Page 2 of 3 [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

06 Jul 2017, 12:04 am

Empathy wrote:
leejosepho wrote:
..and the seeming "shared IP" is related to a second sub-domain of wrongplanet.net and not with any other domain.

What sub party domain host would that be...

What is a sub-party domain host? In any case, the two WP sub-domains doing the so-called "sharing" are listed right there on the Accessify page.


_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================


alex
Developer
Developer

User avatar

Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,214
Location: Beverly Hills, CA

06 Jul 2017, 2:17 am

Empathy: The problem is you're making it seem like there's no certificate or that it is somehow not secure which isn't the case. My fear is that someone will read this and get confused. I'm confused but I realize that confusion is due to the fact that you're not making any sense. Someone who is less tech savvy may actually think what you're saying makes sense and is valid when it doesn't and is not.


_________________
I'm Alex Plank, the founder of Wrong Planet. Follow me (Alex Plank) on Blue Sky: https://bsky.app/profile/alexplank.bsky.social


alex
Developer
Developer

User avatar

Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,214
Location: Beverly Hills, CA

06 Jul 2017, 2:32 am

leejosepho wrote:
Empathy wrote:
leejosepho wrote:
..and the seeming "shared IP" is related to a second sub-domain of wrongplanet.net and not with any other domain.

What sub party domain host would that be...

What is a sub-party domain host? In any case, the two WP sub-domains doing the so-called "sharing" are listed right there on the Accessify page.


If you google "sub-party domain host" the only result is this thread. So no, it's not a thing.
https://www.google.com/search?q="sub-party+domain+host"


The gist of this thread is that the OP went to an ice cream store, ordered vanilla, and then asked why the store didn't offer chocolate. The store said "we do offer chocolate" but the customer held up the vanilla and said, look it's not chocolate so clearly you don't offer chocolate. In reality the customer could have just said "I want chocolate" and they would have gotten the chocolate ice cream. That's basically what's happening here if you replace chocolate with SSL.


_________________
I'm Alex Plank, the founder of Wrong Planet. Follow me (Alex Plank) on Blue Sky: https://bsky.app/profile/alexplank.bsky.social


Empathy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Aug 2015
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,548
Location: Sovereign Nation & Commonwealth

06 Jul 2017, 4:18 pm

TheSpectrum wrote:
This thread was about a site certificate and your worry about a lack of one or it being valid.
That's been cleared up. You have a lot of concerns many of the users share including myself. You deliberately chose not to quote the parts where I agree with you then go on to say you don't get into arguments. This is one.

I'm not worried about being showed up here. If someone states some facts or contributes something which moves the agenda forward I can handle taking a sick burn or two and I'll stand corrected. What we are doing is arguing and it is not constructive. Let's move on from this.

Lastly, while I don't agree with a majority your comments and as much as I doubt your expertise on the SSL here, I do agree he has been avoiding the issues.. Posting isn't the same as addressing issues. Hopefully (trying to remain optimistic here) activity will begin to correlate with results. Let's move on from this.


It's cleared up when I say its been cleared up, when the OP says its been cleared up and when its been put to rest. Only someone with limited access to informaion would endanger themselves from having leanrt more.

Point scoring and nit picking are not constructive. Also, you are showing me up as well as others who've mentioned point for point suggestion, nothing else.

You're the one makeshifter causing the majority of the arguments around here from whoever is around to listen to you slamming against a member who quotes it. So that I may eventually take the blame. I've been on threads where you consistently quote people you think are behaving inferior to you,and then pick up on the fact they've not quoted your best character WTF?
You don't know constructive critiscism or anything but. Try learning to task force, and you'll see who wants to listen to the programme and who doesn't. It contains real people with real feelings and real emotional differences, something I guess off-topic you'll never understand.

Seeing as you doubt everyones expertise,(including Alex's) I'd say you should swiftly move on from this ASAP.



