On Monday 26 April 2004 02:12, m0gely wrote:
> Would this be a huge undertaking? I realize it's pretty late in the
> game to even suggest such a revision if it is indeed that big. But it
> could make some great new mapping possibilities and game play. And I'm
> not talking about making Dust2 64
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 12 September 2003 23:49, Jan Brunner wrote:
> Steam uses a function (I don't remember its name) to allocate space
> for the cache files while not actually writing it. So in those areas
> of the cache files that weren't overwritten by Steam, y
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 11 September 2003 09:58, Jay Carter wrote:
> Enter 'yes' to accept this agreement, 'no' to decline: yes
> sh: line 1: uncompress: command not found
> Broken pipe
Time to install uncompress.
Nothing wrong with the distributed file, you jus
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 28 May 2003 08:07, Brian A. Stumm wrote:
> On Wed, 28 May 2003, David Fencik wrote:
> > What are the differences between versions 3.1.1.0 and 3.1.1.0c of the
> > linux hlds?
>
> the current version is hlds_l_3111b3
Which has what relevanc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 14 March 2003 08:06, Mad Scientist wrote:
> I gave up on Gentoo. For some reason, the install failed trying to load
> the network card driver (a very early stage of the install). It was the
> right module and everything, but for some reason,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 26 February 2003 06:50, HLDS List wrote:
> Ok, then who should I go crying to every time I get banned to let them know
> there was a false detection? The "informational message" is anything but.
Well, let me put it this way.
Sitting on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 26 February 2003 00:59, Jeremy Brooking wrote:
> we have pointed this out before, ask for this before , and been ignored
> before.
>
>
> I suggest we stop wasting our time on this thread, as whatever
> conclusion we come too, VALVe are sta
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 26 February 2003 01:05, Frank Stollar wrote:
> I see you take the point. The cheater has no new info but the admin
> looking into the logfiles maybe days later, has no info at all. Why not
> save and share that info. I think cheaters have
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 26 February 2003 00:51, Tyler \ wrote:
> No, more info for us is fine. But the problem is, the cheaters
> can make better use of that information than we can. We don't
> really have any real dire need to know what is and isn't
> detected.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 17 January 2003 21:21, Tyler \"Overkill\" Schwend wrote:
> People who download a leak are as much to blame as those who
> distribute it.
And just how do you suppose they are supposed to differenciate between a
leaked version and the real ver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 17 January 2003 21:05, Tyler \"Overkill\" Schwend wrote:
> I know the infrastructure would have gone down. I mentioned that
> in a previous thread. I just don't like leakers. :-)
And that justifies your attack on a person whom you have no wa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 17 January 2003 20:52, Tyler \"Overkill\" Schwend wrote:
> YOU STUPID LEAKER!!! YOU RUINED IT!
Instead of posting worthless crap like this, try using some common sense.
If you estimate that 1/20th of the people wanted to get a hold of CS 1.6
12 matches
Mail list logo
