|
|
Posted by rf on 11/30/07 12:39
"Mika" <anon@anon.com> wrote in message
news:B9T3j.55490$c_1.9372@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
> "rf" <rf@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:xLR3j.18784$CN4.7119@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>> "Andy Dingley" <dingbat@codesmiths.com> wrote in message
>> news:26aef9b6-cfff-4fbc-8df5-5fd6325c4fbe@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com...
>>> On 30 Nov, 09:51, "Mika" <a...@anon.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> We accept that the site may not be perceived as good when accessed from
>>>> abroad, but if you try it when you are in the UK,
>>>
>>> I'm in the UK and I have 8M broadband.
>>
>> Har har har. How about *that* Mika?
>>
>>> It's _still_ shit.
>>
>> Agreed.
>
> Nice gang bully mentality there. What's that on your nose Andy? :P
> (We notice you didn't comment or go 'har har' about my proving you wrong
> saying we had ignored the feedback here, when in fact we have acted on
> dozens of things mentioned here. Funny how you omit that isn't it. Har
> har har, what about *that*. Har har har zzzzzzz.)
Are you talking to Andy or me here. It's hard to tell.
> If what you say is true rf, and you find the page does not load in ~5
> seconds, then there is something seriously wrong. You are the _only_ one
> in the UK.
You have seriously lost the plot here Mika. It is Andy that is in the UK.
You know, and I know that you know, that I am in Australia. It's also right
up there, at the top of your post. The bit that says:
news-server.bigpond.net.au. You do know what the .au bit means?
> However we both know that is not the case, and your comment of it being
> "****" relates to your personal opinion of the site and concept,
Yes, correct. Now that I am asked specifically, I think the site is actually
shit. This is, as well as being a term that Andy uses, a term in common
usage here in Australia. It can mean many things, as in, "Wow, that is some
good shit", "O shit, I've dropped my beer", "This web site is shit". Take
your pick.
> rather than the speed, which has been the complaint from the Americans, to
> which I refered to above.
And the Australians.
> We know we cannot please all the people all the time, and have no
> unrealistic expectations to do so.
You don't seem to have pleased many of the people here in these newsgroups
at all.
> Your thuggish comment is therefore
Thuggish? Hmmm. Welcome to usenet. If I think a site is shit I will say it
is shit. That is not thuggish. That is my opinion. And I am entitled to it.
What gets right up my arse is heros like you who simply cannot understand
that somebody else may think your pride and joy is just shit.
> completely irrelevant, especially to the subject of this thread.
Bullshit. The subject of this thread is "Does this page work in your
Firefox?".
I am here to tell you again that no, this page does *NOT* work in my
Firefox. It also does not work in my IE5.5, IE6, IE7. It does not work in my
Opera nor my Safari. It does not work, for me, in any browser you care to
specify.
I don't like the site.
> Good luck with that attitude,
And good luck with yours, Mika :-)
--
Richard
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|