ZeroSpyware Enterprise Evaluation

Discussion in 'Computer Security' started by zerospyware_enterprise@yahoo.com, Mar 22, 2006.

  1. Guest

    Hi,

    I work for FBM Software, and we have just released the enterprise
    version of ZeroSpyware. If you would like a free 30 day evaluation, go
    to:

    http://www.fbmsoftware.com/registration~sid~9192591.html

    Sorry for the spam, but thought some people might be interested.


    Thanks,
    FBM
     
    , Mar 22, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. optikl Guest

    wrote:

    >
    > Sorry for the spam, but thought some people might be interested.
    >
    >


    You can't just say "sorry for the Spam" and expect to be forgiven. It
    doesn't work that way. Although, this is probably borderline Spam, go
    pay for your advertising.
     
    optikl, Mar 22, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Moe Trin Guest

    On Wed, 22 Mar 2006, in the Usenet newsgroup alt.computer.security, in article
    <>, optikl wrote:

    >> Sorry for the spam, but thought some people might be interested.


    >You can't just say "sorry for the Spam" and expect to be forgiven. It
    >doesn't work that way. Although, this is probably borderline Spam, go
    >pay for your advertising.


    If you are going to respond to spammers, always look at the headers. In
    this case, the spammer also hit (at least) comp.security.firewalls and
    comp.security.misc using google.groups from a b0rked DSL box in
    Mandaluyong City in the Philippines. Given that the spamvertised domain
    is registered in Las Vegas, Nevada, is hosted on a provider who has
    demonstrated a preference for spammers and the URL seems to have a referral
    ID, this is a good reason to avoid the products of that company.

    I always find it funny that the spammers flogging something that claims
    to be a security product do so by abusing unprotected systems elsewhere.
    And then, they never see anything ironic in doing so, and may be so st00pid
    as to defend the method as being a normal business practice. I suppose
    that for them, it is.

    Old guy
     
    Moe Trin, Mar 22, 2006
    #3
  4. Guest

    I apologize for breaking the rules regarding posting. I am fairly new
    to newsgroups, and unfamiliar with established practices. I posted this
    announcement only in newsgroups that I thought would touch on security
    issues, because I thought it could be of interest to people who would
    frequent these groups.

    Over half of the company is based in Manila - hence the Philippine IP
    addrress. It is where I am working from. The company is registered in
    Las Vegas, and has a small presence in San Francisco. I don't know who
    our provider is, and how that is indicative of the quality of our
    products.

    We are a growing company and have allocated much of our resources on
    product development and customer support. I do not have the budget to
    buy ads or fly around the world to shake hands. This was simply an
    attempt to inform of a new product release to the people who might
    actually have an interest in it. I do appreciate the irony of my
    actions, but it was one of the few areas I could think to go with my
    constrained budget.

    Again, I am sorry for not posting this message in an appropriate
    manner.
     
    , Mar 23, 2006
    #4
  5. optikl Guest

    wrote:

    > We are a growing company and have allocated much of our resources on
    > product development and customer support. I do not have the budget to
    > buy ads or fly around the world to shake hands. This was simply an
    > attempt to inform of a new product release to the people who might
    > actually have an interest in it. I do appreciate the irony of my
    > actions, but it was one of the few areas I could think to go with my
    > constrained budget.
    >


    You think yours is the only business that has budget constraints?
     
    optikl, Mar 23, 2006
    #5
  6. Guest

    Nope. But I do think it is acceptable to post a relevant post about a
    new product in a handful of groups that focus on issues relevant to
    that product.

    To be honest, the "sorry about the spam" comment was more of a courtesy
    than an indication of guilt.
     
    , Mar 23, 2006
    #6
  7. zerospyware_enterprise wrote:

    > I apologize for breaking the rules regarding posting. I am fairly new to
    > newsgroups, and unfamiliar with established practices. I posted this
    > announcement only in newsgroups that I thought would touch on security
    > issues, because I thought it could be of interest to people who would
    > frequent these groups.


    First of all I don't know where you posted to or how many copies you sent.
    I just saw one post in this group. A couple lines and a link. If you
    plastered it across the whole of Usenet I couldn't say and don't care
    enough to look, but giving you the benefit of the doubt I'll assume you
    only posted to privacy/virus/etc type groups.

