Windows 10 May Reserve Another 7GB For Updates.

[Blademaster91]

56 minutes ago, mr moose said:

They did fire some and restructured, but they didn't start sending out updates untested.  they made the software engineers test their own work and use the machines they were testing them on instead of sending them to another department. They also started the insider program to help with wider scale release testing.

I've already posted much of the stuff I need to  to back up my assertions, you can't just come into a thread and repeat what has already been discussed then try to wish it away by insinuating someone is asking you to do your home work.  I am not asking you to do anything for me, I am asking you to back up your claims.  I have already added weight to mine.

 

but here's some more just in case you aren't aware of how the windows 10 update system changed from previous systems and how business is treated differently and why.

 

https://mcpmag.com/articles/2015/05/20/windows-10-update-strategies-for-it-pros.aspx

https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/robertsmith/2015/05/13/updated-windows-updatingservicing-guidance-from-ignite-2015/

 

 

Business and IT professionals kept telling MS they did not like having all the updates at the same time. 

I was going to mention the insider program which does help, but IIRC insiders aren't paid to test the software, Microsoft expects users to join a testing program and to report bugs thoroughly, according to the mpcmag article the insider program has millions of users, yet bugs still get through. As a business standpoint it makes the most sense as a cost effective approach but if Microsoft wants to push a stable Windows as a service I think they should do more testing during engineering.

[Ashley MLP Fangirl]

@Drak3 would you say my Late 2011 15" MacBook Pro is obsolete? 

 

it isn't supported by macOS Mojave and cannot run Windows 10 anymore because of GPU issues, but in terms of cpu performance it outperforms the 2018 MacBook Air. so is it obsolete by that definition?

[Ashley MLP Fangirl]

14 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

I was going to mention the insider program which does help, but IIRC insiders aren't paid to test the software, Microsoft expects users to join a testing program and to report bugs thoroughly, according to the mpcmag article the insider program has millions of users, yet bugs still get through. As a business standpoint it makes the most sense as a cost effective approach but if Microsoft wants to push a stable Windows as a service I think they should do more testing during engineering.

yeah you can just join the insider program and use a development version of Windows if you want. i've done it when i wanted the features of the next big update a month early. on a system that i don't need every day or depend on of course. insider builds are beta software and even more buggy than the normal release.

 

one interesting thing is insiders complained about the 1809 data deletion thing for a while before it was released and MS didn't fix it before release lmao. so even if insiders detect bugs it's not certain MS will listen to them. 

[Drak3]

33 minutes ago, firelighter487 said:

would you say my Late 2011 15" MacBook Pro is obsolete? 

Yes.

[Ashley MLP Fangirl]

1 minute ago, Drak3 said:

Yes.

even though it is faster than the newest MacBook Air? interesting. 

[TechyBen]

9 hours ago, mr moose said:

Congratulations on not being hacked.  But that has nothing to do with updates or security for the masses.  As has already been pointed out in this thread too many times,  forced updates have had an effect on the number malware infections and updates have reduced serious malware infections in the past.   You know which version of windows didn't get wannacry? windows 10 you know which one did? windows 7 machines that were not updated.

 

By all means use whatever Os suits your needs, but if you think avoiding updates is wise move or that this is akin to locking internet/USb device use then you are missing the whole reason it was introduced.

You can lock out Internet use until the user gets updates == no wannacry. "Oh but people will complain" you say... well, people are complaining. One solution would show the problem, the current solution is a problem! However, they force updates instead of forcing useability based on where/how the code is broken. (Take Specter type hacks for example, a REAL security issue, here they block Hyperthreading, instead of waiting for companies to move secure code out of the HT pipeline, they could do the same with other updates). The update cycle still is staggered, so there would have been a risk if Wannacry was a zero day, and not an old useless exploit, but on lots of exploitable computers... you know what computers got Wannacry around here? XP ones that the companies (massive ones) never bothered to get the updates for the corporate version... not the *users*. So same thing would have happened if it was a Winows 10 exploit, as those companies would also not have updated the corporate version of 10!!!

