Tim Adams stated in post
on
11/27/10 8:28 AM:

--
regarding Snit "You are not flamed because you speak the truth,
you are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting
the newsgroup." Andrew J. Brehm


--
"YOU were the person claiming that the ~ told people to go to
HardDrive/users/username/ while I stated the ~ indicated the name of the
hard drive only." -- Tim Adams

On Nov 27, 8:28*am, Tim Adams wrote:
In article ,





*Snit wrote:
Big Crotch on a Small Fish stated in post on
11/26/10 8:32 PM:

Steve Carroll wrote:
On Nov 26, 7:48 pm, Snit wrote:

One: that has nothing to do with the topic

Your sock puppets never did have anything to do with the topic. So why
do you keep using them?

"this way" - Steve Carroll
"even this way" - Steve Carroll

See:

I "see" that I used the google archive to prove I used the term "this
way"... despite you trying to pretend I didn't or that it didn't
specifically reference a certain "way".

LOL! Now we have yet another "way" thrown into the mix by you.

Nope. I showed one way... the way that works.

So, if a "way" happens to be one that "works" it's the "correct" way..
That is what you just argued. Fine... then I pointed to a "correct"
way, too.

You claimed the way you were talking about did not work.

Incorrect: I didn't just *claim* it, I got you to agree with it as you
labeled it 3 different things.

There is no reason this needs to be a debate.

I agree, especially being that you admitted I found an
"inconsistency". But that's you...generally found arguing 'stupid
debates' based on personalities.

LOL!

If I keep giving you attention, Steve, how long will you continue to make an
ass out of yourself again? *

The problem with that is - Steve is proving michael glasser to be the ass! Of
course, with michael's (documented) poor reading comprehension skills, michael
still doesn't understand that simple FACT!

He just doesn't want to except the fact that I came up with a way
(pretty much right away). I looked at Snit's first video, saw that he
quickly changed it and then really didn't bother much after that
because he was being his usual disingenuous self. Also, regarding the
"way" I was trying to do it, I was 'taught' by the person who emailed
me, not Snit. Curiously, gluehead hasn't yet asked me to divulge the
person's identity, he keeps trying to shame me into it though... but
his "psych degree" doesn't work here

"Steve Carroll" wrote in message
...
On Nov 27, 8:28 am, Tim Adams wrote:
In article ,

What the heck is wrong with you kooks that you can't see you are spamming?
Oh never mind. alt.usenet.kooks.


alt.usenet.kooks,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.sys.m ac.advocacy,rec.gardens

cshenk stated in post on
11/27/10 11:55 AM:


"Steve Carroll" wrote in message
...
On Nov 27, 8:28 am, Tim Adams wrote:
In article ,

What the heck is wrong with you kooks that you can't see you are spamming?
Oh never mind. alt.usenet.kooks.


alt.usenet.kooks,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.sys.m ac.advocacy,rec.gardens


Steve Carroll has been following me around for *years* begging for my
attention... it all started when I noted Bush broke a law and Steve became
outraged but could not find any flaw with my evidence (there as also a girl
who gave me unwanted attention that freaked him out - he was jealous).

But that was years ago. He got so bad he tracked me down to my place of
employment and threatened to send a bunch of lies to my employer, including
saying I was impersonating the person he claimed I am. Yeah, insanity. In
any case, when he became that ill I stopped responding to him, at least
directly.

He then escalated his use of sock puppets (I have a list of names has has
either admitted to or been found to be using) and he cross posts to every
group he has ever found me posting to (and now others).

The current break down of his is because, of all things, I showed him how to
make multiple aliases on OS X... something he claimed could not be done.
This lead to him becoming outraged - how dare I show that I know something
he did not, as if there is anything wrong with admitting we do not know all
(none of us does). He truly is insane... and is not capable of being
honest.

--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

Steve Carroll wrote:
On Nov 27, 8:28 am, Tim Adams wrote:
In article ,





Snit wrote:
Big Crotch on a Small Fish stated in post
on 11/26/10 8:32 PM:

Steve Carroll wrote:
On Nov 26, 7:48 pm, Snit wrote:

One: that has nothing to do with the topic

Your sock puppets never did have anything to do with the topic.
So why do you keep using them?

"this way" - Steve Carroll
"even this way" - Steve Carroll

See:

I "see" that I used the google archive to prove I used the term
"this way"... despite you trying to pretend I didn't or that it
didn't specifically reference a certain "way".

LOL! Now we have yet another "way" thrown into the mix by you.

Nope. I showed one way... the way that works.

So, if a "way" happens to be one that "works" it's the "correct"
way. That is what you just argued. Fine... then I pointed to a
"correct" way, too.

