On 24/07/2025 18:14, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Jul 24, 2025 at 9:47:44 AM MST, ""David B."" wrote
<mef6dgF8lp9U4@mid.individual.net>:
On 24/07/2025 17:05, David B. wrote:
On 24/07/2025 16:43, Mike Easter wrote:
BDB wrote:
I *DO* trust Howard Oakley!
And HO trusts and extols Etre.
*Maybe mistakenly*.
You’re probably familiar with EtreCheck, the free app which is
commonly used in Apple Community Support forums to help diagnose
problems, but have you paid for its Pro features? If you want to get >>>>>> the best performance from your Mac, that’s money well-spent.
While your OP to this topic was 'well-spoken' it belies the fact that >>>>> your own insight is *blind*. Worse than blind, badly distorted beyond >>>>> recognition.
I have NO DOUBTS about HO, a fellow naval officer.
I suspect HO never even thought to question the honesty of "John Daniel" >>>> someone who is simply a "will-o'-the-wisp" persona with nothing to
quantify who and what he is!
He even removed his LinkedIn page when I questioned him!
https://i.ibb.co/NnQtbS98/BC9-C56-A5-B16-B-446-D-A5-BC-63293-B2-D4440-1-105-c.jpg
No honest fellow would do that!
What makes you think that? Not a rhetorical question... why could a person who
is generally honest and decent not remove their LinkedIn page, especially if >> they are being followed around by someone asking questions over and over?
appreciate your question — it's fair to ask why I see that as a red flag.
Let me be clear: simply removing a LinkedIn page isn't, by itself, proof
of dishonesty. But context matters. When someone runs a paid software product, makes strong claims about its capabilities, refuses to answer reasonable support emails (even when support is part of the paid
package), and then vanishes from multiple platforms when asked
legitimate questions — that’s where the suspicion starts.
Removing a LinkedIn profile after being asked for clarity on credentials
or background doesn't automatically signal guilt, but it can appear
evasive — especially if the individual is selling something to the
public and benefiting from trust built within communities like MacRumors
or Apple Support forums.
I'm not trying to hound anyone — but transparency and accountability matter, especially in tech where users often rely on software to
diagnose or alter critical systems. It’s not unreasonable to ask: Who is behind this tool I’m being told to trust?
So yes — context, not just the act, is what shapes my view.
On 24/07/2025 22:25, pothead wrote:
What's hilarious is you asking the most dishonest person on Usenet
for advice regarding honesty.
Now that's quite funny.
You are mistaken, ma'am.
Oh, BTW, lose the ChatGpt replies.
<sigh> I rather gave the game away, didn't I?!! Sorry about that.
I agree with what I posted though.
What makes you think that? Not a rhetorical question... why could a person who
is generally honest and decent not remove their LinkedIn page, especially if >> they are being followed around by someone asking questions over and over?
appreciate your question — it's fair to ask why I see that as a red flag.
Let me be clear: simply removing a LinkedIn page isn't, by itself, proof
of dishonesty. But context matters. When someone runs a paid software product, makes strong claims about its capabilities, refuses to answer reasonable support emails (even when support is part of the paid
package), and then vanishes from multiple platforms when asked
legitimate questions — that’s where the suspicion starts.
Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Jul 25, 2025 at 12:30:33 AM MST, ""David B.""
wrote <megq4pFila5U1@mid.individual.net>:
On 25/07/2025 00:11, Brock McNuggets wrote:wrote >> <mef8tiFbassU1@mid.individual.net>:
On Jul 24, 2025 at 10:30:26 AM MST, ""David B.""
wrote >>>> <mef6dgF8lp9U4@mid.individual.net>:
On 24/07/2025 18:14, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Jul 24, 2025 at 9:47:44 AM MST, ""David B.""
the free app which is >>>>>>>> commonly used in
On 24/07/2025 17:05, David B. wrote:
On 24/07/2025 16:43, Mike Easter wrote:
BDB wrote:
I DO trust Howard Oakley!
And HO trusts and extols Etre.
*Maybe mistakenly*.
You’re probably familiar with EtreCheck,
Apple Community Support forums to help diagnose
features? If you want to get >>>>>>>> the bestproblems, but have you paid for its Pro
performance from your Mac, that’s money well-spent.
