On 12/21/01 02:22 PM, JTK wrote:
>
>
>
> Subject:
>
> Re: It's December 14th again!
> From:
>
> JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date:
>
> Fri, 21 Dec 2001 13:22:53 -0600
>
.
Pratik wrote:
>
>
>
> Subject:
>
> Re: It's December 14th again!
> From:
>
> Pratik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date:
>
> Fri, 21 Dec 2001 11:21:58 -0500
>
> Newsgroups:
>
> netscape.public.mozilla.general
>
> Path:
>
> secnews.netsc
On 12/21/01 01:24 PM, JTK wrote:
>>You're hurling abuse at the one person in here who is trying to help
>>you?
>>
>
>
> 1. I'm trying to help him. He's the AOL employee.
Whoa! Let me get this straight. You think I'm an AOL employee?? I've
nevber seen an AOL office in my life! (nor Nets
gavin long wrote:
>
>
> JTK wrote:
>
>
>> Pratik wrote:
>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Crap huh? We back to "it's all a dream" now?
>
>
> >
>
>>> The question still stands. Did you try out what the bug suggests? Yes or
>>> No?
>>
>>
>> No.
>
>
>
> You're hurling abuse at the one person in here who
Pratik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 21 Dec 2001:
> Agreed. But would you please help us figure out who is the culprit?
> Just saying Mozilla is doesn't help. If you can answer my
> questions, then maybe we can decide its Mozilla but if you don't we
>
On 12/21/01 08:08 AM, JTK wrote:
>>
>>
>
>
> Crap huh? We back to "it's all a dream" now?
Crap because I was more interested in the interaction than stuff about
CRLF. If what I suggested didn't work, then I would have gone back and
paid more attention to what you said.
>>The question s
gavin long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 21 Dec 2001:
> You're hurling abuse at the one person in here who is trying to
> help you? And not bothering to find out if what he suggests will
> help? I'd tell the world what I think of your behaviour, but
JTK wrote:
> Pratik wrote:
>
>>
>
> Crap huh? We back to "it's all a dream" now?
>
>>The question still stands. Did you try out what the bug suggests? Yes or
>>No?
>
> No.
You're hurling abuse at the one person in here who is trying to help
you? And not bothering to find out if what h
Pratik wrote:
>
> On 12/20/2001 11:47 PM, JTK wrote:
>
>
>
Crap huh? We back to "it's all a dream" now?
> >Well again, I run IE through the same exact Proxomitron, and view the
> >exact same CNN, and get two different behaviors. Either two programs
> >are broken in such a way that the erro
Chris Hoess wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JTK wrote:
> > Chris Hoess wrote:
[snip]
> >
> > So, my WAT (wild-ass theory now) is that the letter "b" will solve this
> > problem.
>
> Before you go promoting this again, your interpretation is tangential to
> my point. The reason I me
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JTK wrote:
> Chris Hoess wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JTK wrote:
>> > Pratik wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Nope. Thats just the way websniffer displays it
>> >> (http://webtools.mozilla.org/web-sniffer/). Thats not the fault.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > Is the cache
Pratik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 21 Dec 2001:
> The question still stands. Did you try out what the bug suggests?
> Yes or No? And did that solve your problem? Yes or No?
My guesses:
No
N/A
--
ICQ: N/A (temporarily)
AIM: FlyersR1 9
email: [EMAIL
On 12/20/2001 11:47 PM, JTK wrote:
>Well again, I run IE through the same exact Proxomitron, and view the
>exact same CNN, and get two different behaviors. Either two programs
>are broken in such a way that the errors cancel each other out, or one
>program has a broken cache.
>
>
The question
Chris Hoess wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JTK wrote:
> > Pratik wrote:
> >>
> >> Nope. Thats just the way websniffer displays it
> >> (http://webtools.mozilla.org/web-sniffer/). Thats not the fault.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Is the cache and specifically the headers written thereto plaintext?
On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:28:01 +0100, "Sören Kuklau" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>1st it's December 17th, not 14th.
>
>2nd I have no clue what you're talking about, probably because I'm not from
>the U.S.
I _AM_ from the US, and I think that posted has obviously lost his mind. :-)
Erik Harris
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JTK wrote:
> Pratik wrote:
>>
>> Nope. Thats just the way websniffer displays it
>> (http://webtools.mozilla.org/web-sniffer/). Thats not the fault.
