----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@MSGID: 1@paganini.bofh.team>
055fb0c9
@REPLY: 3@dont-email.me> 2fd4e054
@REPLYADDR Gunther F <grunther@nospam.edu>
@REPLYTO 2:5075/128 Gunther F
@CHRS: CP866 2
@RFC: 1 0
@RFC-Message-ID:
1@paganini.bofh.team>
@RFC-References: 1@paganini.bofh.team>
1@dont-email.me> 1@dont-email.me> 3@dont-email.me>
@RFC-Reply-To: Gunther F <grunther@nospam.edu>
@TZUTC: -0600
@PID: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0
@TID: FIDOGATE-5.12-ge4e8b94
"Adam H. Kerman" <
ahk@chinet.com> said:
> Nonsense. If he had that concern as opposed to shilling an article he
> refused to read himself and lying that Google is turning off all HTML,
> he`d have simply tested the standard interface with Firefox set to allow
> lots of javascript to run.
1. The OP quoted EXACTLY (verbatim!) what the article said.
2. So for you to call it "lying" means you are a victim of your own bias.
3. Besides - he gave you the URL to the article - which you didn`t read.
Without reading the article - you complained that it was wrong.
Without reading the OP - you claimed it was a lie.
Worse - you say to test a future interface.
Which won`t release for three months from now.
Do you read anything before you claim everything you didn`t read is a lie?
--- Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0
* Origin: To protect and to server (2:5075/128)
SEEN-BY: 5001/100 5005/49 5015/255 5019/40 5020/715
848 1042 4441 12000
SEEN-BY: 5030/49 1081 5058/104 5075/128
@PATH: 5075/128 5020/1042 4441