'well-spoken' it belies the fact that >>>>>>> yourWhile your OP to this topic was
own insight is blind. Worse than blind, badly
distorted beyond >>>>>>> recognition. >>>>>> >>>>>>
I have NO DOUBTS about HO, a fellow naval officer.
question the honesty of "John Daniel" >>>>>> someoneI suspect HO never even thought to
who is simply a "will-o'-the-wisp" persona with
nothing to >>>>>> quantify who and what he is!
questioned him! >>>>>He even removed his LinkedIn page when I
https://i.ibb.co/NnQtbS98/BC9-C56-A5-B16-B-446-D-A5-B
C-63293-B2-D4440-1-105-c.jpg >>>>> >>>>> No honest
fellow would do that! >>>>
question... why could a person who >>>> is generallyWhat makes you think that? Not a rhetorical
honest and decent not remove their LinkedIn page,
especially if >>>> they are being followed around by
someone asking questions over and over? >>> >>>
why I see that as a red flag. >>>appreciate your question — it's fair to ask
isn't, by itself, proof >>> of dishonesty. ButLet me be clear: simply removing a LinkedIn page
context matters. When someone runs a paid software
capabilities, refuses to answer >>> reasonableproduct, makes strong claims about its
support emails (even when support is part of the
paid >>> package), and then vanishes from multiple
platforms when asked >>> legitimate questions —
that’s where the suspicion starts. >> >> What
questions? >>> >>> Removing a LinkedIn profile
after being asked for clarity on credentials >>> or
background doesn't automatically signal guilt, but
it can appear >>> evasive — especially if the
individual is selling something to the >>> public
and benefiting from trust built within communities
like MacRumors >>> or Apple Support forums. >> >>
There can also be extenuating circumstances of not
wanting someone to keep >> asking questions seen as
inappropriate. >>> >>> I'm not trying to hound
anyone — but transparency and accountability >>>
matter, especially in tech where users often rely on
software to >>> diagnose or alter critical systems.
It’s not unreasonable to ask: Who is >>> behind this
tool I’m being told to trust? >> >> If you do not
trust it then do not use it. Not sure what else you
want. >>> >>> So yes — context, not just the act,
is what shapes my view.
Hi Brock,
Fair points—and thank you for asking respectfully.
I genuinely don’t have a problem with people
removing their LinkedIn page in general. You're
absolutely right that there can be valid, personal
reasons for doing so—especially if someone feels
harassed or unduly scrutinised.
However, my concerns about John Daniel stem from
more than just that single act. I paid for
EtreCheck’s Power User package — which includes
support — and asked legitimate technical questions
about the app.
What questions? Please be specific.
Despite multiple attempts, I received no reply.
That’s not just frustrating; it’s unacceptable
when support is part of the paid offering.
You have also repeatedly insinuated that it is
malware, which is deeply inappropriate, and have an
unhealthy focus on the software -- which is odd --
and also on the author -- which is harmful.
At the same time, I’ve seen posts quietly vanish,
evasive replies in public forums, and a lack of
any concrete way to verify the developer’s
background or qualifications.
What makes you think you are entitled to know
ANYTHING about his background or qualifications?
In that context, pulling a LinkedIn page
right after being questioned only deepened my
unease.
This isn’t personal,
When you focus on him as a person -- his "background
or qualifications" -- that makes it personal and not
professional.
and it’s certainly not about Snit — he’s a friend,
not a foe! I just believe that if someone is
asking users to trust them with diagnostic tools
that can touch sensitive parts of a system, there
should be some accountability. That’s all.
Preach it saint Snit !
Amen brother Snit.
What a fucking loser you are.
Your post is the ultimate in projection.
You are a fucking, son of a bitch liar who does daily
all that you are accusing Boater Dave of.
Isn't it a little early in the day to be hitting the
pills snit.
Go fuck yourself snit.
pothead wrote:
On 2025-07-25, Tegenaria
<TegenariaArach@incogni.net> wrote:
Brock McNuggets wrote:B."" >> wrote >> <mef8tiFbassU1@mid.individual.net>:
On Jul 25, 2025 at 12:30:33 AM MST, ""David B.""
wrote <megq4pFila5U1@mid.individual.net>:
On 25/07/2025 00:11, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Jul 24, 2025 at 10:30:26 AM MST, ""David
B."" >> wrote >>>>
On 24/07/2025 18:14, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Jul 24, 2025 at 9:47:44 AM MST, ""David
<mef6dgF8lp9U4@mid.individual.net>: >> >>>>
well-spent. >> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> While your OP tothe free app which is >>>>>>>> commonly used inOn 24/07/2025 17:05, David B. wrote:
On 24/07/2025 16:43, Mike Easter wrote:
BDB wrote:
I DO trust Howard Oakley!
And HO trusts and extols Etre.
*Maybe mistakenly*.