 

8 hours ago, RorzNZ said:

Thats really good, I'm sure everyone would appreciate no restore point if an update fails. 

 

I said if it *replaces* restore points. Not *removes*. And MS already has removed restore points, not me. Wow, the lack of understanding in this thread is reaching critical point. 

[ZacoAttaco]

3 hours ago, LAwLz said:

I like the analogy with vaccination. The problem is that the situation we got right now is awful.

Imagine if patches were vaccination.

 

Right now, Microsoft has decided that they are going to vaccinate everyone. Not really a big issue, right? The problem is that they are willing to go so far to keep people vaccinated, that they are resorting to breaking into peoples' homes, kidnapping them and forcefully vaccinating them (not letting users control updates). Well, they say they do give people choices on when to get vaccinated, but if you drag out on it too long then they will break into your house and kidnap you.

 

They do not take into consideration the people who for medical reasons can't get vaccinated (people who has issues with patches). They just forcefully give it to everyone.

 

Another issue is that several of the vaccines they have given out have caused very serious and crippling illnesses in some people. At several points they have recalled vaccines after having injected lots of people with it, because they did not properly test it (updates like 1809).

 

And to top it all off, they are very secretive and do not want to provide information about what the vaccines are against, what they contain or anything of the sorts. They just go "trust us that this is good for you". (No detailed patch notes anymore)

But they have been caught in the past injecting people for "safety" reasons when in reality it was for their own gains (like when they rolled out a "security updates" which also started nagging people to install Windows 10).

 

Now they are demanding that people provide a "vaccination zone" in their houses. 1 square meter of space where someone from Microsoft can stand and give people injections, because apparently some people had their doors locked when Microsoft tried to get in before.

"Oh, you don't have 1 square meter of space in your house that you can spare? Get a bigger house!"

This. This is an excellent analogy and summary of the enthusiasts view of Windows 10.

 

When they decided to make Windows 10 a live service we knew forced updates would be inevitable, because in the end, if there's a vulnerability or major issue that's exposed in a certain build of Windows 10, fingers will be pointed at Microsoft for not aggressively pushing the update to their users. Developers of any live service aim to have as many of their users as possible on the same or similar public release.

 

To contrast, in their effort to keep all their users running the same build of Windows, they ignore the fact that not everyone wants to be forced upgrades, they prefer the older slower style Service Pack releases. To be fair, there are benefits to that style of update, more QA, more to time to optimise, plus as a bonus security updates were still released frequently IIRC. My main reason to update Windows regularly is for security reasons, I haven't found much value in the feature updates yet.

 

I understand why people are upset at updates like the October updates and other 'broken updates' from Microsoft. Personally I haven't had many issues with Windows 10 but I'm constantly aware of the issues many others are having and it is scary to say the least.

[mynameisjuan]

5 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

Not up for debate, these are hard facts

No info or argument. But facts 

[mr moose]

15 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

Facts:

-MS fired QC and testing staff

-quality took a noose dive

-made home users test subjects

-turned home users into cash cow by stealing their data even against their will

-made sure you get their newest crapware whatever it takes

 

Pretty clear IMHO whats going on...

Where's your proof?   So far you are just saying stuff.  I have linked to several articles explaining the process and how it works.  Even the media reports of users being QC link back to MS documents that don't say what they claim it does.

15 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

I was going to mention the insider program which does help, but IIRC insiders aren't paid to test the software, Microsoft expects users to join a testing program and to report bugs thoroughly, according to the mpcmag article the insider program has millions of users, yet bugs still get through. As a business standpoint it makes the most sense as a cost effective approach but if Microsoft wants to push a stable Windows as a service I think they should do more testing during engineering.

