Microsoft launches 'phone home' antipiracy update

[Alias]

Pulse wrote:
> It's likely his OS came on a CD with the version number scribbled on it
> in magic marker.

I see. Your "logic" tells you that if someone objects to spyware that
means they are pirates. Just curious, can you explain this "logic"?

>
>
>
> "Roy Smith" <rasmith1959@live.com> wrote in message
> news:hm6n6t$ouh$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> On 2/25/2010 12:18 PM, Alias wrote:
>>> Roy Smith wrote:
>>>> On 2/25/2010 10:53 AM, Alias wrote:
>>>>> Bill Yanaire, ESQ wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Alias" <aka@masked&anonymous.com.invalido> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:hm673j$35l$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>> Bill Yanaire, ESQ wrote:
>>>>>>>> Do you even know why they are doing that? To keep people like
>>>>>>>> yourself from stealing their products.
>>>>>>> I don't steal software and you have no proof that I do.
>>>>>> Then don't bitch about it. If you have a legit copy, then "calling
>>>>>> home" will be transparent. Oops.
>>>>> How would you like it if Microshit were to send a couple of goons to
>>>>> your home to look over your machine and then declare it "non genuine"
>>>>> and take you computer which you could only get back if you paid up for
>>>>> another license? Would you also bend over and let them give it to
>>>>> you up
>>>>> your ass?
>>>>
>>>> Then let them come. I still have the original installation DVD as well
>>>> as the cash register receipt from when I bought Windows 7 and the
>>>> laptop
>>>> that is running it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> And if they claim those are pirated too, then what?
>>
>> Well then it's a very good copy of a real DVD as it has all of the
>> holographic images embedded in the disc, and that's not cheap to
>> duplicate.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Roy Smith
>> Windows 7 Home Premium
>>
>> Timestamp: Thursday, February 25, 2010 29:53 PM
>


--
Alias

 

[Alias]

Bill Yanaire, ESQ wrote:
>
>
> "Alias" <aka@masked&anonymous.com.invalido> wrote in message
> news:hm6aao$vfc$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Chris Sidener wrote:
>>>
>>> "paul_36" <guest@this.site.is.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:hm68bf$9h7$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> On 2010-02-25, Bill Yanaire, ESQ <bill@yanaire.org> wrote:
>>>>> Do you even know why they are doing that? To keep people like
>>>>> yourself from
>>>>> stealing their products. They need to protect their intellectual
>>>>> property
>>>>> from thieves who want to steal.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't care if my computer "phones home" once in a while because
>>>>> I have a
>>>>> LEGIT copy. It's only those who try to get away with stealing who
>>>>> cry foul.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why don't you go play with Ubuntu and watch the spinning cube. I hear
>>>>> Ubuntu is free yet most reject Ubuntu as garbage! LOL!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Alias" <aka@masked&anonymous.com.invalido> wrote in message
>>>>> news:hm637k$un0$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>> http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9162019/Microsoft_launches_phone_home_antipiracy_update
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you want your computer to phone home every 90 days and risk a
>>>>>> false
>>>>>> positive or two or three, be sure and install what Microshit calls an
>>>>>> "important" update.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Alias
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A false positive will shutdown your machine as a it will be considered
>>>> stolen goods.
>>>
>>>
>>> I was offered KB971033 this morning. I merely marked it hidden and
>>> did not download it. End of story.
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
>>
>> Wise move. Who needs Microshit spyware dialing home every time
>> Microshit wants it to?
>>
> Maybe you can't afford it. You only get $14k a week and probably can't
> afford to have Microsoft call home! LOL! No wonder you are worried.
>
> HA HA HA HA
>
>
>

I have flat rate broadband so the calling home costs me nothing. How
much will it cost you for lying all the live long day?

--
Alias

 

[Frank]

On 2/25/2010 4:15 PM, Alias wrote:
> Pulse wrote:
>> It's likely his OS came on a CD with the version number scribbled on
>> it in magic marker.
>
> I see. Your "logic" tells you that if someone objects to spyware that
> means they are pirates.