You claimed the way you were talking about did not work.

Incorrect: I didn't just *claim* it, I got you to agree with it
as you labeled it 3 different things.

There is no reason this needs to be a debate.

I agree, especially being that you admitted I found an
"inconsistency". But that's you...generally found arguing 'stupid
debates' based on personalities.

LOL!

If I keep giving you attention, Steve, how long will you continue
to make an ass out of yourself again?

The problem with that is - Steve is proving michael glasser to be
the ass! Of course, with michael's (documented) poor reading
comprehension skills, michael still doesn't understand that simple
FACT!

He just doesn't want to except the fact that I came up with a way
(pretty much right away). I looked at Snit's first video, saw that he
quickly changed it and then really didn't bother much after that
because he was being his usual disingenuous self. Also, regarding the
"way" I was trying to do it, I was 'taught' by the person who emailed
me, not Snit. Curiously, gluehead hasn't yet asked me to divulge the
person's identity, he keeps trying to shame me into it though... but
his "psych degree" doesn't work here

LOL!

--
You Ain't the Biggest Fish in the Crotch

Big Crotch on a Small Fish stated in post on
11/27/10 2:33 PM:

He just doesn't want to except the fact that I came up with a way
(pretty much right away). I looked at Snit's first video, saw that he
quickly changed it and then really didn't bother much after that
because he was being his usual disingenuous self. Also, regarding the
"way" I was trying to do it, I was 'taught' by the person who emailed
me, not Snit. Curiously, gluehead hasn't yet asked me to divulge the
person's identity, he keeps trying to shame me into it though... but
his "psych degree" doesn't work here

LOL!

http://goo.gl/cd8X Thu, 14 Oct 2010 15:17:27 GMT
http://goo.gl/CVc4C Thu, 14 Oct 2010 16:25:30 GMT
http://goo.gl/beyx Fri, 15 Oct 2010 02:39:06 GMT

All posted before Steve shared an "alleged" email which "taught" him the
same things - that he later claimed he would not share without permission...
then even later made up a story about how he got permission... after he had
already shared the email.



--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

In article ,
Snit wrote:

Big Crotch on a Small Fish stated in post on
11/27/10 8:11 AM:

If I keep giving you attention, Steve, how long will you continue to make
an
ass out of yourself again? Remember: this is not hard - you did not know
how something was done... I showed you... you were still confused and
said
it could only be done in one view... I showed you that you were wrong.
Along the way you noted an inconsistency in how something works.

And that should be that. But it is not: you insist on trolling and lying
and spewing accusations - proving your deep hatred and jealousy. It
really
is that simple.

There's no "if in that, Snit... you *will* give me attention, you
can't stop yourself from giving me attention

LOL! Ain't that the truth!

Ah, Steve freaked out over his admission of not knowing how to make aliases

Making up more LIES I see. So typical of you michael.

Why don't you provide a link to the post where Steve claimed he 'didn't know how
to make aliases'?

~more babbling by the idiot michael glasser snipped.

--
regarding Snit "You are not flamed because you speak the truth,
you are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting
the newsgroup." Andrew J. Brehm

In article ,
Snit wrote:

Tim Adams stated in post
on
11/27/10 8:23 AM:

...
And more detail for you, from a past post (not worth re-wording for you...
given how it is 100% predictable you will snip, run and lie in response to
the following):

Yes, he found a quirk (a bug, an inconsistency... wow, I have used
multiple
terms, Steve's head will spin!). There is *a* way that you can copy
multiple
aliases in icon view that does not work in the other views, but there is
also
*a* way (or maybe more) that works in all of the views. Steve, initially,
was
wrong about there not being a way... and then after he changed his mind
about
that and learned there was a way in icon view, he was wrong about there
not
being a way in the other views.

As you have seen... and as Steve was shown and thus, if he was not an
idiot,
learned:

http://goo.gl/cd8X Thu, 14 Oct 2010 15:17:27 GMT
http://goo.gl/CVc4C Thu, 14 Oct 2010 16:25:30 GMT
http://goo.gl/beyx Fri, 15 Oct 2010 02:39:06 GMT

The three videos that I made, each done before Steve *claimed* to finally
figure it out based on an anonymous email he got. Oh, an anonymous email
that must remain private. Tee hee. But let us say he actually got one...
which is unlikely given his history of lying, but whatever... say he got
one.
So? So someone finally explained to him what he could not figure out on
his
own *or* with the videos I provided him. That is right: Steve claims he
was
too stupid to figure it out from the video and needed an anonymous email.

LOL!

Even when Steve tries to look clever he just ends up claiming he is an
idiot.