    Unless one of those groups has a charter specifically calling out no
    commercial posts (alt.computer.security does not) it's generally deemed
    acceptable for people to post *VERY* infrequent announcements of new or
    improved products.

    Assuming the above, in my opinion based on decades of Usenet participation
    you haven't done one thing wrong and the people who are whining are just
    doing so to hear see themselves whine. Do yourself two favors... don't
    call your single posts SPAM because they're not, and tell people who snipe
    at you for posting *VERY* infrequent announcements to bugger off.

    Infrequency of course, being the key here... ;)
     
    Borked Pseudo Mailed, Mar 23, 2006
    #7
  8. optikl Guest

    wrote:
    > Nope. But I do think it is acceptable to post a relevant post about a
    > new product in a handful of groups that focus on issues relevant to
    > that product.
    >
    > To be honest, the "sorry about the spam" comment was more of a courtesy
    > than an indication of guilt.
    >

    You are probably very wrong.
     
    optikl, Mar 23, 2006
    #8
  9. Sean Heeger Guest

    wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > I work for FBM Software, and we have just released the enterprise
    > version of ZeroSpyware. If you would like a free 30 day evaluation, go
    > to:
    >
    > http://www.fbmsoftware.com/registration~sid~9192591.html
    >
    > Sorry for the spam, but thought some people might be interested.
    >
    >
    > Thanks,
    > FBM
    >


    What works is saying something like "Does anyone have an opinion of this
    software? Has anyone else ever heard of it or tired it? I did and I
    think it's great."

    It sucks having to get permission to say "hi" to someone online these
    days as well.
     
    Sean Heeger, Mar 23, 2006
    #9
  10. Moe Trin Guest

    On 22 Mar 2006, in the Usenet newsgroup alt.computer.security, in article
    <>,
    wrote:

    >I apologize for breaking the rules regarding posting. I am fairly new
    >to newsgroups, and unfamiliar with established practices.


    You certainly managed to do some rather stupid things to convince people
    to avoid your company. Here's the first free clue:

    http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0000.txt
    http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc0000.html
    http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc0000.txt
    http://www.ccd.bnl.gov/network/general/rfc0000.html
    http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/htbin/rfc/rfc0000.html

    Don't use those URLs yet - they are templates. From the first one, grab
    the index file (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc-index.txt) but be aware it's
    large. Then grab RFC1855 by replacing the four zeros in the URLs above
    with 1855 (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt).

    1855 Netiquette Guidelines. S. Hambridge. October 1995. (Format:
    TXT=46185 bytes) (Also FYI0028) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

    Next, learn to NOT post using google groups, as the poor user interface
    makes you look like a 12 year old fool.

    Next, don't use "throw-away" mail accounts. You claim to be posting for
    some slipshod company - POST USING THEIR DOMAIN.

    People claim that RFC1855 is out-dated. None the less, had you followed the
    recommendations in it, you'd discover these things called newsgroup charters
    and that your advertisement isn't acceptable.

    3098 How to Advertise Responsibly Using E-Mail and Newsgroups or - how
    NOT to $$$$$ MAKE ENEMIES FAST! $$$$$. T. Gavin, D. Eastlake 3rd, S.
    Hambridge. April 2001. (Format: TXT=64687 bytes) (Also FYI0038)
    (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

    Yes, you correctly identified your posting as spam. So here's another RFC

    2635 DON'T SPEW A Set of Guidelines for Mass Unsolicited Mailings and
    Postings (spam*). S. Hambridge, A. Lunde. June 1999. (Format:
    TXT=44669 bytes) (Also FYI0035) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

    >I posted this announcement only in newsgroups that I thought would touch
    >on security issues, because I thought it could be of interest to people
    >who would frequent these groups.


    That comes from your inexperience. Advertisements are not welcomed in
    technical discussion groups, and are usually specifically banned by the
    group charter. They often have a negative effect - making it know that
    yours is a company and/or product to avoid. Here's another clue:

    [compton ~]$ grep -c announce ../big.8.list.03.15.06
    76
    [compton ~]$ grep announce ../big.8.list.03.15.06 | grep -c Moderated
    68
    [compton ~]$ grep announce ../big.8.list.03.15.06 | grep -c '^comp'
    47
    [compton ~]$

    On the 15th of every month, there is an article posted to the newsgroups
    news.announce.newgroups, news.groups, and news.lists.misc titled "List of
    Big Eight Newsgroups". Among other things, it lists the title and a brief
    description of those groups. There are 76 groups for announcements, 68 of
    which are moderated (free posting, but controlled) and 47 of those are in
    the 'comp.' hierarchy. I happen to subscribe to five of them and look there
    for product announcements.

