Hello Marck!
On Sunday, May 5, 2002 at 9:47:27 PM you wrote:
This is not meant to imply a clique or anything like it. I think that
Dierk's brevity was misleading in that respect. I hope the above
explanation goes some way to clarifying what he meant by it.
Thanks for the clarification, you
Hello Miguel!
On Sunday, May 5, 2002 at 8:55:07 PM you wrote:
Does special public, like you seem to be, pay more for their TB
license?. Also, how do you know what we, the general public, are
interested in, need or want from TB?
I am not special.
What a disgusting response !!!
Thank you!
Hello Nick!
On Sunday, May 5, 2002 at 8:55:21 PM you wrote:
It is not available through RITLabs main page, and only available on the
Beta Page. The rightful conclusion from Members is that it is in fact a
Beta. What else can one conclude?
Exactly! Therefore it must be a Beta, otherwise
Hello Marck,
What a disgusting response !!!
Let's get that response a bit clearer then.
I appreciate your efforts Marck, but Dierk's response was quite clear:
Now kids, daddy is here and daddy says you shouldn't worry about
grown-ups' issues. Look, we may have used TB for more or less time,
Hello Dierk,
Does special public, like you seem to be, pay more for their TB
license?. Also, how do you know what we, the general public, are
interested in, need or want from TB?
I am not special.
Well, if someone knows what the bugs/fixes in the different versions
are and can decide on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Miguel,
@06 May 2002, 13:10:59 +0200 (12:10 UK time) Miguel A. Urech wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If Dierk knows what the fixes are, he could just have briefly
mention what they fix.
Dierk does not know. He is not in any
Hello Dierk,
This is not meant to imply a clique or anything like it. I think that
Dierk's brevity was misleading in that respect. I hope the above
explanation goes some way to clarifying what he meant by it.
Thanks for the clarification, you are perfectly in assuming my
intentions and
Hello Marck,
Yesterday, I added the appropriate channel to the footer of this
list. It is the RITlabs BugTraq database.
What's then the Help/Feedback/Bug report for?
--
Best regards,
Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial - Spain)
Using The Bat! v1.60c
Hello Miguel!
On Monday, May 6, 2002 at 1:35:57 PM you wrote:
Can I take your words as a subtle way of apologising to the general
public? ;-)
As others (like Marck) know, I am not subtle2 when I apologize. and I
always do it in public, as I don't see any sense in doing it
privately.
Do you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Miguel,
@06 May 2002, 13:44:06 +0200 (12:44 UK time) Miguel A. Urech wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yesterday, I added the appropriate channel to the footer of this
list. It is the RITlabs BugTraq database.
What's then the
Hello Dierk,
On Monday, May 06 2002 at 12:00 AM PDT, you wrote:
1. Nick, let's not get into another (tedious) technical debate about
Logics.
No, I don't want to start another tedious debate... only trying to make a
point on behalf of all the new Users that have recently come on board. To
Hello Nick!
On Monday, May 6, 2002 at 3:45:10 PM you wrote:
No, I don't want to start another tedious debate... only trying to make a
point on behalf of all the new Users that have recently come on board. To
them, surely this numbering system and lack of definition on the part of
RITLabs is
YES. And the part about this that scares me is that this is the way
the developers of PMMAIL 2000 (my prior e-mail client) operated and it
got worse and worse until users are abandoning ship as there is no
way to tell what/when/where or why the current or next release will do
and/or happen.
Marck D Pearlstone wrote on Monday, May 06, 2002:
I *am* in direct contact with RITlabs
Marck, out of curiosity, approximately how many people are at RITlabs?
Current Ver: 1.60i
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com
Hello Marck,
It's the old way of doing it, still there as a fallback method for
those not affiliated to these discussion lists. IMHO It is not an
efficient method and I believe it relies on a recipient at RIT moving
the issue into the BugTraq by hand if/when they get a chance to.
You are
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Joseph,
@06 May 2002, 09:19:11 -0500 (15:19 UK time) Joseph N. wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I *am* in direct contact with RITlabs
Marck, out of curiosity, approximately how many people are at RITlabs?
I know of (and have
Version Numbers and 1.60h, i or j, etc...
I think it's good practice to not get too caught up in running latest
versions of anything unless it's a really established edition.
So, I think of anything 1.60 as being near the edge of beta. If only
it was as clear cut as this version now has zero
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Miguel A. Urech [MAU] wrote:
...