Oh, and even more fun. The first post where Steve claimed to have gotten
this email was http://goo.gl/roRor. Oct. 14 at 6:58 PM (over 16 hours
*after* the posting of the video which he and Tim Adams claim came after
Steve's email):

-----
This person emailed me with the following text:
"Steve, When selecting the files, when you select the very last
one you want to make an alias of, select and drag it. That way you
are not de-selecting anything in the list. Works for me on an iMac
and a MBP, in icon, list and column view."
-----

But my videos, which anyone can verify, were posted *before* that. Yes.
Easy
to verify... javascript:alert(document.lastModified) on the videos will
work
just fine to prove it for example... and is how I got the info for above.

But, even more funny:

Steve Carroll, 5 Nov 2010
-----
BTW... there is an email but I can't divulge it unless the person
who wrote it gives me permission. See, unlike you, I don't divulge
private emails while I make a claim about being "honest and
honorable".
-----

LOL! Steve had already "divulged" the email in his past lies... he then
turns around and denies that he would ever sink to such a level.

Too damned funny! Once again, Steve piles his lies higher and higher and
they just come toppling down on him!

That's already been addressed. Google proves you wrong. live with it.

Oh, do please point to the post where the above was proved wrong (hint, if
you look hard I actually do make an error

Your whole timeline IS an error which, if you were able to use Google, you would
know by now. but you keep posting your lies in the hopes people will forget
reality.

~more babbling by the idiot michale glasser snipped

--
regarding Snit "You are not flamed because you speak the truth,
you are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting
the newsgroup." Andrew J. Brehm

In article ,
Snit wrote:

Tim Adams stated in post
on
11/27/10 8:28 AM:

If I keep giving you attention, Steve, how long will you continue to make
an
ass out of yourself again?

The problem with that is - Steve is proving michael glasser to be the ass!

Right - how *dare* I show Steve how to do something he claimed could not be
done.

More LIES - so typical, especially when you just recently admitted Steve made no
such claim! but then, don't let reality get in the ways of your lies michael!


~more babbling by the idiot michael glasser snipped


--
regarding Snit "You are not flamed because you speak the truth,
you are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting
the newsgroup." Andrew J. Brehm

--
regarding Snit "You are not flamed because you speak the truth,
you are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting
the newsgroup." Andrew J. Brehm

In article ,
Snit wrote:

Tim Adams stated in post
on
11/27/10 8:28 AM:

--
regarding Snit "You are not flamed because you speak the truth,
you are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting
the newsgroup." Andrew J. Brehm

keep running from reality michael

--
regarding Snit "You are not flamed because you speak the truth,
you are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting
the newsgroup." Andrew J. Brehm

On Nov 28, 6:29*am, Tim Adams wrote:
In article ,





*Snit wrote:
Big Crotch on a Small Fish stated in post on
11/27/10 8:11 AM:

If I keep giving you attention, Steve, how long will you continue to make
an
ass out of yourself again? *Remember: this is not hard - you did not know
how something was done... I showed you... you were still confused and
said
it could only be done in one view... I showed you that you were wrong.
Along the way you noted an inconsistency in how something works.

And that should be that. *But it is not: you insist on trolling and lying
and spewing accusations - proving your deep hatred and jealousy. *It
really
is that simple.

There's no "if in that, Snit... you *will* give me attention, you
can't stop yourself from giving me attention

LOL! *Ain't that the truth!

Ah, Steve freaked out over his admission of not knowing how to make aliases

Making up more LIES I see. So typical of you michael.

Why don't you provide a link to the post where Steve claimed he 'didn't know how
to make aliases'?


The only thing he can point to is what he's already quoted (and has
since stopped quoting because he finally realized it doesn't support
his lies):

"f you don't want aliases that display the word "alias" you can even
hold the Option and Cmd keys and drag an app outside of the Apps
folder into the designated folder... but you can only do one app at a
time this way. Even so, thirty apps shouldn't take too long to do,
even this way." - Steve Carroll

The context, as the text makes clear, is about making multiple aliases
without them displaying the word "alias". I mentioned that you
couldn't do it a particular "way" and even Snit has admitted this
statement is true. In typical Snit fashion he called my discovery of
it an "inconsistency" , an Apple "bug"... he even called it my
"user error"

On Nov 28, 6:31*am, Tim Adams wrote:
In article ,





*Snit wrote:
Tim Adams stated in post
on
11/27/10 8:23 AM:

...
And more detail for you, from a past post (not worth re-wording for you...
given how it is 100% predictable you will snip, run and lie in response to
the following):

Yes, he found a quirk (a bug, an inconsistency... wow, I have used
multiple
terms, Steve's head will spin!). *There is *a* way that you can copy
multiple
aliases in icon view that does not work in the other views, but there is
also
*a* way (or maybe more) that works in all of the views. Steve, initially,
was
wrong about there not being a way... and then after he changed his mind
about
that and learned there was a way in icon view, he was wrong about there
not
being a way in the other views.