    >Over half of the company is based in Manila - hence the Philippine IP
    >addrress. It is where I am working from.


    Your first post was from 203.177.124.109 - a "Corporate DSL" address with
    Globe Telecom... that doesn't resolve. This post is from 58.69.220.6 -
    another "Corporate DSL" in this case from the Philippine Long Distance
    Telco (pldt.com.ph), and this one resolves to... 58.69.220.6.pldt.net
    which really looks professional, doncha think?

    >The company is registered in Las Vegas, and has a small presence in San
    >Francisco. I don't know who our provider is, and how that is indicative
    >of the quality of our products.


    Rightly or wrongly, you are judged by the company you keep - which means
    the companies you do business with, and how they appear. Finding out who
    your provider is takes ten seconds for a DNS lookup and a whois query of
    the result. Likewise, the domain lookup. As for the rest, spend a few
    minutes searching the news.admin.net-abuse.* newsgroups.

    >We are a growing company and have allocated much of our resources on
    >product development and customer support.


    Spend a little of that money on appearances. See that you post from
    an IP address that _doesn't_ look like zombied cable boxes. Post using
    a real address - to groups where the posts are welcomed. Both IP addresses
    you posted from (which in itself looks bad) seem to be business grade
    services if APNIC is to be believed, but neither bothers to give that
    impression with hostnames. Indeed, the Globe Telecom looks even worse,
    because the idiots don't know how to set up DNS.

    >I do not have the budget to buy ads or fly around the world to shake
    >hands. This was simply an attempt to inform of a new product release to
    >the people who might actually have an interest in it. I do appreciate
    >the irony of my actions, but it was one of the few areas I could think
    >to go with my constrained budget.


    Your post probably got you more negative attention - spamming does that,
    as does posting advertisements to groups whose charters prohibit them.
    Certainly there is little reason to consider your company has clue,
    whether or not the product is worth anything or does anything useful.

    Old guy
     
    Moe Trin, Mar 23, 2006
    #10
  11. Sean Heeger Guest

    Very well spoken. People just need to relax and take it easy on their
    high chair trays. They can only take so much fist pounding.

    Spam - Whatever you want it to be!

    mypgp.com

    Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
    > zerospyware_enterprise wrote:
    >
    >> I apologize for breaking the rules regarding posting. I am fairly new to
    >> newsgroups, and unfamiliar with established practices. I posted this
    >> announcement only in newsgroups that I thought would touch on security
    >> issues, because I thought it could be of interest to people who would
    >> frequent these groups.

    >
    > First of all I don't know where you posted to or how many copies you sent.
    > I just saw one post in this group. A couple lines and a link. If you
    > plastered it across the whole of Usenet I couldn't say and don't care
    > enough to look, but giving you the benefit of the doubt I'll assume you
    > only posted to privacy/virus/etc type groups.
    >
    > Unless one of those groups has a charter specifically calling out no
    > commercial posts (alt.computer.security does not) it's generally deemed
    > acceptable for people to post *VERY* infrequent announcements of new or
    > improved products.
    >
    > Assuming the above, in my opinion based on decades of Usenet participation
    > you haven't done one thing wrong and the people who are whining are just
    > doing so to hear see themselves whine. Do yourself two favors... don't
    > call your single posts SPAM because they're not, and tell people who snipe
    > at you for posting *VERY* infrequent announcements to bugger off.
    >
    > Infrequency of course, being the key here... ;)
     
    Sean Heeger, Mar 24, 2006
    #11
  12. Sean Heeger Guest

    Moe Trin wrote:
    > On 22 Mar 2006, in the Usenet newsgroup alt.computer.security, in article
    > <>,
    > wrote:
    >
    >> I apologize for breaking the rules regarding posting. I am fairly new
    >> to newsgroups, and unfamiliar with established practices.