You’re probably familiar with EtreCheck,
Apple Community Support forums to help diagnose
features? If you want to get >>>>>>>> the bestproblems, but have you paid for its Pro
performance from your Mac, that’s money
this topic was >> 'well-spoken' it belies the fact
that >>>>>>> your >> own insight is blind. Worse
than blind, badly >> distorted beyond >>>>>>>
recognition. >>>>>> >>>>>> >> I have NO DOUBTS
about HO, a fellow naval officer. >> >>>>>> >>>>>>
I suspect HO never even thought to >> question the
honesty of "John Daniel" >>>>>> someone >> who is
simply a "will-o'-the-wisp" persona with >> nothing
to >>>>>> quantify who and what he is! >> >>>>>
questioned him! >>>>> >> >>>>>He even removed his LinkedIn page when I >>
https://i.ibb.co/NnQtbS98/BC9-C56-A5-B16-B-446-D-A5-B
honest >> fellow would do that! >>>> >> >>>> WhatC-63293-B2-D4440-1-105-c.jpg >>>>> >>>>> No
makes you think that? Not a rhetorical >>
question... why could a person who >>>> is generally
by >> someone asking questions over and over? >>>honest and decent not remove their LinkedIn page,
especially if >>>> they are being followed around
to ask >> why I see that as a red flag. >>> >> >>>appreciate your question — it's fair
Let me be clear: simply removing a LinkedIn page >>
isn't, by itself, proof >>> of dishonesty. But >>
context matters. When someone runs a paid software
capabilities, refuses to answer >>> reasonable >>product, makes strong claims about its >>
support emails (even when support is part of the >>
paid >>> package), and then vanishes from multiple
questions? >>> >>> Removing a LinkedIn profile >>platforms when asked >>> legitimate questions —
that’s where the suspicion starts. >> >> What >>
after being asked for clarity on credentials >>> or
but >> it can appear >>> evasive — especially if thebackground doesn't automatically signal guilt,
communities >> like MacRumors >>> or Apple Supportindividual is selling something to the >>> public
and benefiting from trust built within
forums. >> >> >> There can also be extenuating
circumstances of not >> wanting someone to keep >>
asking questions seen as >> inappropriate. >>> >>>
I'm not trying to hound >> anyone — but transparency
and accountability >>> >> matter, especially in tech
where users often rely on >> software to >>>
diagnose or alter critical systems. >> It’s not
unreasonable to ask: Who is >>> behind this >> tool
I’m being told to trust? >> >> If you do not >>
trust it then do not use it. Not sure what else you
act, >> is what shapes my view. >> > >> >want. >>> >>> So yes — context, not just the
respectfully. >> > I genuinely don’t have a problemHi Brock,
Fair points—and thank you for asking
with people >> > removing their LinkedIn page in
general. You're >> > absolutely right that there
can be valid, personal >> > reasons for doing
so—especially if someone feels >> > harassed or
unduly scrutinised. >> >
questions >> > about the app.However, my concerns about John Daniel stem from
more than just that single act. I paid for
EtreCheck’s Power User package — which includes
support — and asked legitimate technical
an >> unhealthy focus on the software -- which is
What questions? Please be specific.
Despite multiple attempts, I received no reply.
That’s not just frustrating; it’s unacceptable
when support is part of the paid offering.
You have also repeatedly insinuated that it is
malware, which is deeply inappropriate, and have
odd -- >> and also on the author -- which is harmful.
vanish, >> > evasive replies in public forums, and a
At the same time, I’ve seen posts quietly
lack of >> > any concrete way to verify the
developer’s >> > background or qualifications.
"background >> or qualifications" -- that makes it
What makes you think you are entitled to know
ANYTHING about his background or qualifications?
In that context, pulling a LinkedIn page
right after being questioned only deepened my
unease.
This isn’t personal,
When you focus on him as a person -- his
personal and not >> professional.
friend, >> > not a foe! I just believe that if
and it’s certainly not about Snit — he’s a
someone is >> > asking users to trust them with
diagnostic tools >> > that can touch sensitive parts
of a system, there >> > should be some
accountability. That’s all.
Preach it saint Snit !
Amen brother Snit.
What a fucking loser you are.
Your post is the ultimate in projection.
You are a fucking, son of a bitch liar who does
daily all that you are accusing Boater Dave of.
Isn't it a little early in the day to be hitting
the pills snit.
Go fuck yourself snit.
These days in order to save money, snit Michael
Glasser of Prescott/Phoenix Arizona is mixing up his
own brand of jenkem. That's when he isn't huffing
glue from a bag.
snit Michael Glasser of Prescott/Phoenix
Arizona is the most dishonest poster on Usenet.
Possibly the Internet as a whole.
Do not trust anything snit Michael Glasser of
Prescott/Phoenix Arizona posts because the chances
are excellent that he is lying.
Why don't you join with the other members of ACW and
completely, 100%, ignore and not reply directly to
snit? We welcome you.
Thanks. I will join the rest of you in ignoring
shithead snit. I have some very interesting, current,
information regarding snit that I am in the process of
verifying. If it turns out to be accurate I will post
here.
Happy day to all.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 165:17:57 |
| Calls: | 10,385 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 14,057 |
| Messages: | 6,416,524 |
