OT - For your signature please!

David in Devon
Fri, 22 Feb 2019 09:59:20 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

On 22/02/2019 09:41, Shadow wrote:
On Fri, 22 Feb 2019 09:04:14 +0000, David in Devon
wrote:

Wearing provocative black regalia in the UK doesn't go down
too well with many UK residents (unless one is a nun, that
is!).

A lot of haters don't like nuns. Care to start a petition to
ban them ? Haters are cool, right ?
I've never started ANY partition and don't intend to start now.


Nah, you just lie, like this:


Message-ID:
I proceeded to answer other questions you provided in the same
email asking about it. You indicated no issue with me, no
accusation of my being a 'bad guy' until years later, here on
usenet.

That's correct. I didn't let on that you were a target and I'd
scored a bullseye.

Other than your known dishonesty, is there a particular reason you
aren't sharing the entire contents of your inquiry leading up to
that paste?

I'm totally honest with good guys. What else would you like me to
tell any newbies about you?

*** end paste

To which I responded:

http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=155063392200

I'm totally honest with good guys. What else would you like me to
tell any newbies about you?

You're about as honest as you are sober, David.

Say you were setting me up the entire time. Does that mean (as I
accused you of) that you tried to provide a google street map view
of my house on purpose, then? And when you met in person with
Aardvark and discussed the matter, were you knowingly lying right to
his face?

Are you now admitting that every attempt you made to get to know me,
to be my friend, etc via email were all lies?

Are you also admitting that you told various lies to GM to have a
cease fire on jenn arranged? Under normal conditions, that would
void the agreement. Lucky for jenn, I see no reason for her to have
any issues because you're a dishonest drunkard.

Are you also admitting that you've told lies concerning other peace
arrangements in play?

Are you also admitting that I cannot trust a single thing you write
as being in any way truthful?

So have you been lying for years on usenet or the emails, or both,
then David?


I'd really appreciate some answers to my Questions, david. I realize
that what you wrote and what I asked you shows you to be a rotten
******* with no possibility of redemption or snowing other newbies at
this point with your facade of being a good guy, but, I could still
use a good laugh or two, so if you'd be so kind as to provide some
answers to those questions, I'd appreciate it. BIG ****ING GRIN

Don't worry about your credibility taking a hit, the smoldering pile
of twisted metal beside you was the crediblity plane; it's no longer
flight worthy. Great job!


--
A dog is a dog, but a cat is a purrson!

David in Devon
Sat, 23 Feb 2019 06:58:32 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

On 23/02/2019 04:16, Diesel wrote:
Nah, you just lie

Nope!

The post you quoted that partial line from and completely snipped the
rest of, clearly, without any doubt whatsoever, shows otherwise.

You admit it yourself, proudly:

Other than your known dishonesty, is there a particular reason you
aren't sharing the entire contents of your inquiry leading up to
that paste?

I'm totally honest with good guys. What else would you like me to
tell any newbies about you?

*** end paste

You continued to leave out the rest of the post the snippit you've
shared a few times came from. You know the part, where I've told the
guy I'm sorry if he ever runs across one of mine. Oh, and that he
wasn't the sort of person who walks this earth that makes my skin
crawl. See, it's all about proper context.

Going only by what you've shared could give people the wrong
impression that I hate the entire world without exception. But, when
you read the entire message, you can see it's not everyone I hate -
I'm simply more vocal and less politically correct about the general
majority of people being iffy at best, and generally making my skin
crawl. See, David, proper context. And I don't think for a second
that you aren't well aware of context and how it can be used to twist
the meaning of what someone wrote into something else entirely.

Especially when one clicks any of the google links I've previously
shared and reads some of your posts or replies you wrote to others.
You've been riding the context train for over a decade. Twisting that
track around so much, it's broken off in several places.

I haven't got the foggiest idea with you being perfectly aware of
what you're doing that you still claim you're not a liar and that you
aren't a very bad individual irl as well as online. You verbally
abuse your wife (nothing physical as far as I know) every time you've
had too much to drink - which has been quite an issue for you on
several occasions. It's cost you a valued friendship in real life.

Btw, David, did you ever figure out which people/person is
responsible for providing me so much background information on you in
real life? I told you, it's one or more people you asked about me at
one time or another in person. It's one or more people you provided
my contact details too, all without my permission or knowledge at the
time I might add. One or more persons you were asking for help to
continue your stalking efforts against me. The only difference
between this or them and Savageduck, GM, Jenn, David Eagle, etc,
people you've asked online for help with me, is this or these people
are individuals you've shared drinks with and ate meals with in
person.