Nothing is perfect,  all update systems and software has bugs these days, its the nature of the beast.  I defy anyone to show me an OS that doesn't have bugs or issues.   The issue I take with much of the rhetoric in this thread is that people are pointing to these flaws and making it sound like it was intentional or the result of complacency, something that effects majority of users and can be easily fixed.  It is none of those things,  The concept that MS are intentional pissing off their customers with a complacent attitude is illogical at best. 

 

13 hours ago, TechyBen said:

You can lock out Internet use until the user gets updates == no wannacry. "Oh but people will complain" you say... well, people are complaining. One solution would show the problem, the current solution is a problem! However, they force updates instead of forcing useability based on where/how the code is broken. (Take Specter type hacks for example, a REAL security issue, here they block Hyperthreading, instead of waiting for companies to move secure code out of the HT pipeline, they could do the same with other updates). The update cycle still is staggered, so there would have been a risk if Wannacry was a zero day, and not an old useless exploit, but on lots of exploitable computers... you know what computers got Wannacry around here? XP ones that the companies (massive ones) never bothered to get the updates for the corporate version... not the *users*. So same thing would have happened if it was a Winows 10 exploit, as those companies would also not have updated the corporate version of 10!!!

 

 

 

Are you seriously arguing that locking out network usage until an update is downloaded is better than forcing the update?  

 

You are wrong about wannacry,

98% of victims were win 7 that weren't updated.

The update that fixed the wannacry issue was released months before wannacry happened. It was not a zero day attack.

Less than 1% was XP

 

I have already spoken in depth about the corporate users who did not update their systems,  it is just further proof that people do not update their systems when you have professionals who should know better ignoring something as important as security updates.

 

https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/19/15665488/wannacry-windows-7-version-xp-patched-victim-statistics

 

[TechyBen]

16 hours ago, mr moose said:

...

 

 

Are you seriously arguing that locking out network usage until an update is downloaded is better than forcing the update?  

 

You are wrong about wannacry,

98% of victims were win 7 that weren't updated.

The update that fixed the wannacry issue was released months before wannacry happened. It was not a zero day attack.

Less than 1% was XP

 

I have already spoken in depth about the corporate users who did not update their systems,  it is just further proof that people do not update their systems when you have professionals who should know better ignoring something as important as security updates.

 

https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/19/15665488/wannacry-windows-7-version-xp-patched-victim-statistics

 

Yes. Yes I am. Locking out dangerous usage is fine. Because I could still use my computer. [This is literally the system for other software! You can boot/use/modify, but not connect to servers until you update (games, productivity, mobile OS etc).] You know what is worse than 1 function of a PC being blocked until the exploit/bug is fixed? Forced downloads/installs/reboots!

 

Quote

98% of victims were win 7 that weren't updated.

Correct (the XP scandal on clinic/surgery PCs we had here must have been a manual .exe execution then). But still (Also from Wiki):

Quote

Organizations that had not installed Microsoft's security update from April 2017 were affected by the attack.^[35] Those still running unsupported versions of Microsoft Windows, such as Windows XP and Windows Server 2003^[36][37] were at particularly high risk because no security patches had been released since April 2014 (with the exception of one emergency patch released in May 2014).^[7] A Kaspersky Lab study reported however, that less than 0.1 percent of the affected computers were running Windows XP, and that 98 percent of the affected computers were running Windows 7.

There was less than 30 days between patch and exploit. MS still cannot roll out updates on time anyhow. XD

 

Quote

I have already spoken in depth about the corporate users who did not update their systems,  it is just further proof that people do not update their systems when you have professionals who should know better ignoring something as important as security updates.

That's the thing. Who gets to decide? Who gets to decide when my computer turns off, and what is done to it?

[mr moose]

7 hours ago, TechyBen said:

Yes. Yes I am. Locking out dangerous usage is fine. Because I could still use my computer. [This is literally the system for other software! You can boot/use/modify, but not connect to servers until you update (games, productivity, mobile OS etc).] You know what is worse than 1 function of a PC being blocked until the exploit/bug is fixed? Forced downloads/installs/reboots!

