I think aquariusone may have posted a old item ,but he has related it to the new situations that were not considered as of the original post .this would relate to a newer and up to date discussion involving the latest happenings and new opinions,such as the trial outcome . Thank you aquariusone
The Following User Says Thank You to FARJOHN For This Useful Post:
My point being it was also posted before! So this useful information for newbies and others was already here. I have been on sites where they always suggest reading/searching before posting 'new information', as chances are it has already been posted - such as in this case. I was in a hurry but I think this is one of the older threads in which the 'new' information you read was actually already here(posted Jan 13, 2009).
There has been some misunderstanding and that could get in the way of a healthy and constructive discussion. "Shoot first before asking question" is a comical illustration of what it used to be in the Wild, Wild, West. It could very well be the case here that Mr. Swigger was specifically referring to the Tarnovsky video and not to the true object of the post (since it was clearly indicated that news about Tarnovsky is "a little dated" and not passed on as "new information").
I will take it that Mr. Swigger means no offense at all and I am sure he now sees that the "thirst for information" in these dark days of TV remains unabated.
It is also quite clear that many of us paid no attention to Tarnovsky before the latest blackout and could not have had "such information" to search (before asking any question).
In a gesture of friendship and reconciliation and to clear the misunderstanding and confusion about intent, let us send Mr. Swigger a case of Labatt Blue and have a Dallas Cheerleader deliver it to him! Oh, let us send him some guacamole also!
There has been some misunderstanding and that could get in the way of a healthy and constructive discussion. "Shoot first before asking question" is a comical illustration of what it used to be in the Wild, Wild, West. It could very well be the case here that Mr. Swigger was specifically referring to the Tarnovsky video and not to the true object of the post (since it was clearly indicated that news about Tarnovsky is "a little dated" and not passed on as "new information").
I will take it that Mr. Swigger means no offense at all and I am sure he now sees that the "thirst for information" in these dark days of TV remains unabated.
It is also quite clear that many of us paid no attention to Tarnovsky before the latest blackout and could not have had "such information" to search (before asking any question).
In a gesture of friendship and reconciliation and to clear the misunderstanding and confusion about intent, let us send Mr. Swigger a case of Labatt Blue and have a Dallas Cheerleader deliver it to him! Oh, let us send him some guacamole also!
I am not too sure about that.
He already missed it at least twice. First time was the opening post and second time was post #13.
I am wondering if he would miss a legit stand alone fix in this same manner if and when it were to come out?
SJDNOPFGP ,I may be a little dense in my old age ,But for my benefit would you explain what he missed at least twice.I went back to #1 and #13 but cant grasp what you are referring to . Thanks for your response SJDNOPFGP
SJDNOPFGP ,I may be a little dense in my old age ,But for my benefit would you explain what he missed at least twice.I went back to #1 and #13 but cant grasp what you are referring to . Thanks for your response SJDNOPFGP
The first paragraph of the post #13 which includes quote from opening post.
The Following User Says Thank You to SJDNOPFGP For This Useful Post:
Here is a most important part of the post: "His story, though a little dated, and his publicly available demonstration on how to crack a code is still fascinating."
I am sorry but I cant see were he missed anything in this statement. You will have to point it out for me >Thanks again SJDNOPFGP
Lol.
The first post was about JK's guilty plea in reference to the purchase of a microscope. Chris Tarnovsky also used a microscope in his demonstration video.
Chris' video is an old news and noted by aquariusone in the very first post of this very thread. The whole post is not an old news as suggested by Swigger, twice(#2 and #11).
This is where post #13 tried to explain but to no avail.
This was confirmed by post #57.
While that video is an old news, the connection between the usage of a microscope in the video and the microscope purchased by Jung kwak is hardly an old news. IMHO, this is the point the OP has been trying to convey over to Swigger.
P.S.
I think that I read too much and should cut back a little.
The Following User Says Thank You to SJDNOPFGP For This Useful Post:
If You Like This Website, And Would Like To Give Something In Return,
You Can Make A Donation. Your Donation Will Be Used To Pay For Hosting Service, Domain, And Maintenance Costs
Only!
Oh, let us send him some guacamole also!
Linear Mode