You're such a scumbag who was giving me such an undeserved hard time,
the individual/individuals decided they wouldn't play along with your
games and instead, answer any/all questions I ask them about you.
Sometimes, they volunteer things I didn't ask about you too.

I can't very well be trying to stalk you when it's YOUR FRIEND(S)
that are reaching out to me to discuss you. I don't know them, I
didn't have a way to contact any of them, prior to them emailing me
and that's because you gave them my email address, various physical
addresses, and copies of my pictures you don't have permission to be
retaining copies of. I believe you've sent several copies of my video
out locally at this point too, and none of them have been able to
assist you with it.

Also, it's worth telling you that one of the people you asked to
crack the .zip file emailed me asking for the password. They wanted
to give it to you so you'd quit pestering them about it. I told them
I wouldn't be handing it over, despite their valid request for it due
entirely to the fact you've already been caught abusing my
copyrighted material too many times as it is, and you have no right
to additional work that belongs to me, without having to work for it.

Since you're still peddling the copy of my video that you ****ed up
during the edit process, it's a safe bet that your friends irl
haven't been succesful cracking the cypher yet either.

I'll likely be long dead and gone before you ever see the contents of
the zip file. And, icing on the cake, it actually is a copy of the
original unedited video with working audio track. had you not been so
quick to post my things to the binaries group you found, I wouldn't
have cancelled the post containing the password you need to decrypt
the .zip file.

I cancelled the post after I saw your announcement and confirmed
you'd done what you claimed. At that point, you confirmed for me that
no matter what you agree to, you're not a person of your word and you
only respect laws (copyrights especially) when it suits you to do so.
So no matter what you agree to for the password, I knew for certain,
absolute certain your word couldn't be trusted and I'd be a fool if I
gave you the password. You would, without a doubt in my mind, abuse
the decrypted contents just as you have the pictures and altered
video you still have in your possession.

You've proven to me by your actions not your words, David, that your
word has no value and you are not to be trusted. You meet the
criteria of a bad guy, even if you didn't stalk people or abuse
obituary posts - which are just too examples of the things you've
done to multiple people, not just myself.

Trust is more important than those violations, and, you cannot,
absolutely cannot, be trusted. Once trust is lost, you are of no
value as a person moving forward. The only way you can regain trust
and thus value is by earning it. You've made absolutely no effort to
do that. Quite the contrary with you infact:


Message-ID:
I proceeded to answer other questions you provided in the same
email asking about it. You indicated no issue with me, no
accusation of my being a 'bad guy' until years later, here on
usenet.

That's correct. I didn't let on that you were a target and I'd
scored a bullseye.

Other than your known dishonesty, is there a particular reason you
aren't sharing the entire contents of your inquiry leading up to
that paste?

I'm totally honest with good guys. What else would you like me to
tell any newbies about you?

*** end paste

To which I responded:

http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=155063392200

I'm totally honest with good guys. What else would you like me to
tell any newbies about you?

You're about as honest as you are sober, David.

Say you were setting me up the entire time. Does that mean (as I
accused you of) that you tried to provide a google street map view
of my house on purpose, then? And when you met in person with
Aardvark and discussed the matter, were you knowingly lying right to
his face?

Are you now admitting that every attempt you made to get to know me,
to be my friend, etc via email were all lies?

Are you also admitting that you told various lies to GM to have a
cease fire on jenn arranged? Under normal conditions, that would
void the agreement. Lucky for jenn, I see no reason for her to have
any issues because you're a dishonest drunkard.

Are you also admitting that you've told lies concerning other peace
arrangements in play?

Are you also admitting that I cannot trust a single thing you write
as being in any way truthful?

So have you been lying for years on usenet or the emails, or both,
then David?


A good guy wouldn't write complete trash as you did and then proceed
to ignore questions asked about the contents of their post, for days
on end, as you've continued to do. It's not a matter of you not
seeing the post, it's a matter of you not being able to provide
reasonable, honest, answers that won't expose you for the individual
you've been described by myself and many others as being.