    >
    > You certainly managed to do some rather stupid things to convince people
    > to avoid your company. Here's the first free clue:
    >
    > http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0000.txt
    > http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc0000.html
    > http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc0000.txt
    > http://www.ccd.bnl.gov/network/general/rfc0000.html
    > http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/htbin/rfc/rfc0000.html
    >
    > Don't use those URLs yet - they are templates. From the first one, grab
    > the index file (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc-index.txt) but be aware it's
    > large. Then grab RFC1855 by replacing the four zeros in the URLs above
    > with 1855 (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt).
    >
    > 1855 Netiquette Guidelines. S. Hambridge. October 1995. (Format:
    > TXT=46185 bytes) (Also FYI0028) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)
    >
    > Next, learn to NOT post using google groups, as the poor user interface
    > makes you look like a 12 year old fool.
    >
    > Next, don't use "throw-away" mail accounts. You claim to be posting for
    > some slipshod company - POST USING THEIR DOMAIN.
    >
    > People claim that RFC1855 is out-dated. None the less, had you followed the
    > recommendations in it, you'd discover these things called newsgroup charters
    > and that your advertisement isn't acceptable.
    >
    > 3098 How to Advertise Responsibly Using E-Mail and Newsgroups or - how
    > NOT to $$$$$ MAKE ENEMIES FAST! $$$$$. T. Gavin, D. Eastlake 3rd, S.
    > Hambridge. April 2001. (Format: TXT=64687 bytes) (Also FYI0038)
    > (Status: INFORMATIONAL)
    >
    > Yes, you correctly identified your posting as spam. So here's another RFC
    >
    > 2635 DON'T SPEW A Set of Guidelines for Mass Unsolicited Mailings and
    > Postings (spam*). S. Hambridge, A. Lunde. June 1999. (Format:
    > TXT=44669 bytes) (Also FYI0035) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)
    >
    >> I posted this announcement only in newsgroups that I thought would touch
    >> on security issues, because I thought it could be of interest to people
    >> who would frequent these groups.

    >
    > That comes from your inexperience. Advertisements are not welcomed in
    > technical discussion groups, and are usually specifically banned by the
    > group charter. They often have a negative effect - making it know that
    > yours is a company and/or product to avoid. Here's another clue:
    >
    > [compton ~]$ grep -c announce ../big.8.list.03.15.06
    > 76
    > [compton ~]$ grep announce ../big.8.list.03.15.06 | grep -c Moderated
    > 68
    > [compton ~]$ grep announce ../big.8.list.03.15.06 | grep -c '^comp'
    > 47
    > [compton ~]$
    >
    > On the 15th of every month, there is an article posted to the newsgroups
    > news.announce.newgroups, news.groups, and news.lists.misc titled "List of
    > Big Eight Newsgroups". Among other things, it lists the title and a brief
    > description of those groups. There are 76 groups for announcements, 68 of
    > which are moderated (free posting, but controlled) and 47 of those are in
    > the 'comp.' hierarchy. I happen to subscribe to five of them and look there
    > for product announcements.
    >
    >> Over half of the company is based in Manila - hence the Philippine IP
    >> addrress. It is where I am working from.

    >
    > Your first post was from 203.177.124.109 - a "Corporate DSL" address with
    > Globe Telecom... that doesn't resolve. This post is from 58.69.220.6 -
    > another "Corporate DSL" in this case from the Philippine Long Distance
    > Telco (pldt.com.ph), and this one resolves to... 58.69.220.6.pldt.net
    > which really looks professional, doncha think?
    >
    >> The company is registered in Las Vegas, and has a small presence in San
    >> Francisco. I don't know who our provider is, and how that is indicative
    >> of the quality of our products.

    >
    > Rightly or wrongly, you are judged by the company you keep - which means
    > the companies you do business with, and how they appear. Finding out who
    > your provider is takes ten seconds for a DNS lookup and a whois query of
    > the result. Likewise, the domain lookup. As for the rest, spend a few
    > minutes searching the news.admin.net-abuse.* newsgroups.
    >
    >> We are a growing company and have allocated much of our resources on
    >> product development and customer support.

    >
    > Spend a little of that money on appearances. See that you post from
    > an IP address that _doesn't_ look like zombied cable boxes. Post using
    > a real address - to groups where the posts are welcomed. Both IP addresses
    > you posted from (which in itself looks bad) seem to be business grade
    > services if APNIC is to be believed, but neither bothers to give that
    > impression with hostnames. Indeed, the Globe Telecom looks even worse,
    > because the idiots don't know how to set up DNS.
    >
    >> I do not have the budget to buy ads or fly around the world to shake
    >> hands. This was simply an attempt to inform of a new product release to
    >> the people who might actually have an interest in it. I do appreciate
    >> the irony of my actions, but it was one of the few areas I could think
    >> to go with my constrained budget.