So instead of it being a 5 minute inconvenience once or twice a year (on the requirement of a restart),  you propose it to be a major inconvenience (no network means no email, no conference, no work, no games and basically being restricted to writing a document) until the updates are installed and a restart occurs anyway?  I'll take the restart only  thank you.

 

7 hours ago, TechyBen said:

Correct (the XP scandal on clinic/surgery PCs we had here must have been a manual .exe execution then). But still (Also from Wiki):

There was less than 30 days between patch and exploit. MS still cannot roll out updates on time anyhow. XD

There was an update for XP before the outbreak, it really depends whether those XP machines were part of the corporate support or not.  But all of them made up less than 1% regardless.

 

7 hours ago, TechyBen said:

That's the thing. Who gets to decide? Who gets to decide when my computer turns off, and what is done to it?

That has been the debate over the last 15 pages, MS left that option in the hands of users and they didn't do it,  when updating is important and people refuse to do it voluntarily (even to the point where you can easily find how to's to get around updates) then the only option left is to force the updates.

[Hellion]

On 1/18/2019 at 1:01 AM, mr moose said:

They did fire some and restructured, but they didn't start sending out updates untested.  they made the software engineers test their own work and use the machines they were testing them on instead of sending them to another department. They also started the insider program to help with wider scale release testing.

I've already posted much of the stuff I need to  to back up my assertions, you can't just come into a thread and repeat what has already been discussed then try to wish it away by insinuating someone is asking you to do your home work.  I am not asking you to do anything for me, I am asking you to back up your claims.  I have already added weight to mine.

 

but here's some more just in case you aren't aware of how the windows 10 update system changed from previous systems and how business is treated differently and why.

 

https://mcpmag.com/articles/2015/05/20/windows-10-update-strategies-for-it-pros.aspx

https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/robertsmith/2015/05/13/updated-windows-updatingservicing-guidance-from-ignite-2015/

 

 

Business and IT professionals kept telling MS they did not like having all the updates at the same time. 

I'm honestly taken back by how you came to the conclusion that microshaft articles followed by additional microshaft articles constitutes "weight".

 

I'm sorry but it goes both ways. If you want to glaze over my statements without a real rebuttal and simply copy and paste articles that fit your narrative while ignoring everything else that states the opposite, I'm going to simply dismiss your grossly talented "research" abilities.

 

When several former employees come out of the woodwork to tell their story when they had first hand insight to the workings of microshaft, all your PR links are just gibberish and only act as a waste of time.

 

There's far too much mud brought up to the surface at this point.

[79wjd]

 

8 minutes ago, Hellion said:

When several former employees come out of the woodwork to tell their story when they had first hand insight to the workings of microshaft, all your PR links are just gibberish and only act as a waste of time.

Former employees often have a very negatively biased view of their former employers.

 

[mr moose]

6 minutes ago, Hellion said:

I'm honestly taken back by how you came to the conclusion that microshaft articles followed by additional microshaft articles constitutes "weight".

 

 

 

I'm sorry but it goes both ways. If you want to glaze over my statements without a real rebuttal and simply copy and paste articles that fit your narrative while ignoring everything else that states the opposite, I'm going to simply dismiss your grossly talented "research" abilities.

 

 

 

When several former employees come out of the woodwork to tell their story when they had first hand insight to the workings of microshaft, all your PR links are just gibberish and only act as a waste of time.

 

 

 

There's far too much mud brought up to the surface at this point.

 

 

 

 

Bedsides that fact I have linked to more than just MS articles that you claim you can't trust but you then go on to try and claim weight because your source is a laid off employee.

 

Hands up all those who see the problem with this reasoning?

 

Again, provide some evidence to your claims or stop making them.   You came into this thread 12 odd pages too late, rehashed old arguments and now you want to have the last word but can't argue anything other than your opinions.

 

 

 

[Hellion]

2 minutes ago, 79wjd said:

 

Former employees often have a very negatively biased view of their former employers.