As one would expect based on previous experience dealing with you,
evasion is your standard procedure when you're questioned in detail
about something you've written that had no basis in fact to begin
with. You're known for that crap, too, David. Well known, as a matter
of fact. Examples of it are known to exist with the links provided in
the warning warning warning post I authored a short time ago.

This combined with the aforementioned can only have one result. Logic
therefore dictates you meet the requirements of a bad guy and do not
even come close to the requirements of a good guy. You're not
genuine. Instead, You're a well known liar, stalker, and copyright
infringer, amongst other things, none of which are good traits or
anything else to be proud of.


--
I inherited my curiosity from my cat. Why do you ask?

David in Devon news:QEwcE.893$7p3.599
@fx28.fr7 Sun, 24 Feb 2019 13:05:51 GMT in alt.computer.workshop,
wrote:

On 24/02/2019 07:55, Diesel wrote:
I inherited my curiosity from my cat.

[snip clear evidence of further stalking]

I find it funny how you post a url from my domain due to a randomized
signature. How often do you visit David? Think you're going to miss a
chance to copyright infringe more of my property? Do be careful
lifting my things in the future if you don't have my explicit
permission to be doing so. You might find the joke's on you in the
worst possible way when you share a url to something of mine that's
been lifted from my domain without my permission. You've been warned.
BFG

Now then, let's bring to attention your complete need to evade the
contents of the post you replied to below. I realize that what you
wrote without giving it some additional thought before posting -
combined with my follow up questions to it - have quite nicely,
****ed over your facade of ever having been a good guy with newbies
and old timers alike.

What your own words and my follow up questions do show, that anyone
can plainly see, is a great amount of intentional dishonesty AND
stalking on your part. You're as dishonest and shady as they come
David, and, you know it.


David in Devon
Sat, 23 Feb 2019 06:58:32 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

On 23/02/2019 04:16, Diesel wrote:
Nah, you just lie

Nope!

The post you quoted that partial line from and completely snipped the
rest of, clearly, without any doubt whatsoever, shows otherwise.

You admit it yourself, proudly:

Other than your known dishonesty, is there a particular reason you
aren't sharing the entire contents of your inquiry leading up to
that paste?

I'm totally honest with good guys. What else would you like me to
tell any newbies about you?

*** end paste

You continued to leave out the rest of the post the snippit you've
shared a few times came from. You know the part, where I've told the
guy I'm sorry if he ever runs across one of mine. Oh, and that he
wasn't the sort of person who walks this earth that makes my skin
crawl. See, it's all about proper context.

Going only by what you've shared could give people the wrong
impression that I hate the entire world without exception. But, when
you read the entire message, you can see it's not everyone I hate -
I'm simply more vocal and less politically correct about the general
majority of people being iffy at best, and generally making my skin
crawl. See, David, proper context. And I don't think for a second
that you aren't well aware of context and how it can be used to twist
the meaning of what someone wrote into something else entirely.

Especially when one clicks any of the google links I've previously
shared and reads some of your posts or replies you wrote to others.
You've been riding the context train for over a decade. Twisting that
track around so much, it's broken off in several places.

I haven't got the foggiest idea with you being perfectly aware of
what you're doing that you still claim you're not a liar and that you
aren't a very bad individual irl as well as online. You verbally
abuse your wife (nothing physical as far as I know) every time you've
had too much to drink - which has been quite an issue for you on
several occasions. It's cost you a valued friendship in real life.

Btw, David, did you ever figure out which people/person is
responsible for providing me so much background information on you in
real life? I told you, it's one or more people you asked about me at
one time or another in person. It's one or more people you provided
my contact details too, all without my permission or knowledge at the
time I might add. One or more persons you were asking for help to
continue your stalking efforts against me. The only difference
between this or them and Savageduck, GM, Jenn, David Eagle, etc,
people you've asked online for help with me, is this or these people
are individuals you've shared drinks with and ate meals with in
person.

You're such a scumbag who was giving me such an undeserved hard time,
the individual/individuals decided they wouldn't play along with your
games and instead, answer any/all questions I ask them about you.
Sometimes, they volunteer things I didn't ask about you too.

I can't very well be trying to stalk you when it's YOUR FRIEND(S)
that are reaching out to me to discuss you. I don't know them, I
didn't have a way to contact any of them, prior to them emailing me
and that's because you gave them my email address, various physical
addresses, and copies of my pictures you don't have permission to be
retaining copies of. I believe you've sent several copies of my video
out locally at this point too, and none of them have been able to
assist you with it.