    >
    > Your post probably got you more negative attention - spamming does that,
    > as does posting advertisements to groups whose charters prohibit them.
    > Certainly there is little reason to consider your company has clue,
    > whether or not the product is worth anything or does anything useful.
    >
    > Old guy


    Man, just lighten up people. Can't you see that an apology was given? I
    swear this thread sucks for the fact that some little person just has to
    have the final downswing in taking a sledgehammer to an ant. Move on!

    By the way, I did download an evaluation of the ZeroSpyware v3.4 today
    and have been hitting it pretty hard on my testing platform. It gets 5
    stars. If you guys were on the Mind of Mancia show, Carlos would give
    you a big Dee-Dee-Dee.

    sean
     
    Sean Heeger, Mar 25, 2006
    #12
  13. Sean Heeger wrote:

    <snip>

    > Man, just lighten up people. Can't you see that an apology was given? I


    Second that!

    It's like there's some people who have been slamming their nuts in a
    drawer every time they saw a piece of SPAM and when they finally get to
    talk to someone who just LOOKS like a SPAMMER they go ape shit trying to
    pay him back for all of it.

    Take your meds and have a nap already. <SHEESH!>

    > By the way, I did download an evaluation of the ZeroSpyware v3.4 today
    > and have been hitting it pretty hard on my testing platform. It gets 5
    > stars. If you guys were on the Mind of Mancia show, Carlos would give
    > you a big Dee-Dee-Dee.


    Thank you for some USEFUL input to the thread Sean. >:O)
     
    Borked Pseudo Mailed, Mar 25, 2006
    #13
  14. optikl Guest

    Sean Heeger wrote:

    > Man, just lighten up people. Can't you see that an apology was given? I
    > swear this thread sucks for the fact that some little person just has to
    > have the final downswing in taking a sledgehammer to an ant. Move on!
    >
    > By the way, I did download an evaluation of the ZeroSpyware v3.4 today
    > and have been hitting it pretty hard on my testing platform. It gets 5
    > stars. If you guys were on the Mind of Mancia show, Carlos would give
    > you a big Dee-Dee-Dee.
    >
    > sean


    Sean, the issue isn't whether or not the program is 5 stars, the issue
    is that there are more credible ways to promote your product. If every
    software vendor in the world stopped by to pimp their wares, this and
    other related newsgroups would look like a Baghdad flea-market on a
    Sunday afternoon. Besides, what's wrong with paying for advertising?
    It's a cost of doing business.
     
    optikl, Mar 25, 2006
    #14
  15. optikl Guest

    Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
    > Sean Heeger wrote:
    >
    > <snip>
    >
    >> Man, just lighten up people. Can't you see that an apology was given? I

    >
    > Second that!
    >
    > It's like there's some people who have been slamming their nuts in a
    > drawer every time they saw a piece of SPAM and when they finally get to
    > talk to someone who just LOOKS like a SPAMMER they go ape shit trying to
    > pay him back for all of it.
    >
    > Take your meds and have a nap already. <SHEESH!>
    >
    >> By the way, I did download an evaluation of the ZeroSpyware v3.4 today
    >> and have been hitting it pretty hard on my testing platform. It gets 5
    >> stars. If you guys were on the Mind of Mancia show, Carlos would give
    >> you a big Dee-Dee-Dee.

    >
    > Thank you for some USEFUL input to the thread Sean. >:O)


    It would probably help if you really had a grasp of the issue.
     
    optikl, Mar 25, 2006
    #15
  16. Sean Heeger Guest

    optikl wrote:
    > Sean Heeger wrote:
    >
    >> Man, just lighten up people. Can't you see that an apology was given?
    >> I swear this thread sucks for the fact that some little person just
    >> has to have the final downswing in taking a sledgehammer to an ant.
    >> Move on!
    >>
    >> By the way, I did download an evaluation of the ZeroSpyware v3.4 today
    >> and have been hitting it pretty hard on my testing platform. It gets 5
    >> stars. If you guys were on the Mind of Mancia show, Carlos would give
    >> you a big Dee-Dee-Dee.
    >>
    >> sean

    >
    > Sean, the issue isn't whether or not the program is 5 stars, the issue
    > is that there are more credible ways to promote your product. If every
    > software vendor in the world stopped by to pimp their wares, this and
    > other related newsgroups would look like a Baghdad flea-market on a
    > Sunday afternoon. Besides, what's wrong with paying for advertising?
    > It's a cost of doing business.