You are afraid of being caught aren't you, creep?...Hahahaha...YEP!!!

Just curious, can you explain this "logic"?

"logic"?...You have no logic and no understanding of any logic.
Go peddle your FUD somewhere else you lying linturd asshole.
>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Roy Smith" <rasmith1959@live.com> wrote in message
>> news:hm6n6t$ouh$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> On 2/25/2010 12:18 PM, Alias wrote:
>>>> Roy Smith wrote:
>>>>> On 2/25/2010 10:53 AM, Alias wrote:
>>>>>> Bill Yanaire, ESQ wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Alias" <aka@masked&anonymous.com.invalido> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:hm673j$35l$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>>> Bill Yanaire, ESQ wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Do you even know why they are doing that? To keep people like
>>>>>>>>> yourself from stealing their products.
>>>>>>>> I don't steal software and you have no proof that I do.
>>>>>>> Then don't bitch about it. If you have a legit copy, then "calling
>>>>>>> home" will be transparent. Oops.
>>>>>> How would you like it if Microshit were to send a couple of goons to
>>>>>> your home to look over your machine and then declare it "non genuine"
>>>>>> and take you computer which you could only get back if you paid up
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> another license? Would you also bend over and let them give it to
>>>>>> you up
>>>>>> your ass?
>>>>>
>>>>> Then let them come. I still have the original installation DVD as well
>>>>> as the cash register receipt from when I bought Windows 7 and the
>>>>> laptop
>>>>> that is running it.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And if they claim those are pirated too, then what?
>>>
>>> Well then it's a very good copy of a real DVD as it has all of the
>>> holographic images embedded in the disc, and that's not cheap to
>>> duplicate.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Roy Smith
>>> Windows 7 Home Premium
>>>
>>> Timestamp: Thursday, February 25, 2010 29:53 PM
>>
>
>

 

[Frank]

On 2/25/2010 4:16 PM, Alias wrote:
> Bill Yanaire, ESQ wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Alias" <aka@masked&anonymous.com.invalido> wrote in message
>> news:hm6aao$vfc$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> Chris Sidener wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "paul_36" <guest@this.site.is.invalid> wrote in message
>>>> news:hm68bf$9h7$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>> On 2010-02-25, Bill Yanaire, ESQ <bill@yanaire.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Do you even know why they are doing that? To keep people like
>>>>>> yourself from
>>>>>> stealing their products. They need to protect their intellectual
>>>>>> property
>>>>>> from thieves who want to steal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't care if my computer "phones home" once in a while because
>>>>>> I have a
>>>>>> LEGIT copy. It's only those who try to get away with stealing who
>>>>>> cry foul.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why don't you go play with Ubuntu and watch the spinning cube. I hear
>>>>>> Ubuntu is free yet most reject Ubuntu as garbage! LOL!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Alias" <aka@masked&anonymous.com.invalido> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:hm637k$un0$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>> http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9162019/Microsoft_launches_phone_home_antipiracy_update
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you want your computer to phone home every 90 days and risk a
>>>>>>> false
>>>>>>> positive or two or three, be sure and install what Microshit
>>>>>>> calls an
>>>>>>> "important" update.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Alias
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> A false positive will shutdown your machine as a it will be considered
>>>>> stolen goods.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I was offered KB971033 this morning. I merely marked it hidden and
>>>> did not download it. End of story.
>>>>
>>>> Chris
>>>>
>>>
>>> Wise move. Who needs Microshit spyware dialing home every time
>>> Microshit wants it to?
>>>
>> Maybe you can't afford it. You only get $14k a week and probably can't
>> afford to have Microsoft call home! LOL! No wonder you are worried.
>>
>> HA HA HA HA
>>
>>
>>
>
> I have flat rate broadband so the calling home costs me nothing. How
> much will it cost you for lying all the live long day?
>
Go peddle your bullshit FUD somewhere else, you lying linturd asshole loser.