Also, it's worth telling you that one of the people you asked to
crack the .zip file emailed me asking for the password. They wanted
to give it to you so you'd quit pestering them about it. I told them
I wouldn't be handing it over, despite their valid request for it due
entirely to the fact you've already been caught abusing my
copyrighted material too many times as it is, and you have no right
to additional work that belongs to me, without having to work for it.

Since you're still peddling the copy of my video that you ****ed up
during the edit process, it's a safe bet that your friends irl
haven't been succesful cracking the cypher yet either.

I'll likely be long dead and gone before you ever see the contents of
the zip file. And, icing on the cake, it actually is a copy of the
original unedited video with working audio track. had you not been so
quick to post my things to the binaries group you found, I wouldn't
have cancelled the post containing the password you need to decrypt
the .zip file.

I cancelled the post after I saw your announcement and confirmed
you'd done what you claimed. At that point, you confirmed for me that
no matter what you agree to, you're not a person of your word and you
only respect laws (copyrights especially) when it suits you to do so.
So no matter what you agree to for the password, I knew for certain,
absolute certain your word couldn't be trusted and I'd be a fool if I
gave you the password. You would, without a doubt in my mind, abuse
the decrypted contents just as you have the pictures and altered
video you still have in your possession.

You've proven to me by your actions not your words, David, that your
word has no value and you are not to be trusted. You meet the
criteria of a bad guy, even if you didn't stalk people or abuse
obituary posts - which are just too examples of the things you've
done to multiple people, not just myself.

Trust is more important than those violations, and, you cannot,
absolutely cannot, be trusted. Once trust is lost, you are of no
value as a person moving forward. The only way you can regain trust
and thus value is by earning it. You've made absolutely no effort to
do that. Quite the contrary with you infact:


Message-ID:
I proceeded to answer other questions you provided in the same
email asking about it. You indicated no issue with me, no
accusation of my being a 'bad guy' until years later, here on
usenet.

That's correct. I didn't let on that you were a target and I'd
scored a bullseye.

Other than your known dishonesty, is there a particular reason you
aren't sharing the entire contents of your inquiry leading up to
that paste?

I'm totally honest with good guys. What else would you like me to
tell any newbies about you?

*** end paste

To which I responded:

http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=155063392200

I'm totally honest with good guys. What else would you like me to
tell any newbies about you?

You're about as honest as you are sober, David.

Say you were setting me up the entire time. Does that mean (as I
accused you of) that you tried to provide a google street map view
of my house on purpose, then? And when you met in person with
Aardvark and discussed the matter, were you knowingly lying right to
his face?

Are you now admitting that every attempt you made to get to know me,
to be my friend, etc via email were all lies?

Are you also admitting that you told various lies to GM to have a
cease fire on jenn arranged? Under normal conditions, that would
void the agreement. Lucky for jenn, I see no reason for her to have
any issues because you're a dishonest drunkard.

Are you also admitting that you've told lies concerning other peace
arrangements in play?

Are you also admitting that I cannot trust a single thing you write
as being in any way truthful?

So have you been lying for years on usenet or the emails, or both,
then David?

A good guy wouldn't write complete trash as you did and then proceed
to ignore questions asked about the contents of their post, for days
on end, as you've continued to do. It's not a matter of you not
seeing the post, it's a matter of you not being able to provide
reasonable, honest, answers that won't expose you for the individual
you've been described by myself and many others as being.

As one would expect based on previous experience dealing with you,
evasion is your standard procedure when you're questioned in detail
about something you've written that had no basis in fact to begin
with. You're known for that crap, too, David. Well known, as a matter
of fact. Examples of it are known to exist with the links provided in
the warning warning warning post I authored a short time ago.

This combined with the aforementioned can only have one result. Logic
therefore dictates you meet the requirements of a bad guy and do not
even come close to the requirements of a good guy. You're not
genuine. Instead, You're a well known liar, stalker, and copyright
infringer, amongst other things, none of which are good traits or
anything else to be proud of.

--
History teaches us that no other cause has brought more death than
the word of god. -- Giulian Buzila

On Fri, 1 Mar 2019 09:38:06 +0000, David in Devon
wrote:

On 01/03/2019 04:23, Diesel wrote:
David in Devon news:QEwcE.893$7p3.599
@fx28.fr7 Sun, 24 Feb 2019 13:05:51 GMT in alt.computer.workshop,
wrote:

On 24/02/2019 07:55, Diesel wrote:
I inherited my curiosity from my cat.

