Posted by Michael on 11/06/07 01:44

Check it out I'm Onideus and I'm cool fuck fuck fuckity fuck fuck. Did
they teach you that extensive vocabulary during your college days, or
did you pick that up living in the street with the homeless?

I could be petty and list all the spelling and grammar mistakes you
managed to put in your post, but I wont waste my time. People make
mistakes deal with it.

Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 11:06:04 +1030, Michael
> <michael_j@pythontech.net.au> wrote:
>
>>> AJAX is just a techno buzz word, it doesn't really have any meaning in
>>> most conversations (when being used by wannabes and poser class
>>> dipshits). It's basically a site that relies heavily on javascript,
>>> XML and CSS and is often dynamic in nature.
>
>> AJAX is not a techno 'buzz' word.
>
> You really are living in a bubble of stupidity, aren't you?
>
>> It is an acronym that stands for Asynchronous JavaScript and XML.
>
> When you capitalize javascript...it makes you look stupid, just so you
> know. And just because it's an acronym that stands for something
> doesn't the fuck mean that 90%+ of the retards throwing the word
> around know fuck all about it, other than it sounds "new" and "edgy"
> and "the other guys have it".
>

Look it up, it is capitalized "JavaScript". I never claimed that '90%+
of the retards throwing the word around know f..k all about it'. As
clearly you thought it was just a buzz word.

>> I would say it is ALWAYS dynamic in
>> nature, as AJAX would not make sense on a static site.
>
> Technically speaking the acronym itself doesn't make much sense
> period.
>
>> An AJAX site does not need to rely heavily on CSS at all.
>
> Um, it sort of helps you goober. Let's see, list all the AJAX type
> sites that you know of that DON'T have any CSS! DUM DUM DUM DUM DUM

I merely stated that CSS is not required to use AJAX.

>
>> How ever Web
>> Developers may choose to assign CSS classes by Javascript,
>
> And now you're referring to it as "Javascript"...*sigh*...sign of a
> clueless fuckin newbie.
>

Yes my bad, it should be capitalized having trouble with my shift key
today, 'JavaScript', happy?

>> to achieve a
>> combination of transition effects, or UI feedback. For example,
>> highlighting invalid content in a field.
>
> You could do it without CSS, that's not the point, the point is that
> with CSS it's EASIER, hence the reason why it's pretty much ALWAYS
> used...unless you're just some monumental dumbfuck.

Do it without CSS...

document.write('<font color="#ff0000">haha</font>');

Doesn't really do it now does it? Or if you are referring to the style
object, it is just used to dynamically change CSS properties... So it
wouldn't be without CSS.

>
>>> The concept of AJAX was actually ripped off and dumbed down from
>>> existing concepts, like my "living site" designs (aka God level
>>> coding). Basically the intent is to make a site that acts like a
>>> living creature and will react and change depending on user
>>> interaction. So if you say click on a link it will change the
>>> existing content within itself, rather than taking you to a different
>>> page.
>
>> Your an idiot.
>
> You really shouldn't call other people idiots when you can't even
> figure out the difference between "your" and "you're" you fuckin
> idiot.
>

Watch out it's the grammar police, with his little siren, and his
colourful vocabulary.

>> Living Creature?
>
> Think slow now, don't hurt yourself.

Ok, I've thought about it and still all I can come up with is WTF? How
is your site(s) anything like a living creature?

>
>> No one ripped you off, no one ripped
>> anyone off, it has been around for sometime, and is just a term for a
>> general way of doing something.
>
> Look here you n00b ass fuck job, in case it just skipped yer idiot ass
> the gawd damn Internet has been around for a fuck of a lot longer than
> yer dumbass has been online (according to Google you just started
> posting like...last month. And yes, you drooler, dynamic sites
> existed way, way, WAY the fuck before AJAX was ever coined and pimped
> out to college flunkie retards like yourself.

It's your not yer. It's god not gawd. Flunkie? Oh the point is, if
you're going to be a grammar nazi, you should at least check your own
text before posting.

First of all, Usenet is not the internet. Second of all, indeed the
Internet has been around before I was online... It had to exist before I
could use it right, and I never invented it!

I never went to college, but maybe you should.

>
>> BTW, Microsoft invented the
>> XMLHttpRequest and used it for Outlook Web Access. This is 7 and a bit
>> years ago. Considering your site was registered 21 May 2003, I fail to
>> see how you came up with this first.
>
> My domain was registered in 2003 you fuck job, a look into my Google
> history spans back to around 1995 and there are no shortage of
> websites I made PRIOR to having my own domain (most notably when my
> sites were hosted via petitmorte). Further, you dipshit, you DON'T
> need to use XML in order to make a dynamic site (you obviously missed
> that point in my last post).
>

No, but it wouldn't be AJAX without XML :).

I don't see any legal identity behind your half assed "web design"
business.

Sorry, whilst I was researching your previous work, all that come up
with in Google was how stupid you are... And no thats not a joke... When
EVERYONE thinks you are retarded, don't you sort of get the feeling they
might be right?

>> Also, I fail to see how you were planning to do all of this without
>> Microsoft inventing the technology and Netscape expanding it, and other
>> browsers incorporating it.
>
> The fact that you DON'T NEED XML TO MAKE A DYNAMIC SITE! Yeesh, write
> it the fuck down if yer having so much trouble you idiot fuck. That
> was the whole gawd damn shitting POINT of my last post, that AJAX
> dumbed the fuckin concept down and restricted it to XML when in fact
> you don't need ANY XML to make a dynamic site.
>

If you don't want to use AJAX don't. Get over it. Use JavaScript and
dynamically include more JavaScript.