 

If it was one or two that were let go that would be fair..

 

Problem is it was an entire department's worth of layoffs.

[79wjd]

1 minute ago, Hellion said:

If it was one or two that were let go that would be fair..

 

Problem is it was an entire department's worth of layoffs.

Regardless of the size of the layoff, people who get laid off generally aren't going to go around praising the company that let them go.

[Drak3]

3 minutes ago, 79wjd said:

Regardless of the size of the layoff, people who get laid off generally aren't going to go around praising the company that let them go.

Particularly when they know that the company most likely won't go after them for slander/libel, and if they do, propaganda that said company trying to silence the truth will be spewed by fanatic proponents of alternatives.

[Hellion]

1 minute ago, mr moose said:

 

Bedsides that fact I have linked to more than just MS articles that you claim you can't trust but you then go on to try and claim weight because your source is a laid off employee.

 

Hands up all those who see the problem with this reasoning?

 

Again, provide some evidence to your claims or stop making them.   You came into this thread 12 odd pages too late, rehashed old arguments and now you want to have the last word but can't argue anything other than your opinions.

 

 

 

You can split hairs all you like. The majority of your links have been microshaft based highly motivated cover ups.

 

12 pages too late? Since when is there a rule on a public forum that gives a time frame for comment? You act as if your past actions have any effect on the out come of what others do. As I've stated in the past, I comment when I have time. I'm not spending my entire day here hitting F5 like you do.

 

If there's anything I have learned from guys like you, it's that it wouldn't matter how much time I spent to dig up evidence. You will never admit to being wrong and it's only going to be followed with 100 pages of illogical excuses while I'm not logged in.

 

You have far more to lose then I do because this is your world.

 

[mr moose]

8 hours ago, Hellion said:

You can split hairs all you like. The majority of your links have been microshaft based highly motivated cover ups.

 

And?  until you provide evidence tot he contrary you have said nothing.

8 hours ago, Hellion said:

 

12 pages too late? Since when is there a rule on a public forum that gives a time frame for comment? You act as if your past actions have any effect on the out come of what others do. As I've stated in the past, I comment when I have time. I'm not spending my entire day here hitting F5 like you do.

 

 

Really?  no one said anything about rules, I am just pointing out that you are rehashing tired old arguments that have been addressed.  And what's with the veiled insult?   Do you feel it important to try and insinuate I have less value on these forums?

 

8 hours ago, Hellion said:

If there's anything I have learned from guys like you, it's that it wouldn't matter how much time I spent to dig up evidence. You will never admit to being wrong and it's only going to be followed with 100 pages of illogical excuses while I'm not logged in.

Instead of trying to label me as a particular "guy" and claim it doesn't matter how much evidence you dig up, the problem is you either can't or won't provide it.  That's a failing of your position, that's an illogical excuse you are using.   Your failure to provide anything that supports your stance is not an illogical failing of my comments. 

 

It's scary this needs to be pointed out, however: if you want me to admit that I am wrong you need to actually provide evidence that I am, not hide behind the insinuation I wouldn't accept it. 

 

8 hours ago, Hellion said:

 

You have far more to lose then I do because this is your world.

 

 

I'm not too sure that even makes sense,  but at this stage in the discussion that doesn't actually surprise me.  Like most discussion on the topic, you have gone from black and white statements to petty insults then to weird claims of losing things in a specific "world".  

 

I await your next post, at the rate this conversation is going it'll probably contain narrative on unicorns and bigfoot. 

[TechyBen]

17 hours ago, mr moose said:

So instead of it being a 5 minute inconvenience once or twice a year (on the requirement of a restart),  you propose it to be a major inconvenience (no network means no email, no conference, no work, no games and basically being restricted to writing a document) until the updates are installed and a restart occurs anyway?  I'll take the restart only  thank you.

 

There was an update for XP before the outbreak, it really depends whether those XP machines were part of the corporate support or not.  But all of them made up less than 1% regardless.