[snip clear evidence of further stalking]

I find it funny how you post a url from my domain due to a randomized
signature. How often do you visit David? Think you're going to miss a
chance to copyright infringe more of my property? Do be careful
lifting my things in the future if you don't have my explicit
permission to be doing so. You might find the joke's on you in the
worst possible way when you share a url to something of mine that's
been lifted from my domain without my permission. You've been warned.
BFG


CUT_PROOF_OF_STALKING

It's on Usenet, however, forever.

This PROOF also cannot be deleted:

https://web.archive.org/web/20190221143021/https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012
Nineteen Eighty-Four was a work of FICTION !!!! - Orwell

David in Devon
Fri, 01 Mar 2019 09:38:06 GMT in
alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

On 01/03/2019 04:23, Diesel wrote:
David in Devon news:QEwcE.893$7p3.599
@fx28.fr7 Sun, 24 Feb 2019 13:05:51 GMT in alt.computer.workshop,
wrote:

On 24/02/2019 07:55, Diesel wrote:
I inherited my curiosity from my cat.

[snip clear evidence of further stalking]

I find it funny how you post a url from my domain due to a
randomized signature. How often do you visit David? Think you're
going to miss a chance to copyright infringe more of my property?
Do be careful lifting my things in the future if you don't have
my explicit permission to be doing so. You might find the joke's
on you in the worst possible way when you share a url to
something of mine that's been lifted from my domain without my
permission. You've been warned. BFG


[snip clean, malware free, nice n tidy made from scratch (like a
tasty flaky biscuit) index page source that doesn't answer my
questions]

https://aw-snap.info/file-viewer/?pr...&ref_sel=GSP2&
ua_sel=ff&chk-cache=&fs=1&tgt=YnVnaHVudHt9Llt0LW18dHsuXl0udWs%3D ~en
c

Not only do you not understand what snap.info is complaining about,
you can't even comprehend how it DOES NOT APPLY in my sites case.




--
My wife ran away with my best friend. I sure miss him.

On 3/3/19 PDT 4:04 AM, David in Devon wrote:
On 03/03/2019 04:36, Diesel wrote:
[....]
[snip clean, malware free, nice n tidy made from scratch (like a
tasty flaky biscuit) index page source that doesn't answer my
questions]
https://aw-snap.info/file-viewer/?pr...&ref_sel=GSP2&
ua_sel=ff&chk-cache=&fs=1&tgt=YnVnaHVudHt9Llt0LW18dHsuXl0udWs%3D ~en
c

Not only do you not understand what snap.info is complaining about,
you can't even comprehend how it DOES NOT APPLY in my sites case.


I don't see aw-snap complaining about ANYTHING!

Here's another route to follow if you are having trouble understanding
matters, Dustin:-

https://www.accessify.com/i/bughunter.it-mate.co.uk


xposting

David in Devon
Sun, 03 Mar 2019 12:31:12 GMT in
alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

On 03/03/2019 04:36, Diesel wrote:
David in Devon
Sat, 02 Mar 2019 11:49:13 GMT
in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

On 01/03/2019 13:26, Shadow wrote:
On Fri, 1 Mar 2019 09:38:06 +0000, David in Devon
wrote:

On 01/03/2019 04:23, Diesel wrote:
David in Devon
news:QEwcE.893$7p3.599 @fx28.fr7 Sun, 24 Feb 2019 13:05:51
GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

On 24/02/2019 07:55, Diesel wrote:
I inherited my curiosity from my cat.

[snip clear evidence of further stalking]

I find it funny how you post a url from my domain due to a
randomized signature. How often do you visit David? Think
you're going to miss a chance to copyright infringe more of
my property? Do be careful lifting my things in the future if
you don't have my explicit permission to be doing so. You
might find the joke's on you in the worst possible way when
you share a url to something of mine that's been lifted from
my domain without my permission. You've been warned. BFG


https://www.completelyfreesoftware.c..._w31_BUGHUN.ht
ml

It's on Usenet, however, forever.
Indeed.

David B.
Devon, UK

Nice review too isn't it? Do let me know when and if you ever
contribute something anywhere near as useful for free for the
greater good of all.