 

[John Aldred]

Alias wrote:

>
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9162019/Microsoft_launches_phone_home_antipiracy_update
>
> If you want your computer to phone home every 90 days and risk a false
> positive or two or three, be sure and install what Microshit calls an
> "important" update.
>

I find the prospect of a false positive identification a little worrying.

I received the warning "Your copy of Windows may not be genuine" only last
week while updating Microsoft Security Essentials. I manually validated it
later and it appeared to be OK. It should be, because it was purchased
under Microsoft's pre-release offer from one of their nominated retailers
last year.

--
John Aldred

 

[DanS]

Frank <fb@amk.cmo> wrote in news:4b86b13b$1@news.x-privat.org:

> On 2/25/2010 9:00 AM, Alias wrote:
>> Zootal wrote:
>>>> I was offered KB971033 this morning. I merely marked it hidden and
did
>>>> not download it. End of story.
>>>>
>>>> Chris
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> It was on the list of available updates, but not automatically
>>> selected. I left it that way.
>>
>> That's for now. WGA-N used to be optional too.
>>
> You are the only one thus far who seems to be worried...why is that?
> Oops!

It doesn't necessarily mean anything.

I was pissed off yesterday when I was ID'd to buy friggin' NyQuil,
because of the dextromethorphan in it. (This grocery store chain IDs
everyone no matter how old you appear to be. They will ID someone that
appears plainly to be 60+ years old to buy beer.)

Of course, with the amount of DXM in Nyquil, for the DXM to do anything,
you'd have to take so much of it that you'd die from an acetominophen
overdose.

I guess you'll be the first in line to get RFID chips w/GPS installed in
your head so you can be tracked and identified.

Why not, if you're not doing anything illegal, what do you have to fear ?

 

[Alias]

John Aldred wrote:
> Alias wrote:
>
> http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9162019/Microsoft_launches_phone_home_antipiracy_update
>> If you want your computer to phone home every 90 days and risk a false
>> positive or two or three, be sure and install what Microshit calls an
>> "important" update.
>>
>
> I find the prospect of a false positive identification a little worrying.
>
> I received the warning "Your copy of Windows may not be genuine" only last
> week while updating Microsoft Security Essentials. I manually validated it
> later and it appeared to be OK. It should be, because it was purchased
> under Microsoft's pre-release offer from one of their nominated retailers
> last year.
>

What would have you done had manual validation didn't work and the phone
clerk told you the only way to solve your false positive was to buy
Windows again because he or she didn't believe your story?

The fanbois say it's only a five minute call and no big deal unless, of
course, the phone clerk doesn't believe you.

--
Alias

 

[Alias]

DanS wrote:
> Frank <fb@amk.cmo> wrote in news:4b86b13b$1@news.x-privat.org:
>
>> On 2/25/2010 9:00 AM, Alias wrote:
>>> Zootal wrote:
>>>>> I was offered KB971033 this morning. I merely marked it hidden and
> did
>>>>> not download it. End of story.
>>>>>
>>>>> Chris
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> It was on the list of available updates, but not automatically
>>>> selected. I left it that way.
>>> That's for now. WGA-N used to be optional too.
>>>
>> You are the only one thus far who seems to be worried...why is that?
>> Oops!
>
> It doesn't necessarily mean anything.
>
> I was pissed off yesterday when I was ID'd to buy friggin' NyQuil,
> because of the dextromethorphan in it. (This grocery store chain IDs
> everyone no matter how old you appear to be. They will ID someone that
> appears plainly to be 60+ years old to buy beer.)
>
> Of course, with the amount of DXM in Nyquil, for the DXM to do anything,
> you'd have to take so much of it that you'd die from an acetominophen
> overdose.
>
> I guess you'll be the first in line to get RFID chips w/GPS installed in
> your head so you can be tracked and identified.
>
> Why not, if you're not doing anything illegal, what do you have to fear ?

Let's see. WAT flags a false positive. Manual validation doesn't work.
You call the phone desk in some third world country who doesn't believe
you and tells you that you have to buy another copy of Windows.

