 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / June 2007A way to reduce the advertising fee......
The adversting fee is very large to many company.How to reduce it?I find out a way it can reduce it and it never the time limited,it is using slim light box to display.....It is restless to display,and advertising for you 24 hours.You should only pay for the little electrical fee. Dear friend,how do you think of my idea? Our company dedicate in manufactory the LED slim light box,CCFL slim light box,EEFL slim light box,T4/T5 slim light box. More detail,please enter into www.edlite.hk or send e-mail to jenny@edlite.hk for the detail. > The adversting fee is very large to many company.How to reduce it?I > find out a way it can reduce it and it never the time limited,it is [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > More detail,please enter intowww.edlite.hkor send e-mail to > j...@edlite.hk for the detail. Do you promise to produce MY ads with the same exemplary English that's used in YOURS? If so, then ... where do I sign (pun intended)?? Test > Test So ... our little pre-pubescent troll, Revival? You've taken to posting under MY name now? You are a deeply troubled soul. Are you, by chance, one of Otis's offspring? On Jun 5, 12:26 pm, Neil Brooks <absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Test Just sent this to your ISP: Play with the bull ... you'll get the horns. === This person is posting fraudulent messages using my name. Please advise: Full headers: Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!postnews.google.com! g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Neil Brooks <absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail.com> Newsgroups: sci.med.vision Subject: Re: A way to reduce the advertising fee...... Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 12:26:33 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 2 Message-ID: <1181071593.091825.155530@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> References: <1181049471.048688.327220@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com> <1181051852.329805.294770@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 90.195.30.35 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Trace: posting.google.com 1181071593 8837 127.0.0.1 (5 Jun 2007 19:26:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 19:26:33 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <1181051852.329805.294770@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv: 1.8.1.4) Gecko/20070515 Firefox/2.0.0.4,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com; posting- host=90.195.30.35; posting-account=rDA6_A0AAADaQ3hd5iKUTOCW6k9Agqck Sorry, about that, Neil. Nothing personal, just doing a few tests with 'Google Groups'. Sorry about that, Neil. Just using this thread for some testing. > Sorry about that, Neil. > > Just using this thread for some testing. 1) You're not sorry. 2) You're not funny. 3) I'll have your account pulled ... and anything else I can do, within the law, to ensure that your little antics are stopped. You f***** with the wrong guy ... once too often. I'm sorry, dude. It was nothing personal, I was just trying a few things out. > I'm sorry, dude. No you aren't. > It was nothing personal, Can you imagine that I care what your intent was? > I was just trying a few things out. Me, too ... and ... if all goes well ... you'll be trying out new Internet Service Providers soon. Actions have consequences. Once YOU have figured that out, you can help Uncle Otie understand. In sincere apology, Neil. It was not my intention to offend you. > In sincere apology, Neil. > > It was not my intention to offend you. I can't think of any legitimate reason that you would be attempting to post using anyone else's identity. Sounds like your google posting days are numbered. Perhaps you are intending some kind of identity-theft which is certainly frowned upon these days. sucks to be you about now. > > In sincere apology, Neil. > > > > It was not my intention to offend you. > > I can't think of any legitimate reason that you would be attempting to > post using anyone else's identity. He's a kid. Kids try stuff. > Sounds like your google posting days are numbered. Perhaps you are > intending some kind of identity-theft which is certainly frowned upon > these days. sucks to be you about now. Putting a different return Email address in a newsgroup posting is trivial and causes no system harm. Using some one else's name and Email address in your posting is very bad manners, though. Note that Revival used his own Email address, not Neil's. I don't see how this relates to the classical identity theft (trying to steal money). Note the postings from "Odis". Is that fraudulent? > In article <1181102195.604591.55...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > He's a kid. Kids try stuff. .... which sometimes backfires, leading to negative consequences. > > Sounds like your google posting days are numbered. Perhaps you are > > intending some kind of identity-theft which is certainly frowned upon [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Note the postings from "Odis". Is that fraudulent? Nope. Just like selling "Kleeneks" isn't usually considered to be trademark infringement. Note that you, and everybody else, could readily and easily differentiate. Posting/e-mailing under a fraudulent identity (somebody else's) is in violation of most ISP's Terms of Service. >Note the postings from "Odis". Is that fraudulent? Aw, shucks. I guess I'm a tad bit of a hypocrite =). Well, that's me in a nutshell. As I have stated - >Actions have consequences. I sure bet that "revival" kid is 'shaking in his boots' right about now! *grin grin snigger snigger* I am so amazing at sarcasm! As you know, most of my posts have that 'slight tinge' of incredibly witty sarcasm. Ergo, you are all inferior to me. In addition, I am "master of the pun". (As you can see from my first post in this thread) And yes, I know I do need to get over myself, 'seriously'. Neil Crooks On Jun 6, 10:12 am, Neil Crooks <absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail.com> wrote: I annoy you and "attack" Otis Brown. Whoopdy-$hit. Otis has induced--to MY KNOWLEDGE--more than a dozen cases of diplopia, and has prevented myopia in ZERO cases. Who's doing /substantive/ harm here? Find somebody to defend who actually merits defense. Your criteria for hero selection is awfully suspect. It seems Neil has taken to replying to his own posts. Off our meds again, Uncle Brookie? *Here, have a cookie boy.