, you're a ****wit.

If I am a troll, why do you continue to dance for me, Dustin?

--
Rhonda Lea Kirk

Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is
willing to inflict on others. Phèdre nó Delaunay

[David H. Lipman]

From: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhondalea@gmail.com>

| David H. Lipman wrote:
>> From: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhondalea@gmail.com>
>>
>>> Dustin wrote:
>>>> "SOG-1982" <sog82@army.com> wrote in
>>>> news:1159456368.834799.269390@h48g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com:
>>>>
>>>>> 8 year-olds. And no, there is no danger in having multiple
>>>>> antivirus applications on board your computer simultaneously. Just
>>>>> avoid scanning at the same time.
>>>>
>>>> WTF? You actually recommend people run more than one resident
>>>> antivirus on the same pc?
>>>
>>> That's not what he wrote at all. Not even close.
>>>
>>>> That's a huge waste of system resources and
>>>> good for conflicts. I suppose next you'll suggest two firewalls?
>>>
>>> I guess this means no one should use Multi_AV, right? I'll let Dave
>>> Lipman know. No need to thank me; I was happy to help.
>>>
>> I believe this is in reference to two fully installed anti virus
>> applications.
|
| Actually, it had no real context at all. The guy threw it in at the tail
| end as an afterthought.
|
>> The Multi AV Scanning Tool does NOT perform "On Access" scanning and
>> thus can happily coexist with other fully installed AV applications
>> performing "On Access" scanning.
|
| I know, Dave. I've used it. If you recall, I even defended it--several
| months ago--in one of the Windows newsgroups when someone was railing
| about how it had destroyed his data.
|
>> Generally speaking, it is contraindicated to have two anti virus
>> applications installed and performing "On Access" scanning. One who
>> is good with software and not a noob, may be able to have two fully
>> installed anti virus applications installed but has tweaked both so
>> they don't interfere with each other.
|
| Dustin's post was totally irrelevant, given the context of the original
| post. That's the point.
|

Rhonda:

I am NOT saying you don't know. Please don't take offense.

I was responding to the text I saw and made what I thought were technical replies and
comments for readers in general.

--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm

[Damian]

David H. Lipman wrote:
> From: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhondalea@gmail.com>
>
>> David H. Lipman wrote:
>>> From: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhondalea@gmail.com>
>>>
>>>> Dustin wrote:
>>>>> "SOG-1982" <sog82@army.com> wrote in
>>>>> news:1159456368.834799.269390@h48g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com:
>>>>>
>>>>>> 8 year-olds. And no, there is no danger in having multiple
>>>>>> antivirus applications on board your computer simultaneously.
>>>>>> Just avoid scanning at the same time.
>>>>>
>>>>> WTF? You actually recommend people run more than one resident
>>>>> antivirus on the same pc?
>>>>
>>>> That's not what he wrote at all. Not even close.
>>>>
>>>>> That's a huge waste of system resources and
>>>>> good for conflicts. I suppose next you'll suggest two firewalls?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I guess this means no one should use Multi_AV, right? I'll let Dave
>>>> Lipman know. No need to thank me; I was happy to help.
>>>>
>>> I believe this is in reference to two fully installed anti virus
>>> applications.
>>
>> Actually, it had no real context at all. The guy threw it in at the
>> tail end as an afterthought.
>>
>>> The Multi AV Scanning Tool does NOT perform "On Access" scanning and
>>> thus can happily coexist with other fully installed AV applications
>>> performing "On Access" scanning.
>>
>> I know, Dave. I've used it. If you recall, I even defended
>> it--several months ago--in one of the Windows newsgroups when
>> someone was railing about how it had destroyed his data.
>>
>>> Generally speaking, it is contraindicated to have two anti virus
>>> applications installed and performing "On Access" scanning. One who
>>> is good with software and not a noob, may be able to have two fully
>>> installed anti virus applications installed but has tweaked both so
>>> they don't interfere with each other.
>>
>> Dustin's post was totally irrelevant, given the context of the
>> original post. That's the point.
>>
>
> Rhonda:
>
> I am NOT saying you don't know. Please don't take offense.
>
> I was responding to the text I saw and made what I thought were
> technical replies and comments for readers in general.

You do know, a "technical reply" would go over the head of Dustbin, so why
would you even try?

[James Egan]

On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 23:33:04 GMT, "David H. Lipman"
<DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote:

>...and made what I thought were technical replies and
>comments for readers in general.

But not auk in particular, it seems.

<reviews filter strategy yet again>



Jim.

James Egan wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 23:33:04 GMT, "David H. Lipman"
> <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote:
>
>> ...and made what I thought were technical replies and
>> comments for readers in general.
>
> But not auk in particular, it seems.
>
> <reviews filter strategy yet again>


<maybe you're too stupid to get it the first time>

[Rhonda Lea Kirk]

David H. Lipman wrote:
> From: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhondalea@gmail.com>
>
>> David H. Lipman wrote:
>>> From: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhondalea@gmail.com>
>>>
>>>> Dustin wrote:
>>>>> "SOG-1982" <sog82@army.com> wrote in
>>>>> news:1159456368.834799.269390@h48g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com:
>>>>>
>>>>>> 8 year-olds. And no, there is no danger in having multiple
>>>>>> antivirus applications on board your computer simultaneously.
>>>>>> Just avoid scanning at the same time.
>>>>>
>>>>> WTF? You actually recommend people run more than one resident
>>>>> antivirus on the same pc?
>>>>
>>>> That's not what he wrote at all. Not even close.
>>>>
>>>>> That's a huge waste of system resources and
>>>>> good for conflicts. I suppose next you'll suggest two firewalls?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I guess this means no one should use Multi_AV, right? I'll let Dave
>>>> Lipman know. No need to thank me; I was happy to help.
>>>>
>>> I believe this is in reference to two fully installed anti virus
>>> applications.
>>
>> Actually, it had no real context at all. The guy threw it in at the
>> tail end as an afterthought.
>>
>>> The Multi AV Scanning Tool does NOT perform "On Access" scanning and
>>> thus can happily coexist with other fully installed AV applications
>>> performing "On Access" scanning.
>>
>> I know, Dave. I've used it. If you recall, I even defended
>> it--several months ago--in one of the Windows newsgroups when
>> someone was railing about how it had destroyed his data.
>>
>>> Generally speaking, it is contraindicated to have two anti virus
>>> applications installed and performing "On Access" scanning. One who
>>> is good with software and not a noob, may be able to have two fully
>>> installed anti virus applications installed but has tweaked both so
>>> they don't interfere with each other.
>>
>> Dustin's post was totally irrelevant, given the context of the
>> original post. That's the point.
>>
>
> Rhonda:
>
> I am NOT saying you don't know. Please don't take offense.

It's Dustin who offends me Dave. His whole point seems to be
self-aggrandizement, even if he has to invent a reason.

Just pay it no mind. It has nothing to do with you or your program
except to the extent that your program happens to be the example I used.

> I was responding to the text I saw and made what I thought were
> technical replies and comments for readers in general.

Which is a perfectly reasonable thing to do.

But the point is that the original post was not what Dustin made it out
to be.

--
Rhonda Lea Kirk

Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is
willing to inflict on others. Phèdre nó Delaunay