MAU Such an auto-reply would make you feel that there is at least one
MAU computer out there who cares about what you may have to say and
MAU report. But no, it looks like not even a computer cares :-(
:-))
I agree
Hello Allie,
I agree with you on this.
Are you a human or just a computer trying to be nice to me? ;-)
--
Best regards,
Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial - Spain)
Using The Bat! v1.60c
Current Ver: 1.60i
FAQ:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Miguel A. Urech [MAU] wrote:
...
I agree with you on this.
MAU Are you a human or just a computer trying to be nice to me? ;-)
I understand your frustration.
I also understand that staffing constraints/limitations prevent
Ritlabs from giving
On Monday, May 06, 2002, Allie C Martin wrote...
Miguel A. Urech [MAU] wrote:
...
I agree with you on this.
MAU Are you a human or just a computer trying to be nice to me? ;-)
I understand your frustration.
I also understand that staffing constraints/limitations prevent
Ritlabs from
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jonathan Angliss [JA] wrote:
...
JA The fortunate thing about RitLabs is they run things like this
JA list.
The thing is they don't. This list was started by a user like yourself
and is being run, hosted and moderated by users as yourself. All of us
Hello Jonathan,
But you also have to consider the fact they probably do listen/view
what we have to say...
No, they don't seem to.
--
Best regards,
Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial - Spain)
Using The Bat! v1.60c
Current Ver: 1.60i
FAQ
Hello Miguel A. Urech,
On Mon, 6 May 2002 13:10:59 +0200 GMT your local time,
which was Monday, May 6, 2002, 6:10:59 PM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Miguel A. Urech wrote:
I have reported a couple of bugs (or what I think are bugs) to RITLabs
and I haven't had any kind of response. Maybe I
Hi there, Nick,
Monday, May 6, 2002, 9:45:10 AM, you wrote:
NA Hello Dierk,
NA On Monday, May 06 2002 at 12:00 AM PDT, you wrote:
1. Nick, let's not get into another (tedious) technical debate about
Logics.
NA No, I don't want to start another tedious debate... only trying to make a
NA
Hello Julius,
Monday, May 6, 2002, 9:03:29 PM, you wrote:
JS I guess this is good business for someone.
Yes, apparently for Ritlabs now. If it is fact a successful business
model there will be competion in the future. We as users will benefit.
--
Best regards,
Greg Strong
Hi!
In the footer that TBUDL adds to every mail, I see
Current Ver: 1.60i
But http://www.ritlabs.com/the_bat still states that 1.60h is the
current version. I know that I can download 1.60i and 1.60j from the
beta directory at ritlabs.com, but is it a release or a beta?
If it is a beta: Why
Hello Robert!
On Sunday, May 5, 2002 at 7:30:48 PM you wrote:
If it is a beta: Why does the TBUDL footer say it's the current
version?
Because it's not a beta.
If it is not a beta: Why is it not available via the normal download
on ritlabs.com?
Lots of reasons come to mind. We lately had
l states that 1.60h is
the current version. I know that I can download 1.60i and 1.60j from
the beta directory at ritlabs.com, but is it a release or a beta?
It's a non-beta post-release fix version g.
If it is a beta: Why does the TBUDL footer say it's the current
version?
Because I (aka the Moder
Hello Dierk,
On Sunday, May 5, 2002, at 11:19:37 AM -0700, you wrote:
DH Because it's not a beta.
It is not available through RITLabs main page, and only available on the
Beta Page. The rightful conclusion from Members is that it is in fact a
Beta. What else can one conclude?
If it is not a
Hello Dierk,
OK, the short version is: i/j fix very specific problems and are not
of interest for the general public.
Does special public, like you seem to be, pay more for their TB
license?. Also, how do you know what we, the general public, are
interested in, need or want from TB?
What a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Miguel,
@05 May 2002, 20:55:07 +0200 (19:55 UK time) Miguel A. Urech wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
What a disgusting response !!!
Let's get that response a bit clearer then.
Some people directly report specific problems in
On Sun, 5 May 2002, Miguel A. Urech wrote:
Hello Dierk,
OK, the short version is: i/j fix very specific problems and are not
of interest for the general public.
Does special public, like you seem to be, pay more for their TB
license?. Also, how do you know what we, the general public,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Marck D Pearlstone [MDP] wrote:
...
MDP I think they may be waiting for feedback on the quality.
Yes, I'd think this is the case.
Version 1.60i was introduced to the beta list members and they were
asked to test it as a candidate for replacing the
34 matches
Mail list logo