>>
>
>
> Is the cache and specifically the headers written thereto plaintext? If
> so, I upgrade my WAG to a WA
Pratik wrote:
>> Do you have the same cache setting? Same OS (Why2K)?
>
>
>
> Same cache setting on Linux.
>
>
A, that's bolstering my CR/LF WAG.
>> Let me make a WAG: it's the CR/LF line ends.
>
>
>
> Nope. Thats just the way websniffer displays it
> (http://webtools.mozilla.o
David Gerard wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 03:58:07 -0600,
> JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> :Go to CNN one day, go to it a few days later and you'll see the exact
> :same page until you hit the reload button. Few days being say over the
> :weekend. Nothing more to it.
>
>
> Are you goin
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Christian Biesinger wrote:
> JTK wrote:
>
>> Pratik wrote:
>>>The HTTP headers from cnn.com say
>>>
>>>HTTP/1.1 200 OKCRLF
>>>Server: Netscape-Enterprise/4.1CRLF
>>>Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:28:30 GMTCRLF
>>>Last-modified: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:28:31 GMTCRLF
>>>Expir
On 12/20/01 04:58 AM, JTK wrote:
>
> Pratik wrote:
>
>
> [snip]
>
>
>>Is there anyone else seeing this bug? I go to cnn.com all the time and I
>>haven't seen it.
>>
>
> Do you have the same cache setting? Same OS (Why2K)?
Same cache setting on Linux.
>
>>The HTTP headers from cnn.com
JTK wrote:
> Pratik wrote:
>>The HTTP headers from cnn.com say
>>
>>HTTP/1.1 200 OKCRLF
>>Server: Netscape-Enterprise/4.1CRLF
>>Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:28:30 GMTCRLF
>>Last-modified: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:28:31 GMTCRLF
>>Expires: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:29:31 GMTCRLF
>>Cache-control: private,max-age=
On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 03:58:07 -0600,
JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:Go to CNN one day, go to it a few days later and you'll see the exact
:same page until you hit the reload button. Few days being say over the
:weekend. Nothing more to it.
Are you going through a proxy? If not, are you sure
Pratik wrote:
>
[snip]
>
> Is there anyone else seeing this bug? I go to cnn.com all the time and I
> haven't seen it.
Do you have the same cache setting? Same OS (Why2K)?
> The HTTP headers from cnn.com say
>
> HTTP/1.1 200 OKCRLF
> Server: Netscape-Enterprise/4.1CRLF
> Date: Wed, 19 Dec
"JTK" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Sören Kuklau wrote:
> > "JTK" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >>Mozilla's cache is FUBAR, resulting in me seeing CNN as it was three,
> >>fo
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JTK wrote:
> Bradley Baetz wrote:
>
>>
>> So, noone else is seeing this.
>
>
> Nobody else is admitting that they see this.
If you really think that there's a conspiracy by Mozilla/AOL-TW/the
Trilateral Commission to suppress all the failed smoketests that thi
JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
on 19 Dec 2001:
>
> As I said to Pratik, thanks for taking some interest in this
> problem and not being LaG-gy.
The "problem" is that you hate the entire project and probably aren't
even seeing the problem yourself.
Allthough I promised myself not to reply on treads wich bear the
signature of JTK, I'd like to warn Pratik not to take JTK serious. He is
posting these annouying messages for a while now and keeps on nagging
about his beloved IE browser and still keeps using Mozilla. If he'd
listen to some adv
Pratik wrote:
> On 12/17/2001 12:17 PM, JTK wrote:
>
>> Wow, that's great! I'm just like that TV show - I can find out what
>> tragic events happened three days ago, and armed with that postscient
>> knowledge, make sure they never happened! Why I'd be a regular hero,
>> except of course, n
On 12/19/01 05:52 PM, JTK wrote:
>
>
>
> Subject:
>
> Re: It's December 14th again!
> From:
>
> JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date:
>
> Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:52:44 -0600
>
Bradley Baetz wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 12:43:20 -0600, JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Sören Kuklau wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Umm...
>>>
>>>1st it's December 17th, not 14th.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>See that's what I thought. But according to Mozilla's cache, NOPE!
>>It's still the 14th!