The article could have been more clear about the deep shame felt
by the author of the BugHunter software.

I don't think you grasp how software reviews work, David.

Here are some reviews of the IROK virus - a virus which *YOU*
wrote, Dustin, and spread worldwide under your nickname of
Raid/Slam.

Partially true, David. Irok is my work, I did post it on pro vx sites
where anyone could download it, if they wanted to do so. It was
provided in a crippled non functional state; additional steps had to
be taken to arm it. You know this already, though.

I expect your mummy is very proud that her son is now *infamous*.

Atleast she can still have a two way conversation with me. One that
doesn't consist of talking to a gravesite and hoping they're around
somewhere where they can hear you.

--
A good way to deal with predators is to taste terrible.

David in Devon Sun, 03 Mar 2019 18:06:41 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

On 03/03/2019 12:51, Shadow wrote:
On Sun, 3 Mar 2019 12:31:12 +0000, David in Devon
wrote:

BugHunter software.

Still freeware. Hence on topic. But is no longer supported, so
I doubt many people use it anymore.

Here are some reviews of the IROK virus

A 20 year old malware. Seriously

Yes - it's still out there causing harm to unsuspecting folk.

No, it's not.

It's signatures are well known by ALL av products AND, modern OSes
no longer provide a suitable host environment and haven't done so in
years. Of the systems which are running that could provide it a
suitable host, it's most likely they are also running resident
antivirus; so IROK wouldn't even have a chance on those, either.

One can't EVER be an *exVXer* - no matter how sorry one may be.

Yes, one most certainly can. Especially when one knows the proper
definition to the term. Let's quote someone you've previously
claimed to respect greatly, Graham Cluley:

https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/201...ebsite-raided/

"VX" for anyone who wasn’t aware, is dude-speak for "Virus eXchange".

h0h0h0.

--
Be my brother or I'll kill you.

"p-0''0-h the cat (coder)"
Mon, 04 Mar 2019
16:35:30 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

On Mon, 4 Mar 2019 14:06:23 +0000, David in Devon
wrote:

On 04/03/2019 13:50, p-0''0-h the cat (coder) wrote:
On Sun, 3 Mar 2019 18:06:41 +0000, David in Devon
wrote:

One can't EVER be an *exVXer* - no matter how sorry one may be.

Exactly. Can I be an ex cat? Nope. Q.E.D.

Dusty is and was eVil !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Redemption is just a bull**** American myth about second
chances. Never bet your life or the business on it.

So sayeth the cats.

He'll not thank you for agreeing with me! ;-)

He never thanks me and I have taught him so much.

Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.

Easier to educate (and embarrass) both of you with a single post,
rather than address the ignorance you both suffer from seperately.

Here's Graham Cluley to explain what you idiots obviously don't know
anything about, but, write as if you did. G Until now, that is.
h0h0h0.

https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/201...ebsite-raided/

"VX" for anyone who wasn't aware, is dude-speak for "Virus eXchange".

How either of you ****ing idiots could compare that to Murder is
beyond me. Or thinking one can never be an exVxer. The only logical
conclusion which can be reached is that you were both writing about
a subject completely from your arseholes that neither of you knows
**** all about. Which isn't surprising in the least. You both have a
well established track record of bull****. Your totally off base
accusations simply add to the pile of bull**** already provided by
the two of you.



--
All the world's a stage: and I want better lighting and script approval

David in Devon
Sun, 03 Mar 2019 12:04:54 GMT in
alt.computer.workshop, wrote:

On 03/03/2019 04:36, Diesel wrote:
[....]
[snip clean, malware free, nice n tidy made from scratch (like a
tasty flaky biscuit) index page source that doesn't answer my
questions]

https://aw-snap.info/file-viewer/?pr...re&ref_sel=GSP
2&
ua_sel=ff&chk-cache=&fs=1&tgt=YnVnaHVudHt9Llt0LW18dHsuXl0udWs%3D ~
en c

Not only do you not understand what snap.info is complaining
about, you can't even comprehend how it DOES NOT APPLY in my
sites case.


I don't see aw-snap complaining about ANYTHING!

Look again then, dip****.

Here's another route to follow if you are having trouble
understanding matters, Dustin:-

I wrote the html you pasted here from scratch, **** for brains.
There's nothing wrong with my site or the code present on it, stalker.




--
Any excuse to wear a sword is a good excuse.