Empathy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Aug 2015
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,548
Location: Sovereign Nation & Commonwealth

06 Jul 2017, 4:24 pm

alex wrote:
Empathy: The problem is you're making it seem like there's no certificate or that it is somehow not secure which isn't the case. My fear is that someone will read this and get confused. I'm confused but I realize that confusion is due to the fact that you're not making any sense. Someone who is less tech savvy may actually think what you're saying makes sense and is valid when it doesn't and is not.
The store said "we do offer chocolate" but the customer held up the vanilla and said, look it's not chocolate so clearly you don't offer chocolate. In reality the customer could have just said "I want chocolate" and they would have gotten the chocolate ice cream. That's basically what's happening here if you replace chocolate with SSL.


Correct me on all my facts then and be done with it. I know how I feel, and I echo the concerns of others around me. Thats what I do. Excuse me for feeling the gist of things, you want to maintain security, then maintain it. Not animate it. It doesn't take a structural site tech to know how. Make mine a raspberry ripple, I need more juices. It's 27c still. The store is shut, you're welcome to bring it round after you bypass all security measures first.
Induce a webchat for further discussion..or is it pm these days. I hope the icecream passes the java script test.
If it doesn't,.. please don't hesitate to pm me :)



TheSpectrum
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,121
Location: Hampshire

06 Jul 2017, 6:05 pm

Empathy wrote:
It's cleared up when I say its been cleared up, when the OP says its been cleared up and when its been put to rest.

Tech support threads don't work this way....
Technical support threads don't work on emotional closure..... 8O

Empathy wrote:
Only someone with limited access to informaion would endanger themselves from having leanrt more.

I'm not sure what this even means. But OK.

Empathy wrote:
Point scoring and nit picking are not constructive.

I agree with you. They aren't. Thanks for pointing that out.

Empathy wrote:
Also, you are showing me up as well as others who've mentioned point for point suggestion, nothing else.

This is a direct contradiction to what you've just been saying about me. I can't score points with users I'm trying to show up. I've approached this impartially both scolding how the site is operated and praising the recent attempts to improve it. For the most part I've tried to reason with you, and reiterate what has happened in the thread. Neither of these things are by design personal attacks, even if you feel they are. I'm trying to reason with you even now and at least try and make sense of what you're saying rather than keep defaulting to "you don't make any sense" which must be a frustrating thing to read.

Empathy wrote:
You're the one makeshifter causing the majority of the arguments around here from whoever is around to listen to you slamming against a member who quotes it. So that I may eventually take the blame.

Well what can I say, every action has consequences. If one isn't to blame, they won't be blamed.

Empathy wrote:
I've been on threads where you consistently quote people you think are behaving inferior to you,and then pick up on the fact they've not quoted your best character WTF?

I gut posts like a fish I may only partially or fully disagree with. I occasionally humor such posts. This is common forum behaviour and IIRC it isn't against the house rules as long as it is done with tact and is not a personal attack on the user but rather an intellectual challenge or form of discourse against the idea or ideology. Sorry if that bothers you or anyone else, but I'm within my right to do this. And as people who claim to know me well (who do know me well)...I like my rights!

Empathy wrote:
You don't know constructive critiscism or anything but. Try learning to task force

I don't think task force means what you think it means.

Empathy wrote:
and you'll see who wants to listen to the programme and who doesn't. It contains real people with real feelings and real emotional differences, something I guess off-topic you'll never understand.

This seems more of a personal attack (well, most of this does) but I'll let it slide, as you've already been banned once on your original account. The reason for this; I'd like to prove you wrong and show that I'm not an emotionless droid. I like to think people can change given time.

Empathy wrote:
Seeing as you doubt everyones expertise,(including Alex's)

Hate to be the bearer of bad news but if you go back through my posts...while I've never outright undermined anyone's experience by name. It is abundantly clear I wasn't talking about Alex or leejosepho. I was humble enough to admit I myself lack the experience to fully provide you answers. That does not mean to say I can't analyse a thread with a lot of words, summarise it in order to help resolve issues for those who may not comprehend what others are saying.

Empathy wrote:
I'd say you should swiftly move on from this ASAP.

This is probably a good idea. The thread (whether one feels it has or not) has been resolved.
It would be rude to waste peoples' time further.