* Hm. It is unfortunate that Neil enjoys replying to his own posts with such sparity. It seems someone is unable to recall the subject title - "A way to reduce the advertising fee" Why so off topic, Neil? Did I make you wince? As I say, it's not my fault that I have to keep feeding the trolls! I mean, it's the only way I can make friends. =( It's a shame I haven't got a life outside Usenet and the internet. For those of you who haven't heard my rants - >Otis has induced--to MY KNOWLEDGE--more than a dozen cases of >diplopia, and has prevented myopia in ZERO cases. Translation: Don't you see, Revival!!? Think of all those vulnerable parents and children!! Whatever would they do without me?! As I so often like to say: 'Otis hurts people'. [supermanspeech] It is my duty to protect the innocent. I am your saviour. Otis is dangerous - I will fight him to the end of existence!! *insert super man music*[/supermanspeech] Darn, I *know* that there are so many better ways of helping people. I mean, sure I could give some money to Africa - but, as you know, those peasants are far too inferior for the likes of me. Anyhow, why on earth would I want to help these people suffering from trachoma, when I can help *all* these vulnerable parents and kids unsuspecting coming to the *internet* (define: a place where one is to receive valid information) to the likes of Otis!! Those poor chaps - I think I'll just do their thinking for them. It's only a shame I'm not too great a thinker myself. Aww... darn it, I hope you didn't hear that! - Your heroic super duper Neil Crooks >Note the postings from "Odis". Is that fraudulent? Aw, shucks. I guess I'm a tad bit of a hypocrite =). Well, that's me in a nutshell. As I have stated - >Actions have consequences. I sure bet that "revival" kid is 'shaking in his boots' right about now! *grin grin snigger snigger* I am so amazing at sarcasm! As you know, most of my posts have that 'slight tinge' of incredibly witty sarcasm. Ergo, you are all inferior to me. In addition, I am "master of the pun". (As you can see from my first post in this thread) And yes, I know I do need to get over myself, 'seriously'. Anyhow, I'm off to go feed the trolls. Neil Crooks >Note that you, and everybody else, could readily and easily differentiate. Funnily enough, Neil, I might say the same. Suffice to say, you have thoroughly humiliated yourself, once again. Perhaps in future you should cover up such obvious hypocrisies. Don't want your camp followers to be let down, surely? Get over yourself, kid. >Note that you, and everybody else, could readily and easily differentiate. Funnily enough, Neil, I might say the same. Suffice to say, you have - once again - thoroughly humiliated yourself. Perhaps in future you should "cover up" such obvious hypocrisies. Don't want your camp followers to be let down, surely? Get over yourself, kid. >You f***** with the wrong guy ... once too often. Temper temper now, Neil.The fact that my little brother has been able to provoke you so eloquently gives one the impression that you are an outright fool, and have fallen right down his 'trap'. Dear oh dear. >Note that you, and everybody else, could readily and easily differentiate. Funnily enough, Neil, I might say the same. Suffice to say, you have thoroughly humiliated yourself, once again. Perhaps in future you should cover up such obvious hypocrisies. Don't want your camp followers to be let down, surely? Get over yourself, kid. >You f***** with the wrong guy ... once too often. Temper temper now, Neil.The fact that my little brother has been able to provoke you with such ease and so eloquently gives one the impression that you are an outright fool, and have fallen right down his 'trap'. Dear oh dear. >Note that you, and everybody else, could readily and easily differentiate. Funnily enough, Neil, I might say the same. Suffice to say, you have thoroughly humiliated yourself, once again. Perhaps in future you should cover up such obvious hypocrisies. Don't want your camp followers to be let down, surely? Get over yourself, kid. > Temper temper now, Neil. No temper here. As usual, I simply stated facts. It isn't even fun playing with you anymore, Neil. > It isn't even fun playing with you anymore, Neil. Then, I presume, you'll just have to go back to playing with yourself. > Then, I presume, you'll just have to go back to playing with yourself. Hm - wonder how long it took you to figure that one out. > > Then, I presume, you'll just have to go back to playing with yourself. > > Hm - wonder how long it took you to figure that one out. Sorry you felt compelled to delete your original message. I guess you must have felt rather stupid after my witty reply. Who can blame you? Don't worry. I memorialized it for you by quoting what you had written. Nobody should miss it now. You're out of your league, little boy/girl/thing. It's not even intellectual exercise for me to toy with you. >You f***** with the wrong guy ... once too often. Temper temper now, Neil.The fact that my little brother has been able to provoke you so eloquently gives one the impression that you are an