 

That has been the debate over the last 15 pages, MS left that option in the hands of users and they didn't do it,  when updating is important and people refuse to do it voluntarily (even to the point where you can easily find how to's to get around updates) then the only option left is to force the updates.

5 mins? Some of these updates have taken near entire days! Yes, instead of 2 hours of "updating, boot failed, retry 3 times, rollback update, go into windows, sorry update failed" I'd get a "if you wish to connect to internet, please download *required* security update" and I could still render/work/ backup or whatever I needed in the meantime...

 

Quote

That has been the debate over the last 15 pages, MS left that option in the hands of users and they didn't do it

That's pretty much a decision we make as a society. We can force people to do things. Is that where we wish to go? As said, we have a viable option. We can force reboots/downloads/updates. Or we can force lack of function until there is an update applied *by the user*. They chose the latter. And that's not going to fly for me. Fine if others do, but I am keeping my autonomy.

[jagdtigger]

15 hours ago, 79wjd said:

Regardless of the size of the layoff, people who get laid off generally aren't going to go around praising the company that let them go.

You just have to take the info coming from them with a grain of salt. But if almost all of them complain about a particular(or even more) issue then its better take note of it because it might be true. And Seeing how quality took a nose dive i wouldnt be surprised if MS in fact do not do any meaningful form of QC.

[mr moose]

7 hours ago, TechyBen said:

5 mins? Some of these updates have taken near entire days! Yes, instead of 2 hours of "updating, boot failed, retry 3 times, rollback update, go into windows, sorry update failed" I'd get a "if you wish to connect to internet, please download *required* security update" and I could still render/work/ backup or whatever I needed in the meantime...

But that's in the even of an update failure, that is not everyone, in fact I would hazard that is barely 5% of users.   We can find plenty of threads where an ios update has bricked an iphone to the point it had to go back to apple to be fixed,  but we don't run around claiming that is a reason not to update ios or buy apple.   It's the same thing here, there are problems, there likely always will be for a certain percentage of users because, as I said before, nothing is perfect. even your idea of locking out the network would come with the same degree of issues and setbacks.

 

7 hours ago, TechyBen said:

That's pretty much a decision we make as a society. We can force people to do things. Is that where we wish to go? As said, we have a viable option. We can force reboots/downloads/updates. Or we can force lack of function until there is an update applied *by the user*. They chose the latter. And that's not going to fly for me. Fine if others do, but I am keeping my autonomy.

I will agree that either way that is a forced outcome, which is what MS need.  It will likely serve the same purpose, not sure I would appreciate it though.

[Hellion]

14 hours ago, mr moose said:

And?  until you provide evidence tot he contrary you have said nothing.

Really?  no one said anything about rules, I am just pointing out that you are rehashing tired old arguments that have been addressed.  And what's with the veiled insult?   Do you feel it important to try and insinuate I have less value on these forums?

 

Instead of trying to label me as a particular "guy" and claim it doesn't matter how much evidence you dig up, the problem is you either can't or won't provide it.  That's a failing of your position, that's an illogical excuse you are using.   Your failure to provide anything that supports your stance is not an illogical failing of my comments. 

 

It's scary this needs to be pointed out, however: if you want me to admit that I am wrong you need to actually provide evidence that I am, not hide behind the insinuation I wouldn't accept it. 

 

 

I'm not too sure that even makes sense,  but at this stage in the discussion that doesn't actually surprise me.  Like most discussion on the topic, you have gone from black and white statements to petty insults then to weird claims of losing things in a specific "world".  

 

I await your next post, at the rate this conversation is going it'll probably contain narrative on unicorns and bigfoot. 

Unicorns and bigfoot?….