Frank thinks that if anyone objects to this spyware, they are a thief.
Of course, Frank isn't exactly famous for being logical or intelligent.

--
Alias

 

[DanS]

John Aldred <aldred@newvillage.demon.co.uk> wrote in
news:0yPhn.175720$DL1.60186@newsfe25.ams2:

> Alias wrote:
>
>>
> http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9162019/Microsoft_launches_phone
> _home_antipiracy_update
>>
>> If you want your computer to phone home every 90 days and risk a
>> false positive or two or three, be sure and install what Microshit
>> calls an "important" update.
>>
>
> I find the prospect of a false positive identification a little
> worrying.
>
> I received the warning "Your copy of Windows may not be genuine" only
> last week while updating Microsoft Security Essentials. I manually
> validated it later and it appeared to be OK. It should be, because it
> was purchased under Microsoft's pre-release offer from one of their
> nominated retailers last year.

That's not possible. There is no such thing as a false-positive with
WAT/WGA.

 

[Frank]

On 2/26/2010 5:22 AM, DanS wrote:
> Frank<fb@amk.cmo> wrote in news:4b86b13b$1@news.x-privat.org:
>
>> On 2/25/2010 9:00 AM, Alias wrote:
>>> Zootal wrote:
>>>>> I was offered KB971033 this morning. I merely marked it hidden and
> did
>>>>> not download it. End of story.
>>>>>
>>>>> Chris
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It was on the list of available updates, but not automatically
>>>> selected. I left it that way.
>>>
>>> That's for now. WGA-N used to be optional too.
>>>
>> You are the only one thus far who seems to be worried...why is that?
>> Oops!
>
> It doesn't necessarily mean anything.
>
> I was pissed off yesterday when I was ID'd to buy friggin' NyQuil,
> because of the dextromethorphan in it. (This grocery store chain IDs
> everyone no matter how old you appear to be. They will ID someone that
> appears plainly to be 60+ years old to buy beer.)
>
> Of course, with the amount of DXM in Nyquil, for the DXM to do anything,
> you'd have to take so much of it that you'd die from an acetominophen
> overdose.
>
> I guess you'll be the first in line to get RFID chips w/GPS installed in
> your head so you can be tracked and identified.
>
> Why not, if you're not doing anything illegal, what do you have to fear ?

WoW! You're pretty much fucked up aren't you?
Oops!

 

[Frank]

On 2/26/2010 6:16 AM, Alias wrote:
> DanS wrote:
>> Frank <fb@amk.cmo> wrote in news:4b86b13b$1@news.x-privat.org:
>>
>>> On 2/25/2010 9:00 AM, Alias wrote:
>>>> Zootal wrote:
>>>>>> I was offered KB971033 this morning. I merely marked it hidden and
>> did
>>>>>> not download it. End of story.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> It was on the list of available updates, but not automatically
>>>>> selected. I left it that way.
>>>> That's for now. WGA-N used to be optional too.
>>>>
>>> You are the only one thus far who seems to be worried...why is that?
>>> Oops!
>>
>> It doesn't necessarily mean anything.
>>
>> I was pissed off yesterday when I was ID'd to buy friggin' NyQuil,
>> because of the dextromethorphan in it. (This grocery store chain IDs
>> everyone no matter how old you appear to be. They will ID someone that
>> appears plainly to be 60+ years old to buy beer.)
>>
>> Of course, with the amount of DXM in Nyquil, for the DXM to do
>> anything, you'd have to take so much of it that you'd die from an
>> acetominophen overdose.
>> I guess you'll be the first in line to get RFID chips w/GPS installed
>> in your head so you can be tracked and identified.
>>
>> Why not, if you're not doing anything illegal, what do you have to fear ?
>
> Let's see.

You're blind...so forget it.

WAT flags a false positive.

Never, ever seen that happen. Oops!...I'm running legit copies!

Manual validation doesn't work.

Try getting a legit copy asshole.

> You call the phone desk in some third world country who doesn't believe
> you and tells you that you have to buy another copy of Windows.