    No, the issue was there was an apology and someone couldn't leave it at
    that. They just had to go on and on it great details on how wrong it was
    to post a company here in this thread. There's also nothing wrong with
    paying for advertising. The only thing that will make this place look
    like a "Baghdad flea-market" is continuing on this subject and just move
    on like i already said to do. But unfortunately, too many shame-based
    emotional people won't let that happen from what I can see.

    Now get back to the original subject, keep this group meritorious and
    quit crying.
     
    Sean Heeger, Mar 25, 2006
    #16
  17. optikl Guest

    Sean Heeger wrote:
    > optikl wrote:
    >> Sean Heeger wrote:
    >>
    >>> Man, just lighten up people. Can't you see that an apology was given?
    >>> I swear this thread sucks for the fact that some little person just
    >>> has to have the final downswing in taking a sledgehammer to an ant.
    >>> Move on!
    >>>
    >>> By the way, I did download an evaluation of the ZeroSpyware v3.4
    >>> today and have been hitting it pretty hard on my testing platform. It
    >>> gets 5 stars. If you guys were on the Mind of Mancia show, Carlos
    >>> would give you a big Dee-Dee-Dee.
    >>>
    >>> sean

    >>
    >> Sean, the issue isn't whether or not the program is 5 stars, the issue
    >> is that there are more credible ways to promote your product. If every
    >> software vendor in the world stopped by to pimp their wares, this and
    >> other related newsgroups would look like a Baghdad flea-market on a
    >> Sunday afternoon. Besides, what's wrong with paying for advertising?
    >> It's a cost of doing business.

    >
    > No, the issue was there was an apology and someone couldn't leave it at
    > that. They just had to go on and on it great details on how wrong it was
    > to post a company here in this thread. There's also nothing wrong with
    > paying for advertising. The only thing that will make this place look
    > like a "Baghdad flea-market" is continuing on this subject and just move
    > on like i already said to do. But unfortunately, too many shame-based
    > emotional people won't let that happen from what I can see.
    >
    > Now get back to the original subject, keep this group meritorious and
    > quit crying.
    >
    >


    I'm not crying. And certainly not the one acting like a baby.
     
    optikl, Mar 25, 2006
    #17
  18. Sean Heeger Guest

    optikl wrote:
    > Sean Heeger wrote:
    >> optikl wrote:
    >>> Sean Heeger wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Man, just lighten up people. Can't you see that an apology was
    >>>> given? I swear this thread sucks for the fact that some little
    >>>> person just has to have the final downswing in taking a sledgehammer
    >>>> to an ant. Move on!
    >>>>
    >>>> By the way, I did download an evaluation of the ZeroSpyware v3.4
    >>>> today and have been hitting it pretty hard on my testing platform.
    >>>> It gets 5 stars. If you guys were on the Mind of Mancia show, Carlos
    >>>> would give you a big Dee-Dee-Dee.
    >>>>
    >>>> sean
    >>>
    >>> Sean, the issue isn't whether or not the program is 5 stars, the
    >>> issue is that there are more credible ways to promote your product.
    >>> If every software vendor in the world stopped by to pimp their wares,
    >>> this and other related newsgroups would look like a Baghdad
    >>> flea-market on a Sunday afternoon. Besides, what's wrong with paying
    >>> for advertising? It's a cost of doing business.

    >>
    >> No, the issue was there was an apology and someone couldn't leave it
    >> at that. They just had to go on and on it great details on how wrong
    >> it was to post a company here in this thread. There's also nothing
    >> wrong with paying for advertising. The only thing that will make this
    >> place look like a "Baghdad flea-market" is continuing on this subject
    >> and just move on like i already said to do. But unfortunately, too
    >> many shame-based emotional people won't let that happen from what I
    >> can see.
    >>
    >> Now get back to the original subject, keep this group meritorious and
    >> quit crying.
    >>
    >>

    >
    > I'm not crying. And certainly not the one acting like a baby.


    I just proved my point , you just had to keep talking off topic. Anyone
    else want to destroy this thread? Go for it because the group is
    seriously tainted by a baby that just won't let it go.

