Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computer Certification > MCSE > good cheaters!

Reply
Thread Tools

good cheaters!

 
 
PAJ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2007
On Thu, 6 Sep 2007 13:10:00 +0000, "Michael D. Alligood [CertGuard,
Inc.]" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>"PAJ" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed) :
>
>> On Wed, 5 Sep 2007 10:41:55 -0500, "Robert Williams [CertGuard]"
>> <Newsgroups@> wrote:


>> >
>> >BAD Publicity is still Publicity.

>>
>> The majority of posts are from certguard.

>
>Vague. What's your point?


?
What's not to understand?

Certguard are the ones giving the most 'BAD Publicity"
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
PAJ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2007
On Thu, 6 Sep 2007 08:32:17 -0500, "Robert Williams [CertGuard]"
<Newsgroups@> wrote:

>"PAJ" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
>>
>> The majority of posts are from certguard.
>>

>Ok, I'm bored, I'll bite.
>
>Prove it!


?
Simple math will suffice.
Prior to my last post in reply to Michael there were 10 posts in this
thread. 5 of them posted by Certguard. And 1 posted by a Certguard
'promoter'. So 6 posts from certguard. Which leaves 4 posts by
non-Certguard posters.

Even if we do not count the 1 post from the Certguard promoter as being
from Certguard, we are still left with a 50/50 split of posts from
Certguard and posts from individuals.

There's your proof!

Get it now?
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Michael D. Alligood [CertGuard, Inc.]
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2007
"PAJ" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> On Thu, 6 Sep 2007 08:32:17 -0500, "Robert Williams [CertGuard]"
> <Newsgroups@> wrote:
>
> >"PAJ" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
> >>
> >> The majority of posts are from certguard.
> >>

> >Ok, I'm bored, I'll bite.
> >
> >Prove it!

>
> ?
> Simple math will suffice.
> Prior to my last post in reply to Michael there were 10 posts in this
> thread. 5 of them posted by Certguard. And 1 posted by a Certguard
> 'promoter'. So 6 posts from certguard. Which leaves 4 posts by
> non-Certguard posters.
>
> Even if we do not count the 1 post from the Certguard promoter as being
> from Certguard, we are still left with a 50/50 split of posts from
> Certguard and posts from individuals.
>
> There's your proof!
>
> Get it now?


You cannot have it both ways. You listed 2 possible scenarios. One where
CertGuard, Inc. posted 6 and one where the posts were even. If you
choose the first scenario, you will notice that a majority, if not all,
were responses to posts concerning uCertify -- not initiated by
CertGuard, Inc.. In your second scenario (and btw, the correct one), we
are even in posts. Meaning that your original claim in "the majority of
posts are from certguard" is false. Either way, I am not sure anyone
cares. Thanks for playing anyway.

--
Michael D. Alligood,
MCITP, MCTS, MCSA, MCDST
The I.T. Classroom - http://www.theitclassroom.com/
CertGuard, Inc. - http://www.certguard.com


 
Reply With Quote
 
kpg*
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2007
> Either way, I am not sure anyone cares.

I know I don't.
 
Reply With Quote
 
PAJ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2007
On Thu, 6 Sep 2007 20:57:34 +0000, "Michael D. Alligood [CertGuard,
Inc.]" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>In your second scenario (and btw, the correct one), we
>are even in posts. Meaning that your original claim in "the majority of
>posts are from certguard" is false. Either way, I am not sure anyone
>cares. Thanks for playing anyway.


Errr, No. Sorry but you lose.
50/50 split - individual(s)/certguard
Certguard are the majority here no matter how you try and 'spin' it.

Before I posted to the thread there were 3 posts from Certguard and 4
from individuals, 2 of which were certguard 'promoters'.
So lets call this a 3:2:2 split with Certguard again posting the most.

I would not even have posted to this thread if it were not a Certguard
comment about 'publicity', when certguard are the masters of that
(self-publicity, bordering on span at that).
 
Reply With Quote
 
Michael D. Alligood [CertGuard, Inc.]
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2007
"kpg*" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Xns99A3A3C62D775ipostthereforeiam@207.46.248. 16:

> > Either way, I am not sure anyone cares.

>
> I know I don't.


And that brother is all that matters to me!

K33p1n' i7 r3@l 4 kpg,
--
Michael D. Alligood,
MCITP, MCTS, MCSA, MCDST
The I.T. Classroom - http://www.theitclassroom.com/
CertGuard, Inc. - http://www.certguard.com


 
Reply With Quote
 
PAJ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2007
On Thu, 06 Sep 2007 14:05:15 -0700, "kpg*" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>> Either way, I am not sure anyone cares.

>
>I know I don't.


Me neither.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Michael D. Alligood [CertGuard, Inc.]
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2007
"PAJ" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> I would not even have posted to this thread if it were not a Certguard
> comment about 'publicity', when certguard are the masters of that
> (self-publicity, bordering on span at that).


Whew. As long as we are "bordering on span" -- whatever that is.

BTW: Self-publicity is called MARKETING. However, I would like to think
of it as EDUCATING -- as I am sure a majority of people visiting this
group would agree with.
--
Michael D. Alligood,
MCITP, MCTS, MCSA, MCDST
The I.T. Classroom - http://www.theitclassroom.com/
CertGuard, Inc. - http://www.certguard.com


 
Reply With Quote
 
Michael D. Alligood [CertGuard, Inc.]
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2007
"PAJ" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> On Thu, 06 Sep 2007 14:05:15 -0700, "kpg*" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >> Either way, I am not sure anyone cares.

> >
> >I know I don't.

>
> Me neither.


Then please, HELP or MOVE ON.
--
Michael D. Alligood,
MCITP, MCTS, MCSA, MCDST
The I.T. Classroom - http://www.theitclassroom.com/
CertGuard, Inc. - http://www.certguard.com


 
Reply With Quote
 
PAJ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2007
On Thu, 6 Sep 2007 21:48:02 +0000, "Michael D. Alligood [CertGuard,
Inc.]" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>"PAJ" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed) :
>
>> I would not even have posted to this thread if it were not a Certguard
>> comment about 'publicity', when certguard are the masters of that
>> (self-publicity, bordering on span at that).

>
>Whew. As long as we are "bordering on span" -- whatever that is.
>


Yawn. A typo. Obvious to all but the very dumb.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
good algorithms come with practice and reading good code/books? vlsidesign C Programming 26 01-02-2007 09:50 AM
Good slide scanning service vs. good slide scanner for Do-It-Yourself? LAshooter Digital Photography 0 06-25-2005 07:14 AM
Signs are good, but WAN no good =?Utf-8?B?bmV0bnV0?= Wireless Networking 2 08-21-2004 12:41 PM
JLO situation+ why fastglass is good+DSLR is good Hugo Drax Digital Photography 0 01-17-2004 11:41 PM
Not even a newbee. Good at school course. please advise good start sikka noel C++ 8 08-05-2003 06:43 AM



Advertisments