They caught you trying to lie to them huh?...Hahahaha!
Figures.
>
> Frank thinks that if anyone objects to this spyware, they are a thief.

Your words, not mine, thief!

Of course, Frank isn't exactly famous for being logical or intelligent.

Translation: Frank is not a thief like alias is.
Oops!...LOL!

 

[Pulse]

It didn't actually disable anything though did it (except mark the desktop)?


"John Aldred" <aldred@newvillage.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:0yPhn.175720$DL1.60186@newsfe25.ams2...
> Alias wrote:
>
>>
> http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9162019/Microsoft_launches_phone_home_antipiracy_update
>>
>> If you want your computer to phone home every 90 days and risk a false
>> positive or two or three, be sure and install what Microshit calls an
>> "important" update.
>>
>
> I find the prospect of a false positive identification a little worrying.
>
> I received the warning "Your copy of Windows may not be genuine" only last
> week while updating Microsoft Security Essentials. I manually validated it
> later and it appeared to be OK. It should be, because it was purchased
> under Microsoft's pre-release offer from one of their nominated retailers
> last year.
>
> --
> John Aldred

 

[DanS]

>>> Why not, if you're not doing anything illegal, what do you have to
>>> fear ?
>>
>> Let's see.
>
> You're blind...so forget it.
>
> WAT flags a false positive.
>
> Never, ever seen that happen. Oops!...I'm running legit copies!

We all forgot, the world revolves around you.

Sure, because you've not seen it, it doesn't happen.

Well, what do you know....John Aldred reported a false positive experience
at the bottom of this thread.

OOPS!!!!

 

[Frank]

On 2/26/2010 4:56 AM, John Aldred wrote:
> Alias wrote:
>
>>
> http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9162019/Microsoft_launches_phone_home_antipiracy_update
>>
>> If you want your computer to phone home every 90 days and risk a false
>> positive or two or three, be sure and install what Microshit calls an
>> "important" update.
>>
>
> I find the prospect of a false positive identification a little worrying.
>
> I received the warning "Your copy of Windows may not be genuine" only last
> week while updating Microsoft Security Essentials. I manually validated it
> later and it appeared to be OK. It should be, because it was purchased
> under Microsoft's pre-release offer from one of their nominated retailers
> last year.
>
If true, that is rather strange seeing as how WSE validates before
installing and I've yet to see it re-validate when updating its db.

 

[Alias]

DanS wrote:
>>>> Why not, if you're not doing anything illegal, what do you have to
>>>> fear ?
>>> Let's see.
>> You're blind...so forget it.
>>
>> WAT flags a false positive.
>>
>> Never, ever seen that happen. Oops!...I'm running legit copies!
>
> We all forgot, the world revolves around you.
>
> Sure, because you've not seen it, it doesn't happen.
>
> Well, what do you know....John Aldred reported a false positive experience
> at the bottom of this thread.
>
> OOPS!!!!
>

Frank is losing it big time.

--
Alias

 

[Frank]

On 2/26/2010 9:11 AM, DanS wrote:
>>>> Why not, if you're not doing anything illegal, what do you have to
>>>> fear ?
>>>
>>> Let's see.
>>
>> You're blind...so forget it.
>>
>> WAT flags a false positive.
>>
>> Never, ever seen that happen. Oops!...I'm running legit copies!
>
> We all forgot, the world revolves around you.

Does that thought irritate you dan-o, the asshole?
I sure hope it does.
>
> Sure, because you've not seen it, it doesn't happen.
>

Have you seen it happen?
Well...?

> Well, what do you know....John Aldred reported a false positive experience
> at the bottom of this thread.