    As a notice to parents out there. Try not to pick up your little one
    every time it cries. It will turn into a newsgroup crier.
     
    Sean Heeger, Mar 25, 2006
    #18
  19. optikl wrote:

    > Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
    >> Sean Heeger wrote:
    >>
    >> <snip>
    >>
    >>> Man, just lighten up people. Can't you see that an apology was given? I

    >>
    >> Second that!
    >>
    >> It's like there's some people who have been slamming their nuts in a
    >> drawer every time they saw a piece of SPAM and when they finally get to
    >> talk to someone who just LOOKS like a SPAMMER they go ape shit trying to
    >> pay him back for all of it.
    >>
    >> Take your meds and have a nap already. <SHEESH!>
    >>
    >>> By the way, I did download an evaluation of the ZeroSpyware v3.4 today
    >>> and have been hitting it pretty hard on my testing platform. It gets 5
    >>> stars. If you guys were on the Mind of Mancia show, Carlos would give
    >>> you a big Dee-Dee-Dee.

    >>
    >> Thank you for some USEFUL input to the thread Sean. >:O)

    >
    > It would probably help if you really had a grasp of the issue.


    I have a perfect grip on the situation skippy. Some poor misguided fool
    makes a post that remsembles some problem that frustrates the hell out of
    someone, and to stroke their fragile ego they decide it's justifiable to
    jack off all over the place about totally irrelevant bullshit.

    The announce was amateurish, might have been more effective elsewhere,
    and should have been defended better by telling a couple people to sod of,
    but that's doesn't make anyone engaging in their masturbatory shit
    flinging any less of a jackass.

    Now is THAT clear enough for ya', or do I need a bigger clue by four?
     
    George Orwell, Mar 25, 2006
    #19
  20. optikl wrote:

    > Sean Heeger wrote:
    >> optikl wrote:
    >>> Sean Heeger wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Man, just lighten up people. Can't you see that an apology was given?
    >>>> I swear this thread sucks for the fact that some little person just
    >>>> has to have the final downswing in taking a sledgehammer to an ant.
    >>>> Move on!
    >>>>
    >>>> By the way, I did download an evaluation of the ZeroSpyware v3.4 today
    >>>> and have been hitting it pretty hard on my testing platform. It gets 5
    >>>> stars. If you guys were on the Mind of Mancia show, Carlos would give
    >>>> you a big Dee-Dee-Dee.
    >>>>
    >>>> sean
    >>>
    >>> Sean, the issue isn't whether or not the program is 5 stars, the issue
    >>> is that there are more credible ways to promote your product. If every
    >>> software vendor in the world stopped by to pimp their wares, this and
    >>> other related newsgroups would look like a Baghdad flea-market on a
    >>> Sunday afternoon. Besides, what's wrong with paying for advertising?
    >>> It's a cost of doing business.

    >>
    >> No, the issue was there was an apology and someone couldn't leave it at
    >> that. They just had to go on and on it great details on how wrong it was
    >> to post a company here in this thread. There's also nothing wrong with
    >> paying for advertising. The only thing that will make this place look
    >> like a "Baghdad flea-market" is continuing on this subject and just move
    >> on like i already said to do. But unfortunately, too many shame-based
    >> emotional people won't let that happen from what I can see.
    >>
    >> Now get back to the original subject, keep this group meritorious and
    >> quit crying.
    >>
    >>
    >>

    > I'm not crying. And certainly not the one acting like a baby.


    The **** you say. You wet yourself over nothing, the guy apologizes
    anyway, but you're still whining about it like a spanked 2 year old.

    Grow the **** up already.
     
    Borked Pseudo Mailed, Mar 26, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Silverstrand

    Nikao Dragonfire Case Evaluation

    Silverstrand, Nov 30, 2005, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    732
    Silverstrand
    Nov 30, 2005
  2. Martin Schmid

    XP Evaluation CD?

    Martin Schmid, Jun 30, 2003, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    3,111
    Martin Schmid
    Jul 12, 2003
  3. Tanny

    Evaluation version win 2000 server

    Tanny, Apr 25, 2004, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    517
    peter walker
    Apr 26, 2004
  4. ZeroSpyware Enterprise Evaluation

    , Mar 22, 2006, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    324
  5. RAK
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,130
Loading...

Share This Page