outright fool, and have fallen right down his 'trap'. Dear oh dear. >Note that you, and everybody else, could readily and easily differentiate. Funnily enough, Neil, I might say the same. Suffice to say, you have thoroughly humiliated yourself, once again. Perhaps in future you should cover up such obvious hypocrisies. Don't want your camp followers to be let down, surely? Get over yourself, kid. >You're out of your league, little boy/girl/thing. Ah - the expected reply from "Her Majesty". Quit your prattling, grandma. > It's not even intellectual exercise for me to toy with you. Of course. Perhaps you will perform some exercise on one of those other toys of yours. Woah - let's hope DJ doesn't find out! >You're out of your league, little boy/girl/thing. > It's not even intellectual exercise for me to toy with you. Ah - the expected reply from "his majesty". Quit your prattling, Neil - or would that be - "your majesty". > It's not even intellectual exercise for me to toy with you. Of course. I'm sure there are far better toys for you to exercise with. Woah - let's hope DJ doesn't find out! >You f***** with the wrong guy ... once too often. Temper temper now, Neil.The fact that my little brother has been able to provoke you so eloquently gives one the impression that you are an outright fool, and have fallen right down his 'trap'. Dear oh dear. >Note that you, and everybody else, could readily and easily differentiate. Funnily enough, Neil, I might say the same. Suffice to say, you have thoroughly humiliated yourself, once again. Perhaps in future you should cover up such obvious hypocrisies. Don't want your camp followers to be let down, surely? Get over yourself, kid. >You're out of your league, little boy/girl/thing. Ah - the expected reply from "Her Majesty". Quit your prattling, Neil - erm - sir. > It's not even intellectual exercise for me to toy with you. Of course. It would be far more valuable to exercise with some of those other toys you keep around. Woah - let's hope DJ doesn't find out! > Woah Taking spelling lessons from Uncle Otie, too? Definition - "Woah" - Used to express the sudden realization of one's pathetic character and/or behavior. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=woah Not sure about misspelled words, but it certainly seems to suit you very well, Neil. > Get over yourself, kid. Neil may have the time and energy to toy with you. I'm retired, and have much more important things to do, like sit on the couch and stare out the window. Adios! >I'm retired, and have much more important things to do, >like sit on the couch and stare out the window. Staring is very detrimental to your vision, ya' know... > Woah Definition - "Woah" - "Used to express the sudden realization of one's pathetic character and/or behavior." http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=woah Not sure about misspelled words, but it certainly seems to suit you very well, Neil. >I'm retired, and have much more important things to do, >like sit on the couch and stare out the window. I hope you're not serious! Staring is very detrimental to your vision... > Woah Definition - "Woah" - "Used to express the sudden realization of one's pathetic character and/or behavior." http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=woah Not sure about misspelled words, but, in any case, it certainly seems to suit you very well, Neil. > Definition - "Woah" - "Used to express the sudden realization of one's > pathetic character and/or behavior." [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Not sure about misspelled words, but, in any case, it certainly seems > to suit you very well, Neil. Sorry. I speak English, not gutter slang. I understand why you operate under so many misguided notions, though. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/whoa >He's a kid. Kids try stuff. Is he/she a kid? Once he/she (herein referred to as "It") claimed to be a young girl living in Norway. It sometimes claims that It's younger sibling posts here using It's screenname. And It also posts under other names like William Horatio Bates and others. We really don't know who It is except that It posts a lot, defends Otis, tends to go schizo at times and start name-calling. It has no training or experience in vision health, but like to hang out here socially it seems. >I don't see how this relates to >the classical identity theft (trying to steal money). Obviously its not the same thing as cashing someones else's check, applying for credit under someone else's name, etc. And its not a big deal-- we're talking about posting in an internet NG. But it IS quite literally using the identity of another person without their consent. >Note the postings from "Odis". Is that fraudulent? No, Odis is not Otis. The name spelling is clearly and obviously different. Its just a tongue-in-cheek attempt to parody Otis but not to try to fool anyone into thinking it really is Otis. >> He's a kid. Kids try stuff. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > experience in vision health, but like to hang out here socially it > seems. I think it might live in Britain, as it has seemed to mention to drop hints and the next programs on tv it's going to watch.... Cya Simon > On Jun 5, 12:26 pm, Neil Brooks <absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > === Send this Neil.... and f.ck you. On Jun 13, 7:02 pm, the person who has decided to make his life sniffing my backside, and claiming to be Neil Brooks <nobody@mixmin.net> wrote: >Send this Neil.... and f.ck you. Ouch. That really hurt. > On Jun 13, 7:02 pm, the person who has decided to make his life > sniffing my backside, and claiming to be Neil Brooks [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > That really hurt. That wasn't posted by Zetsu. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.