As you have seen... and as Steve was shown and thus, if he was not an
idiot,
learned:

* * http://goo.gl/cd8X *Thu, 14 Oct 2010 15:17:27 GMT
* * http://goo.gl/CVc4C Thu, 14 Oct 2010 16:25:30 GMT
* * http://goo.gl/beyx *Fri, 15 Oct 2010 02:39:06 GMT

The three videos that I made, each done before Steve *claimed* to finally
figure it out based on an anonymous email he got. *Oh, an anonymous email
that must remain private. *Tee hee. *But let us say he actually got one...
which is unlikely given his history of lying, but whatever... say he got
one.
So? *So someone finally explained to him what he could not figure out on
his
own *or* with the videos I provided him. *That is right: Steve claims he
was
too stupid to figure it out from the video and needed an anonymous email.

LOL!

Even when Steve tries to look clever he just ends up claiming he is an
idiot.

Oh, and even more fun. *The first post where Steve claimed to have gotten
this email was http://goo.gl/roRor. *Oct. 14 at 6:58 PM (over 16 hours
*after* the posting of the video which he and Tim Adams claim came after
Steve's email):

* * -----
* * This person emailed me with the following text:
* * "Steve, When selecting the files, when you select the very last
* * one you want to make an alias of, select and drag it. That way you
* * are not de-selecting anything in the list. Works for me on an iMac
* * and a MBP, in icon, list and column view."
* * -----

But my videos, which anyone can verify, were posted *before* that. *Yes.
Easy
to verify... javascript:alert(document.lastModified) on the videos will
work
just fine to prove it for example... and is how I got the info for above.

But, even more funny:

* Steve Carroll, 5 Nov 2010
* * -----
* * BTW... there is an email but I can't divulge it unless the person
* * who wrote it gives me permission. See, unlike you, I don't divulge
* * private emails while I make a claim about being "honest and
* * honorable".
* * -----

LOL! *Steve had already "divulged" the email in his past lies... he then
turns around and denies that he would ever sink to such a level.

Too damned funny! *Once again, Steve piles his lies higher and higher and
they just come toppling down on him!

That's already been addressed. Google proves you wrong. live with it.

Oh, do please point to the post where the above was proved wrong (hint, if
you look hard I actually do make an error

Your whole timeline IS an error which, if you were able to use Google, you would
know by now. but you keep posting your lies in the hopes people will forget
reality.


On top of that Snit can't prove if or when I looked at any of his
videos.

Tim Adams stated in post
on
11/28/10 6:29 AM:

--
regarding Snit "You are not flamed because you speak the truth,
you are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting
the newsgroup." Andrew J. Brehm


--
"YOU were the person claiming that the ~ told people to go to
HardDrive/users/username/ while I stated the ~ indicated the name of the
hard drive only." -- Tim Adams

Tim Adams stated in post
on
11/28/10 6:31 AM:

Oh, do please point to the post where the above was proved wrong (hint, if
you look hard I actually do make an error

Your whole timeline IS an error

First video: showing icons
http://goo.gl/cd8X Thu, 14 Oct 2010 15:17:27 GMT

Second video, showing icons and list:
http://goo.gl/CVc4C Thu, 14 Oct 2010 16:25:30 GMT

When Steve claimed to have figured it out:
http://goo.gl/roRor Thu, 14 Oct 2010 18:58 PM GMT

And another video quoting Steve and his errors:
http://goo.gl/beyx Fri, 15 Oct 2010 02:39:06 GMT

Completely verifiable by anyone. All it takes is Google and knowing how to
get dates from the videos... which is not hard.

which, if you were able to use Google, you would know by now.

Oh, by all means, *do* show where the above times are wrong. LOL!

Poor Tim... he is *never* right. He thinks 18 comes before 15!

but you keep
posting your lies in the hopes people will forget reality.

~more babbling by the idiot michale glasser snipped

--
regarding Snit "You are not flamed because you speak the truth,
you are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting
the newsgroup." Andrew J. Brehm


--
Survey: http://nitobi.com/survey/
241 of 571 said they use Dreamweaver (42%)
Tim Adams: "_80% DO NOT USE Dreamweaver AT ALL_!"

Tim Adams stated in post
on
11/28/10 6:33 AM:

--
regarding Snit "You are not flamed because you speak the truth,
you are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting
the newsgroup." Andrew J. Brehm


--
"Incest IS sex by the very definition of the words. Therefore they ARE
identical when presented in that order." -- Tim Adams