_________________
Yours sincerely, some dude.


Empathy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Aug 2015
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,548
Location: Sovereign Nation & Commonwealth

08 Jul 2017, 7:36 pm

You're merely leaving me to defend myself, because you are leaving some rather petty comments for me so that I may somehow compliment you on your loud toasting arrangements that you've managed to insult me.
Hahahaha. Well done. Try a bit harder next time and lets see who's next to leave the site through false accusations and 'crying wolf on nom offensive language that you've not even been directly quoted on says the alpha male.'


TheSpectrum wrote:

Empathy wrote:
Point scoring and nit picking are not constructive.

I agree with you.

Empathy wrote:
No problem



Empathy wrote:
You're the one makeshifter causing the majority of the arguments around here from whoever is around to listen to you slamming against a member who quotes it. So that I may eventually take the blame.

Well what can I say, every action has consequences. If one isn't to blame, they won't be blamed.

Empathy wrote:
I've been on threads where you consistently quote people you think are behaving inferior to you,and then pick up on the fact they've not quoted your best character WTF?


I occasionally humor such posts. This is common forum behaviour and IIRC it isn't against the house rules as long as it is done with tact and is not a personal attack on the user but rather an intellectual challenge or form of discourse against the idea or ideology. Sorry if that bothers you or anyone else, but I'm within my right to do this.
And as people who claim to know me well ... I like my rights!


Empathy wrote:
You think you're in your rights to mirror alot of things around you. Supposedly not being able to date someone on Alex's sister site is causing you to air heated words on an autistic forum who you presume offers the kind of manipulation you thrive on. You have driven your rights up everyone elses untimely personas for as long as this site has unwillfully remembered..JanuaryMan.
It seems you opened another account just to keep on stalking me through my own posts.. which is why I actually left before, to open a new one.
You don't know the meaning of the word ;Tact', just like your former namesake and maybe all the bans people had, were with you flirting around and siding with other mods so that more females would be banned.




Empathy wrote:
You don't know constructive critiscism or anything but. Try learning to task force

I don't think task force means what you think it means.

I think we all know what date rape is don't we JanuaryMan?

I think you're already setting your own ban in motion from your pointless occupation to minority point score me.



Empathy wrote:
I'd say you should swiftly move on from this ASAP.

This is probably a good idea. The thread (whether one feels it has or not) has been resolved.
It would be rude to waste peoples' time further.


Empathy wrote:
I don't have a problem with sounding rude, its being immoral I have the problem with. And yeah I have moved on, no thanks to your manipulative selfies in the past and posting false hate crimes about users that never even took place. Your quest to find peace in yourself is ever more disturbing than the last.



This is something you'll never fully acknowledge.
I don't want to quote you at all, in fact I'm repulsed, you but you're blowing this up into a big deal
because you want to be seen as the big G. If you're not here, you're making rude sexist remarks everywhere else.
The men on here only claim it doesn't bother them when they can ridicule and undermine women, when in truth nobody can understand the web progamming any more than another Google Genius.
As for me liking anyone, that's to be seen to be believed, I think those who like my posts will quote me for what it is in the same way back.



Empathy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Aug 2015
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,548
Location: Sovereign Nation & Commonwealth

08 Jul 2017, 7:53 pm

alex wrote:

If you google "sub-party domain host" the only result is this thread. So no, it's not a thing.
https://www.google.com/search?q="sub-party+domain+host"


I'm confused but I realize that confusion is due to the fact that you're not making any sense. Someone who is less tech savvy may actually think what you're saying makes sense and is valid when it doesn't and is not.


That's basically what's happening here if you replace chocolate with SSL.


I understand the initial responses may have caused some confusion and despair, but someone who is less tech savvy should be well within their rights to question what is a problem like forced site encryption on mobile web browsers is like for the user. I think the OP had a general concern for his mobile, tablet or much older browser and needed to clear up his own anxiety over it. I sympathise because i had similar error messages about a non safe website.
Like I have put though, clarifying some points will only make our lives easier and not harder. I thought one of the sub parties in effect, might have been Cloudfare or something.
I'm sorry if my bluntness got misconstrued and taken out of context before.