 

Your lack of understanding time management is truly sad. You may be in denial over your situation but everyone else isn’t nearly that foolish. I pigeon hole you based on your proven track record. That of the village idiot that’s set up shop on the forum mashing the F5 key for hours on end looking for new threads to play devils advocate regardless of how ridiculous a rabbit hole you have to jump down. You may think it’s cute or entertaining, the rest find it eye roll inducing with better things to do then ramble on along side you for pages on end playing your little game. Like I said, this is your world. The one where you scream “WHARE UR EVIDANCE?” while providing links to websites owned by the corporation in question or those within the industry with a stake in the company. You fail to understand what a PR department is and when a business is faced with legal or ethical dispute they will tell lies at no end because they have an image to maintain. Kind of like the one you do. The one where you think your opinion is valued and placed upon a pedestal to which can’t be refuted. God forbid someone bring up an opinion you already “covered”. Since your statements become law of the land and written in stone as fact regardless of how mind numbingly retarded they may be.

 

So no, I’m not providing you with links to websites. You have proven to be able to use a search engine. I would suggest you do so but we already know the bias you hold, centered on the position you always take and can’t look at anything objectively. This is why it’s a waste of time for the other party. A waste of time when they could be accomplishing something of value in life while you furiously pound your keyboard to get the last word in. Arguing with you is a lost cause. One that I won’t be engaging in.

 

[Arika]

19 minutes ago, Hellion said:

So no, I’m not providing you with links to websites. You have proven to be able to use a search engine. I would suggest you do so but we already know the bias you hold, centered on the position you always take and can’t look at anything objectively. This is why it’s a waste of time for the other party. A waste of time when they could be accomplishing something of value in life while you furiously pound your keyboard to get the last word in. Arguing with you is a lost cause. One that I won’t be engaging in.

that's not how that works.

 

you don't make claims and when asked for proof, turn around and say "find it yourself". that is the most frustrating thing about the internet, debating with someone that wants you to find evidence of their argument. it shows that you don't believe what you're saying, you're lazy, or you don't actually have evidence of what you're claiming. none of them shine you in a good light.

 

If you want to be taken seriously then do your own leg work and provide your evidence. If you don't, then people are more likely to discredit everything you just said because it shows you don't have confidence in your argument.

[mr moose]

51 minutes ago, Hellion said:

 

So no, I’m not providing you with links to websites.

 

 

Because you have no argument or proof or anything other than a desire to argue on the internet.

 

You do this all the time in many threads, I've seen you do it to @LAwLz, I've see you do it in many Intel threads.  You have a personal ideal that is not supported with anything so you go on the attack accusing the other person of being ignorant, foolish, forum spammer/f5 and god knows what else.

 

 

So Again, provide something to support your assertions or stop telling other people they:

 

51 minutes ago, Hellion said:

Unicorns and bigfoot?….

 

 

Your lack of understanding time management is truly sad. You may be in denial over your situation but everyone else isn’t nearly that foolish. I pigeon hole you based on your proven track record. That of the village idiot that’s set up shop on the forum mashing the F5 key for hours on end looking for new threads to play devils advocate regardless of how ridiculous a rabbit hole you have to jump down. You may think it’s cute or entertaining, the rest find it eye roll inducing with better things to do then ramble on along side you for pages on end playing your little game. Like I said, this is your world. The one where you scream “WHARE UR EVIDANCE?” while providing links to websites owned by the corporation in question or those within the industry with a stake in the company. You fail to understand what a PR department is and when a business is faced with legal or ethical dispute they will tell lies at no end because they have an image to maintain. Kind of like the one you do. The one where you think your opinion is valued and placed upon a pedestal to which can’t be refuted. God forbid someone bring up an opinion you already “covered”. Since your statements become law of the land and written in stone as fact regardless of how mind numbingly retarded they may be.

 

 

51 minutes ago, Hellion said:

 

 Arguing with you is a lost cause.

 

Yet you keep doing it but not actually addressing the thread, just harassing me. go figure.

51 minutes ago, Hellion said:

One that I won’t be engaging in.

 

 

You've said that before. But here you are calling me an idiot, amongst many other claims and insults.

 

So p[lease, again, can you address the thread or not?  if you can't then stop insulting other people.