Hummm...how convenient huh?
If you beleive him.
>
> OOPS!!!!
>

 

[Frank]

On 2/26/2010 9:17 AM, Alias wrote:
> DanS wrote:
>>>>> Why not, if you're not doing anything illegal, what do you have to
>>>>> fear ?
>>>> Let's see.
>>> You're blind...so forget it.
>>>
>>> WAT flags a false positive.
>>>
>>> Never, ever seen that happen. Oops!...I'm running legit copies!
>>
>> We all forgot, the world revolves around you.
>>
>> Sure, because you've not seen it, it doesn't happen.
>>
>> Well, what do you know....John Aldred reported a false positive
>> experience at the bottom of this thread.
>>
>> OOPS!!!!
>>
>
> Frank is losing it big time.
>
I'm not the one foaming at the mouth and spamming this ng. That
sheep-fucking loser would be you alias!
Big oops!...LOL!

 

[DanS]

Frank <fb@amk.cmo> wrote in news:4b88035e@news.x-privat.org:

> On 2/26/2010 9:11 AM, DanS wrote:
>>>>> Why not, if you're not doing anything illegal, what do you have to
>>>>> fear ?
>>>>
>>>> Let's see.
>>>
>>> You're blind...so forget it.
>>>
>>> WAT flags a false positive.
>>>
>>> Never, ever seen that happen. Oops!...I'm running legit copies!
>>
>> We all forgot, the world revolves around you.
>
> Does that thought irritate you dan-o, the asshole?
> I sure hope it does.

No. Why would it, when it's you that looks like the d*ck, digging a hole
deeper and deeper trying to get out of it.


>> Well, what do you know....John Aldred reported a false positive
>> experience at the bottom of this thread.
>
> Hummm...how convenient huh?
> If you beleive him.

I have no reason *not* to believe him, unlike you, which I have no reason
to believe *anything* you say.

 

[Frank]

On 2/26/2010 97 AM, DanS wrote:
> Frank<fb@amk.cmo> wrote in news:4b88035e@news.x-privat.org:
>
>> On 2/26/2010 9:11 AM, DanS wrote:
>>>>>> Why not, if you're not doing anything illegal, what do you have to
>>>>>> fear ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's see.
>>>>
>>>> You're blind...so forget it.
>>>>
>>>> WAT flags a false positive.
>>>>
>>>> Never, ever seen that happen. Oops!...I'm running legit copies!
>>>
>>> We all forgot, the world revolves around you.
>>
>> Does that thought irritate you dan-o, the asshole?
>> I sure hope it does.
>
> No. Why would it, when it's you that looks like the d*ck, digging a hole
> deeper and deeper trying to get out of it.

Projecting dan-o...like your sheep-fucking buddy alas does all the time?
Figures!
>
>
>>> Well, what do you know....John Aldred reported a false positive
>>> experience at the bottom of this thread.
>>
>> Hummm...how convenient huh?
>> If you beleive him.
>
> I have no reason *not* to believe him, unlike you, which I have no reason
> to believe *anything* you say.
>
Well lets see...hummmm...I actually use the OS in question and WSE do
you or your butt-fucking buddy alias?
Well...?
No huh.
Figures!
Now go fuck yourself asshole!

 

[DanS]

>>>> Well, what do you know....John Aldred reported a false positive
>>>> experience at the bottom of this thread.
>>>
>>> Hummm...how convenient huh?
>>> If you beleive him.
>>
>> I have no reason *not* to believe him, unlike you, which I have no
>> reason to believe *anything* you say.
>>
> Well lets see...hummmm...I actually use the OS in question and WSE do
> you or your butt-fucking buddy alias?
>
> Well...?

Well here.......

I fail to see how me using or not using any OS, be it Windows, Linux,
OSX, Commodore, Atari, Unix, VAX, or even CP/M has any bearing on what my
perception of you is, and whether or not I believe something someone
says.

I believe you that you never had a WGA/WAT false positive. I also believe
that the other person that did....did.

Look at the 100's or 1000's or others that read this group that *DO* use
Windows 7, and they *STILL* think you're nothing more than a big whiny
a**hole that is nothing more than a worthless troll that can do nothing
more than spew filth and stupidity so your moron logic fails there as
well.

> No huh.

See above.

> Figures!
> Now go fuck yourself asshole!

You just keep digging yourself into a deeper hole.... now start back-
peddaling to get out.