>>
>
> So, noone el
Sören Kuklau wrote:
> "JTK" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>Mozilla's cache is FUBAR, resulting in me seeing CNN as it was three,
>>four, five days ago.
>>
>
> Not that I know the FUBAR acronym. Gotta look it up...
Sorry, your english
> Not that I know the FUBAR acronym. Gotta look it up...
>
> -
>
> Hmm...
> http://www.acronymfinder.com/af-query.asp?String=exact&Acronym=FUBAR&Find=Fi
> nd
>
> Which one?
>
> Regards,
> Sören Kuklau
"Fucked Up Beyond All Recognition", is the one I'm used to.
S. Merde
On 12/17/2001 12:17 PM, JTK wrote:
>Wow, that's great! I'm just like that TV show - I can find out what
>tragic events happened three days ago, and armed with that postscient
>knowledge, make sure they never happened! Why I'd be a regular hero,
>except of course, nobody could ever find out a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bradley Baetz) wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 17 Dec 2001:
> So, noone else is seeing this. If you go to advanced->cache in your
> prefs, what are the cache settings? It should be set to
> automatically.
>
> Bradley
*Has visions of the "Never" Button
"Sören Kuklau" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:9vln7l$n4c1
@ripley.netscape.com, on 17 Dec 2001:
> "dman84" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> as in Messed up.. screwed, hosed. :)
>
> ** up? ;-)
>
> SCNR
>
>
>
F* up beyond
"Sören Kuklau" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
9vlij2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:9vlij2$[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 17 Dec 2001:
>> Kinda like the Mozilla situation, only in complete reverse.
>
> Well situation _for_you_. No, if I were in your position, I
> wouldn't like this caching trouble either, but thi
On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 12:43:20 -0600, JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sören Kuklau wrote:
>
>> Umm...
>>
>> 1st it's December 17th, not 14th.
>>
>
>
> See that's what I thought. But according to Mozilla's cache, NOPE!
> It's still the 14th!
So, noone else is seeing this. If you go to advanc
dman84 wrote:
> Sören Kuklau wrote:
>> Not that I know the FUBAR acronym. Gotta look it up...
> as in Messed up.. screwed, hosed. :)
I don't know it's origin, but I got it from Babylon 5...
as Mr Garibaldi would say: This mission is about to be FUBAR
which was then said to mean "Fucked Up Beyond
"dman84" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> as in Messed up.. screwed, hosed. :)
** up? ;-)
SCNR
t;>See that's what I thought. But according to Mozilla's cache, NOPE!
>>It's still the 14th!
>>
>
> Oh.
>
> Well your message was a bit cryptic to me. (I'm not native English) So I
> thought the show's name was "It's December 14t
NOPE!
> It's still the 14th!
Oh.
Well your message was a bit cryptic to me. (I'm not native English) So I
thought the show's name was "It's December 14th again" or so? Well anyways,
I now understand.
Well I usually don't experience these caching problems y
Ian Thomas wrote:
[snip]
> I think he is talking about the TV show '7 days'. Basically, whenever a
> tragic event happened, this guy would go back in time seven days and
> stop it from happening.
>
Yeah, same idea, but I was actually thinking of the one where the guy
got tomorrow's newspap
Sören Kuklau wrote:
> Umm...
>
> 1st it's December 17th, not 14th.
>
See that's what I thought. But according to Mozilla's cache, NOPE!
It's still the 14th!
> 2nd I have no clue what you're talking about, probably because I'm not from
> the U.S.
>
Well the cache problems are probably no
Umm...
1st it's December 17th, not 14th.
2nd I have no clue what you're talking about, probably because I'm not from
the U.S.
3rd how's this related to Mozilla again?
"JTK" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Wow, that's great! I'm just li
Sören Kuklau wrote:
> Umm...
>
> 1st it's December 17th, not 14th.
Thats his point.
>
> 2nd I have no clue what you're talking about, probably because I'm not from
> the U.S.
I think he is talking about the TV show '7 days'. Basically, whenever a
tragic event happened, this guy would go ba
Wow, that's great! I'm just like that TV show - I can find out what
tragic events happened three days ago, and armed with that postscient
knowledge, make sure they never happened! Why I'd be a regular hero,
except of course, nobody could ever find out about my amazing ability to
see into the
46 matches
Mail list logo