>>> As I said though, that concept was stolen (and not just from me) and
>>> then dumbed down to specific languages/forms. The concept was NEVER
>>> intended to be exclusive to any specific language forms, although most
>>> early sites in that form used a lot of javascript/CSS/XML. At this
>>> point, most developers who actually know what the hell it is they're
>>> doing are using a combination of Flash/CSS/XML and PHP to construct
>>> their sites.
>
>> I repeat, your an idiot, your Flash sites are HORRIBLE.
>
> As fuckin stupid as you are it obviously skipped you that there's a
> whole lot more to my sites than Flash. Most of my newer sites are a
> combination of Flash, CSS, XML, javascript, vbscript, PHP, etc. Also,
> it's cute to see you run the fuck at the mouth about *MY* sites when:
>

I wonder how well HTML 3.2 supported CSS. I guess not to well
considering someone is still using <font color="">. People used Flash in
1996? VBScript yuck. You know bout as much as my next door neighbors 12
year old son.

> A. you can't even sum up enough intelligence to explain WHAT you
> supposedly think is horrible about my sites.
>

I don't need to, they speak for themselves.

> and...
>
> B. you're a stupid college flunkie retard who doesn't even HAVE any
> sites of yer own to provide as a basis of comparison. Face it
> d00d...yer just some fuckin wannabe, poser class dipshit. You run at
> the mouth real good, but you ain't got shit to back it up with.

I work for a professional web development firm. I will choose to protect
the integrity of the company I work for. I don't feel the need to prove
myself to you.

>
>>> The other problem with AJAX, is that beyond the fact that it's a
>>> ripped off and watered down concept, it has become a techno-babble
>>> buzz word, meaning it's often abused and misused by the clueless and
>>> poser class wannabes of the world. I would estimate that a good 90%+
>>> of all the people throwing that word around have absolutely no fuckin
>>> clue at all as to what it even pertains to.
>
>> It's easy to determine if something is AJAX or not. I would estimate any
>> project that claims to use AJAX most likely DOES use AJAX, or
>> Asynchronous Javascript, or a very similar method.
>
> The idiot fuck high school dropout whose obviously never worked a day
> in the business is trying to make "estimates"...oh that's cute,
> really. The best way of ACTUALLY determining if a person knows what
> AJAX means is to find a job listing where it says they're looking for
> someone "who knows AJAX", then just go to the interview. It won't
> take too long to poke at them in the right places to see if they even
> understand the position that they're hiring for (very often they
> don't).

Look, am I a high school dropout, or a college school dropout.
Consistency is the key. Was Walmart looking for AJAX?

>
>> However, I'd say you
>> are definitely in the 90% of people who don't know what they are talking
>> about. You are the biggest troll in this group. Maybe your thinking Web 2.0?
>
> You are without a doubt the biggest retard in this group. Let us all
> know when you figure out the difference between "your" and "you're"
> you drooling child.
>

I bet your 'e-business' makes you so much money, which helps with your
'e-penis' when you pick up all your 'e-ladies'.

> --
>
> Onideus Mad Hatter
> mhm ¹ x ¹
> http://www.backwater-productions.net
> http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog
>
>
> Hatter Quotes
> -------------
> "You're only one of the best if you're striving to become one of the
> best."
>
> "I didn't make reality, Sunshine, I just verbally bitch slapped you
> with it."
>
> "I'm not a professional, I'm an artist."
>
> "Your Usenet blinders are my best friend."
>
> "Usenet Filters - Learn to shut yourself the fuck up!"
>
> "Drugs killed Jesus you know...oh wait, no, that was the Jews, my
> bad."
>
> "There are clingy things in the grass...burrs 'n such...mmmm..."
>
> "The more I learn the more I'm killing my idols."
>
> "Is it wrong to incur and then use the hate ridden, vengeful stupidity
> of complete strangers in random Usenet froups to further my art?"
>
> "Freedom is only a concept, like race it's merely a social construct
> that doesn't really exist outside of your ability to convince others
> of its relevancy."
>
> "Next time slow up a lil, then maybe you won't jump the gun and start
> creamin yer panties before it's time to pop the champagne proper."
>
> "Reality is directly proportionate to how creative you are."
>
> "People are pretty fucking high on themselves if they think that
> they're just born with a soul. *snicker*...yeah, like they're just
> givin em out for free."
>
> "Quible, quible said the Hare. Quite a lot of quibling...everywhere.
> So the Hare took a long stare and decided at best, to leave the rest,
> to their merry little mess."
>
> "There's a difference between 'bad' and 'so earth shatteringly
> horrible it makes the angels scream in terror as they violently rip
> their heads off, their blood spraying into the faces of a thousand
> sweet innocent horrified children, who will forever have the terrible
> images burned into their tiny little minds'."
>
> "How sad that you're such a poor judge of style that you can't even
> properly gauge the artistic worth of your own efforts."
>
> "Those who record history are those who control history."
>
> "I am the living embodiment of hell itself in all its tormentive rage,
> endless suffering, unfathomable pain and unending horror...but you
> don't get sent to me...I come for you."
>
> "Ideally in a fight I'd want a BGM-109A with a W80 250 kiloton
> tactical thermonuclear fusion based war head."
>
> "Tell me, would you describe yourself more as a process or a
> function?"
>
> "Apparently this group has got the market cornered on stupid.
> Intelligence is down 137 points across the board and the forecast
> indicates an increase in Webtv users."
>
> "Is my .sig delimiter broken? Really? You're sure? Awww,
> gee...that's too bad...for YOU!" `, )

[Back to original message]