This QS Bug post by SK/FROG/TROLL is one of his favourites. I have therefore decided to enshrine it on my page with my answer to his crap. Subject: Re: QS Bug - More SK/FROG/TROLL French Equine SHIT! From: "Bleaujaye" Date: Wed, July 9, 2003 2:59 pm To: > >On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 13:27:06 -0600 (MDT), compulsive loser QuickSilver stupidly vomited: Lots of drivel snipped > >There is no such thing as a "QS user", not even a "QS beta-tester". >There are hardly "QS guinea pigs", and that's Richard Christman's >drama. > >No seasoned privacy user was ever interested to test QS. And that is Chirstman's fault? Hardly. The head honchos of the remailer scene were busy with their own lives and jobs. They had finished Mixmaster, Pototoware JBN, JBN2, etc., why would they be interested in a piece of software written for Les Dummies? They probably felt it beneath their efforts, plus there was the chance Richard Christman was to go commercial with QuickSilver, which he had/has every right to do. >Elders tested PI, or JBN1, or JBN2, or Reliable, or Mixmaster, but >QS came while they were busy with something else as there was no >need at all for any competing windows remailer client. "They" tested PI, JBN1, JBN2 and Mixmaster because these were revolutionary advances in remailer usuage - AND they were written by those people. So you are saying they "tested" their own work? There *was* an absolute need for QuickSilver. Most anon'rs today are not IT guys, nor software developers. They are Les Dummies with no experience with IT stuff. They just wanted to go anon and wanted a program that would do almost all the work for them. THAT was *the* need, and Christman filled that need. >Richard Christman had to lure newbies and make them his guinea pigs, >but they were never able to properly report bugs, poor things are too >busy with their own problems as newbies. You are so damn right, SK/FROG/TROLL! Under the conditions I indicated above, Les Dummies were the only ones interested in trying QuickSilver. Using Les Dummies *was* a distinct disadvantage for Christman, because of the fact they did understand so little and had trouble communicating with Richard regarding the problems *and* following the solutions as given by Richard Christman. On the obverse side, Christman, being forced to deal directly with the least experienced of remailer users, gained a unique understanding of just how self-sufficient QuickSilver had to be if it were to succeed with Les Dummies. >Richard Christman raised sock puppets by dozens to create some buzz >around his software. No! Richard Christman raised satisfied users by the HUNDREDS who created a buzz around his easy to grasp and use software. >Most his time got spent talking with himself. No, SK/FROG/TROLL, don't attribute your own habit of holding monologues with Richard's reaching out constantly in helping hundreds of Quick- Silver users. >Some time was wasted teaching a few newbies how not to piss their >shoes. No, SK/FROG/TROLL, almost all in apas now know that it is you who are standing around pissing on your own shoes for lack of anything better to do. >There was no feedback, worse: no time left for development and >debugging. And the downwards spiral began. No feedback? Jeez, check Google you lying shit. Gawd, you and Goebells and the big lie. Tell it often enough and people stop thinking about it and just accept it. No time left for deveolpment? Richard has never stopped developing and polishing QuickSilver. (You really have to get off the hookah and the french hashhish for awhile and get a dose of reality.) Downward spiral? QuickSilver usage has grown tremendously, and will continue to do so. It is JBN and JBN2 which will fall off greatly. Why should the new Les Dummies entering the anon scene even think of fighting such a monster? >Why do you think QS is still beta, and that buggy after 3 years? QuickSilver is beta after three years because Richard Christman has his own timetable and agenda in regard to the future of QuickSilver. As for it being buggy, almost everyone in apas knows that is a crock. Even many of the JBN users realize that QuickSilver is a viable and working alternative for the Les Dummy type of anon user. >And now, the whole thing pissed off the elders so badly that no one >would approach QS even with a long pole. Who are these elders? In which post did any of these "elders" express such a view? >Back to the initial question: >There will never be a mailing list for QS development. Who needs a mailing list, fool? I never put myself on anyone's mailing list. QuickSilver users have apas. That's better than any mailing list, and you know this. This is why you, SK/FROG/TROLL, wish to destroy apas with floods, so that the new Les Dummies give up in disgust at not having the knowledge of how to filter your crap out and find Richard Christman's answers to their posts. Eat your heart out, SK/FROG/TROLL, your existence is petty, vindictive and mean. Richard Christman is doing something with his time that will last after he is gone. You, no one will miss. You are a hate-filled loser. >In case there would be a single real person (not a sock puppet) to >test QS, Richard Christman would be too anxious not to show it off. Well, there are hundreds and hundreds of users - sock puppets, in your terminolgy, who are using, testing, evaluating and questioning QuickSilver everyday. Your problem is that you simply cannot turn Richard Christman into a whining, threatening, beaten dog like Frog, who runs and hides after his tantrums, promising "proof" that never comes. -- bluejay at cotse dot com The Frog Who Would Be King http://www.cotse.net/users/bluejay/frog/declaration.html (ALL email to this address is currently being killfiled)